Social partnership has been thrust to the top of the political agenda by the nurses' decision yesterday to accept the Labour Court recommendations and the strong mandate given to the leaders of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to reach a new agreement. This trend is confirmed by the results of the Irish Times/ MRBI opinion poll published today, which show how important social partnership is considered to be by the public at large. The spotlight will now be on the Government's National Plan and on next month's Budget to set parameters for the forthcoming negotiations. Negotiators face the most difficult choices concerning social equity, high productivity and pressures on the labour market.
Nurses voted by a margin of two to one in favour of the recommendations, which many regard as a stepping stone towards further improvements in pay and conditions. Already their success in achieving substantial increases has led to demands from some teachers' unions that the relativity gap opened up must be bridged. The sharpest exchanges at the ICTU conference came when the president-designate of SIPTU, Mr Des Geraghty, warned that the untrammelled pursuit of such sectional claims would destroy the foundations of the partnership approach in a spiral of greed matching that of "rack-renting landlords" and others who have profited from the economic boom.
Mr Geraghty went on to say that private-sector workers would not sit by and see those in the public sector make special claims without regard to levels of productivity, commitment to change and economic development. Precisely such factors are highlighted by the nurses' dispute and must be catered for imaginatively in any new agreement. The partnership and centrally-bargained pacts since 1987 have undoubtedly delivered substantial real increases to most workers, when full account is taken of changes in the taxation system. But labour productivity, profits and rentier incomes have outstripped real wages. The current buoyant economy has put further pressure on many sectors in the labour market. Unless flexible means are found to deal with them, it will be very difficult to reach a new partnership agreement.
The Irish Times/MRBI poll shows clearly that while voters see the country is better off as a whole, most people say they personally are the same or less well off than five years ago - most notably workingclass and small-farm voters. Nearly twice as many people believe partnership agreements have increased the gap between rich and poor rather than reducing them; most say they have made no difference. In other words, Ireland is correctly perceived to be a deeply divided society. But that is certainly not the voters' preferred outcome. Social partnership is seen as important by the overwhelming majority, in acknowledgement of the issues at stake in these negotiations. And their preferences are more egalitarian than the social realities. Expenditure on health and education is given twice the priority of infrastructural spending, while many more people say it is more important to reduce lower, rather than higher, tax rates.
These findings contain a vital message for all those involved in the partnership talks. The priorities should be to distribute budgetary resources much more fairly and to balance equity and productivity more flexibly than has been the case heretofore in national, sectoral and company agreements. On the evidence of this poll, there is a clear mandate for such a balanced outcome to the negotiations.