asked the Minister for the Public Service if he will enter into discussion with the Union of Professional and Technical Civil Servants regarding the payment of the arbitration awards to forestry staff.

5.

asked the Minister for the Public Service if he will outline the final settlement on the agricultural officers dispute; and if the Government will now pay the other grades of staff involved; i.e. foresters, at an early date.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 and 5 together.

The Deputies will be aware that, as a result of negotiations which I have had with the Union of Professional and Technical Civil Servants, agreement has been reached with that union on arrangements for the implementation of all their outstanding arbitration findings. The arrangements take account of the special aspects of these findings.

The agreement provides that an allowance for certain agricultural officers on beef classification duties will be paid in full in accordance with the arbitrator's findings. It also provides for the implementation, from 1 May 1986, of certain increases in pay for other groups, including agricultural officers and forester grades. Any balance of the increases recommended by the arbitrator for these groups will be paid on a phased basis from 1 December 1986, 1 December 1987 and 1 July 1988. In addition, ex-gratia lump sum payments will be paid on a phased basis over the next four years, commencing in July 1986.

The agreement is in the context of the acceptance by the union of the other elements in the package of proposals, covering the 25th round and other pay-related matters, negotiated with the Civil Service unions in January last. The arrangements which I have outlined in relation to the arbitration findings for forester grades and other groups will be implemented as soon as possible after the union signify their acceptance of the overall package.

I thank the Minister for his reply. I would like to clarify a few points. Do I now take it that the nine grades of staff for whom claims have been put in by the Union of Professional and Technical Civil Servants will be paid in full and that the only difference is that the period of payment has been changed? Will the full retrospection for the six grades as well as the three who have already been offered a settlement now be paid in full?

The Deputy is aware of the complexity of this group of nine and I am conscious of time constraints. The increases as recommended in the rates of pay by the Arbitrator would be paid in full over the phased period. In regard to sums of retrospection so-called — if the Deputy accepts that as a shorthand description of moneys involved — six of the nine awards have a phased reduced amount of payment in relation to the amount of retrospection that would otherwise have fallen due if the Arbitrator's award had been paid in full.

I understand the complexities of this and I do not know how the Minister will calculate it. But could the Minister give an idea of the percentage reduction on the full payment of the Arbitrator's award?

I can give it but I would prefer to give it in writing to the Deputy in the form of a tabular statement because it is of such a complex nature that I do not have that information in ready form. So as not to mislead the House I would not like to put it on the record of the House now. But I will undertake to write to the Deputy with the full details.

I appreciate that. The statements put out in the media — I am not sure if they came from the Minister's office or from the Government's press team — were very misleading. To somebody who knows the figures and calculations as well as I do, the figures appear to be either in error or set out to mislead the public. So I would very much appreciate a full and detailed reply to the question I have asked.

I put down a specific question asking when would the Arbitrator's award be paid to the forestry workers. This was awarded some time ago and it has not been implemented. When will this be done?

It will be implemented in the context of the timetable I set out in my earlier reply as one of the nine awards to which Deputy Ahern referred. At all times my Department or any Department that I have been responsible for have dealt with factual information in relation to figures as they have occurred. If the Deputy is referring to anything specific that emerged as misleading information, in his view, from the Department of the Public Service and if he could give me sight of it or draw my attention to it I could give him an answer.

I am referring to the £5 million.

I will have the points clarified and if the Deputy is not satisfied he can come back to me on it.