asked the Minister for the Public Service if he is aware of the generally low level of wages of public service manual grade workers; if he has any plans to bring these wages up to an acceptable level; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The pay and conditions of the public service workers referred to in the Deputy's question are the result of the operation of the process of free collective bargaining over the years. The services of the Labour Court or other independent adjudication are an established part of this process. In many instances the present pay levels of workers in this group have, in fact, been determined as a result of Labour Court or adjudication findings.

The system of free collective bargaining supported, where necessary, by the services of the Labour Court, has long been accepted by both sides as the appropriate method of pay determination for this group of public service workers.

Does the Minister mean that these groups of workers have, over the years and to date, had separate negotiations on their own pay claims or is it the case that the Minister issues guidelines on public sector pay which are then the norm laid down for the workers? Is it the position that percentage guidelines are laid down?

Could I give an outline? The process of pay determination as it stands here today is subject to negotiation by both sides. It is for that reason that the Employer Labour Conference are sitting at this moment attempting to find the basis of a solution of a dispute in relation to pay. There is no imposed pay upon anybody. Free collective bargaining, with all that implies, is the way in which pay is determined in our economy. As long as I am involved in any Government, that is the way it will continue to be.

With respect to the category of workers to which the Deputy refers, described as generally on low levels of pay, in the first instance within the framework of collective bargaining it is for their representative organisations to argue direct for and propose a package in relation to their levels of pay. I should tell the House, and the Deputy in particular, that in the context of the 25th round the package which was negotiated with the general body of unions representing the different categories was negotiated and accepted with reference to its being put to ballot by the officials and representatives of the unions to their general members. In the first instance I think it is up to the representative workers' organisations and low paid workers to propose an alternative to the package. Should that alternative involve substituting floors of payment, lump sum payments, or flat rate increases as distinct from percentages, then it is up to them to say so. That has not been the case in the context of the 25th round in the manner in which the negotiations finally concluded.

I do not want to get into any argument on the current dispute. I am particularly interested in the Minister's attitude to the low paid workers in the public service. I am sure he will agree there are workers whose pay is low and who have great difficulty in managing in these times. I am sure he will also agree that a general percentage rise does not as adequately recompense low paid workers as it does high paid workers for general increases in costs, different changes in family circumstances and so on. In future pay rounds, would the Minister give special consideration to low paid workers in what has now become the norm, where he issues pay guidelines for the public service? We will not then have one percentage figure given as the norm.

I am not unsympathetic to what the Deputy has suggested — on the contrary. However, it would be more appropriate in the first instance if the unions representing such categories of workers were to indicate the kind of alternative to percentage increases, which latter have been the norm in recent years in our free collective bargaining process. Within the spirit of collective bargaining it would be for them, in the first instance, to suggest the alternative they would like to see. I give the Deputy an undertaking that we would be prepared to look at such alternatives should they emerge.