National agreements can lead to politics of lowest common denominator,writes John Downes.
There have been six agreements between governments and their social partners since 1987, each of which have played a central role in the transformation of the Irish economy.
The first, called the Programme for National Recovery (PNR), was introduced in 1987 with the aim of charting a way out of the severe economic recession of the mid-1980s.
This was to be achieved by reaching a national consensus on the best way to proceed.
Other programmes, including the Programme for Economic and Social Progress (1990-1993), Partnership 2000 (1997-2000), and the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness (2000-2003) subsequently built upon the success of the PNR.
As a result, the idea of consensus between government, employers, trade unions, farming bodies and the community and voluntary sector - known collectively as the social partners - became firmly established as a means of determining successive blueprints for this country's economic and social progress.
One criticism of the consensus-driven approach, however, is that it can lead to political trade-offs and the politics of the lowest common denominator.
In the search for consensus, for example, policies that aim to introduce real change risk being sidelined or watered down until they are acceptable to all sides.
The current partnership agreement, Sustaining Progress, came into effect this year and expires in 2005. One of its key aims is to "consolidate the progress of recent years, while achieving a medium-term growth rate capable of sustaining high levels of employment and facilitating the evolution of a more equal society".
It also sets out 10 key economic and social policy issues - known as special initiatives - to be progressed during its lifetime, such as housing and accommodation, the cost and availability of insurance, ending child poverty, and migration and interculturalism.
But how important are agreements such as these to the Irish economy? "Social partnership is primarily a means of creating a consistent policy approach for the country," according to Dr Rory O'Donnell, director of the National Economic and Social Council, which, through the publication of a strategy report, gives the background for each national agreement negotiations.
The council comprises representatives from each of the social partners.
"Social partnership is primarily a means of creating a consistent policy approach for the country," he says. "I think for a small country in particular, it is essential to have such an approach.
"The extent of exposure of the Irish economy to international markets, which change so much, means all our systems have to change to keep pace. You can price yourself out of markets, or back into markets, which is what we've seen since 1987."
The Irish Business and Employers Confederation also believes that partnership has generally been good for the economy, although it does have concerns.
"Social partnership has served the country well," says Mr Brendan McGinty, director of human resources with the organisation.
"It has provided a road map as to how the economy should be managed through a consensual approach. From a business point of view, it has worked well on balance. But a central issue is competitiveness, so that policies don't undermine jobs."
However, Mr Jack O'Connor, president of the Services, Industrial, Professional, Technical Union, which represents over 200,000 Irish workers across all sectors of the Irish economy, believes the trade union definition of competitiveness differs from that of employers.
"Even those on the political right would acknowledge the agreements have been one of the key ingredients in the mix which has transformed the economy from the backward one we saw in the mid-1980s to the prosperous economy we have now," he says.
"Employers tend to see competitiveness exclusively in terms of wages and costs, but we see it in terms of all the factors," he believes.
"Competitiveness is alright, but we view it in terms of the longer term. Issues like the equity of the tax system and quality of healthcare are all part of the equation in the milieu that is competitiveness. If we don't have good healthcare and education, we won't remain competitive for very long."
Benchmarking awards to public servants, which, in return for specific commitments to modernise and improve the level of service provided, fix public service pay rates through comparison with pay rates across the economy, have also been the subject of much debate in recent times.
Some maintain the levels at which they have been set were calculated at a time when wages in the private sector were far higher than at present.
Indeed, one recent report by the Economic and Social Research Institute claimed the payment of benchmarking awards to public servants next year could threaten the whole future of social partnership, because private-sector workers will in fact perceive a "stark divergence" between their pay terms and those in place for the public sector.
This has led some to suggest the Government should reserve the right to postpone increases under benchmarking, while others maintain they should be implemented fully.
The differences of opinion outlined above clearly provide a useful indication of the differing outlooks of the social partners with regards to a variety of issues.
What is equally evident, however, is that the social partnership approach at least provides a basis upon which the social partners can attempt to solve any major problems together, rather than apart.
[ www.taoiseach.gov.ieOpens in new window ]
[ www.ilo.orgOpens in new window ]
[ www.nesc.ieOpens in new window ]
