NOW maybe I have it. I thought that good news totally wrong, but I had should herald great joy.
I mean, there has been so much doom and gloom, so much reporting of ills and woes, that when there is something more positive to be reported, something which could see us through the darkness of the forthcoming winter days, I should have thought our political leaders would have been to the forefront firstly in letting us know about it, and secondly in leading the celebration.
Why, then, does a cloak of secrecy surround the recent midterm review of the EU structural funds programme? It has been said, by those who have knowledge of its contents, that the review no longer categorises Ireland with the other poorer dependent members of the EU, but rather has it well placed to outdo many of the higher earners in the league over the next few years. So why is it left to the national media to sneak us, this snippet? Why are our public representatives choosing, at this time, to keep such glad tidings to themselves?
It could be, as the EU report itself suggests, that our recent economic boom has now put us in excess of the eligibility limit for cash from cohesion and structural funding programmes next time around. But why are our policy makers responding to this news with silence, as if it is something of an embarrassment to be for so long on the receiving end and now to be self supporting? The statistics show that whereas in 1983 Ireland had an average income of 64 per cent of the EU average, by 1995 this had increased to 90 per cent. We are perceived as being well on the road to becoming a wealthy" nation. Why not, then, rejoice in our good fortune?
I suspect that if this country was being run along the lines of a business, and that business suddenly realised it was going to make a bigger profit at the end of the year than had been foreseen its management might also choose to be tightlipped. After all, might not those stakeholders with an interest in that company, and particularly its shareholders, start clamouring for some immediate return on their investment on their loyalty? Might they not start looking now for a bigger slice of the cake?
Perhaps it is coincidental that negotiations are currently underway to draw up a new national agreement, a successor to the Programme for Competitiveness and Work. Put simply, this means, that the time has now come to talk about how best to distribute the goodies. And if the country has indeed been economically uplifted since the last round of talks, as many reports are leading us to believe, then might it not be fair to expect the goodie bag to weigh a little heavier than usual this year?
It is perhaps fortuitous, then, that groups representing the unemployed, women, the underprivileged and youth have been invited to attend and participate in the current talks. This will swell the ranks of the traditional social partners involved in the consultative process and leave them better placed to ensure that the negotiations do not only concentrate on economic, but also social, matters. It has happened, "in the course of negotiating previous agreements, that the emphasis given to pay increases and tax reductions has overshadowed the problems of those outside mainstream society, those who because of their age, or their gender, or their lack of education or address, have been unable to benefit from either. It is certainly a very welcome development, then, that such special interest groups as the Society of St Vincent de Paul, the Conference of Religious of Ireland, Protestant Aid, the National Women's Council of "Ireland, Community Platform, the INOU and the National Youth Council of Ireland will now have a voice, and a vote, in the distribution of the fruits of growth.
But the logistics of allowing active participation of such a diverse range of representative organisations and groups, so that each voice can be heard amid the overall clamour of bargaining and bartering, must be a nightmare for those charged with such responsibility. We must insist, however, that far from being just another "cosmetic" exercise, these talks do in fact allow equal contribution from all participating members, and that the concerns of all will find expression, will be heard, taken on board and acted upon.
However, discussion should not only centre on issues of current concern to those groups sitting around the table, nor on those groups own special interests.
For example, we may well at the moment have a population wherein 42 per cent is under 25 years of age, but one in four Europeans will be over 60 years of age, by the year 2020. It is important, therefore, that the needs of our own ageing population be considered during these negotiations so that a planned approach and not merely a rear guard action can be taken to ensuring a more equitable distribution of resources in their favour when the time comes. This will not happen solely by putting retirement benefits on the agenda; it is also important that the discussion base be broadened to, allow a strategy be planned for the care of our older people. And so on.
A wealthy society that is greedy is not a good society. As long as there is only one group suffering exclusion, this nation of ours will never achieve social cohesion. Those who take their place around the negotiating table, therefore, carry a heavy load on their shoulders. They should not view their participation in terms of neither politics or power but rather as opportunity to be catalysts for change, partners for the achievement of the greater good. For these talks should not just encompass a discussion of economic realities. The many dreams and aspirations of the vast numbers of marginalised people in our society are riding on them. These are the people who have been untouched by our economic boom, the unemployed, those who have fallen through the net of our education system, the disabled, the homeless, the poor of both rural and urban Ireland who, far from receiving a fair slice of the cake from previous negotiations, have had to subsist on the crumbs.
So for what, then, shall these talks this year be remembered? Where will this journey lead? To new departure, an era of equality and hope, or back to the rich man's table?
