Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Friday, 9 November 2012

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform

Pre-Budget Submissions: Discussion with Civic Society Representatives

12:55 pm

Photo of Pearse DohertyPearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

It was said that Government programmes must support the unemployed. Sinn Féin has advocated this and due to our position in government in the North, we have been implementing it. We have introduced social clauses on major construction contracts, most notably the €1 billion contract for the A5. Contractors are obliged to employ long-term unemployed and apprentices on those contracts. When we mention that in this State, we are told the Government cannot do that because we are members of the European Union, even though the North is also in the European Union. We can do this. Is that the sort of idea the INOU wants to see in the social clauses?

We go even further by breaking projects down so instead of awarding one contract for the 88 km of road, we award three contracts, making it easier for local subcontractors to employ people who usually come from their own local pool instead of foreign workers coming in. I have no issue with foreign workers but there must be a social dividend. I would like to hear the thinking of the organisation on social clauses. I have been in touch with people in Donegal who have also taken part in multi-million euro contracts in certain areas. They are part of a major project in Omagh and they volunteered an additional social clause whereby they entered a contract with the local authority agreeing that all expenditure on the project would be done as locally as possible. If they need stone, for example, it will be located locally and so boost the local economy.

The self-employed were mentioned and we made provision for them in the jobs proposals we launched a couple of weeks ago. I would like to know more about the detail of this idea because if we give employers an option to pay PRSI at a higher rate, should they pay the same rate as employees plus the employer contribution? That would be a significant amount and, in reality, it would act as a disincentive. Unfortunately people often only look at the here and now and do not take into account what might happen further down the road.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.