Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I refer to the Department's presentation on the success of the outreach campaign. It said there was evidence that people want anonymity and fear repercussions. It is important that we do not say that we are surprised and that we do say there is disturbing evidence that has come to light in the Department's report. This should be addressed. That is why the issue I raised earlier is important, even if not in that specific case. The question is one of the Employment Appeals Tribunal and issues such as constructive dismissal. What has been the intersection between people who have attempted to take cases there and those who have sought rulings from the Department?

It is very surprising because, for example, information is located in the Department on how many of the 1,097 scope decisions in 2017 were taken to appeals stage. It should have been included in the presentation.

What I asked in respect of spouse class S contributions was what was bringing the matter to the attention of the scope section. Is it proactively looking at the issue or are we relying on individual appeals? Is there a campaign to raise awareness? A huge category of persons are now entitled to make PRSI contributions and they should be supported.

A memorandum of understanding with Revenue was mentioned. Would it be appropriate to share it with the committee? I imagine it addresses some of the issues of concern. Perhaps a summary might be shared. It is very important in assessing whether we can be assured that in a situation where there is an investigation having the full complement of PRSI contributions for each employee is central.

In respect of Deputy Bríd Smith's point about contracts, I have legislation pending. It is an important issue. There is an obligation under EU procurement rules to ensure compliance with International Labour Organization standards. In that regard, it is highly appropriate there be such clauses.