Mr. Tom Fitzgerald:

I will go through the questions and try to answer as many as I can. Most of my experience is in the construction sector, so my colleagues will have more to say than I do on the English language teaching issue. There is a clear overlap in the experience of workers in both those sectors. In regard to the scope section of the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection, without meaning any disrespect to any individual, it has been our experience that it is not fit for purpose. We were involved in a major industrial dispute in 2017 relating to State-funded projects where it was clear as day that a chain of contractors was engaging in bogus self-employment. Exactly like the experience in the airline industry, we had individuals saying they were directors of a company who had been bounced into that position. It is very difficult to unravel those types of situations, but we brought clear evidence to the scope section of such practices. The dispute in which we were involved since 2017 is in the public domain and, almost two years later, the response we have received is that the officials in the section knew those workers were employed and were denied their rights. The cynic in me finds it hard not to believe there is something at play that is delaying a resolution. I do not see how difficult it can be to take a set of facts and benchmark them against an individual experience.

Deputy O'Dea asked about the extent of the problem. Our experience is exactly the same as that of my colleagues in IALPA in this regard. We can give numerous examples of such practices if members require them. The difficulty is that the practice of bogus self-employment, particularly in construction, is a growing phenomenon rather than something that is going the opposite way. Moreover, it is reasonable to conclude that there is a chain of causation between precariousness in general, precariousness in the construction sector in particular, and the ability of workers who are building homes to buy homes. Housing affordability is a significant social issue of the day and certainly a link is there to the issue we are discussing.

Deputy O'Dea also asked about what is happening with schools building projects. The initiative that was launched some years ago in that area involved a substantial investment of taxpayers' resources. I visited one school where I met a young worker going onto the site in a pair of runners who told me he had never been on a building site before. He had received a text asking him to come to fit gas pipes in the school. Wearing runners on a building site was detrimental to his own safety, but there was the further concern that despite having no experience, he was fitting gas pipes in a primary school. That is the type of thing we are hearing about on a day-to-day basis.

Deputy Brady asked what we do when we learn about these sorts of practices. We try, in the first instance, to resolve the situation. That involves doing all sorts of stuff and trying to get over being demonised for doing so by various parties. We only move to engaging with the State as a last resort, not the default position. One is in the mire if one is relying on the State apparatus to advance these types of situations.

Senator Nash referred to the need for definitions. The issues relating to bogus self-employment have been well ventilated in this committee, including in discussions with Professor Michael Doherty of NUI Maynooth and Ms Patricia King, general secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. We do need clear definitions, but we are often told by politicians that there is a difficulty in that regard. What we really need at this stage is outcomes. Any report or subsequent legislation that might flow from the work of this committee needs to be very clear in its capacity to arm the people who are trying to stop the practices described by Unite and by our colleagues in IALPA. I am happy to hear that Deputy O'Dea feels armed with the information we are giving him to look to making real changes.

Senator Higgins asked about sectoral measures that might be adopted. There certainly are tools that can be used in the case of procurement, for example. This is taxpayers' money we are talking about, and we want a situation where workers are properly paid because that will give a dividend by way of taxes returned. It is a positive circle that will also produce better outcomes for State-funded projects such as schools and hospitals. We know that bogus self-employment is a feature of the national children's hospital construction project. In fact, the Irish Congress of Trade Union's construction industry committee is being forced to stage a protest next week at the hospital site to register our concerns. Migrant workers on that project are being forced into bogus self-employment, placed on C45 tax and coerced into being contractors and, in some instances, directors. They do not speak the language, never mind anything else, and there is little they can do. Our experience is that buildings sites can sometimes feel like a war zone for workers, with significant dangers, including the danger of death. The State apparatus is not equipped to allow us to tackle that, despite the best efforts of many people within the political system. We can give specific examples if it would help the committee. The challenges are significant but given the purchasing power the State has, they are easily overcome. To my mind, it is a question of there being the will to do so.