Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

There have been a few letters going to and fro on the details of the potential of doing it. It was also raised at one of the Labour Employer Economic Forum meetings. As soon as we had the transfer of functions to cover employment law and company law, the Minister of State, Deputy Troy, and I brought together a number of stakeholders to discuss a range of ideas, similar to what the committee is doing. It is a worthwhile exercise. We examined some of the recommendations in the Duffy Cahill report and suggestions others put forward, including one on a fund that could be put in place.

Reference was made to a fund in other countries and it is something we have are researching. I have asked for all those suggesting a similar approach to forward to me any evidence they have on how successful it has been and where it has worked. The Department is also engaging. We are looking at a number of issues. The question that has to be teased out goes back to what the Duffy Cahill report states on whether there are two types of people who end up redundant with two sets of entitlements.

The fund would set aside money or would draw on the Social Insurance Fund to pay out for collective agreements, which are above the statutory rights on redundancy. If we are to go down that road, and we are very open to looking at all of this, the question will be who pays into the fund or how we charge for it. Will it be through increased PRSI or a draw on the Social Insurance Fund? Will we consider a voluntary fund whereby those companies and employees who have agreed to additional terms of employment would be in a position to separate moneys to fund it in the future? These are the questions we are teasing out with the stakeholders and we are asking for views on this.

We will come to a conclusion on this when we finish our work, hopefully during December. I am happy to re-engage with the committee on this. I would also welcome the views of the committee on who would pay into the fund and who would draw from it. I understand the proposal is very much that those with a collective agreement, whereby in the event of redundancy they would have extra payouts above the statutory entitlement, would draw on the fund. As part of this discussion we have said that if we go down that road there will need to be greater transparency on collective agreements. We do not have any indication on how many are out there.