Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I do not quite understand the section and I ask the Minister to explain it. I have read the notes and the memorandum and I have tabled a parliamentary question. I want to understand what is meant by the change in the terms and the extension of the eligibility for section 481 to cover labour-only services. I am sure the Department officials know that I am concerned about bogus self-employment. I missed the discussion yesterday but Deputy Nash mentioned bogus self-employment in a well-aimed amendment. In my opinion, bogus self-employment must be defined objectively and not left to be defined by the employer, for example in circumstances in which the employer says a job is not bogus self-employment and the particular contractor is happy with the arrangement. Others who work in the industry, or might want to work in the industry, think this is an abuse that effectively excludes them and are concerned about the lack of objective criteria for what constitutes quality employment and training and is thereby eligible for the benefits of the relief. That is my concern. I am not saying I am right to be concerned; I am saying I am concerned. Therefore, I seek an assurance and certainty from the Minister that the relief is not, potentially, going to be abused.