Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the need to be careful. Equally, there is a need to be ambitious, with which I am sure that the Minister will agree. It is welcome that he is open to looking at the funding for LEOs but he needs to put a bit of action behind that. They have the potential. Notwithstanding the concerns raised about funding one company to put another company out of business, and I get that nobody wants to see that, there is a balance to be struck. When comparing the funding for the Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland with funding for LEOs, a cogent argument can be made to increase funding and set ambitious targets. I thank the Minister for his response.

In programme C, the associated documents outline increased funding of €526,000 for the WRC. It indicates that this will allow the WRC to increase its staffing complement and inspectors are specifically referenced, which is welcome. Is there a reason that on page 84 there are no metrics for the WRC even though there are metrics for other regulatory bodies? Is that an oversight? Can the Minister confirm how many additional WRC inspectors and staff will be recruited? How many additional inspections will the WRC carry out?

I have come across a number of cases, and I know that this matter has crossed the desk of the Minister as well, where organisations that are wholly funded by the State refuse to recognise trade unions in some instance, or attend the WRC in some instances, and after they attend the commission walk away from recommendations. It makes no sense that there are two arms of the State. There are organisations that are funded wholly and entirely by the State and provide services on behalf of the State that feel they can simply look at WRC recommendations, or invitations to attend conciliation, and simply not go. These are really vital community services. The workers who are involved in the delivery of these services do not want to be all the time running in and out to the WRC, threatening industrial action and balloting for industrial action because they know the importance of the services that they provide. Can the Minister comment on this matter? I fully appreciate that he cannot interfere in every local case but there should be a mechanism by which organisations that are State funded should respect the third-party machinery of the State. Every time there is a dispute the Minister and his colleagues in government will say that the matter has gone to the third-party machinery and cannot interfere but when organisations walk away from the results then there is precious little point in them going in the first instance.