Mary Upton (Dublin South Central, Labour)

I wish to share time with Deputy Gilmore.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. I have no doubt the role of migrant workers has been widely acknowledged and credited as having had a significant input into the maintenance of our economic boom, which is welcomed by everyone. It is important now to ensure that these migrant workers are given every opportunity to lead a quality of life that we would expect in a similar environment if we were on the other side of the coin.

I broadly welcome the Bill which goes some distance towards improving conditions and setting out standards. However, there are a number of issues I would like to raise. We should look on our migrant workers, not just as economic units and contributors to the workforce, but primarily in terms of their rights and how they may be integrated into our community and society because of the major contribution they are making to our economic boom. We should also consider the rights of these workers' families. My colleague, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, referred to this yesterday when he stated:

. . . the fundamental principle is the one with which I began, namely that we talk about workers, their families and their rights, internationally. The discussion should be grounded and founded in rights. That is what is contained in the United Nations International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.

This is fundamental to how we behave as a society in treating migrant workers and acknowledging their contribution to the economy.

The role of migrant workers in Ireland is widely recognised and applauded by all of us. Tremendous work is done by foreign nurses, particularly Filipinos. They are superb and have provided an excellent, quality service in many hospitals. I have had personal reasons to be very much aware of this in the past year. However, they feel their rights, particularly where they relate to their families, are being eroded. They face difficulties regarding whether their families will be permitted to visit or stay. If we are to applaud the quality of their work, the very least we might do is ensure they also enjoy a decent quality of life and rights of family, as they play a role in our society. We cannot ignore this issue.

I have concerns about the manner in which work permits were issued or denied in the past. Every public representative has come across cases where decisions were taken at the whim of an official, as Deputy Gerard Murphy stated. I was approached by a number of different people regarding one case. An Indian computer analyst wanted to work for a small information technology company in the midlands. The employer was refused a work permit but, following the exploration of various other avenues, the permit was granted. There was no reason for the refusal in the first place or for the subsequent granting of the permit. What was different? While I welcome the outcome, I am concerned about the lack of transparency in these decisions and I wonder whether the permit was granted at the whim of the employer.

Account must be taken of workplace conditions to ensure migrant workers are not exploited. Every public representative has dealt with cases of abuse in the workplace. Migrant workers are exploited, particularly where their knowledge of English is limited or non-existent. They are vulnerable and afraid and they feel they must dance to the tune of the employer. They are not informed about their rights or where they may seek help and the language barrier is enormous. Moves to ensure such exploitation does not recur are welcome.

I welcome the change which provides that a non-national who applies for employment may transfer from one employer to another provided both employers are in the same sector. However, I am concerned that when employers have applied for the permit, non-nationals will not be able to transfer to another employer, even if he operates in the same sector. This means cases such as that involving Gama Construction could arise again. The fear is unscrupulous employers will still be able to threaten termination of a non-national's employment and tell him or her that, unless he or she fulfils certain conditions, his or her employment will be terminated and he or she will not longer be permitted to work in Ireland. How is that an improvement on the current position?

The legislation will solidify a two-tier system. One tier is for non-nationals who have the required education, skills and means necessary to apply for an employment permit. They will be granted permits which are transferable to other jobs in the same sector, which is good. However, the other tier is for non-nationals whose permits are applied for by an employer who may also be a non-national, as was the case with Gama Construction. Under the legislation, every non-national will have a profession on their work permit but will that make a difference if the non-national whose employer applied for the permit is obliged to surrender it within a month of his or her employment being terminated? I hope I am accurate in this regard but perhaps the Minister will examine the issue. The adoption of a two-tier system is a major concern.

See this speech in context