Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to say a few words about this legislation. Unlike other speakers, I want to endorse the words of Deputy Gilmore wherein he indicated that there could and should be a meeting of minds between the two relevant Departments to make the best possible use of the type of people about whom the Deputy spoke. We all have them in our constituencies. It is ironic because they speak with Irish accents yet they are about to be deported because of the type of situation about which Deputy Gilmore spoke. It is daft that that should be the case. Those people have been educated here. They want to continue that education or their work here but their prospects are not good because of the circumstances in which they came here in the first place and the fact that their relatives are in another country.

Another aspect that must be borne in mind is that this economy has adopted a high wage economy policy. I do not necessarily agree with that. There are two sides to that argument. We have seen a considerable amount of relocation to low wage economies in south-east Asia resulting in job losses here. That is unsustainable and it will cause a problem further down the road. In the meantime, there is a possibility that some unscrupulous people will decide to replace that high wage economy with their own low wage economy by utilising non-national workers and paying them less than the going rate. That has a dual negative knock-on effect. First, it contributes to racism and, second, it is unfair. It is grossly unfair that any Irish employer would treat a non-national worker as a second class citizen.

Before continuing I want to compliment those employers who were particularly anxious to care for non-national employees because in them they see a mirror image of themselves, particularly those of them who emigrated from this country in the 1940s and 1950s. There are quite a number of them in the building industry and they now employ people from across the world and give them great care and attention. They look after them as if they were family because they remember that they were in the same circumstances. I compliment those employers.

I have fewer compliments for some employers who treat their employees badly because they know there is no redress. They are the boss and nothing will change because these non-nationals are far from home and it is too difficult for them to get another job or to get away from their employer because heretofore the work permit process was employer driven. It is hoped that will change now but there are pros and cons either way.

I emphasise, however, that those employers who treat their unfortunate employees badly should be ashamed of themselves and we should be ashamed of them also because they are not doing any good for the country's image. Neither are they doing themselves any good because the wheel always turns. While we may we very affluent and self-sufficient now, there will be other times when that is not the case. As I have often said in this House, if all our emigrants and people of Irish descent across the world were to descend on this island, it would be very crowded. Having said that, the more people we have in the country, the more economical it is to provide goods and services to the people concerned. I do not subscribe to the notion put forward by some people that there is a certain number of people with whom it is comfortable to live and we should not have any more than that.

To return to the Bill, regardless of how we go about it difficulties will arise. We have seen abuses in the employer delivered work permit system, and those abuses will continue. A technique must be found whereby the employee can, within reason, relocate to another employer without having to return and re-apply or whatever. I realise that is the proposal but it should be done as a matter of urgency.

Another aspect about which I am a little concerned is the activities of agencies. The Minister's colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, made an attack on economic immigrants some time ago. Fortunately, I was not in the committee room at the time because both my parents were economic immigrants at one time, as I am sure were the parents of many of the people in the House. We should never forget where we came from because if we examine our past, it will always tell us something about our future. I completely disagree with the notion that it is a capital offence to be an economic immigrant. People throughout the world have become economic immigrants and people left the shores of this country for economic reasons for generations. Let us be clear about it. We can either accept circumstances as they are or try to change history, but people leaving this country for economic reasons is the way it was here and I hope it will never come to that again.

Many of the poor people who come here seeking employment must pay some intermediary an excessive sum of money, which their families have collected. This is not acceptable. Worse still, many such workers must pay an agency when they arrive. That is reprehensible. Once employment is found the fee is paid and that should be the end of the matter. It should be possible to deal with that in the State agencies such as the Minister's Department and the Department of Social and Family Affairs, although the latter's role in this process is not always helpful.

It is important to find a means to ensure that no added penalty is imposed on the employee after employment is found. It should also be possible for the employee to move from one employer to another. That would serve two purposes, namely create competition and help eliminate abuse.

The policy adopted by the United States and Australia some years ago of admitting only those people who had certain skills or could command a certain income, is not the right one for us. The problem here is the reverse of that situation. We require people who will do the jobs many of our people will not do. That is not fair to the employees coming into the country but it is a fact. There are posts in many occupations which are impossible to fill with local employees. The Minister should consider making it easier for poor people from abroad, who are willing to work in these positions, to come here without too much bureaucracy. That problem will persist.

It is contradictory for industries to relocate from here to low-wage economies while we prevent those who are willing to work in low-wage jobs coming here. Although I have not been in this House as long as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, and probably will not be, I am intrigued by some of the contradictions I have seen in my time here. I am sure the Leas-Cheann Comhairle has seen many more of them. If we do not cater for these industries we will lose them entirely from our economy.

We have all dealt with situations in which a non-national, married to an Irish citizen, has children who are theoretically the children of an Irish citizen through marriage but are forbidden to enter the country, or find it difficult to enter.

The Department of Social and Family Affairs has a role in this matter. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform also has a role and has introduced rules to the effect that anybody who, as a resident, is likely to impose a burden on the economy is denied entry. That is a contradiction too and is in breach of international law. Anybody in employment who makes social insurance contributions has a right to his or her entitlements.

It is ridiculous to make parish pump laws whereby we accept social insurance contributions, and an employee's contribution to the economy but give nothing to that person when he or she is out of work or between jobs. That proposal is being suggested in respect of economic immigrants from eastern Europe. I am waiting for somebody, including somebody from the new member states of the European Union, to challenge that.

Any citizen of the European Union has a right under EU law to receive his or her entitlements. This applies across Europe and cannot be dispensed with by any country on an ad hoc basis. Membership of the European Union brings certain obligations and benefits and we cannot switch them on and off as a situation requires.

We in Ireland are better placed than most others to set a shining example in dealing with work permits for non-national workers. We should show people how we would have liked to see it done because our experiences abroad were not always good. At least we know the difference and should be able to set out how to be fair to those in a less privileged position. We have experienced at first hand the need felt by many of these visitors to our shores.

Occasionally one hears people say there are too many non-nationals here. That is fine but they are here because we need them to work in our economy. If they do not fill the positions where will we find people to do so?

The situation at Irish Ferries is most peculiar as it appears to create a second tier of employment in our economy. I do not know what provision covers this but the end seems to justify the means because the company says it will not be viable unless it does this and so the matter is agreed. If that policy is pursued there will be consequences. The company's competitors will start to do likewise which will cause considerable industrial strife in our economy that may spread. I do not accept the case being made for this action. We need to examine it and recognise the likely consequences.

It is often said of people from low-wage economies working here that they would get very little at home. The theory behind this comment is that these people are lucky to be here working for half the normal wage and should be grateful for that. One could easily apply the argument that we should be grateful they came here to do work nobody else is willing to do and to do it for half the price. However, no one ever seems to want to examine the argument from that perspective. I find it objectionable when someone says that the migrants would earn very little at home, since they would have very few outgoings there either. When they are living and working in Ireland, however, they have the same outgoings as everyone else.

A considerable number of immigrants have settled down and bought their own homes, despite having great difficulty in securing a loan and so on. They have worked extremely hard to do that. Nothing has been done to ease their path towards obtaining a loan, but they have managed it and they are making a commitment to this economy. They have made their case and set out their stall by deciding on what they want to do and settling and investing here. We should recognise and appreciate that since they have shown not simply a one or two-year commitment but a willingness to work with, through, for and in this economy.

I was recently amazed, speaking to a teacher in a school, to find that leaving certificate students with only two years' education in Irish were able to pass at honours level. It is amazing to think how they dedicated themselves to achieving that. It is an example to everyone else if a child who has had only two years' grinds in the language is able to get right to the top in one fell swoop. We should be grateful of the opportunity to have non-national workers in this country. We should treat them equally and not discriminate against them. We should remember that we provided the same kinds of services and took up the same kinds of employment in other economies for many generations. I hope that we have learnt a great deal from what we saw and suffered during that period and I hope that we will have the magnanimity to ensure that those who work in our economy in similar circumstances are treated in a way that makes us proud. That does not always happen, but we hope that it can be changed.

See this speech in context