Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)

I welcome Deputy Kenny's words on the current discussions. I appreciate the work done by the national implementation body over the weekend. The president of ICTU, the general secretary of IBEC and the Secretary General of my Department worked extremely hard to find a basis on which to deal with an extremely difficult issue. Their terms were to try to put the Labour Relations Commission back into a position on which it could build. We know how difficult it is from the discussions that took place yesterday and today. I hope all sides will try to work around these well-worked out and ongoing issues. It is approximately one year since we dealt with the Normandy when these issues also arose, so they are not new. It is also extremely difficult to do much about some of the issues if people want to move outside and re-flag, as happened with the Normandy. Discussions are ongoing and I do not want to say anything other than to be supportive and helpful. I will return to the question on the ongoing process shortly.

Irish Ferries is part of IBEC. At the end of September I started the process to negotiate a successor agreement, which we hoped to finish by Christmas. On the Monday of that week Irish Ferries made its statement. I answered Deputy Rabbitte's questions on the Wednesday of that week. It certainly did not help and has not helped the process since. It created a great deal of difficulty and tension.

Related issues on improving our mechanisms arose with regard to Gama and that debate had long commenced, as the Irish Congress of Trade Unions raised such issues a year ago regarding construction and the CIF. I was in the process of giving clarification, and subsequently did so in meetings during October. Discussions on improving the legislative base were already taking place in Departments.

Deputy Kenny asked if my words helped or hindered. As I stated outside the House, to put it in context I was asked at the launch of the new labour trust what more could I do to implement the Labour Court recommendations. Any examination of my words shows they were based on the fact that the Labour Court was involved and I could not do any more on that. I had already answered in the House that day or the previous day that I did believe we should raise the issue in Europe again. I was asked in the House if I would raise it again with the European Transport Council, which I did.

On the question of whether I knew the action would take place that night, I want to make clear that I did. I was told by trade unionists that the action would take place that night. I was told heavies were going to be used. I knew this when I made those comments and I thought the action would take place at 10 o'clock but it happened the following morning. I was correctly and fully briefed by trade union sources on this.

Looking at that event in isolation one could say a group of heavies was gathered overnight but this was not the case. I was aware of what was to happen. My words were intended to be helpful and the matter was worked out. Someone suggested I should name the trade union source but I have no intention of doing so. I was well informed by the source, who was totally correct, on the Monday.

Regarding the damage to the social partnership process, all social partners realise it is the best way to resolve issues now and into the dim and distant future. There have been many difficult issues concerning social partnership and I have been central to most of them in one way or another. Social partnership is always capable of trying to find a way forward and to build and strengthen our economy. The only way of damaging this is to go backwards, or affect our investments, protect our market or do something else in a way that gives a bad image to the country. Social partnership is the right way to deal with these issues but there is not always a resolution. Sometimes issues can be so intractable a stand-off ensues and the matter cannot be resolved fully. Most of the time social partnership does resolve issues. Lost days and trade union figures prove this.

Maritime issues are fundamentally different in every country but concern exists. I have talked to many people over the past months about this. We all know competitiveness, productivity and investment are important. Together, these elements drive our economy successfully. Sometimes people take the view that the way to be a great manager is to reduce staff numbers, get more out of existing staff and improve bottom line figures.

We have a high minimum wage, which is by and large not taxable, and it is very attractive. People come here and wonder how we can run the country. For example, most of the Croatian workforce, even those in senior positions, would not receive the Irish minimum wage. Bright managers can take the view that they should outsource work to contract positions, bringing in new people and getting rid of existing staff, and that this leads to higher profitability and is sustainable. This is a disaster and it is the last thing we need to do. We must be careful of this and it is what the Irish Ferries dispute is about.

We provide much good employment in this country. Over the past few years between 140,000 and 150,000 people have come into this country from the new enlargement countries. They benefit from our minimum wage, our health and safety practices and our good conditions. We look after them very well and while there have been a few incidents most situations are perfect. We must appoint extra inspectors to protect them. We do not want a situation where people seek to get workers out and find another way of getting staff. That is the issue and we can protect in social partnership. I have given a commitment a long time ago that we would try to deal with this.

See this speech in context