Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)

I would love to respond to the comments of the Minister, Deputy Martin, but I cannot hear them.

If the people were given an opportunity to give their opinion on the directive, I am quite confident they would reject it in no uncertain terms. The directive will lead to widescale replication of the circumstances at Irish Ferries, to which the public demonstrated its opposition last month, when perhaps more than 100,000 people took to the streets of Dublin. Public awareness of the implications of the directive needs to be heightened. Some EU Governments, which understand the depth of their voters' opposition to the directive, have said they will not accept the proposal. I am calling on the Government to follow suit and to declare its outright opposition to any EU measure which will undermine the rights, pay and conditions of workers. When the Minister responds to this motion, I challenge him to state unequivocally the Government's precise position on this matter.

The directive includes the country of origin principle, to which my colleagues have alluded. The principle will allow companies which were established in one country to provide services in another country using the standards of the first country rather than those of the country in which they are operating. Under the directive, companies which establish themselves in the EU country with the lowest standards of workers' rights and environmental protection, which is also important, will benefit from such low standards, even when operating in an EU country with more advanced levels of workers' rights and employment legislation. This encourages a race to the bottom, with companies shopping around for the lowest standards in the EU. Member states will be under pressure to lower their standards in order to remain competitive.

The directive is the responsibility of the EU Commissioner, Mr. McCreevy, whose anti-worker agenda is well known in Ireland and increasingly recognised across Europe. In common with the European Trade Union Confederation, Sinn Féin believes the current text does not secure high-quality services and social progress in the EU. It recognises and acknowledges that the Internal Market committee made some improvements to the Commission's draft, for example by stating the objective of the directive does not involve dealing with labour law, collective agreements and industrial action. The committee accepted that some public services, such as health, should be excluded from the scope of the directive. Sinn Féin welcomes such improvements and will strive to uphold them.

In the vote in the European Parliament in a few weeks time, consideration will be given to some amendments which have been submitted and would improve the proposal. Sinn Féin will support any amendment that will help to protect workers' rights. It particularly supports stronger and unambiguous language to ensure the directive does not interfere with labour law, collective bargaining and industrial relations in member states. Such language should refer explicitly to the right to take industrial action, where necessary. Service activities should be regulated by the law of the country where the service is provided or carried out. Sinn Féin is totally opposed to the country of origin principle because it would lead to a risk of downward regulatory competition between member states. The host country must be entitled to impose supervisory measures for all services provided on its territory. Member states need to be able to impose prior declarations and notifications on foreign service providers and to oblige them to have a representative in the host country. All economic or non-economic services of general interest, which is EU-speak for public services, should be excluded from the scope of the directive. I refer in particular to social services and water. Member states should be able to maintain high protection for their workers, consumers and the environment.

As Sinn Féin remains opposed to the directive, its MEPs will vote to reject it in the European Parliament in February. The directive is a new and dramatic illustration of the chasm between much of the European political elite and the preoccupations of many EU citizens. There is widespread opposition to the directive among workers across the EU, many of whom are downright angry. The fury felt by workers and trade unions at the EU's attempts to undermine labour standards was evident during the recent rioting in Strasbourg by European dock workers who were protesting in opposition to the EU ports directive. Such protests are almost certain to be repeated when the services directive is voted on in February. The protests by 10,000 workers and the closure of ports by striking workers was followed by the rejection by the European Parliament of the directive, which would have liberalised port services throughout Europe. I commend the courage of the workers in question. The undemocratic nature of the EU does not allow citizens to register their opposition in any other way. If workers do not stand up and fight for their rights, such rights will be taken from them as part of the general shift to the right and the adoption of what is increasingly referred to as the neoliberal agenda of privatisation, deregulation and attacks on workers' rights. Large-scale public opposition to the directive can achieve results, for example by forcing the Irish Government and other governments to vote against the directive. The trade union movement must work with other interests to mobilise the public in opposition to the directive. If there is not a strong and clear public reaction to the directive over the next few weeks, we will run the risk of suffering a major defeat and a setback for millions of European workers, not only in Ireland but throughout Europe.

See this speech in context