Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)

I wish, on behalf of the Green Party, to indicate general support for the intent and delivery of this Bill. I hope we can provide for its swift passage through the Houses with possible amendments.

I agree with Deputy Quinn that the Bill is complex and when amending it, as in the case of all legislation, one has to refer to existing legislation, in this case the Redundancy Payments Act 1967. In reading the Bill I searched for a simple definition of what an exceptional collective redundancy might be. I was drawn to section 4 which sets out a definition but does define it. It refers back to the principal legislation which is later amended in section 16 of this Bill in a manner that is very difficult to define. That is important because the case in hand that led to this legislation is clear, namely the Irish Ferries dispute. There is a widespread perception that this case had huge ramifications in this State and it led to a number of people protesting about it, perhaps because to a certain extent it was a focal point for a general sense of lack of ease in our State as to whether we had control on the type of development that was occurring or that we were losing control in terms of the economy we were developing. In a sense it represented those fears in a practical and clear example.

In the maritime area of trading there are specific conditions. First, there is the lack of any real control in terms of the ILO Maritime Convention not having been signed and the EU directive on manning conditions for ferries not having been put in force. Particular circumstances apply where a workforce could be working in one state and located in another. The difficulty in reading the legislation is understanding exactly what other circumstances to which this may apply.

While that is a small point, I agree with Deputy Quinn that the partnership process has been beneficial for certain developments in our society. As to whether it should become the legislative body for our State is very much in question. On a number of occasions during the five years since I was elected to this House, I have seen legislation primarily coming out of partnership discussions rather than from a Department, Government or a party in this House. When I read through those Bills, I sometimes had concerns that such discussions were not a good source for legislative change. By all means they should have an influence and a role but them being the primary driver and author of legislation comes across to me as complicated and not particularly clear.

An example of those concerns — this is not to raise a major criticism — is the slight concern I have that we are setting up a complicated procedure. I stand to be corrected, but in layman's language the way I envisage this procedure working is that a request would be sent to the Secretary General of the Department to investigate a matter, he or she would notify the Minister who would refer it to the redundancy panel we are establishing, and it would return to the Minister with a suggestion that it might be referred to the Labour Court, which might make a recommendation and which could be appealed to the Employment Appeals Tribunal. I do not know whether that is a fair summary of the procedures that would be involved. That process is pretty complicated.

See this speech in context