Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fine Gael)

We are still short more than 12 months after the agreement in Towards 2016.

There are a number of issues pertaining to migrant workers that I want to raise. I raised a specific issue last September that was highlighted in the Quarterly National Household Survey. It concerned certain sectors in which migrant workers were out-competing Irish workers in respect of particular jobs. These sectors included the financial and business services sector, the wholesale and retail sectors and even the construction sector. When I raised this with the Minister, he stated the underpayment of foreign workers and the large number of foreign students comprised a significant reason for the differential. There is no doubt that part of the differential arises because of migrant workers with third level skills moving here. It must be acknowledged that the vast majority of migrant workers who come here are more skilled than our own population. Some 50% of migrant workers have a third level qualification compared to one third of our own workers. Naturally, as the migrants gain English language skills, they will be able to compete for certain jobs.

The point I was trying to make to the Minister has been lost, that is, that there is obviously a need to ensure Irish members of the labour force are able to compete for some of the jobs. If there are jobs being created in the economy, we must ensure everyone has the skills necessary to compete for them. I do not believe my saying this is racist and I am not trying to be such. The Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Conor Lenihan, branded me a racist for making those points but it is crucial that we be perceived to have a level playing pitch in respect of competition for jobs. This works both ways. In regard to some aspects of the economy, it is a question of migrant workers out-competing the Irish while, in regard to other aspects, it is the other way around. If a level playing pitch is not put in place, we are opening up a can of worms or what could be a powder keg. No one wants to see this.

Last summer I raised the need for migrants to have language skills. They have the potential to improve our economic competitiveness if we can tap into their skill base. The language barrier is a problem for some migrants. The decision taken by the Minister for Finance before the summer to cut the funding available for language education for adults was disgraceful, as was the cut on budget day affecting migrant children in schools. The reality is that, over the past two years, we have spent more than €300 million on language training for children in schools, never mind adult language training. While this policy has not worked and while it needs to be reviewed to ensure proper delivery, the cutting of the resources in this area will not help anyone. Having cut the budget for language support, the Minister for Finance is wondering why migrants cannot get jobs. He must get his act together on this issue if we are to deal with it seriously and support the integration of all groups into society. This not only involves the provision of language skills to migrant workers but also the provision of numeracy and literacy skills and speech and language and resource supports to our own unemployed. Our children should also be included in this regard as they, too, are left at the back of the classroom.

Last September I spoke about the competitiveness of our economy and the potential of migrants to improve it. I referred to three specific barriers to competitiveness but none has been addressed. The first is the issue of language training. The availably of language courses is the issue for many migrants because many ended up joining literacy classes because they could not join language classes through the vocational education committees.

The second issue is that of business permission. If a person from outside the European Union has a good business idea and wants to establish a company here, he cannot do so without going through a very bureaucratic system and obtaining permission from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Instead of basing a decision on the applicant's business idea and the potential to create jobs, the Department asks the applicant to prove he has €300,000 available to him and that he will employ two EU citizens. There is not an entrepreneur in the country at present who could provide this. Why are migrants being discriminated against in this regard? The regulations should not be in place and they pertain to a different era. I presume they relate to the sale of passports some years ago but surely we have progressed beyond that.

The third issue concerns tapping into the skilled labour pool. Quite a number of migrants in Ireland have third level qualifications but, because they are not recognised here, they cannot gain employment that reflects their skill level. This is because they may have obtained their third level qualifications outside the European Union. FETAC and HETAC are involved in recognising the qualifications.

I met a young man recently who told me he applied to HETAC to have his third level qualification recognised and was told it was the equivalent of grade 7. He appealed this and received a letter stating his qualification had been upgraded to grade 8. Surely this raises concerns. Why did he not receive a grade 8 in the first instance? The anomalies in the system need to be addressed. In tandem, we need to identify and upskill vulnerable workers, regardless of nationality.

We need to ensure we properly regulate and enforce employment law. It is disappointing we do not yet have the full complement of labour inspectors that we should have. I hope the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment will ensure the full complement is appointed.

The issue of undocumented workers is of fundamental importance. I do not refer to illegal workers but to immigrants from outside the European Union who had residency and work permits and contributed to the Irish economy but who, through no fault of their own, fell out of the system and are now undocumented. Many are in the black economy, which is having an impact on the legal economy in that it is undermining the survival of legitimate businesses that are trying to employ people in an above-board manner. The black economy is facilitating cowboys and ensuring that the undocumented are exploited. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform made a commitment in the House 12 months ago that he would introduce a bridging visa to allow those who have become undocumented to have a six-month residency visa to allow them to return to a legal form of employment.

I cannot understand the National Employment Rights Authority's double standard regarding the enforcement of employment law. As far as the authority is concerned, an employer who is exploiting an undocumented worker, or worker with no papers who has entered the country illegally, is not in breach of employment law and will not be prosecuted.

As far as NERA is concerned, if one is exploiting an undocumented worker or one who has entered the country illegally and does not have any papers, the employer is not in breach of employment law and will not be prosecuted. The law needs to change in that regard. I hope the Minister will ensure that matter is addressed on Committee Stage. I am aware he received a submission from the Migrant Rights Centre on this issue. The Minister has met that organisation on many occasions. It is an advocate in regard to many practices that should not be tolerated in this country but, sadly, are. It made the point that in the United States undocumented aliens have the exact same rights in regard to labour exploitation as legally resident workers. In effect, we are facilitating employers who wish to exploit employees who do not have proper documentation and that is undercutting legitimate employers and jobs.

I understand the system that operates in the United States also operates in Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Germany and Spain in the sense that workplace rights are not based on the status of the employee. I hope the Minister will address the issue on Committee Stage and ensure that employees' rights are protected, regardless of their status. Otherwise, we are only facilitating the development of a black market sector and undermining legitimate jobs and employers by doing so. The ESRI study of immigrants at work in the Irish labour market found that there have been significant cases of discrimination against them. The work permit system is in need of serious examination. I acknowledge the announcement by the Minister last week during his contribution on Second Stage that he is reviewing the work permit system. However, that should have been done 12 months ago not now that we are discussing the Bill. It is vitally important that we examine the matter.

The non-transferability of work permits is causing problems. I refer to the fact that they are specific to the employer. If an employer lays off an individual that person is, in effect, in limbo. I came across a case recently that relates to section 54 where a person from outside the European Union who was on a work permit was laid off but he could not get his P45 and redundancy letters from his employer in order to get a new work permit. Time was running out for him when he came to me. I pleaded with the employee's accountant to release the documentation. He explained that the difficulty was that the employer did not have the money to pay the redundancy due to the employee. The main concern of the employee was to get his documentation. He could not have cared less about the redundancy payment. He wanted to submit the documentation to the Department to ensure he could be issued with a new employment permit. In effect, he had a guillotine hanging over his head while the employer was concerned about another aspect of the matter.

That case almost resulted in another person becoming part of the undocumented system or requiring a bridging visa. The frustrating aspect of the matter is that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform facilitates individuals who seek a temporary visa to allow them to get work but that has not been put on a formalised structure within the Department. It is 12 months since the commitment by the previous Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, currently Minister for Finance, that such a system would be put in place without further delay. I urge the Minister to speak to his colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and expedite that single issue which would bring about a significant reduction in the vulnerability of some of these workers who, inadvertently, are undermining legitimate employment also.

I hope the review of the work permit system will encompass the transferability of work permits. Photographs and headlines concerning some of the Minister's colleagues appeared in newspapers in recent weeks in connection with the number of new work permits issued in the past 12 months. We must examine how the permits are being issued, who is getting them and whether there are people — either migrants or non-migrants — who could take up some of the vacant positions should they be offered them. I accept documentation must be provided to support requests for work permits but in the current climate it is difficult to accept that we cannot find people for jobs. However, some of the positions are specialised ones in the health or IT sectors and we need those people to keep the economy going.

Another issue that causes problems for migrant workers is the fact that in many cases, especially at the lower end of the spectrum involving non-skilled or domestic work, accommodation is offered with the job so that if such persons lose their jobs or complain about their employers, potentially they could be out on the street also and have questionable legal status.

We need to put in place a fair balance. We should not hound employers who perhaps have not dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's but concentrate on employers who blatantly exploit people, in many cases purely because of their nationality. It is vitally important that we deal with such people quickly and make an example of those involved in such cases.

Other speakers referred to the cases of the Gama workers and Polish workers employed in Moneypoint. Legitimate companies in this country have distanced themselves from that practice by employing subcontractors who employ people from outside the European Union at much lower rates and who may not be in compliance with the law. We need to change the law to ensure the main contractor knows what is going on. It must be as obvious as the nose on one's face if a subcontractor is coming in with a price that no one can match.

An employer recently related an experience to me of where he had tendered for a State contract at cost price. He cut out everything. He said it was not physically possible for someone to comply with the law at a lower price than his, but he did not get the contract as somebody was cheaper. The only way that could be done was through not paying people a fair rate or the going rate.

An issue was raised with me about the bureaucracy associated with this area. I refer to an organisation called EPACE, which is being ring-fenced specifically according to section 45 to carry out policing of the electrical contracting sector. I have a letter dated approximately 12 months ago from EPACE to an employer who was given eight days to provide a huge volume of documentation to it. The organisation was established to monitor and ensure compliance with the registered employment agreement for the electrical contracting industry. I do not know what legislation provided for the establishment of the body. It is my understanding that it is a private company established by a trade union. Surely if NERA is good enough to enforce employment law across every other sector within the economy it has the competency to do it within the electrical contracting industry also. In some way NERA will be accountable to this House through the Minister but it is my understanding that this other organisation will not be accountable to anyone. I hope the Minister will examine the matter prior to Committee Stage.

See this speech in context