Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)

I am grateful for the chance to say a few words on this Bill. Although time is limited, I wish to deal with a couple of aspects that should be discussed as part of employment legislation. I accept that the inability to pay element is being introduced as an amendment, but it is a pity that the Minister is not here to discuss the matter. I understand the Minister is under pressure to increase the minimum wage, but it is a dodgy road to go down and will lead to a clamour of businesses arriving at the Labour Court with their accounts. They are under immense pressure and in certain sectors businesses will be competing with each other in the same town. How will they win their inability to pay cases at the Labour Court? Why will one case succeed, while another will not? The situation will be murky and while I am sure it is all above board, it is a complicated area due to the nature of the businesses involved. I hope it does not come down purely to profit. Many businesses can survive but they will need some help. There are many other costs that we can reduce for them, apart from an inability to pay the minimum wage or some agreements which are not much more than the minimum wage.

The Department should also consider the inability of certain businesses to pay rents. The law needs to be changed in that respect to allow for inability to pay rental agreements that have already been signed. It is crazy for landlords to demand rents from people who cannot pay them. A 10% or 20% reduction will not be enough. They will need 50% reductions because rent levels are mad in places.

In certain situations we will have landlords who have some of their businesses in NAMA, while on the other hand they are forcing their tenants to pay exorbitant rents. Four or five businesses in my own town have been threatened that they will be pursued for their homes if they do not honour rental agreements. The landlords in question are delighted to jump into NAMA, but they are not showing any leniency to their commercial tenants. The Minister should examine the question of tenants' inability to pay. It is an important issue, but it is relative. If we can drive down the cost of doing business in other sectors, we will not have to touch the minimum wage. If businesses can survive due to a reduction in rent and rates, they will not have to plead inability to pay the minimum wage. Many of the high costs of doing business are Government-regulated, including water charges, council rates, insurance and energy. I accept that energy costs have come down a bit, but we are still above the European average so they are too high. Irish banking charges are among the highest in Europe. The Minister of State sat at the committee meeting where we heard about this. Now that the Government owns a fair stake of the banks, maybe something can be done in that regard. However, the Government probably has an incentive to raise banking charges because it can make a profit from them. Nonetheless, we should examine the matter.

It is a shame that the whole debate on the survival of businesses is coming down to the minimum wage. That is wrong. The Minister of State should not say that anybody on the minimum wage is being paid too much. On 40 hours a week, one would be lucky to bring home €330, or €300 for a 35-hour week. Many workers have to pay for a car, clothes and other costs associated with having a job. Some people would be better off on social welfare. On its discussions with businesses, the Government should avoid being drawn into a debate on the minimum wage. It should clarify the situation soon because that is not where the problem lies. I am pro-business. Some business groups are not afraid of the minimum wage but of the argument that the next pay level must be the minimum wage plus. Therefore, the minimum would be the bottom line and everyone else is demanding more than that. That is probably why some people want the minimum wage reduced - so that they can bring other wages down, but that is unfair to people on the minimum wage who work in industries covered by such agreements.

The Minister of State is right to say that in some sectors those earning the minimum wage may not have a strong voice or a good educational background and are not unionised. They do need extra help and protection, and not just in respect of pay. We always discuss the pay element, but many such people are not always treated that well. The legislation looks good on paper, but there can be abuse in rosters and shift systems. Such workers can be abused in other ways, too, because people think they can take advantage of them, which is unfair. We have a duty to watch that, not just to the letter of the law but by applying some common sense. The previous speaker referred to representatives of various agencies, of which there are many, popping into such places to ask simple questions. It is not about reading up on legal books, but just about watching what is going on because we are all aware that some people are not treated well at work.

Various agreements cause difficulties and some stupid cases have arisen whereby geography or a particular type of business can dictate an agreement. New legislation is required to make all the necessary changes. That would be a chance to have a good debate on employment legislation. Businesses need such legislation because they are swamped with red tape and it can be a major hassle to understand regulations. Some businesses make mistakes and end up being punished badly. Proper legislation would help to clarify their rights as well as changing stupid legislative provisions. As a country that no longer has full employment, we should re-examine maternity and parental leave arrangements. I raised this matter a few years ago with the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, but he was not prepared to change things outside pay agreements, which are now in question. It is time that Ministers started making decisions. Now is the time to do something for children by examining what is done in other countries, such as France and Sweden, where families have better entitlements. It could be time to reverse some of Charlie McCreevy's stunts on tax, which do not help families. There is a chance to have more job sharing, both in the public and private sectors, for the benefit of children who missed out in the Celtic tiger era when everyone was rushing around. We will see the consequences of that in years to come. Now is the time to re-examine the matter through a proper discussion on employment laws, the minimum wage and wages generally. The piecemeal Bill before us deals only with a small sector, so it is time for an all-encompassing Bill to deal with employment legislation generally. A solid debate is required to ascertain where we are going over the next five or six years. The employment market has changed utterly in the past two years, so we need to take a good look at all the relevant agreements. We need to tackle wage agreements, but not the minimum wage. There is plenty of work to do and the Minister of State is willing to engage in such matters by making the right decisions. I note that the Bill restores some powers to the Minister in order to take action in this regard. I welcome that because we are meant to have a say and take decisions here. We should not leave everything to bodies outside this House because people are fed up with that. They want more decisions to be made here.

See this speech in context