Paul Connaughton Snr (Galway East, Fine Gael)

I refer to a point raised by a number of Deputies in previous contributions. The Bill provides for a capacity to revoke the licence of employment agencies and to prohibit recognised employment agencies from operating in Ireland for stated reasons. I understand this is where the three-year rule applies. I assume there is no possible side-step available. I assume agencies are not single individuals but rather are companies under the Companies Act. In a case where a group finds itself on the wrong side of the law and is duly struck off the register, can the Minister of State assure us, as far as is possible, that it cannot reappear under a different name, in a different place and at a different time? Will he indicate how that might be policed? We have not been particularly successful so far as company legislation is concerned, and this type of racket has been going on for years. It has happened in the past when companies have been struck off that the directors proceed to set up a new operation in the name of their spouses, children or cousins. In other words, it is the same company by another name. How does the Minister of State intend to prevent that happening?

We all understand the importance of including a provision to protect whistleblowers. I have noticed in general, whether in the area of health, employment law or otherwise, that the whistleblower's lot is a lonely one. Some of the greatest atrocities committed in this State were uncovered by those brave enough to blow the whistle. However, the ultimate outcome for the whistleblowers themselves has not always been good, with some losing their jobs and those who do not often treated as pariahs who might as well have been out in the desert. We must show that we are serious about protecting whistleblowers and that will we do everything possible to do so. Such people are generally patriotic and entirely committed to acting in accordance with what they see as right. It has been shown in many cases that they were absolutely right, but it often did not work out well for them and their families. I hope the checks and balances the Minister of State provides will be in favour of the whistleblower.

Deputy Varadkar spoke about the issue of compatibility within the European Single Market. Under section 12 of the Bill, the Minister has the power to designate an EEA state as one which satisfies requirements for the licensing of employment agencies in that state. Given that we are told every day of the week that the State is breaking some European Union law or other, I am interested to know what the view is in Brussels in regard to this provision. How can Ireland decide that certain countries within the EEA are in and others out? On what basis are those decisions made? How will such a system work in the context of our linking up to the totality of the European Union and all its institutions?

The Bill also provides for the establishment of an advisory committee to draw up a code of practice and advise the Minister on the implementation of the legislation. This is a reasonable proposal, as is the provision that the committee should include the various stakeholders. It is important that the latter should be included in the mix, but there is also a case for seeking the input of those who are not directly connected to the industry and the sector. Will the Minister of State outline the proposed membership of the advisory committee? I understand it will be a type of FÁS board, with all the stakeholders represented. This may not ultimately be the best policy.

If I understood correctly, the Minister of State indicated to one of my colleagues that training would have to be paid for by the user of the service. Is that correct?

See this speech in context