Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)

Deputy Clare Daly made the point that there is no evidence that what is proposed in this section will lead to the creation of jobs. That is what the section is supposed to be about in the first instance. I would like to address this issue and also that which relates to pay. Earlier, the Minister referred to the fact that the section reverses the cut to the minimum wage. That is a welcome and important development, particularly in the context of the fact that some people might have €40 extra in their pockets each week. If, however, a person is paid €390 per week and if his or her employer wants to benefit from the 50% reduction in PRSI proposed in the section, then the latter will be obliged to reduce the his or her wages by €34 per week in order to bring them down to the €356 threshold. I am of the view that the section leaves it open to employers to do this and does not provide any protection to workers.

The Davenport Hotel made the first move in respect of the minimum wage. When the reduction in the latter was introduced, it was only supposed to apply to new rather than to existing contracts. However, the company which runs the Davenport Hotel insisted that all of the employees should sign new contracts under which they would be paid the new rate of €7.65 per hour. This section leaves it open to other employers to do the same in respect of their employees. All they need do is gather their workers together and inform them that their weekly wages are going to be reduced to €356 per week. It is for this reason in particular that I am opposed to the section. However, I also oppose it on the basis that there is no evidence that it will give rise to job creation and in the context of certain people's general acceptance of the EU-IMF deal.

See this speech in context