Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the issue and to lend my support to the Government in its determination to introduce meaningful and fundamental reform to what is outdated labour law and wage-setting mechanisms. I completely accept the motivation of the Deputy in introducing the Bill to protect workers who as a result of the High Court decision are vulnerable to wage cutting by unscrupulous employers. However, workers are far more vulnerable to years of unreformed labour law and vulnerable to unemployment, about which we are much more concerned.

We have all been lobbied by workers in the construction, retail and hospitality sectors who have highlighted the damage of retaining special employment arrangements for these sectors. This is particularly true in the hospitality and retail sectors, both of which have seen major reductions in employment in recent years. They are also areas of great potential, in particular the tourism industry, which can bring jobs to every town and village where there may be little prospect of getting other employment. It is also a vital service export with high employment, which was allowed to become grossly uncompetitive in recent years. I do not suggest that the problems in this sector are entirely due to labour costs, but it is certainly one of the problems from which the industry suffered and it is not a cause that cannot be addressed.

I would like to see the total abolition of JLCs, EROs and REAs. Perhaps we should have used the opportunity of the High Court decision to start with a clean slate, but if that is not on the table, at a minimum we need fundamental reform of them to update the laws to meet current economic conditions. Opposition Members know that notwithstanding the court judgment, major reform was not only highly desirable - as they have admitted on many occasions in the Chamber - but it is also a condition of the bailout. Nobody can be in any doubt about the need for change. Every day we hear of a hotel or restaurant going to the wall. Profits, salaries, all input costs, rents and wages are all reducing. Trying to shelter any one sector from inevitable economy-wide trends will only impact on the workers we are trying to protect, who will lose their jobs.

We know that the construction sector pay rates have no relevance in today's climate and trying to enforce them any longer would be like trying to hold back the tide. Worse than denying reality, it is encouraging the black market for what little work there is in the sector.

In the retail sector, with the collapse of Superquinn and the need to bring in the receiver, we saw clearly the pressures on businesses and the need to stay competitive. I am delighted that the jobs of those workers seem to be secured. However, the outcome for consumers is not optimal given that an existing player has taken over. I have nothing against the Musgrave Group, which is a good business with a successful operation, but further concentration at both the retail and wholesale sector levels does not serve the best interests of consumers or producers. It would be preferable to have a new entrant in the retail trade and the Minister should consider the barriers inhibiting new retailers from entering, which are operating in virtually every other European economy.

The Opposition Bill deals with only one aspect of the fundamental reform that is now well overdue as has been acknowledged. There is little point in piecemeal reform at this stage when we have had expert reports and widespread consultation as well as the High Court ruling on the unconstitutionality of the old regime. The Deputy's Bill is not of the scope the troika had in mind when it demanded reform of our labour laws to reflect market realities. We need to get on with reform as quickly as possible as the Minister has undertaken to do.

See this speech in context