Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)

I very much welcome the opportunity to speak on the Construction Contracts Bill 2010. This has been a long time coming for many subcontractors, in my own county of Wicklow and throughout the country.

Deputy Nolan is quite correct when he states we cannot fix the problems that have occurred but there is an onus on us in this House to put structures in place to prevent these problems recurring. There is a tendency among those of us in politics to wax lyrical about the mistakes of the past, but this is a real example of forward-looking legislation. It is making a genuine attempt to learn from what happened in the past and to send out a message to subcontractors that the Oireachtas is addressing this issue and that we want a degree of fair play to ensure people are paid for a fair day's work and a fair job done.

As others have done, I place on record my gratitude, and that of many of my constituents who have been employed as subcontractors, to Senator Feargal Quinn for his commitment and dedication to this issue and for developing his own Bill on the issue. I am pleased that Senator Quinn is in the House. It is rare that politicians get such high praise as I have heard for him this afternoon from other politicians but it is a credit to his work and his credentials on this issue. Indeed, I note that Senator Quinn was assisted Mr. Seán Gallagher, and it is important to acknowledge that as well. I am pleased the Government has approached this in a constructive manner, taking on board Senator Quinn's Bill while also liaising with him and the Office of the Attorney General to ensure we have the most effective legislation possible.

As the provisions of this Bill have been outlined by many Members and by the Minister of State during the course of the debate, I want to take the brief time available to me to put on the record the concerns which have been articulated to me by Wicklow subcontractors. I would ask the Minister of State to ensure he is satisfied the provisions of this Bill address the challenges, obstacles and, at times, the downright abuse which have been experienced by the subcontractors with whom I have come in contact. It is important we ensure in the process of Committee Stage that we have the best possible legislation. There have been undoubtedly many examples over recent years, in my county and beyond, of large-scale contractors leaving the small guy or so-called subby high and dry, and endangering as a result not only that subcontractor's livelihood and business but also occasionally even his or her family home.

What has been most galling for subcontractors - the State cannot merely point the figure at others - is that the State was complicit in this over the years. We, as a State, allowed this to happen. Often State agencies, Departments or local authorities paid the full sum owed to a contractor knowing all too well the subcontractors were not being paid. Deputy Nolan and others spoke of the powerful role of some of these large contractors whereby it was almost the case they could walk in to any local authority and get a contract. They were seen as the only show in town and scant regard was paid to the subcontractors who had been left high and dry. The State turned a blind eye to large contractors failing to pay subcontractors for a job well done.

The message I have received loudly and clearly from subcontractors in my constituency is they want to see change. They want to see subcontractors listed in the main contract for a project. They want to see sanctions and penalties for contractors who fail to fulfil their obligation to subcontractors so that one cannot have a situation where a contractor who fails in his obligations on one job is able to get another job from the local authority. They want a system in place whereby a subcontractor must be paid within a set number of days of a contractor being paid an instalment for a project, and they want the State to ensure the next instalment is not forthcoming to the contractor until this is done.

Quite importantly, the subcontractors want to see a ban on the practice of below-cost tendering. We have seen a system - almost a culture - develop whereby contractors effectively bid below cost for a project. Often, it is not the contractor who takes the financial hit, but rather the subcontractors and the range of other individuals carrying out element of the project further down the line.

I have been informed by subcontractors that their industry is, effectively, paralysed with fear. At a time when we are trying to grow the economy and get out of the way of business to let it get on with the job of creating jobs and wealth in this country, subcontractors are almost afraid to tender for work for fear they will be left holding the baby, so to speak, with overheads such as the cost of materials and fuel, and without a safety net. This legislation attempts to introduce that safety net and I very much welcome it.

I am satisfied that, from day one of Government, we have taken this issue seriously. We have listened to the concerns of subcontractors, and in the programme for Government, we made a clear commitment to "introduce new legislation to protect all small building subcontractors that have been denied payments from bigger companies" Today and over the course of this debate we set about fulfilling that commitment. The work done on this Bill by Government in consultation with Senator Quinn has been extensive, and it has involved researching how other jurisdictions deal with this and also consulting relevant industry and professional bodies.

I welcome the clarification from the Minister during the course of this debate that the issue of financial thresholds will be examined again on Committee Stage. That is important. When we are introducing a Bill to protect the smaller guy, one does not want to leave out the much smaller guy. Let us get this right once and for all. One only gets one bite of the cherry.

As a member of the Committee on Public Accounts, I have seen a situation which emerged during Celtic tiger Ireland whereby the price budgeted for a public project was very different from the price with which we ended up and the taxpayer took a huge hit on that. It is important to place on the record of the House the considerable progress that has been made in trying to get public projects delivered on budget and on time. Much credit must go to the officials in the various Departments and the work done by the Civil Service in this regard.

With this Bill we are trying to introduce the protections and safety nets that are so badly required but at the same time limit the exposure of the taxpayer to cost and risk, while also recognising and not wanting to undo the considerable reforms that have been achieved for the taxpayer in public sector construction procurement. It is estimated these reforms in the regime of public contracts has generated savings of €300 million per annum, which is a sizeable amount.

I very much welcome the legislation and hope we can see this introduced into law as quickly as possible.

See this speech in context