Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)

I echo the statement of my colleague. We are all pretty shattered by the latest figures from the CSO, issued this morning, which show the unemployment rate has risen to 14.9%, while emigration continues unabated. A really staggering statistic is that more than half, or approximately half, of those unemployed have been unemployed for 12 months or more. My information suggests that almost one in three has been unemployed for two years or more, which is truly startling. Any jobs legislation or subject discussed in the House in the context of enterprise and employment must be discussed with this in mind.

The section to which the amendment pertains stipulates that, in formulating proposals for a registered employment agreement, the Labour Court must take into account a number of points, including the desirability of agreeing and maintaining fair and sustainable rates of remuneration in the sector in question. We all know that, apart from the social justice element, the people we are legislating for are those who are at the very bottom of the pile in terms of pay. For many, it is hardly worth their while going to work, as recent ESRI studies have shown. Apart from acknowledging the social justice aspect, it is vital for the economy to ensure the people in question earn a decent wage. They are compelled to spend every penny they earn. I know many of them and see they are struggling from week to week. If they had a few more euro to spend, they would be glad to get them. They are spending everything and, therefore, every cent is going back into the economy. Any move to reduce their standard of living or disposable income hurts them and the economy directly. It reduces the circulation of money in the economy, which everybody now agrees has been economically disastrous over the past 12 to 18 months.

If the legislation stipulated the Labour Court must take into consideration what the amendment proposes, the State would be committed to maintaining sustainable rates of remuneration. We know this is desirable but it is essential to ensure social justice and to lessen the negative impact on the economy. It is not an optional extra. The phrase, "the desirability of", seems weak and ambiguous and is susceptible to incorrect interpretation. If the Minister accepted the amendment, thereby enacting legislation that would commit the country to maintaining sustainable rates of remuneration for the low paid, it would send out a very good signal. If, as the Minister stated on Committee Stage, the wording does not in any way change the interpretation materially, he should accept the amendment. The proposed wording sounds a lot stronger and better.

See this speech in context