Dáil debates
Wednesday, 26 February 2014
Protected Disclosures Bill 2013 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed)
5:10 pm
Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source
I made plain in my opening remarks that several authoritative international bodies had given this matter consideration and made recommendations as to best practice in respect of whistleblowing legislation. The similarity between the recommendations of these bodies is so striking as to confirm the need for workers to be protected against unscrupulous employers. I have had ongoing dialogue with Deputies in the House. Bullying is pernicious but often people do not see themselves as bullies. People who are convinced of their righteousness and the correctness of their view can even bully people they feel are bullying them. It is a peculiar fact that I have occasionally come across in my workplace. That is not to say that all issues fall into that category but there is need for legislation. This has long been recognised by me and my party. I sponsored this type of legislation in Opposition and am really pleased to be given the privilege of introducing it as a member of Government. It is much more fleshed out and comprehensive legislation than I could produce in Opposition.
It is inevitable in the context of an employer-employee relationship that an employee who reports wrongdoing will be the weaker party and vulnerable to penalisation, particularly where the employer is not prepared to countenance the reporting of wrongdoing. That is occasionally the reality. In terms of the levels of compensation set out in the Bill, it is correct to say that they represent amounts that exceed the norm for unfair dismissal and so on. However, when one considers all the evidence available, it is clear that persons who suffer detriment at the hands of their employers for reporting wrongdoing rarely prosper. It is a point that was made repeatedly by contributors to this debate. If anything, the opposite is the case and, more often than not, such persons suffer significant personal and financial harm. All things considered, the levels of compensation set out in the Bill are greater than the norm for a good reason and are fair. I am aware of Deputy English's concern about the issue of interim relief.
As I mentioned in my opening remarks, the Bill I have presented compares favourably with international best practice and, in my view, represents an extremely positive development in our anti-corruption framework. It is just one arm of it but it is an important step. I appreciate there will be other Deputies with amendments to propose. I hope we have a good lively debate and I want to ensure that at the end of our discussions, we will have a very robust legislative framework of which we can all be proud.
No comments