Michael Harty (Clare, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I congratulate Senator Ivana Bacik on introducing the Competition (Amendment) Bill 2016 and successfully piloting it through the Seanad. However, because of the Government's amendments, I am afraid the inclusive nature of the original draft has been watered down and the scope of the Bill has been narrowed significantly by excluding the service economy. The Bill excludes self-employed professionals from engaging in collective bargaining and balloting on various Government contracts. In the current draft freelance journalists, voice-over actors and session musicians may gain an exception from the Competition Act to engage in collective bargaining but not other categories. The original intention was to protect vulnerable workers, but, sadly, the amended Bill only provides for a small number of categories. For example, doctors, dentists and other professionals are denied the right to engage in collective bargaining. I know that it may be unfashionable to describe doctors as vulnerable workers, but I can tell the House that general practitioners, GPs, particularly in rural Ireland, are an endangered species and competition law is a significant reason for this. GPs are not allowed to engage in collective bargaining on their contracts. It is virtually impossible to persuade a young doctor to work in general practice, particularly in a rural practice. GPs are almost entirely dependent on the HSE for their income. The HSE considers doctors to be freelance workers but does not allow them to engage in collective bargaining. However, the vast majority of GPs cannot make a living without participating in the general medical scheme. Any individual, professional or tradesman who is dependent on one organisation for the majority of his or her income is vulnerable to changes that organisation may introduce unilaterally. In other words, he or she is false self-employed. The introduction of free visits for children aged under six years is a good example of a major change introduced unilaterally without allowing GPs to engage in collective bargaining or ballot on the agreement.

The Bill does provide scope for a trade union to petition the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation for an exemption from the Competition Act. However, it is the view of the medical organisations that any such decision would be taken in the context of the political climate rather than of looking at the merits of the relevant petition. The medical organisations have suggested that if the proposed Schedule 4 was amended, it would ensure the Oireachtas had the power to decide who should be classed as a vulnerable worker or a false self-employed person. In this regard, the Bill is a missed opportunity. Last November the Minister stated she was seriously concerned about the scope of the original Bill and the impact it would have on the Exchequer. Undoubtedly, the changes to the Bill to which the Minister has agreed will limit the impact on the Exchequer, but they fail to recognise many groups who view themselves as false self-employed. The result is a formula which will help some freelance workers, but it is not based on anything that might be described as justice for many groups who consider themselves to be false self-employed. However, they are excluded from the Bill. Having said that, I will support the Bill because at least it initiates change for some self-employed workers.

See this speech in context