Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

We can only judge the Minister's intentions by her actions, which are reflected in the amendment before us. That amendment is to delete the right of part-time employees to get surplus hours that become available. That is a choice by the Minister and from that we must conclude that she is opposed to the inclusion of that provision. Now she tries to present her opposition to the provision as only being because of it being drafted too broadly, etc. If that were the issue, the Minister could have tabled a different amendment. We could now be discussing an amendment that would include the points about qualifications and so on. Why are we not debating that and why are we debating this deletion? I think it is because the Minister is actually opposed to the provision but she does not want to make that argument. If I am wrong about that, there is a very easy answer that has been pointed out by everybody; the Minister should withdraw her amendment tonight and introduce an amendment in the Seanad to deal with it being too broad, if that is indeed the case, thereby resolving the issue. Otherwise she has to make an argument as to why she is in favour of the right of employers not to give surplus hours to appropriately qualified part-time employees. I do not think she wants to make that argument, but that is the effect of the amendment she is proposing which reinforces the system of control and power for the employer relative to the employee.

See this speech in context