Gary Gannon (Dublin Central, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I will not ask the Minister to comment on this but we need to consider who is in the room when these decisions are made. If trade union representatives were in the room, these gaps in the provisions, which exclude people, could be identified earlier.

If we are going to be making further amendments, we probably need to widen the process of who is being included in the considerations. There is the issue of the Debenhams workers. When I think about this crisis, one of the images that will stick with me forever, which the Minister has already highlighted, is the Debenhams workers standing outside their employment trying to protest in a safe, socially distant manner, and being moved on.

It was really unfortunate, but what has left a very bad taste in my mouth is the fact that we did make considerations when we altered the scheme. We made consideration of the fact that employees would not be able to access the redundancy processes if they so needed. That was enacted in the scheme in early March. I read that in the scheme, it grabbed my attention but I did not expect that within a short couple of weeks a major employer would enter a liquidation process in 11 stores throughout the country, affecting people who have worked in Debenhams for 40 years. I know some people worked in the store in Henry Street in my own constituency from when it was Roches Stores. I never considered when we were passing that legislation that we were creating a law that protected the employer and the capital but made no consideration of the employee. Is that something we can rectify very quickly in respect of these other large employers that are threatening liquidation? Is it something we can amend to ensure that the next wave of workers who are at risk will not be impacted in much the same way as the callous manner in which Debenhams has behaved? I particularly want to reference the fact that Debenhams has offset its assets over to Debenhams UK, meaning that the State, which is going to be liable for the redundancy payments, is going to be at a significant loss, although we rightly have to pay the workers. Those assets include the leases to some of these premises, which are substantial assets. What can we do in the immediate term?

See this speech in context