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

I will start by saying that we need more support for small and micro businesses, such as arts workers, small coffee shops, restaurants, tradespeople and taxi drivers. They need more support at this time be it grant aid, which is preferable, or easy access to very low interest loans. I am, however, opposed to the utilisation of the stories of those small, family-run coffee shops being put to the forefront to cover up for a substantial amount of corporate welfare in the State. We need to shine a light on the amounts of money going into very big businesses. We are talking here primarily about the wage subsidy scheme and how some of the most profitable companies in Ireland are getting huge, no-strings-attached bailouts from the State. Deputy Smith drew a very appropriate comparison between the zeal with which the Minister, Deputy Varadkar, previously pursued mostly imaginary social welfare cheats, and the approach to this current situation when he said, in a blasé manner, that it is a blanket approach. For "blanket approach" we can read blank cheque approach, whereby the Government is willing to hand over huge amounts of public money to profitable companies and not ask for a living wage of €15 per hour for those workers, not ask for basic environmental conditions as called for by Extinction Rebellion, not ask for a share since we are giving all this money, and not saying looking for worker access to trade unions for any company in receipt of this money. Instead, the money is simply given over to major businesses that are entitled to continue to operate in whatever way they want. I shall give an example. Pat McDonagh, the Supermac's millionaire was on the radio complaining about people getting €350 per week, did not mention that Supermac's was in receipt of a much larger amount on a weekly basis of corporate welfare through the wage subsidy scheme. Other companies such as Ryanair, Aramark, Cement Roadstone Holdings, CRH, and other big construction companies are also getting huge public money with no requirement that they actually pay decent wages or recognise trade unions. I have been contacted by one group of workers employed by the major international Aramark and who are working on the front line at University Hospital Galway throughout this crisis. These workers were paid minimum wage, plus 10%, and the company has been claiming the wage subsidy for that. The workers have now been cut back to just the minimum wage. These are front-line workers, the workers for whom we clap each week. They are working in our hospitals for minimum wage and the company is getting paid on the double. The State is paying the cost of the contract and also covering most of the wage bill through the wage subsidy scheme. We need to see the figures, particularly for the wage subsidy scheme, for the top companies getting these supports. We also need to attach strings to these supports.

I want to talk about one company in particular, which is Aer Lingus, and if I have time at the end I will ask the Minister to respond. Aer Lingus has been receiving huge support from public funds - more than €1 million per week from the State over recent months - while engaging in very antisocial behaviour. Aer Lingus is a company with almost €1 billion in cash reserves. It is part of a multinational that has only recently made more than €3 billion in profits. Now it is in receipt of €1 million per week in corporate welfare. One would think that being in receipt of such public money might make Aer Lingus a little more humble or social, but it is proceeding with a series of antisocial and anti-worker policies. It wants to slash 500 jobs, it wants to cut wages by an incredible 70% and it wants to ban its workers from taking industrial action. The same workers who were applauded only a few weeks ago for flying much needed personal protective equipment, PPE, from China are now being told to make do on 30%, less than one third of their wages. Perhaps the CEO of Aer Lingus would be able to live on 30% of his previous income but for an ordinary worker it is simply not possible and would result in many people losing their homes. Cabin crew have rejected the rotten deal and others should be given a vote on it too. Aer Lingus should not be allowed to get away with this slash and burn agenda. It underlines again what a failure privatisation is and the need for re-nationalisation. Does the Minister believe it is acceptable that companies like Aer Lingus are in receipt of such massive amounts of money but treat workers in such a fashion?

See this speech in context