Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

To be clear, the points I put to the Tánaiste were not points that I dreamed up. They came directly from the Debenhams workers I was talking to this morning. They are their arguments and their proposals, and I agree with them.

I am glad the Tánaiste mentioned Clerys because what the Debenhams workers pointed out this morning is that precisely the same situation operated in Clerys. The Clerys owners tried to do the same trick that Debenhams is doing. There were two companies in Clerys. There was a trading company that had no assets - none - and then there was a property company that owned the building. The workers still got a deal. It was not a very good deal but it was better than the deal they would have got had they not fought. That is exactly what is going on here. The claim that Debenhams Ireland does not have assets is not true. There are assets worth millions in the stores. Moreover, artificial debt was loaded on the company and there is a retail business still operating, all run by a parent company that has massive assets. This is a manipulation of the situation and, therefore, it is right and correct, particularly because of the Government's failure over years to address the issues arising out of Clerys and other disputes, to say that they will secure the moneys necessary to pay the two plus two.

I ask the Tánaiste not to forget the point I made about all the taxes the Debenhams workers paid to Revenue, which give them a moral claim on the Revenue's position on the creditors list.

See this speech in context