Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

I will reply to some of the comments made by the two Ministers of State in the course of the debate. There is no argument whatsoever from anyone who is a serious observer of Irish labour law but that the proposals in the Cahill Duffy report would significantly improve rights for working people in this country. The report has laid on the Minister's desk for five years now and the recommendations within it have not been acted on. The Minister of State has some brass neck coming into the House and lecturing socialist Deputies on the issues of workers' rights and honesty, about which I will talk in a moment.

Would the implementation of the proposals in the Cahill Duffy report have improved the situation for Debenhams workers? The Minister of State says categorically they would not but Mr. Cahill and Mr. Duffy do not say that. I was at the relevant committee meeting and I listened and questioned, and took careful notes. What I took from what Mr. Cahill and Mr. Duffy said was that their recommendations may not have improved the situation for those workers but, on the other hand, they may have done. They could not categorically answer the question and the Minister of State is twisting their words. A lot boils down to the question of the value of the stock and the value of the online business that was taken from underneath the noses of the workers.

It is the Government Deputies who have been dishonest in this debate, first and foremost the Fianna Fáil Deputies, who have wandered down to picket lines and been photographed for newspapers, standing with the workers, but who then will line up behind the Minister and vote to defer the Debenhams Bill for a year.

On social protection, workers paid into that fund every week for ten, 20 or 30 years. One of the Debenhams workers had more than 40 years' service. The Government should not try to pretend it is being generous by paying that money back to them. In fact, back in the day, the State put 60% into that fund and the workers put in 40%. The Government cut that back during the austerity years and now the workers have to pay 100%.

The Minister of State, Deputy Troy, said there will be a two-tier payment system through which some workers will get paid a collective agreement rate while others will get paid the statutory rate. He is technically correct. Would that not provide an incentive to workers who are in non-union jobs to get collective agreements? To do that, those workers would have to organise and unionise. I suspect that is the real fear of Fianna Fáil on the issue. In the opening sentences of his contribution, the Minister of State said that my proposal was timely and, in the next breath, he supported an amendment that would put it back for 12 months. The Minister of State should make up his mind where he stands on the matter.

The other Minister of State, Deputy English, said that the Government will have its act together on this in less than 12 months. I would suggest it should withdraw the amendment but if it is not prepared to do so, do not delay the legislation by 12 months. Delay it by three months or six months, if the Government must. It will not do that because it wants to kick the can down the road for as long as it possibly can. Why? I know, the Government knows and the working people of this country know. There is a jobs massacre coming up in the autumn when State supports will be withdrawn. Nowhere will that be felt more keenly than in retail. We want the protections for workers to be put in place and we have a sense of urgency about it. The Government does not want those protection put in place, which is why it is kicking the can down the road.

This is the anniversary of the execution of James Connolly, one of the greatest ever fighters for workers' rights. It is, therefore, a good day to have a vote on an issue such as this. We know on which side we will be. On which side will the Minister of State, Deputy English, be?

See this speech in context