Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will try to deal with some of the questions that were raised. I welcome the interest in this Bill and the discussion and debate around it. I thank my colleagues who have stayed for a long time. I recognise there is great interest in this legislation and I look forward to working with Deputies on Committee Stage to bring through the Bill.

I acknowledge there is annoyance that we did not take on board all the matters raised during pre-legislative scrutiny. It is not possible to always take everything from pre-legislative scrutiny. It is an important process and I totally agree with it. Pre-legislative scrutiny certainly enabled me and my officials to make some positive changes to the Bill on foot of the advice we received. We will tease out other parts of that on Committee Stage. However, there is no guarantee that recommendations made at pre-legislative scrutiny will always be accepted. It is a worthwhile exercise from which everyone gains. We have certain reasons for not accepting all the recommendations, which we will tease through. I will deal with the issues touching on atypical employees. Deputy Connolly is leaving the Chamber but I will chat to her about the issue another time. The advice which emerged from pre-legislative scrutiny is there and we will have the next stage, with Committee Stage as well, in July.

In response to Deputy Connolly, the report that was published only went to the Cabinet yesterday. That is why it was only published yesterday evening or today. It involves a number of Departments. It is worth reading the full report. I am conscious Deputy Connolly has only had the chance to speed-read it and she likes to do things in detail. I am happy to engage with her on the issue. Her main question was why we have not allowed for atypical employees. This legislation sets out the criteria for the various lists that were recommended. We do not name in this legislation all the categories of people who would be able to avail of a permit. The recommendation in that report is, thankfully, that we now allow the fisheries sector to avail of a permit scheme. It does not have to be specifically referenced in this legislation. This legislation is, however, clearly about that matter. It will deal with the process they can now engage with. I know the Deputy needs to rush off. I will engage with her again on this matter. There are many issues in the report. In fairness to the fisheries sector and the many stakeholders involved in it, they were asking to be permitted to go into the general employment permit system. That is what we are now doing and will do. It is a positive. There are issues in that regard going back a number of years. I am not going to read the report now because I did not bring it with me. I am happy to engage with the Deputy another time. I have no doubt the committee will want to do so too.

Many Deputies asked if the legislation will erode the employment rights or workers. I want to be clear that it will not. Employment permit holders have exactly the same protections under Irish employment law as any other worker in the State. The employment permit system has been designed to ensure that the employment rights of migrants are observed. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment is responsible for regulating many aspects of the labour market and works to ensure that opportunities for labour exploitation are minimised. The legislation supports employment rights compliance in the State and the protection of employment rights for migrants by, for example, ensuring a written contract of employment is in place, the permit holder receives the original copy of the permit and a summary of the employee's rights printed on the employment permit with contact details for the Workplace Relations Commission where the permit holder can access information in a number of languages. The legislation prohibits deductions in respect of the application process from the permit holder's remuneration. Employment permit holders may change employer within 12 months in circumstances such as redundancy or where the terms of employment are fundamentally changed due to events that were unforeseen at the time of application. I acknowledge there is an issue around those 12 months but we must recognise this is a two-way process. The employer has offered the job. The potential employee looked for that job and applied for a permit to go with it. They have worked hand in hand. There is a cost to the process and we have to bear that in mind. A 12-month period is an acceptable length of time for that permit not to be moved elsewhere. There are exceptional circumstances, and we have dealt with that carefully in many cases. We allow for different scenarios. We work closely with people in that regard. I think most people would recognise that the process works reasonably well but I am happy to tease it through at a later stage.

All employment permit holders may change employer after 12 months. Minimum remuneration levels are set. The Bill will include additional control for meat processing and other professions with a threshold of less than €22,000. We will work with the meat processing sector controls. The WRC's inspector or authorised officers for the enforcement of the Employment Permits Acts, and their investigation and enforcement powers, work to protect employees from abuses of the employment permit system by unscrupulous employers. Such employers may be subject to fines or a prison term where they are found to be in breach of the Employment Permits Acts. The proposed amendments do not impact any of these safeguards. I want to be clear about that. They do not impact on any of these safeguards. There is an impression being given here that they do but they do not. The provisions for training and accommodation which have been proposed will further contribute to the support for migrant workers in specified circumstances.

There are a couple of issues there, as raised by Deputy O'Reilly, around the need for upskilling and training, and the conditionality of permits. We agree with the committee about that. We have also attached conditions to some of the various quotas and permits already. We are as one on the need to do that. We are also as one and very clear on the remuneration that for indexation must be allowed for. That is fair and we want to allow for that to happen automatically and ensure it is not at the whim of a Minister to set or update the wages. They should follow an indexation. That is dealt with in the legislation. We are as one on that matter, which the committee also raised.

There has been a lot of debate about the need for permits and Deputies have asked whether training and upskilling can deal with the need. There is a robust system here to judge the need when a permit is applied for or to judge the need for a particular skill to be on the critical skills list or the ineligible list. It is about that need and the analysis of that sector. We have an expert skills analysis team in our Department. It analyses individual sectors along with the parent Departments and other stakeholders. There is a cross-departmental working group to analyse all the various sectors and requests when it comes to managing these various lists under the legislation. We always first look to see can the need be met locally. We ask whether the need can be met within the European context or the EEA context. We are clear about that. It is a part of the European agreement. It is part of the EU in which we operate. We would also ask whether we can find the talent necessary locally through skills and development. We ask can we close the skills gap by investing in skills and development. I say to employers that there are now many opportunities to engage with the State through my Department, Skillnet Ireland and the training levy, as well as the Departments of Education, Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science and Social Protection. They are all involved in funding training and upskilling solutions and supports to allow potential employees to go on those courses. They also work with employers with skills shortages. As has been reflected in the debate, many sectors say they have skills shortages. Nearly every business owner I talk to tells me they cannot find the staff they need and have a skills shortage. There is an issue here. However, close to 1 million people in this country are not at work for various different reasons. They are not all availing of social welfare payments but neither are they in the work environment, for whatever reason. We always say we must try to encourage those people back into the work system. That means there must be good terms and conditions, as we have debated in this Chamber. This legislation reflects the need for that. There must also be a good tax system to ensure it is worthwhile going to work or taking on extra work or shifts at the weekend. That is why I am glad we made changes in respect of the higher taxation rate in the most recent budget. That was to encourage people to take on more work where there is a need to do so.

There are supports for people to go back into work. The work that is done through the pathways to work scheme, led by the Department of Social Protection, is a useful means of getting people back into work, encouraging them to get back to work and assisting them to get back to work, and to ensure they do not lose out on entitlements because they went back to work. A lot of work has been done across Departments. I always encourage any prospective applicants for permits to look at that system first and to engage with it.

Many Deputies named the individual sectors that require permits. Many of those sectors have engaged with us and we have asked them to go back and engage with the Department of Education, our education and training boards, Skillnet Ireland and the Department of Social Protection around trying to source talent locally. That is a process through which they all have to go. If we have gathered all the evidence and tried all those approaches but still cannot fill those skill gaps, then a resort to permits is often used. It is only one part of the solution and should never be the permanent or only solution. However, we must recognise that we are short of critical skills in some areas and need to bring them in. In other cases in respect of general permits, we cannot source the people we need within the EEA and the permits are set out for that too. The system is managed extremely well and reviewed quite regularly. A number of sectors that Deputies want to have reviewed have been put forward. I will not go through all the names involved. We engage with the various parent Departments in that regard. We try to respond, which we did over the past two years on a number of occasions by removing quotas or allowing for a certain number in various categories. I will not go through the list now because this debate has gone on a long time

We try to respond as much as we possibly can and will continue to do so.

We are not too far off the recommendations made by the committee, in most cases. There is a difference in respect of the seasonal permit. The initial review that led to this change recommended a seasonal permit, as did the public consultation. The committee's recommendation seems to recognise there is a need for such a permit but suggests a different way of doing it. I accept that is its recommendation. We are all agreed that there is a need to allow for some sort of seasonal permit. We are one of the few countries in Europe that does not make allowance for it. We believe we are right to allow for a seasonal permit. I accept we do not have all the amendments to tease through in the Chamber but we will on Committee Stage. Maybe we will be in a better place to move forward as one on the seasonal permit when people see the recommendations we are putting forward, in addition to the amendments and the regulations that will come, which will also be discussed on Committee Stage.

The committee recommended that the special circumstance employment permit should only be issued following certification by a relevant agency. We are not proceeding with that so we have probably gone further than the committee on that. We can deal with that issue in other ways, with the agreement of the various sectors.

From my reading of it, what we are saying on the 50:50 waivers is much the same as the committee recommendation. There is possibly some confusion around that so if I need to tease through that on Committee Stage I will, but what we are saying is practically the same.

On the committee recommendation on the proposal to amend the labour market needs test and other operational details by way of regulations, there is disagreement on whether that should be done through regulation or primary legislation. As I have been a Minister of State in many different Departments at this stage - I must be getting old - I can see the benefits of having regulations and not always having the details in primary legislation because it makes it very hard to change things thereafter, when we want to do that in full transparency and in a way that is open to every analysis. It is not a case of trying to avoid scrutiny but being able to deal with scenarios when they come at us. Very often, our officials cannot do that or cannot make changes because we have to go back to primary legislation. That can be a slow process and also means, when we consolidate Bills, that it is a long process to get everything right, whereas we can engage with all the stakeholders and Members to make changes in regulations a little more quickly, when the need is there. It is not to abuse the situation in any shape or form. If we need to work on that to get people's confidence in it, we will also do that on Committee Stage.

The committee also recommended that "holders of General Employment Permits should be given improved rights in relation to family reunion and the access of family members to the labour market". That is something that comes up quite a lot in debates in the Chamber. There is certainly a change in tone on that in this House compared with what we might have had years ago from some, although that is not the case for everybody, which I accept - I got that stare from Deputies. We are talking about employment permits. We are not the Department of Justice but I will certainly make sure that this debate is reflected back to that Department and that can be kept in mind. The Department of Justice recently brought forward its own scheme to deal with many scenarios where people were left in the shadows in this country. More than 6,000 people, or possibly 8,000 individuals, will rightly benefit from that scheme. That is a positive contribution.

The Department of Justice is very much open to working with Members to get this right. It has engaged quite a lot with us on employment permits in order to align our work and try to see how we can fix the system together in order to respond. The situation in respect of doctors was one where we were able to work together, along with the Department of Health. There are opportunities to make changes. I will certainly reflect the tone that has been put forward during this debate around critical skills, the general permit and the length of time after which someone can bring their family here. The period for critical skills permits is straight away but a general permit is 12 months, which we always believed was acceptable and is still recommended but we can tease that out a little more and I can also talk to the Department of Justice about it. It goes back to the fact that general permits are not meant to be the full solution to a situation. We would like to invest in skills, training and education locally to fill those jobs from within Ireland as best we possibly can.

The committee also raised a concern around the link to an employer for the first 12 months. We disagree on that. We do not believe that is unfair for the first 12 months, once we allow for scenarios to be dealt with. This legislation allows for that, as will the regulations. We do not agree with its members on this issue, but we have justifiable reasons for that. Most people generally come to this country on that permit and, in most situations, it seems to work extremely well. Cases have been brought to our attention that are dealt with and, very often, dealt with effectively.

The report further states that the committee would like to see the concept of conditionality in the work permit system developed. We are at one on that. We agree with that. We have used conditions in the past and will do more of that in future. We are all agreed on that. It is not just about training for filling the potential role locally; it is about a person who comes here getting training. The conditions for healthcare assistant roles are that there will be training, people in those jobs will be helped to attain qualifications in their first two years here, and we will then judge the second application for a permit based on that, rightly so. We are in the same space on that one.

The report states "the protection and enhancement of the position of employees should be at the centre of proposals to amend the employment permit system". That is absolutely what it is. It is to streamline the process for everybody involved in it, including the person who wants to work here and does not want to wait six, seven or eight months for that permit to be processed and the employer who is offering that job. We are protecting people in this system. That is what we are trying to do. The employment permit system has been designed to ensure that the employment rights of migrants are observed. We are very clear on that and very strong on it as a Department. I have previously said in the Chamber that I am quite proud of Ireland's labour protection laws. All those laws are fully available to people whether they are on a permit or not. That is the way it is. We are very clear on that too.

I will try to deal with a couple of other issues that were touched on. There was a lot of conversation around HGV drivers. No quota on that is operated by us and there is no delay relating to the permits. The question raised was around the recognition of qualifications. We do a lot in our Department but we do not recognise people's qualifications for their ability to drive. That is down to the Road Safety Authority and the Department of Transport. Likewise, they will try to speed up that process and have dealt with individual countries in respect of that. There have been some issues around the recognition of qualifications, for example, of many members of the Ukrainian community who have come here. I have raised at European level that we should find a quicker way to do that across all professions and not just HGV drivers. This issue is not dealt with by our Department but I will reflect it back because if we are able to approve a permit quite quickly, every other Department can come with us on that journey too.

We try to align on this issue. We have had a lot of luck in having the resources but we have a lot of backing from the Minister and Tánaiste, Deputy Varadkar, and our Secretary General to put additional staff and resources into our permit section in order that we can deal with our backlog and get through that. Mr. Kevin Daly, who led that charge, is present. We have dramatically increased the team and the skills. The IT system has changed and is being changed dramatically for the future. We have been able to respond at the level of our Department to clear that backlog and put a system in place to keep the processing time down to less than four weeks and, in many cases, two or three weeks. Other Departments also want to do that and are talking to us about how to align our systems. We will do that. Legislation such as this makes it a little easier for us to be able to do our job in the Department in responding to all the needs.

The issue of the home-care sector comes up quite a lot. As with every other sector, I would argue that permits are not the only solution. This was looked at previously and it did not pass the criteria. The evidence was not there to indicate we should bring in those permits and we did not make changes to that. We all still recognise that there is a major shortage of people in that sector who provide care in the home. There a quite a large demand for it that is not being met. There are different reasons for that. We always say we have to look at terms and conditions, pay levels, issues around transport, the HSE contracts that are on offer and everything that goes with that. A working group is now doing that and looking at all those issues. The Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Butler, is in charge of that. Out of that work, which is practically complete, that group will bring forward recommendations. If there is an ask there for us to do something around permits, we will of course respond to that based on the evidence. Again, the solution is a combination of attracting more people locally into that sector, with the skills, training and supports they need as part of their terms and conditions, in addition to the HSE playing its part. There is a lot going on there. We are willing to be part of that, if the ask is there from the Department of Health and the evidence is there to back it up. That is what the interdepartmental working group is doing. That report should be available for debate in the Chamber quite soon and will feed into the system. I am well aware of the need in that sector and we are well prepared to work on that.

Other issues were raised on different aspects of farming and agriculture. We have engaged with many of those sectors and have made changes to the quota over the years but the evidence has to be gathered and has to come through the parent Department with a very clear ask of us. We try to respond where we can. We make changes quite quickly, when the evidence is there. Some sectors were mentioned. These sectors have to engage with the various Departments and prove they have tried to find some talent locally. It is important we do that.

On apprenticeships, traineeships and so on, there is a long history in our Department of saying to people in these various sectors to look at their systems. Are they putting innovation and automation in place in their businesses to try to deal with some of their concerns? Are they investing in skills and training? Have they designed an apprenticeship? Sectors were mentioned that took a long time to design their apprenticeships to respond to a skills shortage, even though it was highlighted by our skills unit many years previously. A successful apprenticeship programme is a combination of that sector working with the education system to design it.

However, there must be a desire and need to do that. As we are talking about apprenticeships, I am delighted that the number of apprenticeships to choose from in Ireland has gone from only 29 to close to 70. We have a long way to go to reach the same number as Germany or Austria, where there are 300 or 400, but there is now a recognition in this country of the role apprenticeships can play in developing talent and career paths and that they can give people top-class careers. It is about that blend of further education and training, and moving on into higher education where it is appropriate, while recognising the need to sometimes have in-house and on-the-job training. Many solutions can be found through apprenticeships, traineeships, Skillnet, education and training board, ETB, Skills to Advance programmes and all of those initiatives. We ask employers and those who are not working to engage with these and to find ways forward.

We can remove occupations from the ineligible list based on evidence. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked a question about that earlier. We do this based on criteria. Likewise, we will put occupations on the critical skills list based on evidence.

For some strange reason, Deputy Paul Murphy wanted to make some accusations about lobbying. I can deal with him off the record on that. I do not mean "off the record". I mean I will deal with him at another time because he is not here. I will say on the record that I have not been lobbied by the person he made reference to. I am very clear on that. I do not believe my officials have been either. The Deputy may want to check his records and correct the record. We can get behind that. I will certainly check on our side. It is fine. We are very much open to any sector that wants to come to us for discussions. We are very open to meeting people. However, it was being insinuated that this was something else, which I do not like. It is certainly not true on my part. I put that on the record. It can be dealt with again if needs be.

Deputy Cahill raised the issue of major shortages of workers in many sectors and the red tape and bureaucracy in the system. We are trying to cut the red tape and bureaucracy. That is what this Bill is about. We have cut a lot of that red tape. There were a lot of question marks placed over the system and the application process today. I have looked at the application process and, to be honest, it is not that complicated. Some people navigate it very successfully and can apply and get their permits dealt with quite quickly. Others find it complicated or get stuck in the system for whatever reason. Some people pay thousands of euro to have it done only for it to be done wrong by those they are paying. We in the Department are very open to working with people who are making applications. Again, we have made changes. We will streamline the process and do better after this legislation passes but it is a two-way process. We are quite clear and provide training, advice and guidance as to how to make these applications. I disagree with the idea that it is very complicated.

I am also very concerned that someone said they had been charged €8,000 to make an application or that an application costs that much. As far as I am aware, that should not be the case. Our fee is approximately €1,000, which is a long way short of €8,000. Again, it seems that some misinformation has been presented to the House. Perhaps there is more to the story than I am aware of.

Deputies O'Dowd and Canney raised the issue of home care. In fairness, Deputy O'Reilly did as well. Most speakers touched on it. It is a sector I have touched on and which we are prepared to work with.

The case of a person who wished to work in Wexford while coming from Offaly was raised. I am afraid that is not within our Department's remit but I will certainly check it out. It has not been brought to my attention before today. Those situations should not arise. I believe it related to someone who has come from Ukraine and who was given accommodation that did not match their job. At this stage, the system should be able to respond. Some 5,000 or 6,000 people who have come from Ukraine are now working here. It could be more because the last time I checked was probably July. These people are successfully in jobs. We try to facilitate that through all our Departments and through engagement. Likewise, every effort should be made to ensure their accommodation matches up with where they want to work. I do not know how that person might have fallen through the cracks. It is a shame if they did because we need more people working in the healthcare system. I will certainly check it out but it is not something my Department is normally directly responsible for. There was reference to the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth and IPAS. We will have that matter dealt with.

There was a request for the critical skills list to reflect our needs in respect of retrofitting. Reference is made in the Housing for All document to the need to work with our Department to deal with the skills agenda. We made changes to some of the occupations on those lists on foot of that. We again work with all the sectors involved. We try to respond when there is a very clear need. With regard to the retrofitting of houses, many of our ETBs, technological universities and universities are involved with developing training programmes and courses to respond to those needs. We need approximately 17,000 people to work in that sector. Again, it will be a matter of a combination of using our own education system to upskill people who are in other jobs or out of work and who want to go into that sector and using the employment permits system in some cases where skills are needed. The system can do that. We try to make that clear.

On climate change, rather than praising any individual sector, I believe Deputy Ó Cathasaigh was asking that, when it comes to setting criteria, we ensure the country's other needs are captured in addition to the economic needs we deal with. I believe they generally do but I will take a look to make sure. If there is a commitment from the Government to tackle climate change and if we do not have the skills to do that, the permits system can respond. Our economic agenda is now very much tied to our green agenda. Many customers of the companies we have here are demanding that they have a green agenda. Likewise, the Government has to have such an agenda. The climate change Bill and plans highlight and drive that agenda. Of course, the permits system can respond to those needs but I will make sure that is the case.

I believe I have dealt with most of the issues that were brought up. If I have missed anything, I am happy to go back to it. The issue of platform workers was raised. This is causing a lot of debate at European level. There are efforts to find the answer to this issue. There are directives and we are working with them. Everyone wants to make sure that people here are fully protected whether they are self-employed or not. We strive to make sure that people are protected. Where there is misclassification, there is a process to deal with it. We have a working group on that. Having strengthened the social protection supports offered to those who are in work and those who are self-employed, the country is in a strong position with regard to our social welfare system. We do not want anyone falling into the gaps. That is an issue we are looking at and focus on but we have to ensure that, when we take on new initiatives and new sectors, we do not stymie work, innovation or opportunities to create new businesses. It is about getting that balancing act right. As a country, we generally do get it right but we are always prepared to look again, to watch things and to listen, learn and engage.

On foot of a request from the Tánaiste, there is a team, which I chair, looking at the whole issue of misclassification, or "bogus self-employment" as Deputy O'Reilly might call it. I got that stare again but, again, we are in that space working with all the various stakeholders to see if anything can be strengthened and if we need to do more. Revenue and the Department of Social Protection have a very strong system in this regard which is quite quick to make an initial decision but in which appeals can take a long time. That is where the issue might be. We are happy to work on that. That working group is focused on that as well.

I hope I have covered most of the questions that were raised. There are others on which I could go on for ages. To be clear, we do have an expert group on future skills needs and it puts great work into looking ahead and closely analysing the country's needs. It is often in the follow-through, which involves everyone and not just the Government and a range of Departments, that the system may not deliver quickly enough. However, when we have analysis that tells us where there are going to be difficulties with skills in five, six or seven years' time - many of these difficulties are already here now but the analysis tells us what is coming down the track in years to come - we have to make sure we respond to those needs through our education system, with enterprise also playing its part. Some sectors have done that really well but not every sector has, which can sometimes come back to bite them. It is important that, when we do analysis and come up with a list of recommendations, we try to follow through on them. That is what we are doing with this Bill. It is based on analysis from 2018. We are now trying to follow through and to change the system as much as possible to reflect that analysis. There is a difference of opinion between the Government and the committee but we will work through that on Committee Stage. I hope we all be on the same page when we finish this in the very near future. I again thank Members for all of their contributions to the debate here today. I also thank our officials in the Department.

See this speech in context