Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 90: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food if she will make a statement on the recent statement by the European Commission that Greencore is only entitled to full compensation on the basis it has fulfilled all its obligations to its former workers. [4169/07]

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Under the relevant EU regulations, the restructuring aid for the sugar industry has to be drawn down on the basis of an aid application submitted by the sugar processor. The applications must contain a restructuring plan, including a social plan detailing the actions planned in particular with respect to re-training, redeployment and early retirement of the workforce concerned. In July 2006, Greencore duly submitted such an application, which indicated that the proposed redundancy payments for the Mallow workers were in accordance with the ruling of the Labour Court. I am aware there is an ongoing dispute between the company and the workers over the interpretation of the Labour Court recommendation and while I regret the parties have not yet resolved their differences, I have no function in that regard. The position regarding that dispute was fully explained by my colleague the Minister of State with responsibility for labour affairs, Deputy Killeen, in reply to a parliamentary question last Wednesday.

The aid application submitted by Greencore was approved in September subject to the outcome of the judicial review proceedings instituted by Greencore in respect of the Government decisions regarding the allocation of the aid. In view of these legal proceedings, it would not be appropriate for me to comment further.

Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for her reply. Is the Minister aware that a reply to a question by Mary Lou McDonald, MEP, to the European Commission two weeks ago stated that compensation for the closure of the sugar plants at Mallow and Carlow would only be paid once all the members and actions defined in the restructuring plan had been implemented by the undertaking and verified by the member state? The reply further stated that this system enables the member state to ensure that all obligations linked to the restructuring plan, such as redundancy arrangements for the workers, are met.

Does the Minister accept, given that Greencore has refused to honour its original agreement with the Mallow workers, it is not entitled to draw down the full amount awarded to it, particularly in light of the fact that the €4.4 million owed to the workers pales in comparison to the €146 million awarded to Greencore in compensation? Does the Minister also agree that in refusing to comply with an order of the Labour Court, Greencore has, in effect, admitted it is in the wrong? Has the Government not an obligation, as holder of the public share in the company, to ensure Greencore does not receive one cent of compensation until such time as it has honoured its original commitment to the workers and has lived up to all the outstanding commitments to the workers in both factories?

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I must take into consideration that judicial proceedings are in progress on this issue. I am aware of the situation. I have met the workers twice and know the unions have met Klaus-Dieter Borchardt the Deputy Chef de Cabinet of Ms Fischer Boel who has outlined a response similar to that provided to Mary Lou McDonald, MEP. The Commission's position explains the relevant provisions of the EU regulations which accords with the Department's understanding of the regulations.

Deputy Ferris mentioned the Labour Court. While not a statutory matter, we would all like to ensure that all companies with the financial wherewithal to abide by Labour Court proceedings and decisions would do so. However, as has been said, the company has decided it is not prepared to alter its existing redundancy provisions. Similarly, the trade union has not changed its position and is not prepared to accept the company's offer. We would like to bring this matter to a finality. To reiterate, the services of the Labour Court remain at the disposal of the parties if they wish to return to get clarity on the matter.

Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for her reply. The Minister is aware there was a disagreement between the union and Greencore with regard to the interpretation of the Labour Court decision. This was subsequently clarified by the Labour Court. However, because the clarification did not suit it, Greencore has effectively ignored it. Not alone that, the Minister is part of a Government that retains a public share in the company and has allowed this to happen. The Labour Court is there for a purpose, but its adjudication has been totally ignored which is wrong.

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The golden share has nothing to do with the issue. It only refers to permission to be given by the State in the disposal of the sugar assets and has nothing to do with the day to day workings of Greencore or anything arising from the EU restructuring scheme. Therefore, I cannot interfere, particularly when a judicial review is in the offing. We would love to bring clarity to the matter and bring it to finality, particularly for the workers. The Labour Court is at the disposal of both parties and willing to facilitate an outcome. I regret there is a dispute between the parties. All I can do is reiterate my call for the matter to be brought to finality and for clarity from both sides as to the best outcome.

Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Minister intend to exercise the golden share with regard to the future of the property?

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

All the golden share allows me to do is give permission for the sale of the property, but we are not at that stage.

Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is the Minister prepared to exercise her rights in that regard?

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The matter is before a judicial review and I am precluded from any public comment on any aspect of it in case that process would be seen to lack independence and clarity, which is what I want to pursue until the matter is brought to finality.