Paul Coghlan (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State. It seems that we are spending too much time in this Chamber of late but, please God, there is a break on the way. We drew the short straw this week, whoever arranged it.

The main purpose of the Bill is to implement the provisions of the EU directive concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by the European social partners. It should be noted that the European Commission claimed that Ireland had failed to properly implement this directive which should have been implemented in 1999. I understand there is a legal case pending against the State. I am not definite about it, but when the Minister of State responds he may update us, in so far as he can, and as long as it is not sub judice.

My colleague, Deputy Hogan, raised this matter in the Dáil last April and to date I do not know if there has been a proper explanation with regard to the delay. The response to a parliamentary question on the matter states – I am sure the Minister of State has covered it in his speech – that one of the main provisions of the proposed Bill is to provide that abuse arising from the use of excessive fixed-term employment contracts will be outlawed; and whereby the contracts of fixed-term employees will become permanent after a certain amount of time or after a certain number of contract renewals. The exact position is not evident to me from the response, as the question is not properly answered. Perhaps the Minister of State will allude to this in his reply to the House.

While certain aspects of this Bill are welcome, we would like full and complete details from the Minister of State as to the financial implications of what is proposed. It is noted that the application of this Bill is estimated to cost the Exchequer some €50 million per annum. The Minister stated that the benefits would be considerable. Can we have more details on this claim? Could the Minister of State also give us a detailed breakdown on the costing of this legislation? What does it provide for small and medium-sized enterprises in respect of its implementation?

While this Bill provides some benefits to employees working on fixed-term contracts, it seems to impose a heavy burden of paperwork on employers. It is reasonable to insist on a written contract or statement from employers at the commencement of employment, but the additional provisions of section 9(2) seem unduly harsh, particularly the provision that an employer who does not give written reasons for the renewal of a fixed-term contract can be penalised by a rights commissioner. It could be envisaged that employers would have to employ lawyers to clear all this new documentation. This is a further cost to employers and one a small business can ill afford. We have had many references recently to all aspects of competitiveness. This is exercising other minds outside the Houses, as it is undoubtedly important for the economy.