Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I welcome this legislation. During the negotiations on Sustaining Progress, the issues contained in the Bill were central to a resolution. In welcoming it, I also have some regrets. I regret that the Irish employers and business people do not have the confidence and courage to recognise fully the right of employees to be represented by trade unions. While there is a constitutional right for people to associate and by virtue of that to join a union, it is very churlish and shows a complete lack of understanding of industrial relations that they are afraid in some cases to deal with trade unions.

In welcoming the Minister of State to the House, I would be far happier if he were introducing legislation giving the right of recognition to trade unions representing workers in whatever enterprise, industry or service they were based. I fought for this during the Sustaining Progress negotiations with the particular backing of the ICTU and SIPTU. There were long nights of argument, negotiation and fighting on that particular issue. We did not get what we wanted out of it. I recognise, however, that we did make progress. Today's Bill fully reflects the final compromise agreement that was reached at that time. When the Bill was published some weeks ago I was less than enchanted by what I read. I welcome the improvements made in the other House, particularly on Report Stage, which will be crucial in gaining wider acceptability for the Bill.

In many ways, this legislation should never have been here. The agreement of 2001 to which the Minister referred was supposed to deal with these issues. However, we found unscrupulous employers once again using the structures of the Labour Court, the industrial relations process and the agreement to repeatedly delay matters that needed to be dealt with. This was a good lesson for us; an agreement that was negotiated in good faith was exploited mischievously by employers, so it quickly lost the trust and confidence of the workers being represented by trade unions. Once this had happened, it was no longer of any use in industrial relations. The same could happen with this legislation. I welcome the step-by-step approach the Minister explained in his speech, but there are still gaps. We have tried to plug some of these gaps by providing for access to the courts to ensure enforcement. Other gaps were filled by moving away from the voluntarism that characterised earlier agreements in this area.

This legislation is a major step forward. The most important thing about it, as mentioned by Senator Hanafin, is that it brings resolution. It is not always the case in disputes — in fact, it is rarely the case — that somebody is clearly right while someone else is clearly wrong, even in the eyes of the most objective judge. Generally, by the time a problem has escalated into a major dispute, matters have become clouded. It is always the case that the lower the level at which resolution is reached, the better. My hope is that this legislation, as the Minister said, will be a clear signal to enterprises, business people and employers that it is better to deal with things locally. It is better to sort out problems on the ground by reaching agreement with the local trade union office or group of workers. That is also the view of the Labour Relations Commission and the Labour Court.

The fight is still going on for trade union recognition. It seems extraordinary, after the last 100 years or more of trade union involvement in Irish society, that trade unions are still fighting with some employers for recognition. It is extraordinary that after 17 years of partnership there are still people on the employers' side who refuse to recognise trade unions — and on the Government side also, although no members of the Government have said so publicly. Many questions have been raised by Government Members on this issue. I have heard the Taoiseach, to his credit, say that he supports trade union recognition, but I would like to see this reflected in legislation. As Senator McDowell said last night, Fianna Fáil Members are good at telling us how things should be but when they are in a position to achieve this they do not do so.

I would prefer a simple resolution mechanism. If a group of workers choose to be members of a trade union and say they want to be represented by the trade union in the course of a dispute, that should be the end of the story. I have argued this with employers time and again. I have asked them to leave their prejudices and their anti-trade union feelings at the door so that we can talk about the issue in some other way. If somebody needs representation in court or in a dispute resolution process, nobody has any problem with allowing a lawyer or somebody else, even a best friend, to represent him or her. If employers have a difficulty with trade unions they should envisage them as a service industry looking after the interests of the members they represent.

There is currently a complex range of industrial relations law. Those of us who have been dealing with it daily, in our working lives and legislatively, have great difficulty in advising people on aspects of the law without checking first. My colleague, Senator McDowell, coming from a legal background, might be more confident, but I always need to reread a piece of legislation before I advise somebody on any issue of equality, equal status or unfair dismissals. The range of legislation has been a huge success for the trade union movement, from the early 1970s, when the then leader of the Labour Party introduced some important legislation, culminating in the Employment Equality Act 1977, to the various Industrial Relations Acts we have today. The Taoiseach, as Minister for Labour in 1990, brought in the Industrial Relations Bill and moved things forward substantially.

Today's Bill is important because this legislation will allow trade unions to represent their members fully in disputes. Now that there is a process that can be followed, trade unions will finally be able to get past the difficulty of dealing with employers who will not recognise their right to represent workers. I hope this will give employers a final opportunity to accept the way things are in the world. We are in a society based on partnership. The rights of workers are represented by their unions just as the rights of businesses and employers are represented by IBEC and other groups. There is nothing wrong with that. We need to be able to sit around a table and listen to and argue with each other, accepting and assimilating the views, objectives and arguments of the other side. That is how disputes are resolved. In the current climate there is no way IBEC should accept from any of its members the antediluvian idea that trade unions cannot be dealt with.

The idea that trade unions are there to undermine the work of the business is completely wrong. Less than three years ago it looked as though Aer Lingus was going under, as had happened to half the airlines in Europe. It is a tribute to the workforce and the unions representing them that this was turned around. Aer Lingus is now fighting for business with the most competitive airlines in Europe. This was achieved through an act of partnership. It was achieved because people were committed to making their industry work. The view of the modern Irish trade union movement is that workers bring their brains to work and have views on the service, commodity or industry in which they are involved. This should go all the way up to their trade unions.

I welcome this legislation. I ask the House to facilitate its being dealt with quickly. The Leader has indicated that it can probably be concluded next Tuesday. This legislation is needed in the workplace. Over the past ten years Irish workers have had the best productivity record of any workforce in Europe. It is worth pointing this out to those who ask what trade unions and partnership are good for. We have also had the fewest industrial strikes in Europe over the past ten years. This is important when we consider how places such as Belgium, Italy, Germany and France are sometimes completely brought to a halt because they have failed to grapple with trade union issues, agreements, arrangements and legislation such as that we are dealing with today. This is an important move forward. I hope it is a step towards full recognition of trade unions. In the meantime, we should make use of this legislation and move on from there.