Mr. Martin:

I will comment on amendments Nos. 3 and 8 first and then deal with the substantive point the Senator has raised on amendment No. 9. I presume Senator Coghlan's amendment No. 3 is to section 6(f) and section 7(b) dealing with permission to remain in the State. The powers granted to me under section 12(1), to refuse to grant an employment permit where the foreign national concerned has been in the State without permission, are discretionary, not mandatory. Any minor irregularity would not automatically disqualify the applicant from being granted an employment permit. Accordingly, this amendment is unnecessary.

Mr. Martin:

With regard to the substantive issue addressed by amendment No. 9, employment permit holders are, by definition, given permission to work for a fixed period. It would be inappropriate to grant them permanency of employment because this would undermine the work permit edifice.

Mr. Martin:

The same protection of employment rights is available to non-national workers as Irish workers. Section 6 of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003 provides that a fixed-term employee shall not be treated any less favourably than a permanent employee, irrespective of nationality. By their nature, those with employment permits cannot be granted permanency of employment because the basis for the permit is that the holder can work for a defined period. Is the Senator satisfied that no anomaly exists?