Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

I agree with Senator Feargal Quinn on this amendment. For as long as I have been a Member of this House, it has always been stated retrospective legislation does not comply with the Constitution. When the Minister spoke on Second Stage, he said he had received legal advice that the legislation was in order. However, the same happened in the case of the nursing home Bill and when it was challenged, it was found to be unconstitutional. I, therefore, strongly urge the Minister to ensure the provisions of this Bill will be applicable from the date of enactment.

The only reason for backdating is to get over the problem that the Bill was not ready and passed by the Houses in time. However, that is not a reason to apply retrospectively provisions which might have implications for businesses and, perhaps, employment. In fact, the Minister conceded on Second Stage and in his correspondence with the unions that there would be job losses arising from enactment of the directive. That is lunacy at a time of such high unemployment. I have said in the past - I am not making a political point because I said it from 2008 to 2011 also - that the public service and politicians have failed to grasp the severity of the downturn for those who are struggling. We are acting as if we are still living in good economic times. Every Bill should be jobs-proofed. If this Bill was, it would clearly be illustrated that its provisions should be ameliorated as much as possible in the interests of maintaining jobs in the economy.