David Cullinane (Sinn Fein)

I oppose the amendment. I support what the Government is doing here and I support the advice which has come from the Attorney General.

I am flabbergasted at some of the comments that I have heard so far in the Chamber today because I fail to see how we will see job losses on the scale that some Senators have stated we will see them. I just do not see it. Senator Walsh spoke of three Senators who represent themselves in terms of them being business people. I applaud those who set up businesses and entrepreneurs, but I also have spoken to those who represent workers in trade unions. I refer not to the senior trade union representatives on high salaries of whom Senator Walsh spoke but to those on the ground who represent agency workers. I spoke to agency workers. I was part of a campaign that SIPTU and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions initiated to protect workers.

This is a simple measure we are trying to implement. It is not convoluted and complicated, as somebody said. It is to try to bring about equity for those who are agency workers and those who are directly employed permanent workers.

I am at a loss. Perhaps those Senators could point out to me from where the job losses will come, how they believe this will amount to massive job losses, and why that is so. If that was the case, it would say more about employers in this country than anything else.

Senator White should explain why an employer would want to leave an agency worker go simply because he or she is being asked to provide that worker with the same terms and conditions as somebody who is a permanent worker. Senators should explain how they believe this will amount to job losses and why they have a difficulty with the notion of agency workers having the same rights and entitlements.