Feargal Quinn (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House for the Committee Stage debate on a very interesting Bill. I listened very carefully to Senator Landy's comments. I believe it was 100 or 150 years ago when Members of Parliament in Britain were first paid, but many members of the Conservative Party did not want to be paid. However, under-privileged Members of Parliament argued that they had to be paid or they would not be able to afford to represent their constituents. That is Senator Landy's basic point. To the extent that it applies in the case of the Houses of the Oireachtas, it also applies in the case of local councillors. While very few councillors are full-time public representatives, a number of them are full-time. In our democracy we need people of varied views and experience and we do not want to find that people can only be politicians if they have sufficient income from other sources. I urge the Minister of State to give some consideration to the point made by Senator Landy.

I also listened very carefully to Senator Zappone and could not disagree with her objectives and what she is seeking to achieve. However, I must question if it is wise to introduce phrases like "quality job creation" and "decent work". These terms are vague and what constitutes "quality job creation" or "decent work" is debatable. When I started in business, there were no self-service shops here, only counter-service shops. When we opened our first self-service shop, a number of people said that it was not good for the economy or for our employees. They argued that we would have fewer employees than would be the case with counter-service shops and, on that basis, there was quite a strong movement against the development of self-service shops. That would have been a huge mistake but the argument being made at the time was that people need "decent" work and "quality" jobs and that we should not be depriving people of work. I would have doubts about the wisdom of including terms such as "quality job creation" and "decent work" in the legislation and believe the Bill is better as currently drafted. I say that reluctantly because Senator Zappone made a very strong and understandable case for the inclusion of such phrases. However, if the legislation is to work and achieve its objectives, it should not be vague.If we are to have legislation that works and achieves its objectives, we must be careful not to be vague.