David Cullinane (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I would like to respond on amendment No. 12, although I first confirm I will be withdrawing amendment No. 14 and thank the Minister of State for his amendment No. 13. To return to amendment No. 12, this could be looked at in a number of different ways. It could be argued that this is tying the hands of the commission but one could make that argument about this Bill anyway. In essence, whatever structure the Minister of State puts in place, he is essentially tying the hands of the commission. The commission is being set up to do a particular job and it is then up to us in the Oireachtas to determine what it is we want the commission to look at.

There is a difference of opinion between the Minister of State and not just me but others outside this House, who see the commission almost solely, or at least primarily, as dealing with the national minimum wage. What people want is for the commission to look at those who earn below two-thirds of the median wage, in other words, the 20% of workers who are in low pay, and then make recommendations, not just on varying the national minimum wage but on strategies on how to deal with low pay and all those other issues. It depends on how we look at it. What these three subsections of the amendment do is to give a clear focus to the Low Pay Commission.The amendment would not tie the hands of the commission in a negative way, as the Minister of State presented, if it were passed. It would tell the commission it needs to monitor the incidence of low pay by examining the prevalence of pay two thirds or below the median earnings, in other words to look at the prevalence of low pay and ask why it is happening in certain sectors, why we are creating so many low-paid jobs and what needs to happen to change it. It would involve looking at these dynamics and then making recommendations. I do not see what is wrong with this. I do not understand the Government's political rationale because it would make huge sense. The Government would have support from all parties and none if it was prepared to go the extra mile and make the Low Pay Commission something more substantial.

The amendment is not being overly prescriptive in a negative way. It sets out the real issues affecting low-paid workers, which is not just the national minimum wage. There are all the other issues we have discussed. It is about low pay in its entirety, and the 20% and not just the 5% on the national minimum wage. There is a lack of a regulatory framework and we know abuses happened in certain internships and labour activation measures. I agree with the previous speakers that some internships and labour activation schemes were very good and some people have done very well out of them, but some have not worked out so well. It would be a good function of the Low Pay Commission to examine this area. Apprenticeships are being examined by various Departments doing various things, but the commission could look at the issue of internships holistically, and put them front and centre in terms of good quality well thought out internships that serve a real purpose and have a real value and do what they are intended to do and not allow some unscrupulous employers to exploit workers.