Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. I agree with the previous speaker, that the motion before us is very timely, coming as it does at the end of a recession and at the same time entering into a period of growth. Senator Power made some very cogent arguments in support of the motion. It would be difficult for anybody who has the welfare of citizens at heart to disagree with the essence of what has been said here this evening.

We are especially lucky in this country in the past 20 years that we have very good industrial relations. In fact, we have had very little industrial unrest. That is a very important plank of development and growth in any economy. It is particularly true when one is considering investment from outside the country. There have been some glaring cases, which have upset many people. I refer first to what happened in Waterford Crystal and the long-drawn out saga which we had there, and the manner in which the workers had to fight for their pension rights. It seemed like daylight robbery for anybody who had even a cursory glance at the story. The Dunnes Stores episode also stands out as something of which we cannot be particularly proud.

On the other hand, there is nothing to be gained by setting out to hammer industrialists or employers who have stepped out of line. We must look at the matter in a positive and productive way. The minimum wage rate per hour of €8.65 has been in place since 2007, a period of eight years. Much has changed in that time. I do not believe there has been any assessment of the changes within the economy during the period to assess whether the rate amounts to a living wage. I accept it is a minimum wage but there is no doubt there is a difference between a minimum wage set by legislation and a living wage. We must decide on what constitutes a living wage. The Low Pay Commission should have some role in deciding what is a living wage. It would obviously vary from one part of the country to another. One must also take into account the fluctuations in the economy in terms of the construction sector, the acquisition of houses and mortgages. Many areas have changed the landscape radically, yet we have not stopped to think what it would mean to the person who is trying to live on a certain wage and the demands on them.

In addition, one must look for value for money. It all depends on what one is expected to buy with the minimum wage. It is necessary to examine the effect of the water tax, property tax and other taxes because they minimise the effectiveness of the wage one brings home. One cannot just talk about looking after the rights of employers, one must also look after rights in terms of public provision as well. However, one thing is certain, an hourly rate of €8.65 cannot be considered a living wage in any context whatsoever.

The most productive businesses are ones where the workforce is happy. That has been proven time and again. If the workforce is not happy then that will impact negatively on the work which is being done. I do not have figures to support the case, but I think there was a degree of exploitation once the recession set in. We saw the same exploitation with the undocumented Irish when they went to America, simply because they could not get their rights. The same applied during the recession. People found themselves in very precarious situations. Very often they were prepared to accept less than what they were entitled to. Given that we are entering into a period of growth, that day of exploitation must be confronted and made to stop.

In terms of conditions within the workplace itself, I could never understand why there is any resistance to collective bargaining, representation or to the trade union movement. It is the only mechanism that guarantees first, fair play for the people who are being represented, but it also contributes to a working environment which is conducive to providing the goods, so to speak. Therefore, we should be very clear about discouraging in every way the idea that dividing and conquering within a workforce is the way to make progress. It is not a good policy.

Other issues arise also which employers could examine. We are all very clear on one thing, namely, employers have a difficult position as well. One cannot get water out of a stone.The main thing is to provide the structures which are necessary for delivering what is correct. We have come a long way in regard to the idea of any type of discrimination in work. If there were discrimination, I think it would jump out very strongly and there would be a reaction to it straight away.

I also feel there should be opportunities in the workplace to progress and improve people's position. It is one thing to have training opportunities in community employment schemes and so on. However, opportunities should also exist within the workplace in order that people can see it not just as a full stop type position but also as improving their position. It would be in the interest of any good employer to give employees the opportunity to do courses for self-advancement.

To come back to the motion, it is exceptionally well crafted and has a number of interacting elements which we should not deal with in isolation but together. The appeal we are making to the Government is to engage with all the partners in employment - trade unions, the Low Pay Commission, employees and employers - to give them all the opportunity to have an input into a proper charter as we go forward.