Denis Landy (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House and I welcome the views of all Members. Our group's motion is an attempt to deal with a specific ongoing issue but it also looks beyond that to the longer range view of how we deal with industrial relations in this country. I will debunk a number of myths that have been mentioned in this debate.I wish to make clear that none of my party colleagues who has spoken said anything about the current system - be it the Labour Court or the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC - being unfit for purpose. That is language that was introduced here; it is not ours. An earlier speaker gave the impression of responding to my colleagues, but let us be clear on this - we are satisfied with the work the WRC and the Labour Court do. We are seeking to put in place a provision that will not allow two cars to crash into each other, which is a strike. We want both sides, employers and unions, to examine where labour relations are going and where problems may arise. In that way, unions, management and employers can come together in unison for the betterment of society and of employer-employee relations.

What we propose is quite clearly not a reintroduction of social partnership. It is, therefore, incorrect for Sinn Féin to brand the motion as a backdoor for the reintroduction of social partnership. The premise of the amendment is incorrect, so it should be withdrawn. In that regard, I am surprised by the stance of my colleague, Senator Gavan, who is a SIPTU official and lets us know it. I commend him on that. I was also a branch secretary of a union, on a voluntary basis, for 13 years so I have some knowledge of the area. Nobody in this Chamber would dispute the credentials of Mr. David Begg as a trade union official and activist. In today's edition of The Irish Times, Mr. Begg put forward the concept contained in this motion. Senior SIPTU members, with whom we have discussed this matter, are in favour of another tier being put in place. Senator Gavan may be on a solo run, I am not sure, but he is certainly not talking on behalf of SIPTU.

Much has been said about Labour in government and what we failed to do. I would like to bring to the attention of the House the relevant subvention figures, starting with Bus Éireann, the subvention for which in 2013 was €34 million. The Bus Éireann subvention during the peak of the boom in 2006 - under Fianna Fáil - was €26 million. The subvention for Dublin Bus in 2013, when we were in government and defended it, was €74 million. Under Fianna Fáil at the peak of the boom, the subvention for Dublin Bus was €69 million. It is, therefore, folly to argue that Labour did not stand up for the PSO system and public transport when it was in government. I would appreciate it if, in future, people making such allegations against my party would do better research.

This is not just a Dublin Bus issue. Like many other Senators, I come from a rural area. I take issue with what Senator Reilly said, namely, that we cannot measure a benchmark subsidisation across Europe. In fact, this has already been done. The subvention level in Ireland is the second or third lowest in Europe. I recently visited France, where it costs €1 to travel 50 miles on the metro and €28 to travel six miles by taxi. It is clear that Government policy in France favours public transport, which is what we are seeking to do here. It is not a question of being against anybody. Rather, it is about being in favour of public transport. The only way to do that in a country such as ours, which is predominantly rural, is to provide a proper subvention. The only way to get from my town of Carrick-on-Suir to Dublin is by getting a rural link bus 14 miles to pick up a Bus Éireann service. If we continue down that road, we will further isolate rural areas and we will never rectify the problems arising from the new Government's efforts to downgrade Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus.

I used taxis during the bus strike days in Dublin. Taxi drivers and 99% of the public support Dublin Bus workers in the context of the work they do. I got onto a bus this morning and was unsure of which stop to get off at but the driver took the time to explain the route and destination. That is the public service we want to defend. We are confident we can defend it with motions such as that before the House.