Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank all the Senators for their contributions and for assisting us with having a timely debate on the Bill and progressing it this week in order that we can, I hope, get it finalised. We will be back in the House on Thursday or Friday to deal with any amendments they might wish to put forward.Some amendments were put forward in the other House. We dealt with them, went through them and explained the rationale behind them. Hopefully, we can do the same and reach agreement in this House and progress the legislation quickly.

Again, I thank all Senators for their contributions. I think everybody welcomed the publication of the Bill, which is a positive thing. This reflects our debate in the other House. I know people still have concerns on some aspects. It is important we respect the decisions of the Supreme Court and implement the changes, so that the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, can get on with its work. We compliment the work of the WRC and recognise the great work it is doing. Generally, it moves cases through quite swiftly. We want to respond to that and enable it to continue to do that work quickly.

As I said earlier, the purpose of the Bill is to ensure we deal with the matters of immediate concern identified by the Supreme Court in the case. It is important that this was a majority decision. There is the case we are trying to remedy as quickly as we can. Senator Crowe and others mentioned the delays and backlogs in cases that might come about because of that. I want to be clear that the WRC is continuing to schedule cases. I am informed that of the 1,601 hearings scheduled from the 6 April 2021 to 22 June 2021, only 27 were adjourned. That is the most recent data, although I am conscious that we are now in July. Senators Crowe and Sherlock were concerned about this. However, 27 were adjourned, due to the adjudication officers' concluding that adjournment was necessary to facilitate a note or an affirmation to be administered. That is why this legislation it is important.

There are a range of outcomes that may arise when hearings are scheduled. These are: that they will be postponed prior to the meeting; that the hearing can be completed; or that issues case managed to reduce the matter to be dealt with if adjourned. They may be part-heard, requiring them to reschedule later. They may also settle prior to, or during, the hearing. Some Senators asked if a case had already started whether parties could go back to mediation if they wanted to. The answer is that they can. Not everybody wants to his or her case heard in public and might prefer to go back to mediation.

The issue of privacy, as well as of public and private, has been raised as a concern. I agree with Senator Seery-Kearney that is important we have justice administered in public. There are clear mechanisms for people who have concerns with that, and who, for various reasons, want to have the case held in private. Both parties or a single party can apply to do so. The adjudicator can decide to administer the justice in private if needs be. We have a review in 12 months' time to allay concerns around that.

There will be regulations and guidelines to inform that practice and to make sure that it is administered and used properly. I would be happy to engage with Members, like we did before with the committee, around the regulation and the guidelines before we fully sign off on them. I am open to doing that with Members who want to involve themselves in that process, because we are determined to do this right, and with the approval of Members. I am happy to do that and to share the regulations with Members. I am confident that it is about bringing transparency to all of the decisions of the WRC. It welcomes that, as would most people.

I do not agree that this would deter employees bringing cases forward. People should recognise that in this country we are entitled to have our rights vindicated. We should have no fears in doing that. On previous days, there was commentary that this would prevent that. It should not and will not. We do not want to encourage this in any shape or form. Any decent employer will not hold it against a potential employee who took a case to the WRC to vindicate his or her rights under our employment law. We are proud of our legislation in this country. People should feel free to be able to use it and should not be deterred from going to the courts or the WRC. Hopefully, we can work with Members to give people assurances and the confidence they need. The WRC can do its job well, either in public or private. That is what we are trying to do.

Senator O'Loughlin raised the issue of the offence of perjury. All fraudulent claims should be prevented because people’s reputations are affected on all sides of this. That is why perjury is included in the amendments. It should strengthen the case with the WRC in terms of justice.

I have dealt with private hearings and with most of these things I was asked about. A few Senators raised the work the WRC does and whether it has enough people to do it. They quoted the number of inspectors. At this stage, the WRC's budget is approximately €15 million. It has been that amount for the last number of years and it will remain at that. We engage with the chair of the WRC and its team to ensure it has enough resources to carry out its work. Of course, it is extremely busy. We are in the process of recruiting new inspectors to back up its service. At the moment, there are approximately 53 WRC inspectors, 48 of whom are at executive officer, EO, level, while five are at higher executive officer, HEO, level. We are engaging in the process to bring in new people. We recognise there needs to be an increase in its staff levels. I am happy to work with the WRC directly on that in the years ahead. Part of my job as, Minister of State with responsibility for it, is to secure extra money for it. I am glad we are doing that. We will continue to do that.

There is also training for the WRC inspectors and we will do that as well. A decision made in 2006 about the number being 90 is often referred to. To be clear, many changes and reforms have happened since that point. That year predates the WRC being set up. Five bodies were brought together to create the WRC. We made these changes nine or ten years later. In 2015, we brought in a new law. Therefore, I do not think 2006 is the best point of reference. The agreement was made with the unions in 2006, prior to what happened in this country in 2007, 2008, and 2009. There were many changes on the way, and not just in terms of what happened financially to the country, but in how the WRC was set up and how it was run. The bodies have changed. While I accept we need to strengthen numbers, I do not necessarily think 90 is the right number to get to. However, we will work with the WRC to make sure we are at the appropriate level. That is what I am doing under the direction and guidance of the Tánaiste.

I hope I have covered all the questions that were raised. I look forward to being here again during the week to complete the legislation, if we can.