Paddy Burke (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

We have spent a good while on section 7, the reason being that it is the kernel of this legislation. This is the second House of our Parliament. It is really a blocking House and that is what the House has done. It has held up this legislation and, in my view, it was right to do so. I have not met any of these farmers. I do not know them but everybody knows when they feel something is not fair. The view has been expressed right across this House, by Members from all parties and by Independent Members, that what has been offered to workers and to the farmers and employers is not fair. I am disappointed that the Department has not met with the farmers in recent weeks. This House has given ample time for those meetings to take place.

This Bill strikes me as being much the same as the Public Health (Alcohol) Act 2018. That Act went through this House and put a great imposition on small retailers the length and breadth of this country. It put impossible restrictions on some of the small retailers who sold alcohol. This House saw that at the time. The Government was not too happy with the House, just as I believe it is not happy that this Bill is being held up. This House feels that there is an injustice here. As previous speakers have said today and during our last session on this Bill, there is not a sense of fairness in this Bill. I ask the Minister of State to give an indication to this House of what is going to take place after this legislation is passed or that he will stop the progress of the legislation for another while to allow meetings to take place. In other words, I ask him to give an indication that something positive is going to happen.

The last time I spoke on this Bill, I said that the hardest thing my wife and I have had to do was to close down a business. It is not that easy to close a business. Everybody comes after one, including creditors, Revenue, people seeking redundancy and everybody else. One needs a fair pot of money to close a business. As has been pointed out, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine is setting a precedent in closing down these farmers' businesses. Some of them have been in business for 35 years. That is a long time to spend building up a business. It takes a long time to build up a business. We have heard that every assistance will be given to them to create alternative businesses. If these alternative businesses are going to be so lucrative, they would already exist and employ people, but they do not exist. When one considers the amount of money needed to develop an enterprise in an area such as poultry production, egg production or pig production of a magnitude comparable to the enterprises of those people who are now making a wage and employing people, the amount of money they are getting to close down pales into insignificance.We cannot have bicycle shops and all of that stuff all over the countryside. Everybody knows that only one such enterprise is profitable in a given area. Few enterprises like coffee shops along walking routes make money to any great degree.

I ask the Minister of State to treat these people in a very fair manner and look very favourably on what might be the outcome of his negotiations with them, even if it is after the legislation is passed. They are not being treated well, to be quite honest. The only obligation on the farmers is to pay statutory redundancy to workers. There is a good bit of talking to be done regarding the Bill. As previous speakers have said, this could be the start of things to come in regard to the just transition that has to take place. If it is, we are not getting off to a very good start with this Bill. I hope the Minister of State gives a strong indication to the House that there will be changes to what we have heard heretofore.