Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Jobs and Innovation, Deputy Perry, to the House.

I have been asked to read a cautionary note to Senator Cullinane. As the Senator is aware, I had to rule out of order certain aspects of the Senator's Adjournment matter as they appeared to me to encroach on the functions of the High Court, which is not permissible under Standing Order 47 relating to matters that are sub judice. I ask Senator Cullinane to respect my ruling when discussing this issue. The Seanad Office has provided him with a text that is admissible. For his information, he cannot raise the matter of compensation for workers and the protection of the workers' pension scheme. These matters go to the heart of the deliberations of the High Court case and may damage the proceedings. Senator Cullinane has four minutes to put his case to the Minister of State, being mindful of the admonition that I have to read to him. It is a guideline.

David Cullinane (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State is aware that the former Waterford Crystal workers brought a case to the Commercial Court.

The Commercial Court sought advice from the European Court of Justice on a number of aspects of the State's obligations under the European Union 2008 insolvency directive. The European Court of Justice ruled last week and found that the State had failed in its obligations to implement measures which safeguard workers' pensions in respect of a double insolvency and that the State had not implemented Article 8 of the EU insolvency directive.

I hosted a briefing in the audio-visual room today which was attended by Members from all parties and none. The briefing was given by Mr. Jimmy Kelly and Mr. Walter Cullen, officials from Unite, Mr. Tom Hogan and Mr. Michael Dooley, former Waterford Crystal workers and plaintiffs in the court case to which I referred, Ms Mona Costello, the lawyer for the workers, and Mr. John O'Connell, a pensions expert. The two former workers spoke about their experience of working for 30 years and 40 years in Waterford Crystal. They found out at very short notice that their jobs were gone, that they were essentially being locked out of their jobs and that they were being left without proper redundancy payments and without proper terms and conditions being implemented. They were treated very badly by the company. The workers then found out that not only was the company insolvent but that their pension fund was insolvent and that after long service to a company, they would not get their proper entitlements in terms of redundancy nor would they get the vast bulk of their pension into which they had paid. To add insult to injury, they then found out to their cost that the State had failed in its obligation. If the State had implemented the 2008 European Union insolvency directive, those workers' pensions would have been protected.

I commend those workers for taking the court case and congratulate them on their victory. However, I appeal to the Government to act. I understand this must go back to the Commercial Court but the strong message from all the people who made the presentation in the audio-visual room today - from the legal people to the pensions expert to the workers themselves to the union - was that the Government should not drag its heels. While the Leas-Chathaoirleach can argue it is sub judice, that does not stop the Government from acting. The Government has it within its power to enter into immediate negotiations with the trade union to properly compensate the former Waterford Crystal workers.

I will leave it to the Commercial Court to make its decision but I am asking the Government to start negotiations with the former workers. The delegation was very clear that if the Government does that, then agreement can be reached to everybody's satisfaction. However, there must be justice for former Waterford Crystal workers who must get their pensions. What steps will the Government take following this judgment? Will it drag its heels, drag this out further and add insult to injury or will it accept the court's ruling and allow the Commercial Court to run its course but enter into negotiations with the trade union, properly compensate the workers and seek to put in place legislation, which it ultimately will be compelled to do, to ensure all workers and their pensions are protected?

John Perry (Sligo-North Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for Social Protection. On 25 April last, the European Court of Justice issued a ruling which contained a number of clarifications regarding transposition EU Directive 2008/94EC which concerns the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer. This ruling was in response to a July 2011 referral from the High Court regarding proceedings brought by former workers at Waterford Crystal. The High Court had, in taking the view that interpretation of the provisions of directive 2008/94 was necessary in order for it to give its decision in this case, decided to stay the proceedings and to refer a number of questions to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.

Following the European Court of Justice ruling, the matter will now revert to the High Court for consideration. Given this matter remains before the courts, it would not be appropriate for me to comment further on any specific aspects of the case at this time.

David Cullinane (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

While I understand the brevity of the response and the fact the Minister of State may be reluctant to discuss this further, I must stress that there is nothing stopping the State from doing something of its own volition. There is nothing stopping the Minister for Finance starting discussions with Unite and the former workers. I appeal to the Minister of State to use his good office to appeal to him to start those discussions and negotiations. There was cross-party support at today's briefing for that to happen. It should happen because those workers deserve justice.

If it is seen by people in Waterford and those workers that the Government is continuing to hide behind the court and legal issues and dragging its feet on this issue, it will be fiercely resisted. The vast majority of people in Waterford feel very deeply for those former Waterford Crystal workers. For anybody who believes in justice, the Government must do the right thing by those workers. I appeal to the Minister of State to ask the Minister for Finance to arrange a meeting with the delegation and start those discussions, which will happen anyway.

Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sure the Minister of State will convey the Senator's remarks.

John Perry (Sligo-North Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to emphasise what I said in my response. I stated that following the European Court of Justice ruling, the matter will now revert to the High Court for consideration, which is very important, and that given that this matter remains before the courts, it would not be appropriate for me to comment further on any specific aspects of the case at this time.