Vol. 476 No. 1
3 Miss Harney asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment the representations or contacts, if any, made by him or officials at his Department to the IDA in relation to the organisation of working time legislation. [6441/97].
There have been numerous contacts between myself, officials in my Department and IDA Ireland concerning the legislation to implement the Directive on the Organisation of Working Time. The views of the IDA on the legislation were sought when legislative proposals were being prepared and there have been continuing contacts since. In the course of these discussions the IDA made a variety of points about perceptions that might be generated about the Bill's possible impact. These views have been fully taken into account in the course of preparing the Bill and in formulating the amendments tabled on Committee Stage.
Shortly before the Bill was considered on Committee Stage, the IDA was briefed on developments in the legislation, including the proposed amendments and indicated its general satisfaction at the manner in which the concerns of its client companies were being addressed. After this meeting I became aware that, in early January, prior to the Committee Stage amendments being known, the IDA had written to the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy conveying some views on the legislation. As I explained at my press conference last week, I conveyed my surprise at the contents of the letter to the IDA. However, I did not request that body to withdraw the letter. Subsequently, it withdrew the letter, on its own initiative, explaining that its views on the legislation had altered considerably since it had been written.
This Bill is a balanced measure, arrived at through deep and wide consultation with the social partners. This partnership approach has served Ireland well. It has served employers, employees and the unemployed well. It has brought, along with this Government's excellent handling of the economy, industrial peace, economic well-being, increased employment, reduced unemployment, low inflation and low mortgage interest rates. The Bill is built on this approach.
The Government has adopted the most flexible approach in line with the partnership arrangements that are fundamental to Government policy in this area. In the preparation of this Bill, the maintenance of competitiveness in the economy and the attractions of this country as a location for inward investment have been of primary concern to me, the Government and the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Eithne Fitzgerald. I am satisfied the proposed legislation poses no threat in this respect.
While the Minister may not have asked IDA Ireland to withdraw the letter, clearly he exerted pressure on that body. Does he agree that establishing contact with that body and expressing his surprise would be sufficient warning from any Minister? With whom in the IDA did the Minister establish contact? Was it with its chief executive?
I established contact with its chief executive on this topic, as I have on numerous occasions. Therein lies my surprise at the letter because many of the issues we discussed surrounded individual companies. Several companies expressed concerns which were addressed in the course of our discussions. They essentially formed the Committee Stage amendments introduced by the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Eithne Fitzgerald. The Deputy will be aware of some of those amendments which will afford significant flexibility in implementing the provisions of the Organisation of Working Time Bill, such as the definition of "working time", those who are exempt, the arrangements for a transition period and so on. In addition, we have established a monitoring committee to oversee its implementation. The amendments to that Bill were very much a product of the interaction between the two Ministers, our Department, the IDA, its clientele and other, wider industrial and trade union interests.
Does the Minister accept that, as was said in its letter, IDA Ireland was seriously concerned that Ireland was not taking advantage of the opt-out clause? Since that has remained the position, is the Minister suggesting that IDA Ireland has changed its mind and is no longer concerned that we are not taking advantage of that opt-out?
The Deputy will see that IDA Ireland has already spoken and indicated that, at the time that letter was written, it was not privy to the amendments being introduced to the Bill. Indeed it has expressed satisfaction at the approach adopted by the Government and my Department to the introduction and implementation of this Bill. We have always taken considerable heed of any advice from that body. However, I strongly reiterate that the issue of the opt-out clause is not a fundamental element. Ireland is an extremely competitive location. Since introducing this legislation we have attracted and announced 11,000 additional overseas jobs here. It ill-serves the House for Members to suggest we are undermining our competitiveness in some way since we have one of the most demonstrable, competitive packages for overseas investment throughout Europe, evidence of which is manifested in job performance.
Will the Minister accept the IDA letter was withdrawn only three weeks after it was sent because its political master ensured it would be withdrawn by expressing his concerns? Is that not the case?
That is categorically not the case. I have had numerous discussions with the IDA on this issue. Those discussions gave rise to the surprise expressed when I learned of the letter. The IDA's action, which it took entirely on its own account, demonstrates the sensible approach we have adopted in relation to the introduction of this legislation. I am convinced this legislation will be seen as a broad part of a package for a competitive environment in Ireland for the creation of employment and the attraction of overseas industry.
