Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 12 Oct 2005

Vol. 607 No. 3

Employment Permits Bill 2005: Second Stage.

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

This Bill has two key objectives. First, it puts in place a statutory framework within which I will implement an active, managed economic migration policy, the details of which I am announcing to the House today. The three pillars of this employment permit policy will be green cards, an intra-company transfer scheme and a revised work permits system. Second, it provides a number of new important protections for migrant workers working in Ireland.

Before dealing with these two key objectives and going on to describe the sections of the Bill in detail, I wish first to put the Bill in context in terms of our economic and labour market situation. Obviously, economic migration policy must be responsive to different stages of economic development and to labour market conditions. We can be satisfied that our economic migration policy to date has been responsive in this way. During the past ten years, for example, Ireland has been transformed from being primarily a country of emigration, or outward migration, to a country of immigration, or inward migration. During the late 1980s as many as 65,000 people left Ireland each year. This has changed so much that in the year to April 2005, the same number migrated into Ireland.

Economic migration policy responded quickly to the improvement in our economic performance, the fall in unemployment and the resultant labour shortages. As a consequence, the number of work permits issued increased dramatically from slightly less than 6,000 in 1999 to close to 48,000 in 2003. When the new ten member states joined the EU, as a significant mark of solidarity with our new EU partners and in recognition of the tightness of our labour market, the Government decided to grant freedom of movement to nationals from these states from the date of accession on 1 May 2004. This has had a major impact on the number of work permits being granted. In the nine months to the end of September, a total of 20,400 permits were issued, of which just 6,000 were new permits. In the year 2000 we also introduced the work visa-work authorisation system to deal with skills shortages among highly skilled occupations in the information and communications technology, construction and health sectors, in particular. Last year 1,500 of these permits were issued.

There is now great diversity in our labour force. Nationals from more than 100 countries work here and between 1999 and 2005 the number working here rose from 3.7% to 8%, or about 160,000, of the total labour force. Therefore, so far our work permit policy has served the needs of the economy well and has reacted flexibly and successfully to the requirements and changes in our labour force. This Bill is another response to our skills and labour force needs.

The Employment Permits Bill puts in place a statutory framework for an active, managed economic migration policy. The economic policy context for this was set out in the enterprise strategy group report and the Government's action plan to implement it. Both the report and the action plan had as their objective the moving of the economy to a position where it is both knowledge-based and innovation driven.

Labour market policy measures are a key part of the objective in three ways. First, we must continue to upskill our own workforce and the One Step Up initiative, which I launched last month, will be crucial. This €35 million initiative, being implemented by FÁS, will upskill our workforce through a process of life long learning. It focuses in particular on lower skilled workers in SMEs as that is where the most need lies.

Second, we must maximise the potential for European Economic Area nationals to fill most of our skills deficits. We are now part of a labour market of 200 million workers who have free access to our relatively small labour market of 2 million. We are obliged as EU members to have regard for Community preference in meeting our labour market needs. Many citizens from the ten new European Union member states have already come to work in Ireland. It is estimated that over 90,000 of them have come to work here at some stage since January 2004.

There is no doubt that appropriate EEA workers are available to fill most of our skills shortages. The Forfás expert group on future skills needs came to this conclusion in its report entitled, Skills Needs in the Irish Economy: the Role of Migration, which it will publish later this month. I am arranging to supply draft copies of the report to the Opposition spokespersons. I did not wish to delay the passage of the Bill.

However, there are skills shortages which cannot be sourced other than through economic migration. This the reason the third key labour market policy measure to move our economy to one that is both innovation-driven and knowledge-based is the development of a strategic skills-based immigration policy to which the enterprise strategy group report specifically referred to and which this Bill will allow me to implement.

The focus of this policy will be to efficiently and effectively import those skills which are required to quickly move our economy onto a new plane but which cannot be sourced either within Ireland or the EEA. The strategic skills-based immigration policy that I am announcing today has taken into account the views of the Forfás expert group on future skills needs as expressed in its report.

The expert group report referred to the economic arguments that a migration policy which targets individuals possessing high level or scarce skills can have a significantly positive impact on economic performance, on GDP per capita and productivity, particularly when company-specific skills are required. I regard these arguments as compelling and they have informed the policy I am announcing today. I thank the expert group on future skills needs for its work in this area which has been a very useful input to policy.

Our economic migration policy will be vacancy-driven rather than based on quotas or points. The core of the policy is the offer of a job. In this way our employment permits policy will be both more responsive and more efficient in responding to the needs of the labour market. Our system will be simple and transparent rather than complex and bureaucratic. We will avoid the complexities and inefficiencies involved in points and quota systems. The expert skills group report also favoured this approach.

The new employment permits system, which it is my intention to introduce next year, has three pillars. Pillar one is the establishment for the first time in Ireland of a green card for occupations where there are skills shortages. This will be for a restricted list of occupations in the annual salary range from €30,000 to €60,000 and for a more extensive list of occupations in the annual salary range above €60,000. Pillar two is a re-established intra-company transfer scheme for temporary trans-national management transfers. Pillar three is a work permit scheme for a very restricted list of occupations up to €30,000, where the shortage is one of labour rather than skills. These three pillars will be the means of implementing an actively managed economic migration policy.

This Bill provides a framework within which I have the flexibility to adapt and use different migration policy instruments based on different criteria, as necessary. I will keep the implementation of the current set of policy instruments under review and will adapt them as necessary as the economy and the labour market continue to change. In doing so we will take on board the lessons learned by other countries, including the integration issues raised by the experience in those countries. I am aware the International Organisation for Migration will in the coming months produce a report on the economic and social implications of migration to Ireland, which has been commissioned by the National Economic and Social Council. I look forward to considering its findings.

The green card system will be for occupations where there are high level or strategic skills shortages. I will cite the key features of this new green card system. First, where the annual salary, excluding bonuses, on offer is in excess of €60,000, which is twice the average industrial wage, the green card will be available for an extensive list of occupations. It will also be available in the annual salary range from €30,000 to €60,000, which is between the average industrial wage and twice that level, for a restricted number of occupations where skills shortages are being experienced. These occupations will be identified following advice from the expert group and will be reviewed on a regular basis.

There are two reasons for using salary thresholds in this way. First, in many cases high pay is a reasonable proxy for high skills and this has been demonstrated by the current work visa-work authorisation scheme. Second, salary levels provide some assurance that these workers can provide for their families here without State assistance.

The expert group report has already given very firm indications of the sectors and occupations in question. The report refers to skills shortages in the information and communications technology, healthcare and construction sectors to which the current work visa-work authorisation scheme applies. The report also includes other sectors such as construction, financial services, engineering, pharmaceutical, and sales and marketing.

In the allocation of green cards, regard will also be had to the skills, qualifications and experience of the workers. The number of green cards will be kept under constant review to ensure that it is not excessive, given the small size of our labour market.

The second key feature of the system is that green cards will be issued for two years initially, with the possibility of permanent or long-term residence after that. Third, green card holders will be permitted to bring their spouses and families to join them immediately and their spouses will have the right to work without a work permit.

With the implementation of this new green card system the existing work visa-work authorisation system, which has addressed our needs in this area until now, will be discontinued. The new green card will ensure that we can attract and retain the skills we need to move our economy to one based on innovation and knowledge.

The second pillar of our new employment permit system is the re-establishment of the intra-company transfer scheme. This scheme is strictly for temporary management level transfers within a company or group of companies and will allow for the temporary transfer of key management staff from overseas companies to offices in Ireland for a period of up to five years. This scheme will bring Ireland into line with current best international practice.

The third pillar of our system will be a revised work permits system in which work permits will be required to be applied for in respect of both those occupations in the annual salary range from €30,000 to €60,000 for which green cards will not be issued and a limited number of occupations below an annual salary of €30,000 where there are significant labour shortages; these occupations will be identified following advice from the expert group on future skills needs. In both cases a labour market test, including advertisements in the national or local press showing that the positions could not be filled from within the EEA, will need to be met. Work permits will be granted first for a period of two years, followed by a further period of three years. The fee will be the same as now, €500 per annum, in other words, €1,000 for the first two-year period, and €1,500 for the following three-year period.

The other key objective of this Bill is the provision of a number of new important protections for migrant workers. These include the granting of both the employment permit — whether the work permit or the green card — to the employee, rather than to the employer. The Bill allows both the employee and the employer to apply for an employment permit, whether it be a work permit or a green card, based on an offer of employment. I expect that initially the employer will continue to apply for the work permit. This will facilitate the enforcement of employees' rights and traceability.

The employment permit will contain a statement of the rights and entitlements of the migrant worker, including that the employee may change employment through the application for another permit by a new employer. This will provide migrant workers with greater freedom and flexibility. The Bill prohibits employers from deducting from remuneration any expenses associated with recruitment and from retaining personal documents belonging to the employee. The Bill will introduce significant penalties for breaches of the legislation, comprising fines to a maximum of €50,000 or terms of imprisonment not exceeding five years.

Following my announcement on 12 April 2005, 31 inspector posts have been sanctioned for the labour inspectorate. This represents almost a doubling of inspectorate personnel in the last 12 months and is indicative of my determination to ensure compliance with employment rights legislation. It is important to stress that the labour inspectorate operates without any differentiation with regard to worker nationality, as statutory employment rights and protections apply to immigrant workers in exactly the same manner as they do to native Irish workers. Inspectors pursue allegations of worker mistreatment and when evidence of non-compliance with the relevant employment rights legislation is found, the inspectorate seeks redress for the individuals concerned and, if appropriate, a prosecution is initiated.

There are currently 20 officers serving in inspector posts and, following a competitive interview procedure, a further 11 officers will be appointed. I anticipate this entire process being completed at the end of this month or very soon afterwards. However, the breadth and complexity of the inspectorate's remit is such that considerable training is required. Initially, much of this training is undertaken in the company of an experienced officer who will take time to explain the issues at hand and assist the trainee inspector in developing the skills and confidence necessary to take on tasks alone. A new initiative in this regard is the assignment of an officer to oversee and manage the training and development process in respect of this significant influx of new officers to duties in the inspectorate.

When these officers are fully operational they will be concentrating on those employment sectors that have traditionally required considerable attention from the inspectorate. These would include the construction sector and the services sectors that are covered by employment regulation orders such as hospitality, cleaning and agricultural work. It is notable that many migrant workers are currently employed in these sectors.

Apart from the strengthening of staff resources, other initiatives are also under way. Arising from a commitment in Sustaining Progress, and in order to assist in the preparation of proposals for consideration by Government, a discussion document was prepared by the labour inspectorate concerning its mandate and resourcing. This comprehensive discussion document was prepared and circulated to the social partners in January of this year.

The document covered the full dimension of issues that impact on the operation of the labour inspectorate ranging from the legislative framework right through to operational issues and staff development. The discussion document looked at a range of possibilities around the operation of the inspectorate and offered a spectrum of options ranging from a compliance regime where the initiative would move more toward the aggrieved employee, with the labour inspectorate offering support, to a model where the right of initiative would essentially remain with the inspectorate which would continue to adopt a hands-on approach.

The discussion document is not prescriptive but seeks to present both sides of the argument on an extensive range of issues impacting on the mandate and associated resourcing of the labour inspectorate, together with its linked business units. The primary purpose of the document is to stimulate debate and to signal that fundamental changes in the approach to the enforcement of employment rights compliance should be considered.

The document has been well received among the social partners and the parties are now well advanced in their consideration of the more than 40 proposals on the agenda. The objective is to formulate a set of recommendations for Government arising from the various possibilities presented in the discussion document. The issues being discussed include concerns expressed by the social partners and other Departments. It is intended this process will feed into and complement the up-coming discussions in the context of the negotiations of a new national social partnership agreement.

A proposal of particular interest is that a strategic programme of education and information dissemination on employment rights be undertaken from early next year. It is intended that all general communications media will be utilised in order to underpin message delivery to the respective target audiences. The programme will embrace the demand to target messages to workers in specific sectors and to meet the challenge of informing people who do not have sufficient English for it to be an effective working language for them.

I will now describe the details of the Bill's provisions section by section. Section 1 provides definitions for certain terms used throughout the Bill. In addition, subsections (2) and (3) cover the circumstances under which a recognised employment agency enters into a contract with a person to work or perform a service for a third party. Effectively, employment agencies may not apply for an employment permit on behalf of a third party. Section 2 amends section 2 of the Employment Permits Act 2003 to allow the employment of non-nationals in accordance with the provisions of section 7.

Sections 3 to 6 state the various conditions under which an application for an employment permit can be made. In particular, section 3 provides for the making of an application and outlines the four categories of persons who may apply for an employment permit under this Bill, namely, an employer in the State, non-national, a foreign contractual service supplier, and any other person party to the employment of a non-national in the State. Section 4 provides that all employment permits are granted to the non-national employee, irrespective of who applies for the permit. This is one of the more significant changes that the Bill proposes. Work permits are currently issued to the employer but granting them to the employee will increase the power of migrant workers in the employment relationship. Section 5 specifies the information to be provided in an application for a permit other than by a non-national, that is, applications by employers. The information required mirrors existing specifications with regard to work permit applications. It ensures the proposed non-national candidate has the necessary skills, qualifications and-or experience for the position and that the position is of a nature that requires it to be filled by a non-national. Section 6 specifies the information to be provided in an application for a permit by a non-national, that is, in applications for green cards by non-national employees. This information is currently required to be provided by applicants for a work visa or work authorisation, which is the precursor of the green card.

Section 7 provides for the granting of employment permits by the Minister. This is a fundamental part of the employment permit process which, until now, has not been provided for in legislation. It provides for the granting, by regulation, of permits of unlimited duration to non-national applicants, effectively allowing the establishment of the green card system.

Section 8 provides for the issuing of employment permits granted under section 7 and provides for particular information to be stated on the permit. An employment permit granted under section 7 shall be issued to the non-national employee. Where the application was made by the employer, a copy of the permit will be issued to him or her. Information relating to the rights and entitlements of migrant workers, including their remuneration and a statement of the national minimum wage, the right to change employers and the prohibitions set out in section 22, will be stated on the permit. As I said earlier, these new provisions will increase the awareness of employment rights among migrant workers and will increase their power in the employment relationship.

The provisions of section 9 are designed to meet our EU Treaty Community preference obligations not to grant an employment permit unless it has been offered to EU nationals first. Section 10 stipulates further conditions for consideration when granting of work permits including ascertaining the legitimacy of applications for employment permits, the economic policy of the Government at the time and the terms of any regulations in force with regard to the granting of employment permits.

Section 11 outlines the conditions for refusal to grant an employment permit and the procedures to be applied when an application has been refused, while section 12 provides for review procedures in the case of a decision to refuse to grant an employment permit under section 10.

Section 13 deals with the making of regulations governing the granting and renewal of employment permits, including limiting the number of permits granted, the categories of employment and qualifications or skills and the period covered by the permit. This section together with section 14 enables the Minister to monitor and adjust the employment permits system in line with prevailing economic conditions. Section 14 specifies the criteria that must be observed when making regulations under section 13. These criteria relate to economic and social development and competitiveness in the State.

Section 15 lays down the conditions under which the Minister may revoke an employment permit and sets out the conditions that determine at what stage the revocation will take place while section 16 provides the conditions under which a decision to revoke an employment permit may be submitted to the Minister. The conditions of section 16 largely mirror those outlined under section 12, which deals with the review of the decision to refuse to grant a permit.

Sections 17 to 18 describe various misuses of employment permits that are prohibited and provide that persons in contradiction of these provisions are guilty of an offence. Such misuses include forgery and fraudulent use, alteration of employment permits or illegal transfer of permits.

Section 19 provides for the renewal of employment permits in various circumstances. A significant aspect of this section is its provision to allow the renewal by regulation of permits of unlimited duration to non-national applicants, that is, to green card applicants. This, in effect, grants the right of permanent residency to them. Applicants must confirm that they have complied with the terms of the permit and of this Act up to the point of application for renewal, if deemed necessary. As is the current practice, it is not necessary for them to undertake a labour market test to ensure that the skills deemed necessary for the employment cannot be sourced locally.

Section 20 allows for the cessation and reinstatement of employment permits while section 21 provides for the appointment and conditions of officers authorised for the purposes of the Act. In practice, the Garda national immigration bureau enforces the law with regard to illegal working. The labour inspectorate of my Department has responsibility for the monitoring and enforcement of rights, protections and entitlements under employment protection legislation.

Section 22 provides additional statutory protection for migrant workers, including prohibiting employers from either deducting recruitment expenses from remuneration or from retaining workers' personal documents, including passports. Any employer who contravenes any of the provisions of this section is guilty of an offence.

Section 23 provides for the circumstances pertaining to the surrender of an employment permit, namely that the holder is obliged to return the permit to my Department within four weeks of the date the employment ceased. Section 24 relates to the provision of false or misleading information, which is an offence. Under section 25 employers are obliged to retain, make available and furnish to an authorised officer, if requested, books, records and accounts concerning a non-national employee. A person who contravenes this section is guilty of an offence.

Section 26 provides for the establishment and maintenance of a register of employment permits granted under the Act. This information is already recorded by my Department. Section 27 enables the Minister to make regulations to govern the procedures for the application for, and renewal of, an employment permit. This section deals primarily with administrative matters.

Section 28 provides for the making of regulations on a range of issues referred to in the Act and provides for their laying before the Houses of the Oireachtas while section 29 provides for the serving of notices and their requirements.

Section 30 provides for penalties and proceedings with regard to offences committed under this Bill. On conviction for an offence under this Bill a person may be liable for a fine from €5,000 up to €50,000 and-or imprisonment for a period from 12 months up to five years. Section 31 qualifies section 30 by setting out a standard provision regarding offences by corporate bodies and places responsibility for such offences on individuals, where appropriate.

Sections 32 to 36 provide for the delegation of certain functions to officers, transitional arrangements for permits currently in force, aligns the definition of non-national to conform with the definition in section 1 of the Immigration Act 1999, provides sanction for the expenditure incurred in the implementation of this Act and the preliminaries common to all legislation.

Since the publication of the Bill last June, the Forfás expert group on future skills needs has completed its work and its report will be published in the near future. In order to take account of its findings, the Bill as published will require some amendments, which I will bring forward on Committee Stage. The amendments will also include one to cover whistleblowers, to facilitate those who wish to expose illegalities under this legislation.

There is no doubt that the successful performance of the Irish economy over recent years in terms of growth and job creation has been phenomenal. There is equally no doubt that in order to sustain economic growth going forward, we must ensure we position our economy as one that is both knowledge-based and innovation-driven. To do this requires labour force policy action on three fronts. The first priority is to up-skill our own workforce. We must also maximise the potential for European Economic Area nationals to fill most of our skills deficits from the EU labour force of 200 million. Finally, we must supplement these actions with the efficient, flexible, strategic, managed and skills-based immigration policy I have announced today. This is a key part of our policy that will enable us to meet any deficits we have for high level and strategic skills.

The Bill also increases our protection of migrant workers in a number of key respects. It is essential that workers from abroad enjoy the same rights and protections as Irish national workers. Together these twin elements of the Bill will ensure that our economy and labour market will continue to be successful, sustainable and fair. I commend the Bill to the House.

This Bill has been a long time in gestation. Much of it was conjured up because there is no immigration policy here. Despite a future skills needs evaluation being carried out by the Minister's Department through Forfás, I expected he would have had access to the research being carried out by the National Economic and Social Council before coming to this House with the type of sustaining influences required to provide an Employment Permits Act, which will give transparency to the workers who are currently in this jurisdiction and those who will come here in the future.

Ireland missed out on the last industrial revolution. The strength of the Irish economy in recent years indicates that the Celtic tiger is still going well. Employment is good, the level of unemployment is low and the skills needs for the economy in the future are an important factor. A study by the Minister's Department will highlight a number of areas of our economic activity that will require a significant level of skills to be brought into this jurisdiction. These are in a wide variety of areas, which is why I would like to know why are we so stringent in regard to the financial or wage parameters to which the Minister referred in one of his pillars in respect of the green card system. This system may have to be flexible and reviewed on a regular basis if we are to meet the skills shortages in engineering, pharmaceuticals and across a wide variety of employment opportunities where companies cannot fill the level of skills currently required. It is a tremendous change from the type of Ireland we had in the previous century when people had to emigrate to build up the economies of other jurisdictions. As that trend is now in reverse, we must find a mechanism through the employment permits system whereby we welcome overseas workers and ensure they have the same protections as Irish employees in this jurisdiction.

Study after study indicates the severe difficulties in finding the right people for the right jobs. This includes in areas such as finance, the leisure industry, health care and within management in the retail sector. Many migrant workers are employed in the hospitality sector. We are all aware that the vast majority of people who work in restaurants and hotels on the lower wages are non-nationals. This trend is likely to continue and we do not want to see exploitation of the situation for the benefit of reducing costs for employers because these workers are making a contribution to the economy and to the sector in which they are employed.

The legal framework whereby workers could come into this country has been unclear for a long time. This is as a result of not having a proper immigration policy. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment have been slow to have an open and transparent debate in this House or elsewhere to discover the reasons we need to have workers, where are the skills shortages in the various parts of the economy and how can we come up with a system that is less harsh than has been the case up to now. I hear much criticism from time to time in regard to work visas and work permits in that some individuals who genuinely want to make a contribution to the economy are being harshly treated. The process by which these applications are processed is very slow. We must be more responsive if we are to have a continuation of migrant workers into this country. No one doubts that there must be rules. The green card system is an initiative to give us some semblance of rules to deal with the matter, with which I will deal later.

Prior to the last election the attitude of the some backbenchers and members of the Government, which have been toned down recently, was less than satisfactory in regard to the base instincts of some people to migrant workers. Since the last election, a Minister of State referred to people as "kebabs", for which he was not punished. This type of attitude cannot be tolerated if we want to welcome people into this country to make a contribution to our future economic development. We cannot stand idly by and allow these racist remarks or xenophobia to increase. In the recent case of Irish Ferries, there was a temptation on the part of some people who, for one reason or another, were being displaced as local domestic and indigenous employees by foreign workers, to build up some resentment towards these workers, which is the last thing we want. The State should provide an education and information programme which is up-front in regard to the need for these workers to ensure there is a major economic drive in the country in the years ahead.

It is important to base employment forecasts on population forecasts. It is worth reflecting on the statistical analysis of Mr. Aidan Punch of the CSO, who recently commented that the Republic's population is expected to increase from the current level of just over four million to 5.5 million by 2030, which is a huge increase. He went on to say in his speech to the Magill Summer School that births are projected to average around 63,300 annually, with deaths averaging 32,400, leading to an annual natural increase in population of 30,900. However, migration is projected to differ markedly from that experienced in the past. Part of the reason for so many shortages in various sectors of the economy is that we have not planned for it. There is a significant dearth of forward planning across a wide variety of sectors in the economy, not least in terms of employment projection. We have known for several years that this would be a problem, and we have reached the 11th hour again before to dealing with the issue. We have experienced the need for and enrichment of certain categories of migrant workers. The transparency they are creating through the proposal for the green card system is to be welcomed.

When the Bill was published, the Minister stated that in regard to work permits, the legislation will enable the Minister, every two years, to set the maximum number of employment permits to be issued both in total and by sector, to identify the skills and qualifications required for the grant of a permit, and to identify the categories of employment that may or may not be the subject of granting employment permits. I agree with that statement and Fine Gael welcomes the provision. The more information there is in regard to that statement on the publication of the Bill, the more people will understand why there are so many migrant workers walking around our towns and villages and why they are needed in certain sectors of the economy.

The Bill allows for the creation of a green card system. The Minister stated that the practice of employers applying for the permit will continue. I am open to debate on this issue. In the past, the practice of giving a work permit to an employer was open to exploitation.

The Bill deals with this issue.

While the Bill deals with the matter, employers are still being given an opportunity to seek a work permit. This matter should be examined on Committee Stage. Employers, notwithstanding their bona fides when applying for work permits, are tempted to exploit that opportunity. There is more opportunity for labour mobility if the employee is the custodian of the work permit, notwithstanding the strict rules governing work permits.

The legislation outlines the process an employee must go through to obtain a work permit under the green card system. We should examine this issue on Committee Stage. A green card is defined as "an identity document issued by a country's authorities affording non-citizens a number of the rights its citizens enjoy sometimes with the prospect of naturalisation". An example is the United States permanent resident card. Ireland could follow this example but make it employee rather than employer-based.

Since the publication of the Bill, the Minister has referred to green cards in an effort to suggest his Department has come up with a comprehensive and compassionate answer to the problems faced by migrant workers who keep this economy going. However, the last time I checked, citizens had the right to quit any job they liked and seek another. The same is not true of migrants; they do not have complete freedom in this regard. Different criteria apply to migrants workers and citizens, which should be acknowledged. We will decide on Committee Stage whether the Minister should go further to afford migrant workers more benefits and protections under our employment law. The legislation will make it easier for migrants to move job but an employee-based system should be examined.

I welcome the provisions for migrant protection in the legislation. Unfortunately, following the good work of Deputy Joe Higgins and others, we had the recent shocking revelations at GAMA Construction and Irish Ferries. We are going down an unsavoury road where employers may be tempted to indiscriminately dump domestic workers and employ foreign workers at a cheaper rate to reduce their cost base. That is completely at variance with the comments of successive Ministers, including the current Minister, about going up the value chain. Sean Dorgan, chief executive officer of the IDA, regularly states we are going up the value chain but the issues raised within these companies suggests we are going down the sewer regarding employment law and practice. These issues must be explored to prevent worker exploitation.

I acknowledge the Minister increased the number of inspectors attached to the labour inspectorate following these revelations and good enforcement is important. Deputy Howlin and I attended a committee meeting earlier at which the Association of Electrical Contractors made a presentation. It seldom happens that an august umbrella body representing employers informs a committee about how the Government is being ripped off, as legitimate contractors are being undercut by non-compliant contractors operating in a black market. Local authorities may even be getting in on the act by granting contracts to unscrupulous employers who have not adhered to agreements in place between the Department, employers and unions. The labour inspectorate is crucial, not only in respect of migrant workers but also in respect of other issues in the economy. People are tempted to offer a contact to the person who provides the cheapest quote, irrespective of whether he is compliant, because costs are increasing. Compliance with the legislation will be critical.

I refer to the Minister's second pillar, the intra-company transfer scheme. This is a new notion and I am not up to speed with the scheme. However, according to the Minister, it was implemented in the past and he is reintroducing a similar scheme.

A number of FDI companies transferred management consultants from their headquarters to Ireland.

On a temporary worker basis?

Yes, to establish an enterprise.

I have a little problem with the issue of temporary workers. Ireland has bilateral agreements with a number of countries regarding employees working in this jurisdiction on a temporary basis. In addition, PRSI exemptions are provided under Article 97 of SI 312 of 1996, which is subject to abuse. The scheme is operated by the Department of Social and Family Affairs. I refer to the number of exemptions issued in recent years.

For example, GAMA Construction competes for infrastructural projects, particularly roads projects, against domestic companies. In 2002, 290 PRSI exemptions were issued, of which GAMA received 92, while in 2004 603 exemptions issued, of which 347 were awarded to GAMA. Up to the end of May 2005, 313 exemptions had been issued, of which 288 were given to GAMA Construction. This is an abuse. This company is tendering for projects against domestic construction companies but it can use the PRSI exemption to reduce labour costs when submitting the tender. GAMA recently tendered successfully for the Castleblayney road project at a cost of €58 million, but the PRSI exemption could be worth 2% of a saving on the contract for the company, which is a decided advantage for it.

If tenders are awarded to companies on the basis of PRSI exemptions, a level playing field must be provided and, therefore, such exemptions should be factored into the tendering process. It is unfair that domestic contractors must compete against a foreign company which is given a 2% advantage in labour costs from the outset. Labour costs account for one third of a contract. Contracts are, therefore, skewed in favour of GAMA Construction. Ironically, at the time the Castleblayney contract was being adjudicated on, the company was under investigation by the Minister's Department. It is not fair, particularly since GAMA was not sanctioned for being up to its neck in labour issues but instead was rewarded with a €58 million contract in Castleblayney and given an advantage in the tendering process though the PRSI exemption granted by another Minister.

Does the Minister intend to make more resources available to the labour inspectorate and other bodies which will enforce the legislation? How does the Department intend to communicate these new rights to migrant workers? What mechanism will be used to give them the information? How does the Minister intend to co-operate with foreign embassies in ensuring these rights are translated into meaningful improvements for migrant workers, given the linguistic difficulties involved? A number of interdepartmental initiatives involving the Departments of Education and Science, Foreign Affairs and Justice, Equality and Law Reform are required to ensure everyone understands our system. It is not desirable that one arm of Government does not know what the other is doing.

Our international reputation took another hit last month when the Polish edition of Newsweek reported that Ireland was a living hell for many Poles, who arrived expecting to be able to pick and choose jobs because we are advertising job opportunities and stating we have no workers. Instead the Poles found themselves sleeping rough and living on charity. The Polish Embassy has suggested that around 10,000 Poles living in this country are experiencing difficulty. The astounding thing about this situation is that it is not just the “pinkos”, as the former Minister for Finance would have referred to them, who have highlighted this issue.

The bleeding heart pinkos.

IBEC has called for a proper immigration and green card system in this country.

No green card is required for EU citizens.

We do not want the same situation occurring for non-EU citizens. I do not want to see the Minister incurring the wrath of IBEC or CORI as he may end up pleasing none of the people all the time and that would be bad for the Government.

I appreciate that.

I wish to refer to several sections of this Bill. In section 8(2)(c) the Bill requires a statement of requirements under the National Minimum Wage Act 2000. A number of workers in the construction industry, the hotel industry and agriculture will be covered under a registered employment agreement or statutory instruments setting out terms and conditions, including wages, of employment. I am anxious that this be done and ask Minister to amend the legislation so that where a collective agreement or a rate of pay and terms and conditions are specified by the statutory instrument, the permit will specify compliance with same. When the permit is issued everything in respect of pay and conditions should be in order. As it is proposed to issue permits on the basis of economic areas, I see no reason this cannot be specified in the work permit.

The Minister may also consider the case where a permit has been issued to an employer. In this case the employer should have to specify whether any order has been made under the Industrial Relations Act 1990 to take account of recent high-profile breaches of Industrial Relations Acts. Under that Act the Labour Court has specified rates of pay above the national minimum wage. In addition, an employer should have to specify if any agreement has been agreed with any union designating rates of pay above the national minimum wage.

Those bringing claims on behalf of foreign workers find that registered employment agreements or rates of pay specified under statutory instruments of the Industrial Relations Act 1990 that have not been recorded as registered employment agreements are not being followed. Agreements reached, such as higher rates of pay agreed in the Labour Court or through industrial relations, are not being followed in respect of foreign workers. By limiting the reference to the National Minimum Wage Act there may be a number of sectors where the employee believes he or she is only entitled to the minimum wage but may in fact be entitled to more.

The timescale referred to in section 16 seems very short. Some 14 days are provided to lodge a submission to review a decision to refuse. This could be increased as obtaining all the information needed to lodge a review might take more than 14 days. A situation similar to that of An Bord Pleanála might be the appropriate timescale, where everyone can avail of 21 or 28 days.

The matter of making oral presentations has not been addressed in this section. Could this be possible in the same way there is an oral hearing in the planning process? This may take time and may clog the system but the Minister must take this into account.

Section 25 relates to retention of records for work permit applications and also in respect of all foreign workers. In practice, this may create significant difficulties for businesses. In the case of workers that do not require a work permit there would be a significant additional burden on Irish business in complying with rules and regulations. It would mean retaining additional documentation, even for workers who do not normally require a permit. It would mean that an Irish employer employing an English national would have to maintain records under this Act even though a work permit is not required. This is my interpretation of the section. I appreciate that this is relevant in respect of work permits but if it is going to create significant additional and unnecessary costs, EU workers could be made exempt from this provision.

In section 27 the amendment to the Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act 1851——

It is very important.

——is very important. My legal advisers inform me the amendment is welcome. It would be appropriate to extend this period to 24 months rather than 12 months under section 27. Issues arise outside the 12-month period and many of these will involve matters of fact rather than recollection. Limiting cases to those where the complaint has been made within 12 months will limit the number of prosecutions that can be made. Often issues will only arise after civil proceedings have been completed and the matter comes to the attention of the Department. Currently, a case before the Equality Tribunal must be brought before six months and the hearing date is unlikely to take place within six months. In this case the Department may not receive a report nor have the matter referred to it until 12 months have elapsed. The timescale is too short and I urge the Minister to examine this before Committee Stage.

I give a general welcome to the legislation brought before the House today. I look forward to Committee Stage where we can work towards achieving a balance between bringing people here on a transparent basis, ensuring their integration into society, and avoiding abuse by the employer that is a temptation at present. Irish society should welcome these migrant workers as part of our community and the contribution they can legitimately make to the growth of the economy.

This Bill is particularly suited to Committee Stage and I hope the Minister will provide for adequate time to deal with a range of complex issues. I hope he will approach the debate on Committee Stage with an open mind. In my short contribution I hope to deal in a philosophical way with issues that are important for us as a nation. We have been tardy in the way we have approached issues that are germane to this Bill but go beyond its scope and involve other Departments. It is time we had this debate in a joined-up fashion and I hope the Minister is open-minded in respect of this and can communicate with his colleagues. We must seek to construct a framework that goes beyond the economic needs of Ireland and considers how Irish society is to be constructed in a coherent way.

In June I welcomed the belated publication of the Employment Permits Bill, one that had been promised by the Minister's predecessor for publication prior to Easter 2003. It has been a long time coming and one would expect a radical Bill after such a period of gestation. I do not consider this Bill particularly radical and it could have been produced long before now.

It is legislation that is urgently needed as Ireland's employment structure and base has changed beyond recognition, as the Minister outlined in his contribution. The delay in producing an appropriate legislative framework to address the changing nature of Ireland's employment structure and the relatively new phenomenon of significant non-national migration into this State has had real consequences. We must recognise that. As the Government dithered and delayed, the exploitation of some foreign workers by a minority of ruthless employers was allowed continue without interruption. There was some interruption when particularly notorious cases were pointed out, not necessarily by the inspectorate employed by the Minister or his Department but often by vigilant trade unionists or, at least on one occasion, vigilant Members of this House.

For years there has been a recognition by many that our current work permit system is unfair and unreasonable. Like so many millions of Irish through the decades, it has condemned many foreign workers who have come to these shores to seek a better economic situation for themselves to a form of bonded labour that we would have deplored had it been inflicted upon Irish nationals elsewhere. There is a certain irony, as other Members pointed out, in the fact that last week in this House and this week in the other House a motion was debated commending a legislative measure currently going through the Congress in the United States to deal with the undocumented Irish while we have allowed a situation to exist in our jurisdiction where many decent, hard working people who have come to this land for no better reason than to improve their economic circumstances and those of their families have been dealt with, to put it at its mildest, in a shabby fashion.

The inability of the Minister's Department to properly monitor workplace conditions and terms of employment has been starkly revealed in some recent high profile cases. Regardless of what the Minister says, it is abundantly clear that the labour inspectorate charged with monitoring workplace conditions and ensuring the laws we enact in these Houses that govern workers and their rights and entitlements is inadequate and under-equipped to monitor 2 million workers in a complex and changing social and legal environment.

The facts speak for themselves. Despite the huge influx of foreign workers over recent times and the evidence that has been presented of systematic exploitation, the number of inspections carried out by the labour inspectorate declined from 8,323 in 2002 to 5,160 in 2004. The number of prosecutions in the same period fell from 25 to 14. We are going backwards in terms of our ability to monitor and ensure that workers, both domestic and non-national, are afforded the full protection of law. We can enact the best legislation possible in these Houses but it is meaningless if employers, or at least a minority of employers, believe they can get away with that. Unfortunately, in a workforce of 2 million the chances are that they can, and we have seen concrete evidence of that. As Deputy Hogan rightly said, this morning at a meeting of the joint committee the Electrical Contractors of Ireland made it clear to the committee that they have the gravest concerns at the ability of the labour inspectorate to monitor their industry, one of many.

Another issue I had not heard before but I put it on the agenda for the Minister is that the volume of cases now coming before the Labour Court will mean the Labour Court itself will become moribund and clogged with cases and will not work efficiently into the future. I will be anxious to have a clear reassurance from the Minister that that is not the case and that the resources and capacity of the Labour Court, as well as his own labour inspectorate, will be expanded to ensure the vigorous nature of Irish law is fully enacted at ground level to ensure we will not have a recurrence of some of the high profile abuses we have witnessed recently.

In this contribution I want to deal in general terms with our position now and what we want to achieve in a society, and I would welcome the Minister's reflections on that. By way of background, we must ask what we want to achieve in terms of the new labour market and structure of employment in this jurisdiction. Do we want to create a selfish system that allows workers to be brought in who are needed for a finite period to fill a particular gap in terms of the work available here only to discard them as soon as that gap can be filled by domestic workers? Is that the system we want to construct or is it a system that acknowledges the need for non-national workers to grow our economy and wishes to afford such people who choose to come here an opportunity to have a stake in our economy, settle in Ireland and be part of a new developing Irish society? That is a fundamental question and the models exist.

In simple terms the Minister has used, in all his press statements since the publication of this Bill, the notion of a green card to which I will return in some detail. The understanding of the green card is the American model. The American model says one can apply to get a green card and have a stake in America, that one has a right to work that is exclusive to one. From that model we have the melting pot of e pluribus unum. People come to that country with their green card with a notion of settling down.

A different model has prevailed in some European countries, for example, the German model is the gastarbeiter. Over generations guest workers, as we have seen with the Turks in Germany, have been separate. They never integrated and the societal difficulty that creates for people who feel no stake in the country they and even their parents have lived in is a real dilemma for Germany. We have seen some of that, although not as starkly, even in the United Kingdom where the second generation of migrants who were brought in during the post-war boom period now feel alien in their own land. The issues are being addressed in terms of people searching for new identities from that of their grandparents who believe they have no stake in the country they were brought up in, that they are seen by that society as alien and, despite having been born, bred and educated in that country, are not part of it. These are the models we have to learn from to ensure we do not create in ten, 20, 30 or 40 years' time an Ireland that is fractured. I raise that as a real issue that we must address and get right. It is not simple legislation the Minister is introducing to fill, in some sort of mechanistic, economic system, a gap in the workforce by bringing in people as if they were cogs only to turf them out again when they are no longer needed. That is a difficult, important decision that Ireland must make for our future and for the sort of society we wish to create.

The original view expressed by the Tánaiste in answering questions in this House some years ago — I know the Tánaiste's predilection to opt for America over Europe but perhaps she is right in this case — was that she wanted to opt for the American model of the green card. My understanding of that was that we would identify economic need within our society. The Minister has done that and his report on the assessment of need has been sent to me. We should fix in general terms the numbers to be dealt with but the Minister has resiled from that position and is not anxious to work on a quota basis. I ask him to be open at least to debate that issue.

The Bill facilitates that discussion.

Good. Let us debate that on Committee Stage. There is much in the Bill to discuss on that Stage.

There is some merit in the argument that we apply a quota. It is less selfish than saying we will let people in only where the job exists, as opposed to allowing some economic migration into the country. We are a player in the world market and, while I do not wish to sound pejorative, we can share some of the burden of people who want to migrate in here. We could do this in a structured way that is not exclusively defined according to absolute need in our economy. That is a debating point for Committee Stage.

I understood green cards would be granted to those people we have identified who applied and would meet the conditions and that allocation would signify a degree of permanence. These people would be allowed to put down roots and have a stake in this society, and not be seen as a "temporary arrangement"— to borrow a phrase — to meet a temporary difficulty. In effect, the Bill puts the current working visa authorisation scheme which is re-presented as a green card system, on a statutory basis.

It is more than that.

Let us deal with that. Permits will be issued and can be renewed on a two year basis. The Minister may then bring in regulations under section 7 to allow "such longer period" as the Minister may determine. Does that afford people the sort of stake in Ireland that is critical to creating the social cohesion we need in the long term?

The view of those who have made submissions to me and no doubt also to the Minister is that there will be two categories of migrants under these proposals, determined by income. I would welcome the Minister's comments on this. One category will be regarded as more valuable than another and will have greater entitlements and rights. I am concerned about that. We will await the Minister's clear explanation on Committee Stage but this issue may not be absolutely clear until we see the detailed regulations. I hope the Minister will bring these to the House for debate.

We already have the notion that large corporations such as Intel can come and go as they like but there are other categories that must go through a different set of hoops. One example with which we all have grappled in recent years is that of people who have a legitimate entitlement to work here, and on whom we depend, who have difficulty bringing their family members to settle here. The Minister would have direct knowledge of this through his experience of the health services.

They can bring them in.

That has been addressed for example in respect of nurses. Other issues arise. I have dealt with consultants who are critical to maintaining our health service whose close relatives cannot visit them because the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform regards anybody who comes in as wanting to live here.

This applies even to people who have clear economic reason to stay where they are but want to visit here. We have a closed mind because we are unused to this situation. We need joined-up thinking in the future if we are to address these issues.

My concern is that we will have one category under what the Minister classifies as "green card" and I regard as simply putting on a legislative basis a category that already exists, and a second category that will be regarded as a lesser breed. This raises the issue of ownership of the work permit. The Minister indicated that the work permit can be issued to the individual.

Someone who receives a work permit for which his or her employer has applied will depend on the employer to reapply in order to renew that permit. People caught in that second category will encounter all the difficulties with which we grapple on behalf of those already here, namely, impermanence, the inability to open bank accounts, difficulties in getting even medium-term leases and rented accommodation and difficulty taking out loans. We must tease out all these points and get them right.

It is not good enough that there is such a gap between Departments. Other Deputies must have encountered the same problems dealing with what I call Burgh Quay, where two Departments are located, the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and Enterprise, Trade and Employment. The Departments seem to operate independently. It is extremely difficult and frustrating even for a Member of the Oireachtas to deal with them.

I could cite cases in which I receive contradictory information from these two Departments. They are not joined up or connected. It is difficult to deal with the issue of visiting relatives. Economically the Minister's Department attracts people who are critical to our economy or services such as the health service but the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has a different mind set and attitude and often will not allow the close relatives of these people to visit them on temporary basis often. I have gone through that process many times. I can give the Minister chapter and verse if he is interested.

We need to deal with this problem in a structured way. I published a document called Ending the Chaos years ago when we had a significant backlog of asylum cases. Like the Minister's Bill it had three pillars, namely, asylum seekers, economic migrants and integration. They run across Departments but must be dealt with together or we will not find a solution to benefit society.

I do not know from where an integration policy will come. Notionally, it should come from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform which has primary responsibility for migration matters. Deputy Hogan referred to a Newsweek article about Polish workers coming here. They are not covered by work permits because they are members of the European Union but many thousands have come and are in all our towns where they are welcome. They are hardworking, enthusiastic and remind us all of the Irish of the past.

That article painted a bleak picture. I am not suggesting it is accurate but it is at least partially accurate. It concerns people who have no legal difficulties. Those who will benefit from work permits will have more difficulty because of the qualifications attached to a work permit regime such as we are setting up. We need an integration strategy for the new member states of the European Union that is more developed than the existing one. We need a separate strategy for people who have been invited to work here under the work permits regime that we are fine-tuning through this legislation. It is an area we must address.

Public perception is extremely important. We all hear it and sometimes Members play up to it. The fiasco of Irish Ferries, where a company determines that it should "disemploy" Irish workers, in this case substituting eastern Europeans at a fraction of the cost, allows incipient racism to bed down, there is no doubt of that. David Begg of ICTU made a very compelling case and was the first to articulate it in those terms. If we allow the perception to bed down that non-national workers are undercutting the Irish labour force and will take our jobs and work for buttons, there will be chaos. We are sowing the seeds of racism and the worst sort of xenophobia that will result in great societal difficulties. We must grasp that issue very carefully and firmly.

I will not go off on a tangent regarding Irish Ferries, an issue unique to the maritime sector, since we can apply Irish law elsewhere. However, as we have seen regarding Gama and other situations, we must have a mechanism to identify all those cases to ensure that does not happen and that we have an agency proactive in explaining to people the need for a flexible labour force, how welcome they are, and that we guarantee to protect current labour law and rights in bringing about economic transformation.

I deplore the attitude shown by IBEC to the Irish Ferries dispute, which has played into this and allowed a belief to develop that we will allow the undermining of Irish jobs and pay rates and the advances made by workers over the years. We must be very robust and clear on all sides of the House in explaining time and again the new type of workforce required in this country but that all are welcome at Irish pay rates and that we are determined to enforce Irish law in that regard.

The bureaucracy attached to basic matters is incredible. A highly qualified young architect came to me, having been offered a job in this jurisdiction. Since he is from South America, he was told that he must go back to his home country to make the application, although he is already here with the family of his Irish girlfriend. He has something to offer and has a job, yet we want him to return to South America, to a country where Ireland does not have an embassy, so that he can go to a consul general and apply for a work permit that will be submitted to the nearest Irish Embassy, which happens to be in Buenos Aires, to be transmitted to Dublin so that the authorities there can make a determination and send it all back. If that is the level of complexity involved, it is enough to do anyone's head in.

The information that I have received from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is that he does not have to do that at all. Achieving clarity on the issue, or even checking the website for information, is very difficult. These areas must be reformed, with much closer co-operation between the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Enterprise, Trade and Employment to ensure that people whose skills we need are respected and not belittled by the systems that we put in place.

Recently I had a debate on the radio with a well-known economic commentator. I will take the liberty of mentioning that third party, who is robust enough to tolerate it, Mr. Moore McDowell. I was absolutely taken aback by his attitude, which is that what is happening at Irish Ferries is the dislocation of Irish workers by cheaper ones, that it will happen time and again in our economy, and that it is a good development. It is important that we make it clear that it is no such thing and that it will not be tolerated. The Minister must be clear in his discussions with IBEC that he expects it to work in partnership. The consequences are not only very serious for economic development and the maintenance of social partnership but for the maintenance of a structured society with a changed ethnic structure achieved in peace and harmony. Those issues are very serious and not for glib comments to be thrown in from a narrow economic perspective.

I welcome section 22 of the Bill, which addressed an issue with which we have dealt as individual public representatives — the prohibition on employers deducting recruitment expenses or retaining the personal documents, including passports, of migrant workers. There have been clear abuses. I have dealt with individuals who felt like bonded slaves since they could not leave because their documentation was withheld by an employer. We must have a clear register of abusive employers to ensure that they are never again allowed work permits.

We will be introducing an amendment on Committee Stage to ban anyone who transgresses.

The maintenance of that register is important, but it will be meaningless without a mechanism to identify such people; we are back to enforcement.

I wanted to make broad points going beyond this Bill's scope and the Minister's departmental concerns but which are important in the context of constructing a mechanism that will be good for Irish society. This Bill is tailor-made for a detailed discussion on Committee Stage and I look forward to it.

I would like to share time with Deputies Connolly, Finian McGrath and Eamon Ryan.

Sinn Féin welcomes the fact that this legislation puts current regulations on a statutory footing, that workers will receive copies of their work permits and the provisions that address exploitative practices on the part of employers.

However, the Bill is more notable for what it fails to do than for what it does. It will bring very little improvement to the lot of migrant workers or change to the current system. It is profoundly disappointing because it is not underpinned by a desire to improve the situation of migrant workers who have contributed so much to society and the economy. I am disappointed that a Minister who, by this stage, must be fully aware of the extent to which such workers are vulnerable to exploitation resulting from the current system has chosen to do so little to resolve or address that situation.

Some of the most common complaints that arise regarding the treatment of migrant workers by employers are employees not being given work contracts, statutory breaks, wage slips, days off in lieu of bank holidays worked or the correct minimum wage entitlement. Often their work permits are not renewed by employers, although they claim to employees that they are in the process of doing so. Other cases have included passports being confiscated and workers being paid less than their Irish counterparts. There have been allegations that workers have been asked to sign contracts obliging them to live exclusively in accommodation provided by their employers. Other issues encountered by the Immigrant Council of Ireland include non-payment of holiday pay, instant dismissal for being sick or having an accident in the workplace, no additional pay for weekend work and even passing on the cost of obtaining the work permit to the employee.

The provisions in section 22 prohibiting deduction of remuneration and the retention of personal documents are welcome. I hope additional restrictions will be put in place in terms of some type of punitive action against wayward employers who seek to flout these regulations. They will be completely worthless unless they are enforced. It is open to question whether this can be done adequately given the low number of labour inspectors. Resources must be made available to ensure the full enforcement of these provisions.

The current system makes it difficult for exploited workers to come forward with complaints against exploitative employers. It is clear the proposals related to higher skilled workers involve little change to the current system. The new system will provide no permanency and does not constitute a green card system akin to that in operation in the United States. My colleague, Deputy Ó Caoláin, will deal with this issue in greater detail in his contribution.

The work permit system as it stands facilitates employers in exploiting migrant workers. The employer applies for and, heretofore, holds the work permit, restricting the ability of workers to leave exploitative employment. These workers are in a most vulnerable situation. Many do not speak English and most are away from their families whom they may be supporting through remittances. They may be afraid of losing their jobs and being thrown onto the street, so to speak, if they make a complaint. Moreover, they know they will not get another job because the work permit is the property of their current employer. The only legislative change in this regard is that, although it will continue to be employers who must apply for work permits, they will be issued and held by workers, with copies provided to employers.

Only those workers who qualify for the two-year so-called green card will be allowed to apply for their own work permit. This restriction has been severely criticised by those groups that deal daily with the exploitation of migrant workers. For example, the Immigrant Council of Ireland has voiced its concern that this does not "provide the worker with ownership of their own labour and, as a result, concerns about workers being at risk of exploitation still remain". Under the terms of this Bill, employment permits will continue to be issued for only 12 months in cases other than those under the so-called green card system.

Many cases have been reported where employers have forgotten or not even bothered to renew work permits. Such actions by employers undermine the legal status of migrant workers. In many of the cases that have come to light, employers have not told workers that their permits have not been renewed. The worker eventually discovers that the permit has expired and that he or she faces deportation. Issuing all employment permits for a period of two years would go some way to addressing these difficulties and would give both the employee and employer a sense of security that is absent when the former must renew his or her permit on an annual basis.

We need migrant workers to continue to make a significant contribution to our economy and society. If it is the policy of the State to promote economic migration, we must ensure those migrants are treated equally and are given the rights and entitlements necessary to live a normal life. Most important among these is the right to have one's family nearby. This Bill will change little in regard to family reunification and nothing for those with ordinary employment permits. Migrant workers are not mere cogs in an economy but human beings who make a major contribution to the State. They should not be subjected to the hardship of being separated from their families. If we want workers to migrate to Ireland, we must show that we value their contribution by addressing the issue of family reunification as a matter of great urgency.

My party is clear about the entitlements we want to see delivered for migrant workers. Work permits must be applied for, issued to and held by the employee rather than the employer, thus enabling workers to change employers and to walk away from exploitative treatment. Also required are the ratification by the State of the UN convention on the rights of migrant workers and their families and the codification of a common set of core rights and entitlements for migrant workers, including family reunification, the option of permanent residency after a fixed period, and housing, health, welfare and education rights.

Migrant workers must have rights equivalent to those of the host society. Improved information on workplace related rights, available in multilingual format, must be provided. There must be effective enforcement of workplace related rights, with a particular emphasis on spot checks on those employers employing migrant workers. We must provide enhanced protection for migrant workers and other immigrants against racism, including a focus on combatting discrimination, assaults, incitement and abuse.

None of these matters has been adequately dealt with in the Bill. It is most unfortunate that the opportunity has not been taken to address these important issues given the absolute dependence of our economy on migrant workers. I will address some of them on Committee Stage and I hope some of the proposed amendments will be accepted.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Employment Permits Bill 2005, long-promised legislation which has been in gestation for approximately two years. It is welcome notwithstanding this delay. The Bill sets out a comprehensive and clear process for the application, granting and refusal of work permits and will thus serve to streamline the recruitment procedures for migrant workers and provide enhanced safeguards for their rights and interests. It will also provide for the introduction of a green card system for highly skilled migrant workers, similar to that which pertains in other jurisdictions. It will also enable the Minister to establish the number of employment permits in total and by sector and to identify the skills and employment categories for which these permits may be granted. Its function is remarkably similar to that envisaged for the PPARS system in the health system.

It is important to differentiate between a skill shortage and a labour shortage. A skill shortage signifies an insufficient number of trained, qualified individuals in the domestic market to meet the demand for an occupation. Skill shortages arise in occupations associated with particular skills that are usually acquired through education and training. In a labour shortage, on the other hand, there is an insufficient number of individuals willing to take up employment at the prevailing wages and conditions.

The Bill provides for a number of new and important protections for migrant employees. However, I note the absence of any form of grievance procedure or facility for the employee to have recourse to the rights commissioner to resolve grievances. Resources must be put in place to ensure adequate enforcement of the legislation. In this regard, the number of labour inspectors must immediately be doubled. I have called in the past for the number to be increased to 75. Of the existing 31 posts, half remain vacant. If legislation is to be effective there must be the means of ensuring it is enforced.

Statutory provision should also be made for a formal mechanism through which labour inspectors could liaise with the trade union movement. Many individuals arrive in Ireland with poor language skills and even less awareness of their rights and, up to now, have been ripe for exploitation. Many of these individuals possess skills which are insufficiently available among the domestic labour force. I have seen instances where mechanical engineers have had to resort to waitressing because of poor language skills. We all know of migrants working as hairdressers who have extensive qualifications in an unrelated field.

This is not productive or useful for us. Such individuals should have the facility to develop their language skills in line with the technical skills for which there is a considerable need. How do the provisions of this Bill correspond to our asylum process, which must also be streamlined? We should have taken action on that some time ago.

Debate adjourned.
Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Top
Share