Vol. 887 No. 2
6. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation under the Action Plan for Jobs, the concrete measures that will be taken to improve the supports for female entrepreneurs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28673/15]
I ask the Minister the supports he is putting in place to improve the number of female entrepreneurs under the Action Plan for Jobs. In particular, what is he doing in the regional action plans because that is an area that is untapped? I ask the question in the context of a report on this area, which will be published next week, from the Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation authored by Senator Mary White, who is a successful entrepreneur.
In the first Action Plan for Jobs in 2012, special actions were initiated to support an increase in female entrepreneurs. This included Enterprise Ireland’s first dedicated Competitive Start Call for female entrepreneurs. That call was massively oversubscribed and was immediately extended. That was the first step taken.
An increase of female entrepreneurship has been a consistent policy objective. Since then it has been reflected in the subsequent National Policy Statement on Entrepreneurship which was launched last year. This is the first time a Government has published a comprehensive national plan for entrepreneurship in Ireland. The policy initiatives to promote greater involvement by women include start up training programmes, mentoring and networking dedicated start-up training programmes, mentoring and networking dedicated start-up calls targeted at women, and public promotion of role models of successful women entrepreneurs. The policy is yielding significant results.
Enterprise Ireland had its best result ever for female led start-ups in 2014. Of the 183 technology start-ups that received equity investment, 43 were led by female entrepreneurs. Enterprise Ireland also supported 94 female led businesses through female specific development programmes co-funded by Enterprise Ireland, and it is on track to increase the numbers this year. Enterprise Ireland also has an online networking platform for female entrepreneurs and has supported several awards, conferences and initiatives to create platforms for female entrepreneur role models. I have not seen Senator Mary White's report yet, and I know the Deputy is launching a report today also. If we get a chance we can attend that to examine it but as is the case with all the reports that come through the committee, if there are proposals from which we can benefit we try to implement them if we can. We will have a look at that.
Last year, and this is a good statistic, the local enterprise offices, LEOs, delivered training to almost 14,000 women, compared to 11,000 males. That is a major increase. On the mentoring, approximately 2,921 women took up mentoring compared to 3,969 men, but the gap is closing, which is an improvement.
The LEOs organise the National Women’s Enterprise Day and the Women in Business Initiative, which bring together women who are successfully running their own business and who aspire to success. Of the more than 1,000 participants in the LEO-run Ireland’s Best Young Entrepreneur competition, there were 487 female participants. Some of the initiatives are having an impact but the onus is on all of us to keep promoting them.
I thank the Minister. I acknowledge that a lot of work has been done but to give an indication of the potential in this area, the total early stage entrepreneurial activity is measured by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor and it shows that, in Ireland, 6.5% of the adult population are what it defines as early stage entrepreneurs. The percentage for Irish females is 4.23%, and the European average is 5.45%. The US average is 10.56%. We need to increase our activity.
As the Minister stated, the Enterprise Ireland fund was completely over-subscribed. First, are there any plans to increase the fund and increase the number of calls to the fund to ensure that more people get involved in it? Second, in the context of the regional jobs action plans, will specific measures be undertaken to encourage regional activity in this area? I acknowledge the huge amount of work that has been put into this by the people in Enterprise Ireland and in the local enterprise offices, LEOs, but they are crying out for more support and funding. As the Minister said, there is huge potential in this area but we need the funding to match the potential.
Regarding the statistics, the Deputy quoted the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, GEM. To be clear, the 2013 report showed that Irish men were 1.9 times more likely than Irish women to start their own business or become an early stage entrepreneur, and the EU average is 1.9:1. That is not good enough but we are competing in that regard. We are slightly above the OECD average, which is 1.7:1, but the Deputy will agree there is untapped potential when it comes to female entrepreneurship, and we are trying to push that forward.
The regional plans have a range of actions, two of which have been launched, with more to follow. Many of those actions are to be agreed and implemented at a local level. Some of them are specifically aligned to female entrepreneurship but they are more general in nature. Through the LEOs and Enterprise Ireland there are a range of initiatives specifically to target female entrepreneurship. To name a few, from an Enterprise Ireland perspective there is Going for Growth, which is a development programme specifically targeted at female entrepreneurship; the Dublin City University Royal Academy Female Propeller for High Fliers programme, the NDRC Female Founders programme; and the Cork Institute of Technology female Exxcel programme. There are an additional 32 women in the New Frontiers entrepreneur development programme as well. We have the funds available in terms of the target initiatives but it is a question of promoting the applications process.
In the context of the Action Plan for Jobs, one of the Minister's cries is that it is cross-departmental and represents a whole of Government approach. However, there are other issues around the lack of a proper child care system, the taxation of self-employed people, and generally supporting people to take time out of their personal lives to develop a business. What is the Department doing, under the Action Plan for Jobs infrastructure, to push other Departments, including the Department of Social Protection, to do what is necessary to encourage more female entrepreneurship? The Minister has used the phrase "disruptive reforms". He needs to blow a few reforms towards some of these Departments, particularly the Departments of Children and Youth Affairs and Social Protection, in regard to entrepreneurship generally but especially in regard to female entrepreneurship.
That is a fair comment. We try, through the Action Plan for Jobs, to bring all the Departments together in that regard. I understand the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy James Reilly, is bringing forward a document next week on the child care element and early school learning. It is hoped there will be some supports in that and that this will encourage us.
On the taxation of self-employed people, the Taoiseach referenced that yesterday in that we intend to address that in this year's budget and to be able to close that gap over coming budgets and make it more aligned to the PAYE system for self-employed. We know there is a gap in that regard, and that will be addressed in this budget.
On the area of child care, many of the start your own business courses are supported through the LEOs, the training awards and, likewise, our education and training boards. When it comes to child care, there are supports to facilitate women to attend these courses. We can examine that with a view to improving the offering because the Deputy is right. We have to encourage women to take up these courses. I am satisfied that the percentage of females involved in these courses has increased dramatically and if we need to do more to encourage that, we will.
7. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if he will provide a reading room to enable Oireachtas Members access departmental documentation on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership; and if he will ensure the EU Commission establishes a reading room for Oireachtas Members in its Dublin office as already provided for Members of the European Parliament in Brussels. [28664/15]
Transparency is the ally of the citizen and where there is a lack of transparency and affairs are shrouded in mystery, we see that the interests of the citizens are not upheld.
The IBRC and NAMA are organisations where we see that in practice. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is shrouded in secrecy. It is very difficult for elected representatives, even with the discussions we have had in the House, to be fully aware of the details on what is actually happening at negotiation level. Our own Emily O'Reilly, the European Ombudsman, has stated this time and again. What will the Minister do to ensure elected representatives in the Dáil will have access to that information?
To be fair to all concerned there are unprecedented efforts taking place to make the EU-US trade agreement as transparent as possible. All EU text proposals on the EU-US trade negotiations are now published on the European Commission website, generally within a week or two after each negotiating round. The website also includes a wide range of position papers, fact sheets and documents explaining positions. In addition, there is consultation with stakeholders after those rounds. All departmental documentation is available on request, subject to any legal restrictions, and my Department has published relevant documents, such as the recently commissioned study on the economic impact of an agreement on Ireland. I have briefed the committees of the Oireachtas and my officials are available to respond to any requests, subject to any legal restrictions.
The European Commission is obliged under the treaty to keep the European Parliament informed about trade negotiations. The arrangements in place between the European Commission and the European Parliament as regards access to documents, which are governed by the framework agreement between the European Parliament and the European Commission, are a matter for the two institutions concerned. There are not, to my knowledge, any similar framework agreements with national parliaments. However, the rules governing access to EU documents contained in Regulation (EC) No. 1049/2001 have as their purpose the widest possible access to documents. The procedures for applying for access to documents from the relevant EU institutions are set out in the regulation.
By their nature, negotiations are evolving and not all documents considered in such context are for publication. Notwithstanding those constraints, the European Commission is determined to make the process as transparent as possible.
The European Ombudsman, Emily O'Reilly, has established two separate investigations into the European Council and the Commission on the lack of transparency around negotiations. In her report she calls for public access to consolidated negotiations texts, greater proactive disclosure of TTIP documents and increased transparency as regards meetings that Commission officials hold on TTIP with other businesses, organisations, lobby groups and NGOs. This is a big sphere of leverage that is being put onto this particular negotiation. She has also called for the Commission to establish a comprehensive list of public and non-public TTIP documents and for greater proactivity concerning the publication of documents, including agendas and minutes of meetings with lobbyists. Emily O'Reilly has called for the Commission to extend the transparency obligations as a result of meetings with stakeholders to ensure EU officials involved in the TTIP negotiations only meet with interested representatives who are registered with the transparency register. At this stage the US is making some of these documents available through its embassies throughout Europe. Commissioner Malmström has stated it is up to particular governments, that is, the Minister, to ensure access by elected representatives, such as me, have access to these documents. Will the Minister give us access to these documents? Will he give us a reading room?
The position on access for the European Parliament is set out in the framework agreement. Part of the increased transparency is that it will provide broad access to all MEPs, subject to appropriate modalities to be agreed with the Parliament to ensure the confidentiality of the information provided, including taking the appropriate steps in the event of unwarranted disclosure of documents themselves or their content. MEPs are getting a certain privileged access subject to restrictions and obligations upon them. In terms of all other public interest, the Commission has made extraordinary new efforts to open this up. All the documents are provided. A full list of the documents that are going to the European Parliament is shared generally. There is an extensive report on the negotiating rounds. There is online material that explains the negotiating positions. There is engagement with civil society and the public at political and working level and increased communications and outreach efforts, and we are attempting to do the same. I have attended numerous briefings for parliamentarians and non-parliamentarians. We have invited people to contribute to debates and we have exposed everything we have that could contribute to an understanding of the issues. Clearly there are procedures in place whereby if the Deputy wants access to a particular document that is not in the public domain-----
The Minister mentioned that representatives in the European Parliament are getting privileged information. It is a privilege to be a public representative. Access to information which affects the people one represents is not a privilege; it is a right for public representatives. We are always told that nobody takes an interest in the European Union. Now people are taking an interest in particular negotiations and what is happening? There is a battening down of the hatches to try to stop the dispersal of information. This is a massive ceding of sovereignty. This is one of the biggest economic agreements to which the State will ever be party and yet the information we are getting is second-hand and the majority of elected representatives in this particular seomra have no iota of what is happening with TTIP.
What I am asking the Minister is very clear. We have been told by Commissioner Malmström that a reading room where we could gain access to all the documents that are already accessed by MEPs could be made available in this Oireachtas. Will the Government make such a reading room available? Emily O'Reilly has asked what MEPs do with the information once they get to see it in the reading rooms. At present they are prohibited from communicating that information any further than those reading rooms. That issue needs to be addressed. Will the Minister make a reading room available and, if so, will he allow elected representatives use that information in the best interests of citizens?
I have to deny categorically that there is any effort by either the Commission or anyone else to conceal information. There is a huge effort to make the information publicly available.
Why then the investigation of the Ombudsman?
In any such discussions there is confidentiality around individual items. There is commercial confidentiality. There is confidentiality that is recognised in our freedom of information process. Where there is a negotiation or a deliberative process one does not have a right of access to all the papers that might be engaged in. It is recognised in every freedom of information legislation that there is such a deliberative process. In some negotiations there are sensitive issues that have to be dealt with. Obviously the Commission has agreed to give limited access to members of the European Parliament.
Will the Minister give those to us?
As the Deputy rightly said, they are under restriction. If they get access to confidential documents it is to inform them and it is not for them to pass it on.
Will the Minister give access to these?
There are certain restrictions but in general we make everything available that we can and the Commission makes everything available that it can.
The Minister has not answered the question. Will he give access to us?
It has made huge efforts to do so and has a whole document on transparency.
I ask Members to obey the clock as we are way over time.
8. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation when the Construction Contracts Act will be enacted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28406/15]
The question concerns vitally important legislation for the construction industry and, particularly, subcontractors to ensure they receive payment from contractors. The legislation was signed into law on 29 July 2013 but we are still waiting for the commencement of various parts of that legislation. Will the Minister provide an update on the bottlenecks and the reason for the delay in the legislation being commenced?
I thank the Deputy for tabling the question. The Government is committed to the earliest possible implementation of the Construction Contracts Act 2013 and, as a consequence, last November approved the delegation of responsibility for its implementation to me as Minister of State with responsibility for business and employment. Significant work has taken place since then. I have recently appointed Dr. Nael G. Bunni as chairperson of the construction contracts adjudication panel. Discussions are taking place with the Public Appointments Service to arrange an open competition for the selection of applicants for inclusion on the ministerial appointed panel of adjudicators.
I am informed the Public Appointments Service will seek expressions of interest from suitably qualified persons in the coming weeks. In accordance with the Construction Contracts Act 2013, such persons will be drawn from categories specified in section 8(6) of the Act. I am also overseeing the preparation of a code of practice for the conduct of adjudications, which will be binding on all adjudicators operating under the Act. Once the preparatory arrangements have been finalised, a date for implementation of the Act will be announced in advance to provide sufficient notice to those affected by the Act's provisions. I expect that to take place later on this year.
I thank the Minister for his reply and note his commitment in trying to get this legislation off the ground but this has been dragging on for quite a number of years at this stage. It is vitally important legislation, particularly for subcontractors who are unfortunately closing because of cash flow difficulties. In some instances they are not receiving payments from very large contractors who are making their lives extremely difficult.
I accept a chairperson has been appointed to the panel of adjudicators, which is good news, but will the Minister of State push the matter forward and ensure the full panel is put in place as a matter of urgency? I understand the Minister of State is looking for specialist and very qualified people to be appointed to the panel. Will the Minister of State give us an update on the code of practice regarding adjudications? I know the Minister of State had hoped all of this would be in place by spring of this year but that unfortunately has not happened. Will the Minister of State give a further update on the timetable for the implementation of the Act?
This is an important provision under the Construction Contracts Act 2013 and I only received responsibility for it towards the end of last year. I proactively sought this responsibility because I see it as being critically important to the construction industry, an industry that has suffered over the past few years. It is particularly important for SMEs operating in the construction sector, especially subcontractors, that there is a clear, fair and transparent system in place. Such a system has been lacking for years.
One of the issues we had was to identify a suitable and appropriately qualified individual who would command respect right across the industry. We have managed to do that in the appointment of Dr. Nael Bunni. His appointment has been widely welcomed by stakeholders in the sector. He is eminently qualified and internationally renowned in this space and I consider ourselves lucky to have his services.
It is important the appointment of the panel of adjudicators is done in an open and transparent fashion. The last thing I would do is simply appoint individuals based on an application to me or someone else. It is appropriate it is done through the Public Appointments Service and that will take some time but I expect the process to be concluded and for this scheme to be up and running shortly.
Will the Minister of State clarify if he will sign a statutory instrument when the panel of adjudicators is in place? Companies are suffering greatly because of the failure to commence this legislation. Some huge companies do not always pay their subcontractors in a timely manner, causing huge cash flow difficulties for them and companies are working on projects despite having no guarantee of payment. The sooner we have the adjudication process in place, the better. I welcome the appointment of Dr. Nael Bunni, who is highly respected within the construction industry, as well. The sooner everything can be implemented, the better.
There is little for me to add other than to say this is a priority and I have given it my full commitment. We need to get the right people for this important panel to ensure the aspirations underpinned by the legislation work for everyone involved. I hope it will be a swift process but it needs to be open and transparent. The Public Appointments Service process will take some time but I am satisfied it is being expedited and look forward to the panel being appointed shortly and doing the work the legislation requires of it.
Will the Minister of State be signing a statutory instrument?
I believe so.
9. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation the amount of grants paid per year, every year to indigenous Irish start-up companies and foreign start-up companies between 2011 and 2015. [28629/15]
We are always being told Ireland is a great little country in which to do business but there probably is a perception that the focus is overwhelmingly on attracting foreign multinationals rather than nurturing sustainable home-grown industry. Economic watchdogs such as the Nevin Economic Research Institute would warn we need to be careful of an over-reliance on foreign direct investment. How were the hundreds of millions available in State funding divided over the years of this Government's term in office between foreign and indigenous companies?
I do not wish to be evasive but the written question tabled by the Deputy related to start-ups and the statistics provided to me relate specifically to start-ups. In general terms, the vast majority of start-ups are Irish. Enterprise Ireland supports approximately 185 start-ups. Only ten of those would be sponsored by non-Irish individuals. The vast majority of the run of money, running from €17 million in 2011 up to €29.5 million in 2014, has gone to Irish-owned companies. IDA Ireland does not support start-ups in that sense. Similarly, the local enterprise offices have approximately €18.5 million of which approximately 60% is directed at start-ups, very few of which would be international.
On Deputy Daly's wider question, more than two thirds of the budget of the Department is spent on Irish as opposed to overseas companies. Irish companies account for the vast majority of the jobs growth. IDA Ireland was involved in the creation of 7,500 net jobs, Enterprise Ireland was involved in the creation of 8,500 net jobs and local enterprise offices were involved in the creation of 4,000 net jobs. That is some 12,500 net jobs versus 7,500 net jobs on the export-oriented side. Most of our budget goes to Irish-owned companies and most of the job creation is in Irish-owned companies. Foreign-owned companies are an important part of the mix and we seek to have a balanced expansion. There is a fair devotion of resources. The investment in Irish companies is on a much broader range. A much broader suite of policy supports are available to Irish-owned companies including capability, lean processing, research and development, innovation, management development and access to finance supports.
This is really part of a broader discussion that needs to be had in terms of State supports, which come in many forms. I appreciate the Minister's point about my question. I had two questions in one but I think they must have been split up. I appreciate the points the Minister made about start-ups. I also hear what he is saying about more than two thirds of his budget going to Irish companies. However, that is only part of the issue. We have to see business supports as being much more than just grant aids and we need an analysis of this issue. Large international companies do not come to Ireland just because they get State aid. Much of it has to do with our low corporation tax and PRSI rates and, as Michael Taft said, the role Ireland plays in global tax avoidance. Has the Minister seen the report featured in The Guardian last week about the concept of corporate welfare? Big business is essentially getting massive handouts at the expense of the taxpayer. In Britain, it was £93 billion which equates to more than £3,500 per household. Why can we not do a similar analysis in Ireland to see the cost that is being borne by Irish families to pay for this State subsidy to big business?
As the Deputy knows, under the EU's regional guidelines, there are huge restrictions on state aid that can be given to large companies. By and large, there is no substantial state aid. The companies can be supported in areas such as research and development or training, but the era of large grants is over. Neither is the Deputy right when she says the predominant magnet of Ireland is our tax regime. The predominant magnet is our talent and the clusters we have developed in key areas. They have become the dominant attraction. The corollary, however, is that we need to continue to develop those talent areas. There is strong demand for skills in areas of science, engineering and mathematics, which are really important.
In terms of support to Irish companies, they are not, as Deputy Daly suggests, grant aid in the form of corporate handouts. That is not the approach which has been taken. Enterprise Ireland has strict criteria.
Much of the money is competitive or is for leadership for growth. It is for companies to provide better leadership within companies or to look at their processes and improve them. It is very much focused on specific targets set by the business to grow its export and employment base. It is not a question of dishing out corporate charity.
The point I am trying to make relates to the concept known as corporate welfare. It is not simply about direct aid which, as the Minister has said, has been restricted somewhat in recent years. It is really about subsidies and tax breaks. Would the Minister not agree that there is no centralised record in Ireland of exactly how much taxpayers' money is being diverted to foreign multinationals through various arms of the State in this way and, therefore, the true cost to the taxpayer remains one of the best kept secrets we have? Should we not try to find out that information?
In a British context the analysis has revealed the equivalent of £3,500 per household. I imagine in an Irish context the amount of the transfer is far greater. It is a little like what the Think-tank for Action on Social Change has said in the sense that what we are seeing is the concentration of income in fewer hands, giving wealthy people more power to lobby for tax cuts that will disproportionately affect them. It is the case, therefore, that Ireland is one of the most unequal countries in Europe. The issue of corporate welfare is part of this and we would benefit from a greater analysis of the problem.
I think the Deputy really is letting ideology run away with her. The total sum that my Department disperses is €500 million. This compares to a welfare budget of €20 billion, an education budget of €8 billion and the health budget of €13 billion. We are not engaged in substantial corporate welfare in any sense of the term. Any of the money we disperse is tightly accounted for. It is based on criteria, namely, the capacity of those companies to grow and deliver results. Often it is linked to delivery of results. In other words, if there is support, it is connected. It is all focused on commitments made by the companies which are closely monitored by development advisers of the companies.
This is a strategy to support an export-led recovery and the evidence is there to support it. Irish-owned companies have had double-digit export growth in each of the past four years. We have succeeded in attracting substantial and ambitious companies to use Ireland as their base to grow in Europe. They believe we have a good business environment in which they can grow. That is the nature of our policy. Any objective assessment of our policy would say that it is successful, focused, transparent and accountable.
10. Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation to outline his plans to regulate the au pair industry in view of the recent publicity regarding poor wages and bad working conditions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28414/15]
My question relates to the possibility of the Minister regulating the au pair industry. Recently I had a visit from some au pairs in the south east. They relayed to me some horror stories of exploitation, poor working conditions and abusive treatment. One lady pointed out that she was working 60 hours per week for a €120, which is €2 per hour. This is a breach of all Irish employment laws. What changes will the Minister bring about to regulate this industry?
There is no legal definition of the term "au pair " in Irish legislation, and individuals described as au pairs, nannies or childminders are not exempted or treated as separate categories of workers under Irish employment law. Ireland's body of employment rights legislation protects all employees who are legally employed on an employer-employee basis, regardless of what title is given to them. Therefore, once it is clear that a person is working under a contract of employment on a full-time or part-time basis that person has the same protection under employment law as other employees. For example, the National Minimum Wage Act 2000 requires that any persons working under a contract of employment be paid the statutory national minimum wage. For the purposes of this Act, this means a contract of service or apprenticeship or any other contract whereby an individual agrees with another person to do or perform personally any work or service for that person.
Where the National Employment Rights Authority receives a complaint involving someone described as an au pair, it will investigate with a view to establishing whether a person has statutory entitlements under employment law. The question of whether a person is an employee is generally established by reference to the provisions of existing employment legislation and established contract law, regardless of any title or designation given to the individual. Complaints involving au pairs are considered on a case-by-case basis in the light of the facts of each case.
In addition to NERA's programme of inspections involving domestic workers, which has been ongoing since 2011, last year the authority launched an information booklet on the employment rights of domestic workers to coincide with Ireland's ratification of the International Labour Organisation Domestic Workers Convention, C189. It is available in a number of languages.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Has the Minister had any contact with the Migrant Rights Centre Ireland, which recently published a report on this area? The report stated that 49% of au pairs earn between €100 and €119 per week with 26% working between 40 to 60 hours per week. There is serious exploitation in this area. The people who visited me suggested they are more or less abandoned once they leave their employer. Will the Minister consider setting up a registration centre in his Department to enable people to register, have someone to talk to and get an explanation for why they are being treated so badly and why employers are not adhering to employment laws, as laid down by this country?
My officials have met representatives from Migrant Rights Centre Ireland. Furthermore, NERA is keen to engage with people in any way. It has a lo-call number, 1890 808 090, and a website. It has provided a usable guide to entitlements. It seeks to engage with people in those conditions, advise them of their rights and investigate any case of breaches. If the Deputy has any particular examples they can certainly be brought to the attention of NERA. My Department will continue to work with the bodies representing such workers to ensure that they are treated fairly.
