Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 27 Oct 2022

Vol. 1028 No. 5

Ceisteanna Eile - Other Questions

Industrial Development

Joe Flaherty

Question:

5. Deputy Joe Flaherty asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if he will provide an update on the IDA commitment to deliver an advanced building solution in Longford town; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53733/22]

The Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, is very familiar with Longford and has seen the success and benefits of foreign direct investment, FDI, in the town. Indeed, he has commented on it previously. In a half-mile triangle in the town we now have three companies employing 2,300 people. That is certain to grow with Abbott Diagnostics, Avery Dennison Medical and Technimark Ireland all focused on growth plans. Mindful of the importance of foreign direct investment, FDI, for provincial Ireland, I ask the Minister of State to update the House on the IDA's plans for an advanced building solution for Longford town.

I thank Deputy Flaherty for his question. As the House knows, regional development is at the centre of IDA Ireland's current strategy, Driving Recovery and Sustainable Growth 2021-2024. Under this strategy the IDA is targeting half of all investments to regional locations which aligns with the objectives of the programme for Government. Specifically, the IDA is targeting 25 investments for the midlands region, including Longford, in the period from 2021 to 2024.

Longford, as Deputy Flaherty has said, is already home to six IDA Ireland client companies directly employing more than 1,300 people and has an impressive range of companies across all industry sectors, with strengths in life science, technology, global business services, international financial services and engineering in industrial technologies.

In respect of the specific question from Deputy Flaherty, IDA Ireland has advised me that the site selection process for the advanced building solution in Longford is ongoing. The IDA continues to liaise with Longford County Council and with wider stakeholders as it seeks to find a suitable site for the proposed facility.

The timely provision of appropriate, innovative and cost-effective property and infrastructure solutions that meet the needs of our multinational community remains essential to winning FDI. Over the last five years the IDA regional property programme enabled the winning of capital-intensive projects of significant scale to regional locations. In a competitive and uncertain global environment, the IDA's regional property programme, supported by my Department, ensures the supply of land, buildings and infrastructure in regional locations, as required by current and prospective clients of both IDA and Enterprise Ireland.

The IDA's plan is to deliver 19 advanced building solutions in 15 regional locations across the country, including in Athlone, Longford and Mullingar. National capital investment plans outlined in the new IDA strategy, subject to planning permission and public procurement processes, are expected to commence and be delivered within the term of the new strategy at all identified locations. The Exchequer allocation for the IDA regional property programme in 2022 includes an additional €10 million, bringing the budget for that programme to €52 million.

I thank the Minister of State for that update. Technimark Ireland is nearing completion of a new wing at its factory in Longford town and will shortly be adding 100 staff to its workforce. In the coming days, we are expecting Abbott Diagnostics to lodge a planning application for a major expansion at its plant in Longford town which, doubtless, will lead to additional employment there also. Throughout the period of the crash we saw the importance of FDI for provincial Ireland. The towns that prospered or survived best during that time were those that had the benefit of tourism or of FDI. The Minister of State will be very familiar with the importance of tourism in the context of Westport and many of the provincial towns in Mayo but where there was no tourism, it was those towns that had the benefit and the crutch of FDI that did best. Notwithstanding the successes to date in Longford, it is critical that the Department makes it an absolute priority to ensure that IDA Ireland delivers a new advanced building solution for Longford town without any further delay. I am conscious that there is a commitment to deliver before 2024 but we are now at the end of 2022. This is an absolute priority for Longford.

I will work with Deputy Flaherty and all of our Oireachtas colleagues from Longford to ensure that this happens. In addition to that, the urban regeneration and development fund, URDF, investment of €10.4 million in the Camlin Quarter in Longford town, the rural regeneration development fund, RRDF, investment of €1.1 million in Granard, along with the investments in Ballymahon through the very successful Center Parcs project, demonstrate a whole-of-county approach that is essential for attracting FDI.

In recent weeks we have also engaged with the chair of the Midlands Regional Enterprise Plan on its work. I look forward to working with Deputy Flaherty on the implementation of that plan as well.

I am familiar with the IDA plans for 19 advanced building facilities around the country. By way of an update, the Carlow facility is almost ready, while the one in Cavan is expected to be ready in 2023. The IDA has recently purchased lands in Kerry, while the facilities at Galway, Dundalk, Monaghan and Sligo have all been built. Planning permission was recently granted for a facility in Athlone and the plans for Mullingar are advancing. As the Minister of State said, there is a commitment to deliver plants in Longford, Mullingar and Athlone before 2024. I implore the Minister of State to visit Longford at his earliest convenience to meet officials from Longford County Council. It behoves the local authority to take the lead on this and acquire a site. On that basis, there would be no excuse for the IDA but to press ahead. The quest for a site has been dragging on for too long. We need the local authority to take the lead on this and then IDA Ireland can follow through with the investment.

We want to see this done right across the country and that is why the Tánaiste has prioritised within the Department the investment in the regional property programme. I am more than happy to go to Longford to meet Deputy Flaherty and the officials from the local authority. Longford County Council has an excellent chief executive. We trained him well in Mayo before we sent him to Longford. I am happy to work with everyone involved in attracting more investment to the regions.

Question No. 6 taken after Question No. 7.

Work Permits

Colm Burke

Question:

7. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if he will provide an update in respect of recent changes to the way that doctors can access employment permits and visas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53593/22]

I seek an update in respect of the changes to the way that doctors can access employment permits and visas. We have a huge challenge in recruiting doctors and it is important that the process of getting them into the country is not delayed once they have been advised that employment is available.

I thank Deputy Colm Burke for raising this very important matter and assure him that we have tried to work with the Departments of Health and Justice to improve the situation.

The State's employment permit system is designed to supplement Ireland's skills and labour supply over the short to medium term by allowing the recruitment of nationals from outside the EEA where such skills or expertise cannot be sourced from within the EEA at that time. The system is, by design, vacancy led and managed through the operation of the critical skills and ineligible occupation lists. Doctors, including non-consultant hospital doctors, NCHDs, are on the critical skills list.

The critical skills employment permit is targeted at highly skilled people in eligible occupations deemed to be critically important to growing Ireland's economy and who are in significant short supply in our labour market. The permit provides for immediate family reunification and broad access to the labour market for dependants, spouses and partners, as well as for fast-tracking to long-term residency after two years. The criteria attached to this permit type include the requirement for the non-EEA national to have secured a job offer and employment contract of at least two years. As most NCHD contracts tend to be six to 12 months in duration, until recently these doctors had to apply for a general employment permit which had to be renewed after each contract. To reduce this administrative burden, my Department, working with the Department of Health, introduced a new two-year multi-site general employment permit in November 2021. This new permit for non-EEA doctors was established to eliminate the requirement for a new permit for each six-month rotation, thereby reducing the administrative burden on the Department, the HSE, hospitals and, most importantly, on the doctors themselves. This new permit is only available to public hospitals who hold trusted partner status with the Department.

Under the terms of this new permit, the doctor is required to provide a new contract and location to the Department at the end of each rotation, rather than applying for a new permit each time. At the end of the two-year period, the doctor will be eligible to apply to my Department for a stamp 4 support letter, which will put him or her on a pathway to permanent residency. Previously, this was only issued after a five-year period.

To coincide with the introduction of this new permit, the Department of Justice created a new stamp 1H, which is issued to all doctors who hold a multi-site general employment permit. This new permission requires doctors to register yearly with the Department of Justice, as well as providing a stamp 1G permission to spouses of these doctors, allowing them to access the labour market without the need for an employment permit.

In addition to this new permit, in March 2022 the opening of the temporary fast track to stamp 4 permission scheme was announced. All non-EEA doctors working in the State for more than two years while holding a general employment permit between 2018 and 2022 can apply to my Department for a stamp 4 support letter.

As the Minister of State will be aware, we are now competing on the world market in respect of the employment of doctors. Any change being brought about which will facilitate the recruitment of doctors such that a very fast mechanism is in place is important. As for the scheme now in place, however, is there a need to set up a review of it in, say, six months to see how it is working and to see if any further changes can be made in order to make sure we are not losing people with the medical skills to other jurisdictions? We are competing with Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK. Therefore, we need to be fast and efficient in dealing with applications. Can a review process be put in place in, say, 12 months to see how the scheme is working, if further changes need to be made and if there are glitches in the system that need to be resolved?

Again, I thank Deputy Burke for raising this issue. We keep this under review. The changes were put in place last November in our Department and then the Departments of Health and Justice followed suit. The three Departments are working quite closely to try to prioritise this area.

When it comes to judgments on the permits, we have made a lot of changes in our own Department to streamline that overall process and to be responsive. The time for most permit applications is down to a couple of weeks now. We have for a long number of years prioritised all cases related to health.

The system is probably correct now. It allows us to compete for talent, certainly when it comes to medical doctors, all over the world. I think we compare quite favourably with any other jurisdiction. We keep this under review and engage with the Departments of Health and Justice quite regularly on it. As late as yesterday, the Tánaiste, the Minister, Deputy McEntee, and I and our officials all met again to review the system in general in order to see how we can align our services to make them as fast and efficient as possible. When it comes to critical skills, we want to be able to react quickly. I believe we can do so, but we will keep this under review. If Deputy Burke has any issues he wants to raise directly, that is no problem at all. I am happy to meet him.

The problem we have is that a lot of the smaller hospitals around the country still have shortages of general doctors.

Another problem arising - I know it does not come under the remit of the Minister of State's Department but it is something we need to look at - is doctors transferring from one hospital to another and being on emergency tax. It is causing huge frustration and there needs to be more co-ordination between Departments on it. The Minister of State talked about going across his Department and the Department of Health. His Department is also going across the Department Finance and the Revenue Commissioners. That is a big issue as regards people being on emergency tax for a long time. It is frustrating people and they are tending to say "I am getting out of here" because of the tax structure and the lack of a more structured process. Once a person gets one contract, they should not have to go onto emergency tax if they move in six months' time. That is not an issue for the Minister of State's Department but it is a case of all Departments needing to work together to try to make sure we streamline the process for these people who are coming into this country and providing a valuable service.

I agree. It is important that we have streamlined the process. It is now much more accommodating to the situation regarding stamp 4 and family reunification. The issues the Deputy raises probably cross over with the Department of Finance and Revenue as well as the Department of Social Protection. I am certainly happy to raise them. We have been for a long number of years trying to implement a lot more cross-departmental arrangements to solving problems, and that is working quite well. I will raise the issues the Deputy raises. If there are any others, I ask him to let us know because we value the expertise of the people coming to work here. We need them to complement our own talent. Changes have been made in respect of the number of doctors coming through our education system. We would encourage the continuation of that work along with the Minister, Deputy Harris, in that area. We are very much open to working cross-departmentally. I will bring any issues the Deputy raises to the relevant Departments.

I will now go back to Questions Nos. 6, 12 and 19. I apologise to Deputies O'Donnell and O'Dowd. Question No. 6 was grouped with their questions. I did not see that and Deputy Dillon was not in the Chamber.

May I make a general point before we go on? If there are substitutes, they generally have to be notified within a certain time. Otherwise, I will be inconsistent and unfair and that is just not fair to Deputies. There is a timeframe for such notifications. I remind Deputies of that. I am sometimes caught out by it myself when I am not in the Chair, so I fully understand, but I will not deal with late applications in the middle of the morning because it is not easy enough and just not fair.

Enterprise Policy

Alan Dillon

Question:

6. Deputy Alan Dillon asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the measures his Department is taking to help businesses deal with rising energy costs, given that their bills have increased by over 200%; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53896/22]

Kieran O'Donnell

Question:

12. Deputy Kieran O'Donnell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the measures being taken to help businesses deal with rising energy prices; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53863/22]

Fergus O'Dowd

Question:

19. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if he will provide an update on the available supports for businesses to deal with the crippling energy prices being encountered across the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53405/22]

I was asked by Deputy Dillon, who is in a meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts, to ask this question on his behalf. It is similar to other questions other Members of the House have asked. It relates to the manner and means by which the Department is expected to respond in a meaningful way to the retail sector and the general small and medium-sized business sector in the face of dramatic oil price increases.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 6, 12 and 19 together.

I thank the Deputies for their questions. Understandably, a lot of businesses are very worried heading into the winter. The cost of energy and the cost of doing business more broadly is rising. Interest rates are going up and consumer confidence is waning. Businesses need help with their energy bills so the Government has introduced a significant package in the budget to help them over the coming months.

As the Deputies will be aware, the temporary business energy support scheme has been designed to help eligible businesses that have experienced a significant increase in their electricity or natural gas costs. It will apply to trades, professions and new businesses and is currently being finalised as part of the Finance Bill, which is progressing through the Houses.

This morning, along with the Minister, Deputy Michael McGrath, I launched the new €200 million Ukraine enterprise crisis scheme. That is for manufacturers and internationally traded firms. It will provide up to €500,000 per firm to ensure there is sufficient liquidity available and up to €2 million per firm for those businesses that are particularly energy-intensive.

In addition, a new €1.2 billion State-backed Ukraine credit guarantee scheme will help the wider business sector with liquidity and help it invest in energy efficiency. I received Government approval earlier this week to publish the legislation to underpin this, which I will bring through the Oireachtas in the coming weeks. Also, a new State-backed growth and sustainability loan scheme will be opened next year and will be the successor to the future growth loan scheme.

The reduced rate of VAT on gas and electricity from 13.5% to 9% has been extended until 28 February 2023.

This is very much an evolving situation, though. We understand the scale of the energy crisis and I assure the Deputies that we will respond with scale.

I thank the Tánaiste for that very informative and supportive reply. To what extent might a short-term and longer-term response be forthcoming if it is found necessary, given that many of the contributory factors to the dramatic oil price increases are likely to continue for a considerable time? In those circumstances what might now be the best approach to make provision for the long battle that lies ahead?

I call Deputy Kieran O'Donnell.

On a point of order, what question-----

The rules have not changed. When questions are grouped, the Member in whose name the first question is tabled gets the 30 seconds and the other Members lose their 30 seconds. The same rules apply. You will get the amount of time you normally get, Deputy O'Dowd-----

I will get an opportunity then.

I will call you straight after Deputy O'Donnell.

Thank you very much, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. That is in my own interest.

You are more than welcome, Deputy.

The Minister will appreciate that, as I am a Deputy for Limerick City, I get a lot of people on to me about business. The schemes being announced are very welcome and will make an enormous difference, but the energy costs of businesses like the retail businesses ringing me, particularly supermarkets, are now going up threefold. Those businesses are very genuine. They are huge employers in the area and they are asking if there will be latitude in the level of support provided. The temporary business energy support scheme provides 40% off their energy costs, but in many cases their energy costs have now trebled. I had one supermarket on to me whose costs have gone from €16,000 per month to €48,000 in the past month alone, and they will go even higher again.

All the schemes are great. I just want to know if there will be latitude in the percentage discount the Government can give under the temporary business energy support scheme. Will the Department have further flexibility in being able to extend the scheme beyond February of next year if the energy crisis continues? Furthermore, is there flexibility under the scheme to allow for charities, which operate very much in supporting sectors?

The Bare Food Company in Drogheda is a small business.

It received an electricity bill of €3,500 in April. Its latest bill is for €8,000. The story relating to the company is on the front page of our local paper as a result of the fact that it is asking its customers to leave early in the afternoon because it cannot afford to light the shop, cook the food or keep the fridges going the way it wants to. I welcome all of the Tánaiste's announcements and the work he is doing but businesses under a certain size find it much harder to bear the increased costs of their heating and cooling operations, particularly butchers like Callaghans in Ardee, the Bare Food Company and Tuites Butchers in Drogheda. Many people have serious worries. I ask the Tánaiste to look again at smaller businesses, which do not have the margin capacity of larger businesses to shift their profit and losses on different accounts.

It is fair to say that when we were in the teeth of the pandemic, we intervened and intervened at scale to save as many businesses and jobs as possible because it was not just about businesses, it was also about saving the jobs of the people who worked in them. However, there are constraints - much more so than would have been the case during the pandemic. Now that the cost of Government borrowing is rising, we are in a different place compared with where we were two or three years ago. There are budget limits and we are not in a position to say to any household or business that we cover the full cost of its increased energy bills. In fairness, I do not think anyone is calling for or expects that.

We are also constrained by the EU temporary crisis framework, which comprises a set of European rules that are not just there to annoy us. Those rules are there for a good reason, namely, to ensure that taxpayers' money is protected and that different countries do not out-compete each other with better subsidies all the time. That is just a beggar-my-neighbour attitude. The temporary crisis framework is there to protect us from that. Under the framework, we are only permitted to cover 30% of the increase in energy costs. We are trying to push that to 40% but I do not want to raise expectations that it will be possible to do better than 40% because that is not the feedback we are getting from the Commission or other member states. We can always look at other ways of helping businesses beyond energy supports. We have done that with the VAT reduction and perhaps there are other ways.

In the short term, the focus will be on the Government-backed loans, the energy subsidy and the new emergency scheme we announced today. In the medium to long term, the EU temporary crisis framework will allow us to extend these interventions beyond the end of February. They can be extended to the end of next year, but, obviously, no decision has been made on that nor can it be at this stage. The longer-term approach is quite different. It involves ramping up investment in renewables so we are less dependent on oil and gas and encouraging businesses to adopt energy efficiency. I have heard of some businesses that have reduced their energy bills dramatically just by covering their fridges, but I also know of plenty of businesses that have done everything right and are still facing very high energy bills.

Under the schemes operated by my Department and the Department of Finance, charities are not covered unless they have a trading income. There is a fund to help charities and sports clubs in a different way. This is run by the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media.

I thank the Tánaiste for his substantial reply. In the event of there being a long battle, for want of a better word, against fuel price increases, has there been any investigation into the possibility of replacement by renewables? Can that be speeded up to give confidence to those in the sector in order that they can plan ahead knowing what is likely to happen in the future and knowing the necessity of competing in the marketplace among their peers and those who might be hostile?

I thank the Tánaiste for his comprehensive overview. I welcome the fact that he is willing to consider with businesses and understand the constraints under which he is operating regarding energy supports and the European Commission, that he will keep other supports under consideration and that he has the flexibility to extend the supports beyond the end of February depending on the position regarding the energy crisis. When will businesses see the money hit their bank accounts under the temporary business energy support scheme and when they will get the arrears back to September?

I also welcome the Tánaiste's comments. There may be grants available to businesses, particularly smaller ones, to upgrade their heating facilities and find the most efficient and effective way of using energy, although I am not familiar with them. Is advice available to them regarding how they can reduce their costs in this regard? Is there a possibility of special grants to allow them to upgrade their fridges or cooking facilities to make them more efficient? We need to put pressure on energy companies as well. In particular, the ESB makes huge profits. I know the money is going to the State, but I am concerned that not enough is coming back down to smaller businesses.

It may not be a major issue but is there an option to introduce rates relief for businesses, particularly smaller businesses, that can prove their energy costs have increased exponentially? Are there any other supports or strategies in other countries that we could look at?

I thank the Deputies for their contributions. There is room for bio-renewables as part of the new energy mix. One company in Cork, whose representatives I met recently makes boilers. It was explained to me how you could move away from using oil for those boilers to a blend or bio-renewables. I do not know enough about the matter to comment too much, but I take the Deputy's point that we need to give confidence to people around price and policy before they invest. I will take the matter up with the Minister for Environment, Climate and Communications.

Like many people in this House, I engage with business a lot, whether that be on an individual level, with businesspeople and employers, representative groups headquartered in Dublin or chambers of commerce all around the country. All of them are raising the issue of energy costs with me. I still say that the difficulty involved in finding staff is probably as significant an issue, perhaps even more so. It is interesting to hear that. We must think about the policy wisdom of subsidising businesses while other businesses cannot get staff. You could have two restaurants in the one town, one of which is doing okay and could do better but cannot get staff and another that is really struggling but has staff. We must think about the wisdom of subsidising businesses at a time when other businesses cannot get any staff at all.

The temporary business energy support scheme is contingent on the Finance Bill being passed. The Minister for Finance's target is to get it through by the end of November, which means the scheme can be open at the end of November or in early December. The subsidy will be backdated to September, so we anticipate businesses getting a substantial amount of cash from Revenue to cover some of their energy bills before Christmas. That is certainly the plan at the moment. In fairness to Revenue, it has proven to be very efficient with the employment wage subsidy scheme and the Covid restrictions support scheme in the past. In such circumstances, I would have a lot of confidence in it.

The Government has 20 schemes to help businesses to reduce their energy use and use renewables. The best port of call for small businesses would be the local enterprise office but much of it is doing through the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland. The rules around solar panels have been changed so that pretty much any business in the country can put a solar panel on its roof without needing planning permission. There are few exceptions but not many. We hope to launch a new grant scheme in the very near future that will help businesses with the capital cost of investing in renewables and energy saving - up to 50% in some cases.

Businesses tell me that there is a great deal of help with audits, consultancy and advice, but maybe not enough when it comes to doing the work that needs to be done, whether it is with the small turbine, the solar panel, the insulation, the fridge doors or whatever. This is on the way.

Turning to the issue of relief from commercial rates, there is no plan to do this at present. Commercial rates are an important source of income for local authorities. This is a tool that has been used in the past, however.

Industrial Development

Fergus O'Dowd

Question:

8. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if he will provide an update on the recently announced purchase by IDA Ireland from Louth County Council of further lands to increase IDA Ireland's land bank in north Drogheda; the total new acreage of the site; if the site will be serviced sooner than expected; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53404/22]

The purpose of this question is to ask the Tánaiste if he will provide an update on the recent announcement regarding the purchase by IDA Ireland of further lands from Louth County Council to increase IDA Ireland's land bank in Drogheda. This is welcome. I would appreciate any additional details the Tánaiste may have, particularly regarding the total new acreage and if the site will be serviced. This addition will provide some 44 or 45 acres in total. This will be a great advantage to the town, especially if, or when, it is serviced.

I thank Deputy O'Dowd for raising this matter again. He has a keen interest in ensuring that we get more employment and investment into Drogheda. The new IDA Ireland land bank at the Mell in Drogheda forms part of IDA Ireland's long-term strategic plans to position Drogheda and the wider mid-east region to compete for FDI. I have been advised that since acquiring this land bank last year, IDA Ireland has undertaken an infrastructural review on servicing and how best to position the land bank for a potential major investment. The project is at the concept review stage now and a multidisciplinary team has been appointed by IDA Ireland. This review is ongoing and progressing well.

IDA Ireland and Louth County Council have agreed terms on the transfer of seven acres to IDA Ireland. This transfer is currently the subject of a conveyancing process. Once the transfer is complete, it will increase IDA Ireland's current landholding to 46 acres and enhance the marketability and attractiveness of the lands to potential investors. In recent years, IDA Ireland has worked with companies on investments and expansions in County Louth, including WUXI, Wasdell, Almac, PCI Pharma Services, Amazon Web Services, AWS, and Simply NUC. IDA Ireland is pleased to have acquired these two land banks which will enhance its ability to bring capital intensive projects of significant scale to the area.

I welcome the Minister's reply. It is good news indeed. It shows joined-up thinking and, literally, joined-up land, which increases road frontage. This site is especially well located as it is beside the motorway. We had significant investment, particularly with AWS building in the town. Areas with these types of data centres need these companies to invest. People who need data need to be beside their data. Hopefully, the fact that AWS is now in Drogheda and operating will make it a more attractive site for inward and other investment by companies that need access to their data in close proximity. This is extremely good news. It is very welcome. I would be grateful if we could get a timeline regarding the servicing of this site. This is critical. Once the site is serviced, it will be up and running. Until that happens, this is a lovely plan but we need the site open and active.

I agree. The acquisition of the extra seven acres by IDA Ireland from Louth County Council makes the entire parcel of land much more attractive to investment. The Deputy knows the geography of the area better than I do, but I know where the site is. The purchase has not just increased the footprint from 39 acres to 46 acres but has also made this a better-shaped site, if this makes any sense. As the Deputy said as well, it provides better access to the road and should make it easier to service. I do not have a timeline for the servicing of the site. I will keep putting pressure on IDA Ireland in this regard. I am conscious that, in the context of County Louth, there has been much investment in Dundalk. There has been a great deal in Drogheda as well, but perhaps not as much. The AWS development is very welcome in Drogheda and is positive in respect of attracting additional investment to the town. The number of jobs there is limited, though, and we want to ensure that we use this 46-acre site on the edge of the town for investments that will be jobs-rich. We want to bring in hundreds of jobs to that site and this is very much what we intend to do.

Question No. 9 taken with Written Answers.

Industrial Relations

Richard Boyd Barrett

Question:

10. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if he will honour the agreement made by his Department to an organisation (details supplied) and introduce amending legislation in order that fishers can submit complaints under SI 709/2003 and its successor, SI 672/2019, relating to excessive working hours and insufficient breaks and rest periods, to the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [51490/22]

The purpose of this question is to ask why the Government has not done what it has promised on several different occasions, namely, to provide a remedy for migrant fishers, or any fishers, who are overworked. They are working long hours in contravention of the EU directive. Currently, they cannot go to the WRC. The Government has promised on multiple occasions that it will introduce amending legislation to enable the fishers to do so, but it keeps failing to do it. It is the migrant workers who are losing out. I will give examples later.

The WRC, under the aegis of my Department, is one of several agencies that monitor the operation of the atypical worker permission scheme for non-EEA fishers employed on certain Irish-registered fishing vessels. I presume this is the scheme the Deputy is mainly referring to. The WRC has particular responsibility for checking compliance insofar as terms of employment, permission to work, payment of wages, annual leave, public holidays, and National Minimum Wage Act 2000 entitlements are concerned.

Hours of work and rest periods of fishers who work under a contract of employment or in an employment relationship on board Irish-registered fishing vessels are governed by the European Union (International Labour Organisation Work in Fishing Convention) (Working Hours) Regulations 2019 (SI No 672 of 2019), which are monitored by the Department of Transport. Marine surveyors of the Department of Transport are authorised officers for the purposes of the enforcement of these regulations and may, where a contravention of the regulations is detected, issue directions to the owner or master of a vessel or detain a vessel. Proceedings concerning offences under these regulations may be brought by the Minister for Transport. WRC inspectors currently do not have a statutory function in relation to SI 672/2019.

Following mediation in April 2019 on the atypical scheme, however, a settlement agreement provided that the Department of Justice would recommend that WRC adjudicators have jurisdiction over violations of the fishing vessel working time hours of rest regulations and that this would be implemented by the appropriate measures to be determined by my Department. In this regard, our Department has engaged with the Department of Transport and agreed a proposal to extend the WRC's jurisdiction relating to excessive working hours and insufficient breaks and rest periods. This proposal will be progressed as soon as is practicable in new legislation as part of a package we are working on. Hopefully, I will be able to provide a further update to the Deputy on this matter soon. I hope this deals with the specific question tabled. I think the Deputy wants to go further than this as well, which I am happy to do if there is time.

I thank the Minister of State. I do wish to focus on this issue. The consequence of the Government failing to act on the agreement with the International Transport Workers Federation is that workers like Jose Pame Salandron are not able to vindicate their rights in the WRC. This is a guy who was working 80 or 90 hours a week regularly. He went to the WRC and he was awarded, wrongly, €14,000 under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997. The case then went to the Labour Court and it was stated that this context was not covered. This is accurate. His award was then cut down to €4,000. Mr. Salandron may now be taking a case against the State, which could cost it money under the Francovich damages' principle, which he is seeking, because of the State's failure to transpose the directive. The Minister of State indicated that this is going to be done as soon as is practicable. In answering a parliamentary question from Deputy Barry in January, however, he said, "This proposal will be included as a miscellaneous amendment in a legislative instrument in the Spring". When is this going to be? I presume it was the Spring of 2022 that was referred to and not the Spring of 2023. The Government is leaving migrant workers extremely vulnerable to continued massive exploitation and to working 80 to 90 hours a week. When is this measure going to be progressed?

I cannot comment on the specific case raised, but I am happy to engage with the Deputy separately on this aspect in general. We are bringing forward this package. I do not have a timeline for it now. I will, though, try to get it fast-tracked. We were waiting for the recommendations and the changes and the review of the atypical worker permission scheme. The Deputy will agree that it is positive that this scheme will now be changed and replaced by access to the work permits scheme. A cross-departmental working group is examining this endeavour and these changes will be brought forward in the next couple of months as well. Overall, then, new legislation will be required. It is not prepared or ready yet, but I will try to respond to the Deputy with a timeline as fast as we possibly can. Several Departments are involved in this process and the associated complications. The commitment was that the WRC would be involved in this and we will follow through on this as quickly as we possibly can.

The settlement agreement was reached on 30 April 2019. The reply to the parliamentary question was given in January of this year. Do the Minister of State and the Government not feel bad that this failure to act has left extremely vulnerable workers ripe for extreme exploitation? They are being left with no remedy in respect of going to the WRC to deal with being asked to work an illegal number of hours. The Government continues to fail to transpose the working time at sea directive by not giving workers access to a remedy here. People like Jose Pame Salandron are being asked to work 80 or 90 hours a week.

Unfortunately, he is not alone. I urge the Government to stop taking its time with this matter. It is urgent. The Government should act immediately.

I join the Deputy in urging the Government to take action on this as quickly as possible. It is not all vessels and it is not all employers. Where it happens, however, it is awful.

We have people working 17 hours a day in unconscionably awful conditions. They are extremely vulnerable. These are migrant workers. It is already tough for workers who work on land and who might have access to some resources to vindicate their rights at work. It is nearly next to impossible for workers at sea - people who are extremely vulnerable - to vindicate their rights. Collectively, we should be trying to alleviate that to the greatest extent possible.

I pay tribute to the International Transport Workers Federation for the work it does. However, that organisation has to feel that the Government is working against it instead of working with it. The Government should be working with the federation, particularly as we all have a responsibility to protect these workers.

This is an area of priority. Most stakeholders with whom I engage in this sector across the different Departments wanted the review of the atypical working scheme prioritised as soon as possible. To be honest with the Deputies, that is where a lot of our work has gone in. That review is to be completed. The recommendations and the report went to Cabinet a few weeks ago, and we can get on with that work to replace the atypical working scheme with the work permit scheme. That will be beneficial to everybody. Most Members of the House will agree that was the right area to concentrate our work on.

Since the launch of the atypical working scheme in February 2016, the WRC has been involved in closely monitoring it. In particular, during the period from when the scheme was launched to 31 October this year, it carried out 530 inspections. It detected 392 contraventions and completed 251 investigations and 21 prosecutions. The WRC has also made 45 referrals to the Department of Transport in respect of potential contraventions of the hours of rest and working time regulations enforced by that Department. There has been ongoing monitoring. This is to do with the next part that the Deputy is concerned with as well.

A number of information awareness measures have been introduced by the WRC since 2016 to enhance employment rights awareness and compliance in the fishing industry. In order to enhance these measures, the WRC consulted last December with 16 relevant stakeholders who were requested to make written submissions in relation to, among other matters, possible additional outreach measures for fishing vessel owners and migrant fishers. Submissions were received subsequently from five of the 16 stakeholders. The WRC 2022 report on the outcomes of these consultations sets out a range of actions, including some 23 measures and initiatives currently being progressed. Such measures include: information provision; awareness and promotion; and direct engagement with officials, vessel owners and representative organisations, taking in training and use of communication and social media channels.

There is much change afoot in the sector, and rightly so. Those need to be driven across Departments as well. We are willing to play our part and have been doing so.

Question No. 11 taken with Written Answers.
Question No. 12 taken with Question No. 6.

International Agreements

Catherine Connolly

Question:

13. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment further to Parliamentary Question No. 2 of 12 October 2022, the status of his engagement at WTO and EU level with regard to the proposal to extend the 17 June 2022 decision of the WTO on the TRIPS Agreement to cover Covid-19 therapeutics and diagnostic tests with no further conditions to the text; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53788/22]

Paul Murphy

Question:

14. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if he will support strengthening the very limited TRIPS waiver agreed in relation to Covid-19 vaccines to include suspending all relevant intellectual property rules and ensuring the mandatory pooling of all COVID-19-related knowledge, data and technologies in order that any nation can produce or buy sufficient and affordable doses of vaccines, treatments and tests; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53850/22]

Pádraig O'Sullivan

Question:

43. Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the engagement that he has had at an EU level regarding the proposed extension of the TRIPS waiver to therapeutics and diagnostics for Covid-19; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53672/22]

I want to ask the Tánaiste about the status of his engagement at WTO and EU level with regard to the proposal to not apply the TRIPS Agreement to cover Covid-19 therapeutics and diagnostic tests, as well as the issue of vaccines.

I am taking Questions Nos. 13, 14 and 43 together. Is that okay?

Mheas mé gurb é Ceist Uimh. 14 amháin a bhí i gceist ach tá an ceart ag an Aire Stáit.

Responding to the exceptional circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic, Ministers at the WTO Ministerial Conference in June 2022 agreed an outcome in relation to the production and supply of Covid-19 vaccines. The ministerial decision on the TRIPS Agreement provides for a waiver of certain obligations of the agreement and includes clarifications that will allow eligible WTO members to authorise a company to manufacture and export Covid-19 vaccines in a fast and simplified manner and without the consent of the patent owner. Developing countries will be able to use this solution to authorise the manufacture, import or export of Covid-19 vaccines without prior negotiation with the patent owner and without any notification requirements that would delay the start of the manufacture or export. Equally important is the clarification that the remuneration for patent owners may take account of humanitarian or not-for-profit purpose of production and hence support the production and supply of Covid-19 vaccines at affordable prices for those in need.

The ministerial decision covers Covid-19 vaccines as well as the ingredients and processes necessary for their manufacture. At the time of the adoption of the decision, there was no consensus among the members to cover also Covid-19 diagnostics and therapeutics. As a compromise, paragraph 8 of the decision stipulates that no later than six months from the date of that decision, which would bring us to 17 December next, members will be expected to decide on whether to extend the decision to cover the production and supply of Covid-19 diagnostics and therapeutics.

Deputies will already be aware that trade is an exclusive competence of the EU, and, accordingly, the negotiations on TRIPS, as a trade matter, are led by the EU. The EU is in the process of conducting internal consultations and analysis on the extension, taking into consideration that the case for Covid-19 therapeutics and diagnostics is more complex than the one pertaining to vaccines. Discussions on the extension of the mechanism to cover the production and supply of Covid-19 diagnostics and therapeutics are ongoing at the WTO. The EU is engaging constructively in these discussions.

Ireland will continue to engage with the European Commission and other member states on the EU position. A decision to extend the earlier ministerial decision from June will require the agreement of all WTO members. The next main date is December, if we are to stay within the six month-period. We will certainly update Deputies after that session as well.

What is Ireland's position? The Minister of State spoke for a long time but he did not say what Ireland's position is. Does Ireland support extending the TRIPS waiver to diagnostics - technology other than vaccines - or does it not? Does it stand with the poorest people in the world who want to get access to the technology to be able to test for Covid, etc., or does it stand with the big pharmaceutical companies that want to keep a monopoly on those technologies in order to maximise their profits?

Where does Ireland stand? That is important to know because what is being reported is that the obstructive position in the talks is being taken by the EU, the UK, Canada and Japan which are seeking to delay progress in relation to that. Obviously, Ireland is part of the EU. What is Ireland's position? Does the Government support extending the TRIPS waiver to diagnostics and therapeutics or does it not?

I would also like that question answered. It is specific. I have had the advantage over Deputy Paul Murphy of reading it. The Minister of State is not dealing with the question in the context of what is Ireland's position. The decision that was agreed in June falls far short of what was asked by countries, led by India and others, in October 2020. They asked for a lot more.

Here we are now. In the beginning, there might have been some excuse, although I do not think there was. We were reacting. Now there has been time for reflection. Is our voice being heard at EU level to say this has to be extended in a fair manner to diagnostics, tests and treatments? Is that happening? Where is our voice?

The Government continuously tells us that trade is an EU competency. We know that. We do not need the Minister of State to keep telling us that. This is a health matter. This is about human beings and about justice, equality and fairness. Where is our voice at EU level in that regard?

It is probably fair to say that the ministerial decision was the outcome of extensive, detailed and politically sensitive negotiations which we have discussed here quite a lot over the past year. Ireland has always taken a prominent position on that within the EU. They hold the competency for this and we contribute to that. Our officials in Dublin, Brussels and Geneva are involved in a round of negotiations since that meeting nearly four and a half months ago in preparing for the next round, which is on 17 December, and we are feeding into that.

The EU is in the process of engaging with various stakeholders, conducting internal consultations and analysing available information to gain an understanding, and we are feeding into that as well. We have always had the view - we are clear from an Irish point of view - that we had to find the best way to get access to what was on offer while protecting the intellectual property, IP, as well. Deputy Paul Murphy and I differ on that. We believe that one must protect an IP regime to encourage more people to invest in that and to invest in future medicines and future therapeutics, and health services as well. If one does not have that regime right, one will lose out on that investment and everyone - developing countries or not - suffers.

We have been feeding in to try to find the best way. We have always made it clear that the opportunity to manufacture and access the infrastructure on the ground was important. We have made a lot of progress since the previous talks. The conversation has moved on and that is the part in which the EU is involved. The talks are politically sensitive and they involve many countries. The EU has been one of the leaders in this and we have made some progress since the previous talks. I will be able to update Deputy Murphy after the December meeting. I am afraid that is as far as we can go today.

That is not acceptable. We are asking a question. The answer of the Minister of State, repeatedly, was to say we are feeding in to find the best way. I have no idea what this means. Is Ireland at European Council level pushing for the EU to support the extension of the waiver or is it not? We have the right to know what position the Irish Government is taking. The Minister of State does not, or certainly should not, have the right to come in here and talk nonsense and not say anything. He says he supports the intellectual property. If the Government's position is that the right of the companies to profit and the right of Ireland to get a small amount of corporation tax should come before the lives of millions of people the Minister of State should come and argue that position and let us have a debate about it. To hide Ireland's position in language stating that we are feeding in to try to find the best way is quite craven. Come out and say what is the Irish Government's position. If the Irish Government supports the extension of that waiver that is great. Clearly that is what I think we should be doing. It is not acceptable to refuse to answer the question. The negotiations are happening now. As the Minister of State said, this has to be done by 17 December. It will be scandalous if the Irish Government stands with the pharmaceutical companies and not billions of people around the world.

I would love to hear the voice of the Tánaiste on this because we need leadership on it. I understand he is in possession of a letter from more than 18 non-governmental organisations, including the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. They have pointed out that less than 20% of people in the poorest countries are fully vaccinated. At the same time high-income countries account for 75% of total known supplied details of all existing therapeutics. Within a minute one cannot read out the letter. The NGOs are deeply disappointed that the WTO TRIPS decision, made on 17 June and endorsed by the Irish Government, was not comprehensive.

We are speaking about health. There is no point in making Ireland safe if other countries are not safe. If we endorsed a system that enriched a small number of pharmaceutical companies beyond belief on public money let us learn from it. Let us stop praising the wonderful pharmaceutical companies that did this on public money. Perhaps at some point the Minister of State might tell us how much public money went into it. He might also tell us how many vaccine doses we have given to COVAX. I do not expect him to have the answers now. We are constantly trying to get information. At this point I am just asking for leadership to let our voice be heard.

I also have the letter that was addressed to the Taoiseach from the individuals outlining their concerns. We have to reflect on what progress has already been made on access to the vaccine since we discussed this when people raised it previously. The ministerial decision on the TRIPS agreement provides for a waiver of certain obligations of the TRIPS agreement. It includes clarifications that will allow eligible WTO members to authorise a company to manufacture and export Covid-19 vaccines in a fast and simplified manner and without the consent of the patent owner. There have been major changes. Developing countries will be able to use this solution to authorise the manufacture, import or export of Covid-19 vaccines without prior negotiation with the patent owner and without notification requirements that would delay the start of the manufacture or export.

Equally important is the clarification that the remuneration for patent owners may take account of a humanitarian or not-for-profit purpose of production and hence support the production supply of Covid-19 vaccines at affordable prices for those in need. The decision that has been made will simplify to the maximum the process to export vaccines and their ingredients to other developing countries. This includes waiving various prior notification packaging or labelling requirements. It will also enable developing countries to scale up production capacity and supply vaccines to other eligible members. It will also support the establishment of manufacturing hubs that rely on supply chains in multiple countries. This will facilitate, for instance, filling and finishing capacity in several countries. The outcome maintains the protection of intellectual property as opposed to waving intellectual property rights. This is a key element for developing countries not only to benefit from the innovation the system sustains but also to have an environment that incentivises investment the international community should make to boost capacity and diversification in the production of vaccines and pharmaceutical products more broadly throughout the world.

I have argued previously that the successful production of new vaccines and new medicines involves public money and private money.

Mostly public.

It is fair to say a lot of extra public money was put on top of billions of euro of private money for Covid. There is no doubt about this. There was an investment of private money well before this. We have to make sure the intellectual property regime protects both of these investments and enhances the best opportunities. We believe Ireland's role in our negotiations through the EU in the trade talks has assisted with these changes. We will continue to take this approach in the coming months until 17 December. They are negotiations. We are part of negotiations through the EU and the WTO that involve more than 150 companies. I cannot go into every little detail the Deputy wants but we recognise-----

I think it is public, private and profit.

It is about how we best maximise money for research. I do not have all the figures here today but I ask Deputy Connolly to trust me that the private end has been higher than the public end for a long number of years. Let us be fair about this. It is important that we maximise the opportunity. We differ on the need to have a blend of public and private money in research. To me it is about how we maximise the impact of expenditure. This is done by combining the two in many ways. This is not an approach shared by Deputy Paul Murphy. I am not sure of the approach of Deputy Connolly but I know Deputy Murphy believes it should be all taxpayers' money. I believe that would miss out on opportunities that we have to build on.

With regard to COVAX I do not have the figures but I will get them for Deputy Connolly.

Questions No. 15 to 18, inclusive, taken with Written Answers.
Question No. 19 taken with Question No. 6.

White Papers

Catherine Connolly

Question:

20. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the status of the development of the White Paper on enterprise; his plans to prioritise sustainable indigenous industry in the forthcoming White Paper; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53787/22]

My question is on the status of the White Paper on enterprise, which is fundamental to the new transformation we must make in Ireland.

My Department continues to progress its work on the White Paper on enterprise, which is scheduled for publication in December this year. We undertook an extensive consultation with the public, stakeholders, academia and other interested parties over the summer. We also held a symposium on the project earlier this month.

The White Paper will seek to articulate what needs to be done differently to realise our aspirations for our economy in 2030 and beyond. It will set out the risks we face, the policy choices and, importantly, the trade-offs we will need to consider. It will also seek to confirm what elements of the ecosystem are working well and what should be continued or adapted in the context that Ireland's enterprise and industrial policy which has, to date, served us well.

Prioritising sustainable indigenous industry, as Deputy Connolly has identified, will be an important theme of the White Paper. It will also cover entrepreneurship, innovation, scaling companies, the twin transitions of digital and green, investment in skills and education and competitiveness among other issues. The outcome will likely be one of evolution and adaptation rather than revolution. My ambition for the White Paper is that it will contribute to a more prosperous, equitable and sustainable Ireland.

I thank the Minister. The White Paper will be crucial to set out the policy for Ireland. I had hoped to make a submission. I read all the documentation and I got as far as writing a draft submission. I took the trouble to read it and what troubles me is that in theory we will make a change but the documentation I read suggests that we are continuing in the same direction.

The Minister for Rural and Community Development will also deal with my next point in the next business. We do not yet have a policy for sustainable living on the islands and for supporting what is being done there with indigenous industries. I will take as examples areas in which I have taken a particular interest. One of these is seaweed - the Minister is nodding his head. We have got nowhere with this as an indigenous industry. Another is wool, which I discussed yesterday. We have spent €100,000 on being told the possibilities for wool. In the scheme of the big accountancy firms this is not much but it is still a lot. The possibilities for wool include everything from insulation to fertilisers but we have done nothing. These are the examples that come to mind very quickly.

With regard to making a submission it is not too late. It is a non-statutory process and if the Deputy or any other Oireachtas Member wants to make a submission even at this late stage they are very welcome to do so. Our industrial policy down the years has served us very well. We have done well in our economic success, full employment, high levels of prosperity and high living standards in a ranking of 200 countries. It is largely based on trade and exports. It is not just about foreign direct investment. People often do not know this but there are as many people working now in Enterprise Ireland companies and Irish-owned exporting companies as there are in IDA Ireland companies. The objective of the White Paper is to give us a high-level roadmap on where we go from here to consolidate the gains we have made and to consider what the next wave of industries we need to invest in will be.

Many of them will be in the digital space as well as the green space, such as in renewables, circular economy and new products, some of which the Deputy mentioned.

I thank the Minister for clarifying that submissions are still being accepted. I thank the Minister who will be dealing with the next questions on the progress that has been made. However, we have been waiting on the policy for the islands for so long and on interdepartmental reports.

Going back to the topic of seaweed, these are good news stories we are ignoring. I am only picking two or three, the latest of which was the story on wool. You read a report that tells you about the potential of wool, only for the Government to do a Pontius Pilate and says it is up to the industry. The industry has not done it. The farmers who depend on sheep and say they are not getting any price for their wool, are begging for help and leadership on this. Of course they will work with the Government, but it has not happened. Therefore, the new policy must look at indigenous industries in a real way and look at regional imbalance. The Minister of State seated beside the Minister knows very well that the north west has been downgraded by Europe for the second time. There is something seriously wrong here in that we are not taking charge with a different vision of the possibilities that exist, with the people on the ground, and having co-ops as a serious part of that vision.

Top
Share