Amendments Nos. 6 and 7 are related and may be taken together by agreement. Members may speak to both amendments but they will be moved and voted upon separately.
SECTION 4.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 8, subsection (3), line 40, to delete "may" and substitute "shall, before the coming into operation of Part II of this Act,".
Amendment No. 7 is consequential upon this amendment. Article 17 of the directive allows member states to exempt certain activities from the provisions of the legislation in relation to daily rest, breaks, weekly rest periods, length of night work, etc. It should be compulsory for the Minister to make the regulations before the legislation comes into effect. It is extraordinary that any company, regardless of size, resources or the sector in which it is involved, wishing to have minor flexibility in work practices should either have to register an agreement with the Labour Court or lobby the Minister for an exemption. That is impractical, bureaucratic and will add to the financial and administrative cost incurred by the company. The impact of this legislation will be substantial and on enactment companies must abide by it. If regulations are subsequently made which exempt certain sectors or companies, we will have asked them to make huge changes which will have proved unnecessary. In the interests of certainty and clarity and to give derogations in line with the directive, I ask the Minister to make the regulations before Part II of the Bill comes into operation. On this matter, IBEC has stated:
It is absolutely extraordinary and wholly impractical to provide as the Bill does that every company in the country, regardless of size, resources, culture or sector, which needs relatively minor flexibility to operate efficiently must either conclude and register a collective agreement with the Labour Court or lobby the Minister to provide exemptions by regulations. This approach is bureaucratic and will impose unnecessary additional costs on Irish companies both in financial and administrative terms.
If my amendment No. 6 is accepted, amendment No. 7 would follow.
I support Deputy Harney's amendment.
Deputy Harney's proposal is unnecessary. Section 4(4), the subsection immediately following the one she seeks to amend, provides that consultation will take place as soon as possible with representatives of both sides of industry in the sectors referred to in Article 17(2) with a view to establishing the range of exemptions necessary, which we hope can be incorporated in one omnibus set of regulations. It will be necessary to ensure these regulations come into effect not later than the bringing into effect of Part II of the Bill but we need to specify that.
A general election is due shortly so the Minister may not have time for consultation.
It will be after the budget on 29 October.
I suggest a compulsion be put on the Minister to make these regulations so that we have clarity and certainty in our regulations and, as the directive allows, can opt for derogations and exemptions. We should do as the directive allows — opt for derogations and exemptions. I cannot see why the Minister will not accept my amendment. If it is going to happen anyway, which the Minister assures me it will, I cannot see why we do not make it certain in the legislation.
It actually makes it more inflexible to have to do it the way the Deputy suggests.
Having read what Deputy Harney intends in this amendment, it would give certainty. If the Minister changes the word "may" to "shall" it means that everybody will know where they stand with regard to the regulations. All those interested will be clear as to where they stand. The Minister makes the point about consultation in section 4(4) but that is not strong enough. The Minister of State should agree with Deputy Harney's proposal and at least bring it back on Report Stage where we may have another chance. I do not agree to leaving the word "may". "Shall" should be substituted. It is a straightforward proposal.
Deputy Harney's proposal to write in how exactly it will be done would possibly be, to use her own words, "unnecessarily bureaucratic". I will have a look at it on Report Stage, but the intention is to do this. Section 4(4) says "the Minister shall consult" so there is no question of consultation not taking place.
It is not a matter of consultation. I want the Minister of State to make the regulations.
Regulations will be made. I would be glad if the Deputy could acknowledge that we are availing of all the flexibilities in the directive. The intention is to avail of these flexibilities.
Is the amendment being pressed?
I will come back to it on Report Stage but will not press it now. I would like a reassurance on that point because I believe it is important.
The Minister of State has indicated that.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 7 not moved.
Section 4 agreed to.
Sections 5 to 7, inclusive, agreed to.