Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 23 November 2023
5. Deputy Louise O'Reilly asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment when the recommendations of the Labour Employer Economic Forum high-level review group on collective bargaining report will be incorporated into legislation. [51454/23]
View answerIt is very straightforward. It is more than a year since the Labour Employer Economic Forum, LEEF, high-level group on collective bargaining published its report. I am just looking for an update as to when the legislative proposals for implementation will be published or if legislation is what is being considered.
I thank the Deputy for raising the issue. As she may be aware, a LEEF subgroup has been established, which I chair, to discuss in detail the recommendations contained in the final report of the LEEF's high-level working group on collective bargaining. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions, ICTU, and the Irish Business and Employers Confederation, IBEC, are represented on the group, which last met on 16 November 2023. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend due to a last-minute commitment but the meeting went ahead in my absence as the group is very keen to get this concluded.
Prior to the last meeting, my Department circulated a note to the social partners on a proposed approach regarding some of the report's recommendations. The Department and the social partners had a positive and constructive discussion at a meeting I chaired on a range of recommended actions, including the use of technical assessors to assist the joint labour committees, JLCs, and to advise the Labour Court when preparing opinions; the makeup and membership of JLCs; the scope of sectors in respect of which JLCs should be established; other changes that could be considered to incentivise participation in the JLC mechanisms; and training requirements.
There was also some discussion about Ireland's action plan on collective bargaining, as required by the EU directive on adequate minimum wages, and how we can best work together to develop it. Both legislative and administrative measures need to be fully considered to give effect to the report's recommendations. In some cases, the legal proposals pose complicated legal and constitutional issues that require considerable analysis. Some recommendations could lead to legal challenge if not considered carefully. It was agreed with the social partners that this should be avoided.
Officials have been engaged with the Office of the Attorney General on those proposals, which would require legislative amendments. These are the proposal to empower the Labour Court to propose an employment regulation order when a JLC cannot convene, and the proposals for good faith engagement at enterprise level. A written opinion has been requested on these issues from the Office of the Attorney General. The group will meet again in due course.
I welcome that clarity. The Minister of State has previously said to me that legislative and administrative measures are going to need to be fully considered to give effect to the recommendations. He said that certain legal proposals pose complicated legal and constitutional issues. These are answers that I received several weeks ago so I am concerned that the situation has not advanced in terms of whether it will be legislation or an administrative procedure. If there is a constitutional issue, is that likely to delay matters? Is it the Minister of State's opinion or belief that a referendum of any type might be required or is it simply just the advice on how to proceed within the bounds of the Constitution?
He also mentioned that a further meeting of the group was scheduled to take place in the coming weeks. I am just wondering if it is moving towards a conclusion on this.
I do not mean this disrespectfully but the answer I got is a carbon copy of the one I got previously, which makes me concerned that there has not been any movement and that it is still a matter of a range of legislative and administrative procedures plus a potential constitutional concern. Is the Minister of State concerned about the pace? Is he satisfied it will happen, or happen quickly?
I thank Teachta O'Reilly. I am not concerned about the pace because we are getting into really important detail that needs to be resolved. There have been very frank discussions between departmental officials, me and social partners. We need to get absolutely precise information from the Attorney General's office. As the Deputy knows as well as everyone else, this has to stand the test of time. I would rather get it right than done quickly. We have seen in so many different areas that legal challenges can undo much good work and intention behind hastily drafted legislative and administrative measures.
I am not sure exactly about the timeline but am keen to see substantial movement, probably in the first quarter of next year. There will be a need for administrative changes and there is a likelihood that there will be a need for legislative changes. On whether constitutional changes will be required, we will have to wait for the opinion of the Attorney General. However, we are open to everything required to ensure that what is introduced is effective and stands the test of time.
I thank the Minister of State for the response. Could he indicate when the opinion of the Attorney General will be available? I appreciate that he is satisfied with the pace, but I am referring to the really important recommendations on strengthening JLCs and EROs and the appointment of technical assessors. The recommendation was that legislation would need to be introduced. As we all know, even to get it wrong you cannot go fast, and to get it right takes even longer. I am very concerned that there is a drift in this regard. That is not to say the people involved in the working group are not doing their work. I am sure they are, but I am concerned about getting the same answer every two months. To me, it does not seem like there is any pace. This matter is incredibly important. A strong trade union movement underpins a very strong economy. The more union members, the better. Membership is the best way to vindicate your rights at work. However, I am a little concerned that all the elements outlined to me two months ago are still being addressed and that there does not seem to be the required pace.
The Deputy knows I agree with her on that part. I have said so in this Chamber previously while taking parliamentary questions. Like the Deputy, I am a proud trade unionist, but I want to make sure this is correct.
The Office of the Attorney General has been asked to produce an opinion as quickly as possible. We keep ourselves updated on that and we will get it ready. The meetings between the social partners and the departmental officials are occurring in a very frank and open manner. We want to make sure we get this right. I apologise if the reply seemed to be a bit repetitive but it was such because the work is ongoing and very technical at this stage. I very much hope to revert to the Deputy in the early part of next year with some serious advances in progress. I look forward to her support if and when we have to make legislative changes in the Chamber.
