I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter. I thought I was in order more often than I am.
Private Notice Question. - Kinsale Gas Dispute.
What I try to avoid is what I might call a Deputy Gene Fitzgerald hour each day.
It might be the most sensible hour the Dáil would have each day.
The rules would have to be changed.
Then why not change them? I have no objection to agreeing to change them in order to have such an hour.
I would have no objection either.
I suggest that Deputies Fitzgerald and O'Rourke put their heads together——
I would love that.
——and take steps to change the rules.
What is the Chair trying to suggest?
asked the Minister for Labour if he will intervene as a matter of urgency in the dispute affecting Kinsale head gas field and thereby prevent its escalation with dire consequences for the Cork region.
I should state for the information of the House that the dispute in this case arises over the dismissal of an employee by Campbell Catering Limited, a company which serves the Kinsale platform. I understand both sides are endeavouring to agree on ways of moving towards a solution. In the circumstances, the parties should be allowed to continue with their efforts. I assure the House that if there is any useful role the industrial relations machinery of the State can play, such machinery of the State is, of course, available to the parties. I would add that there is no immediate threat to gas supplies.
I accept the delicacy of the situation and realise that all disputes must end at some stage. I am also aware of how vital the supply of gas is from that region and that the Minister's confidence in the availability of gas supplies could be shattered more quickly than we would like. As a result I ask him to ensure that, if the desired approach between the parties does not result in a meeting quickly, he will use his offices to ensure an early intervention.
I note what the Deputy says. This dispute arose from the dismissal of one employee. As the Deputy has indicated, this has potentially serious implications for other employees engaged in offshore activity and more serious implications for the region generally. In those circumstances the best thing I can do is appeal as strongly as I can to both parties to get their heads together and agree some form of mediation or conciliation. I ask the Oppostion to join with me in that request.
Nobody has been more responsible as far as industrial relations are concerned but I smile when I hear the present incumbents of the office asking me for my co-operation.
Has the Deputy a question?
I have and I will come to it. My attitude to disputes has always been to encourage both parties to reach a solution as quickly as possible. Realising the lack of co-operation which came from the Fine Gael benches when I was Minister——
A question, please, Deputy.
I am entitled to make that remark.
The Deputy is not entitled to——
I am entitled to make the point about the lack of co-operation that came from the Fine Gael benches when I was Minister.
The Deputy must frame a question.
I ask the Minister if he realises that we are facing into the weekend and that the potential escalation of this dispute could have serious repercussions for the Cork region. I do not want to encourage that or highlight the problem beyond what is necessary. However, I wish to alert the Minister of the necessity to intervene if that is necessary.
The potentially serious implications in any offshore dispute are recognised by the Government. Every Deputy will be aware of the potential danger of escalating a dispute which originally arose from the dismissal of one employee if we do not choose our words carefully. In those circumstances all I can do is repeat, in the strongest possible way, my urging to both parties to get their heads together and mediate or conciliate.
Would the Minister agree that when he referred to "any offshore dispute" there is no other offshore supply coming to us of the magnitude of this one. This is a unique situation. I do not want to go into the details of the dispute any more than the Minister does. Is the Minister aware that there is disagreement about the reasons for the dismissal of this individual? I do not want to go into that either. It is the overall implications which this dispute could have which prompts me to seek an assurance from the Minister that the position will be monitored over the weekend.
Every industrial dispute is constantly monitored by officials in my Department. There is no disagreement about the potentially serious implications of this dispute and the importance of the activity on this platform is as the Deputy has indicated to the House. This dispute arose from the dismissal of one employee. The implications for an escalation are very serious as the Deputy has indicated. Every Member of the House should do what he can to persuade the parties to reach agreement and explore all the avenues open to them.
Do I detect a line from the Minister that because there is only one employee involved the danger to other jobs should be taken into consideration? There may be a principle involved which the Minister should not ignore. However, that is in the detail of the dispute which I do not want to go into. I ask the Minister to leave aside the causes of the dispute and monitor closely the effects it may have during the coming days.
Nothing that I have said should be interpreted as either a direct comment or a comment by implication on the merits of the dispute. I simply join with Deputy Fitzgerald in alerting the House to the fact that this dispute has potentially serious implications, and all of us must be careful that no words of ours can make more likely those serious implications. I express the hope that because those serious implications must be staring everybody involved in the face, both sides will come together and avail of arbitration or mediation.
The remaining questions will appear on next Tuesday's Order Paper.