I am glad to have the opportunity to contribute to this important Bill. As Deputy Tom Kitt said, retailing trading hours have expanded inexorably over the past few decades. Most of us welcome the opportunity to avail of early morning and late evening opening hours for shopping. We do not support what this Bill is designed to pre-empt, which is the steady encroachment of shopping on Sundays due to recent developments and the deterioration of working conditions which the extension of retail opening hours can mean.
This Bill is designed to allow sufficient flexibility for the employer to run his or her business without undue constraint, while balancing the rights of the employee. I compliment Deputy Tom Kitt on initiating this legislation. He has addressed this issue for a considerable length of time and engaged in widespread consultation on the matter.
I welcome the Government's indication that it accepts the principles underlying the legislation introduced by Deputy Kitt, the Fianna Fáil spokesperson on Labour Affairs. Unfortunately, it seems that once again Fianna Fáil has had to prompt the Minister to take action. Even if the impetus came from the Opposition, the assent of the Government is nonetheless welcome.
The indication by some larger retail stores that they intended to open on Easter Sunday drew our attention to the relentless extension of trading hours. I do not think anyone will feel deprived in restraining themselves from heading to the shopping centre that day. We may be living in a period where there has been a healthy growth in the economy and where some of those in employment enjoy increased purchasing power, but an increase in discretionary spending is precisely that.
For most people, extra resources are spent on cars, furniture, holidays and other goods and services which we buy or refrain from buying, depending on the structure of the family budget. The most visible expansion of trading, particularly in Sunday retailing, has been in the supermarket sector and shopping centres, of which a food market is the anchor attraction. An increase in purchasing power generally is not strongly reflected in increased spending on food.
The demand for supermarket goods is much less elastic than for other products and services. The extension of opening hours is not likely to make an impact on overall turnover in that sector. Even if supermarkets were open and available for business 24 hours a day, seven days a week, the expenditure in total on food items is unlikely to expand significantly. The overall profitability of stores will not increase proportionate to the extension of opening hours, neither will the remuneration of staff.
The thrust of the Bill is not to curtail retailing on Sundays, although there are valid grounds for reservations. I hold strong reservations on the idea of widespread Sunday shopping. Many people have genuine religious objections which should be respected. Others hold that Sunday is a time for rest and recreation, attending and participating in sporting events and spending time with the family. It does not have to be a time for shopping.
More importantly, many feel that Sunday is not a day on which they should have to go to work. Nonetheless, staff of supermarkets who are required to work on Sundays undoubtedly feel they have little choice. The retail trade uses part-time and casual employment to an increasing extent. Part-time and casual employees feel or can be made to feel that they are ten a penny and that if they are not cheerfully available for work on Sundays, others will and that, ultimately, those reluctant to volunteer for Sunday working will find themselves eased out on Mondays or Tuesdays as a result.
The Bill does not preclude Sunday opening. It leaves operators of retail outlets and their customers with a choice. What is important is that it also gives staff a choice. Recent Governments have put many Bills through the House to legislate for equality in a wide range of areas and some have made great play of their endeavours in this regard. The Government has an opportunity to ensure that, within reason, those who choose to keep Sunday free to rest, study and participate in sport do not suffer discrimination vis-à-vis those who do not.
The provision in section 6 (2) is designed to ensure that workers who give up their Sundays to facilitate trading on that day are appropriately remunerated. There are very few professions — membership of this House is one of the exceptions — where Sunday working is not remunerated over and above the level of compensation for normal shifts or unsocial hours. Neither the proprietors of retail outlets, nor the public whom they claim Sunday trading is designed to serve, have any grounds for complaint in this regard. If my impressions are incorrect, that Sunday trading boosts the revenues of retail outlets choosing to open, the benefits should be shared with the employees who make it possible.
Another area where I see severe repercussions, particularly for rural areas, is the increasing attraction of multiple stores sited nowadays in most provincial centres. The capacity of those stores to remain open for extensive hours puts undue pressure on smaller stores, particularly family run shops and businesses. In recent years there has been a marvellous upgrading of stores, pubs, shops, hotels and other businesses in rural areas. Great credit is due to those who have to contend with severe competition due to the huge extension of the network of multiple stores.
I have tabled numerous parliamentary questions to the Minister for Finance on the inequity in the system of rateable valuation of premises. When a premises is renovated or extensive improvements are carried out, the rateable valuation is increased. This is wrong as it acts as a disincentive. In most cases the enhancement work or upgrading of premises is necessary to retain existing business, let alone attract additional business. It is wrong that those with initiative and commitment to improve premises, often in small towns, villages and rural areas, should be penalised in this way while there are substantial tax incentives available to start business in some large urban areas.
The response of the Minister for Finance to my questions on each occasion did not, unfortunately, convey any indication that such penalties and disincentives would be removed. I appeal to the Minister of State whose portfolio is an economic one to at least recognise the difficulties that exist for smaller stores in towns, villages and rural areas, as well as suburban areas of the larger urban centres, and to have a system devised under which the person who invests heavily in upgrading a business premises is not penalised for so doing while there are favourable incentives available to big business to locate in certain urban areas.
The draw of business from smaller towns and villages is a source of concern to all interested in the future well-being of rural areas. Major disruption can occur in the organisation of community and sporting activities when young people feel compelled to work on some Sundays. Football and hurling clubs and other sporting bodies in rural areas have a small number of people on which to draw. Any further infringement on traditional Sunday activities will not benefit local communities.
Since December 1994 Fianna Fáil has been one of the most constructive and responsible Oppositions in the history of the State. It has engaged in healthy democratic debate and in healthy criticism of the Government, when necessary. It has given broad support to the Government, where appropriate. I compliment Deputy Kitt on producing this Bill. The Fianna Fáil Party has produced more Private Members' Bills and well researched and substantial policy documents than any previous Opposition. When Deputy Bertie Ahern is elected Taoiseach in a short time, Fianna Fáil in Government will be willing to take on board the valid views and concerns of the Government parties which will then be in Opposition.
