Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 6 Mar 2012

Vol. 214 No. 1

Adjournment Matters

Redundancy Payments

Senator Thomas Byrne

I am glad to have the Minister in the House. Gabhaim buíochas leat an ábhar tábhachtach seo a roghnú maidir le na h-oibrithe thuas i nDún na Rí i gContae na Mí a bhfuil i ndáirire ar stailc agus a bhfuil "blocade" ar siúil acu ó lár mí na Nollag seo caite.

I raise the issue of the Lagan Brick factory. If this factory were in a main town or city it would be occupying the main news headlines on a daily basis. Since the middle of December the workers in the Lagan Brick factory, who have been treated appallingly by their bosses, have been engaged in a combination of blockading the factory and, since last Saturday, on official picket. They are now almost 12 weeks on that blockade, which is the same length of time involved in the Vita Cortex workers case, but they have received none of the publicity or praise. My heart goes out to those men because they are not looking for publicity or praise. They seek only their entitlements and their rights.

On behalf of the workers I plead with the Minister to intervene in this dispute in an effective way because no intervention has been forthcoming. In terms of what will happen without an intervention, first, Ireland's only brick factory will close down. This industry is traditional to that area, and there are no other brick factories in the country. Second, many workers will lose their jobs including workers from County Meath, where the factory is based, County Cavan, in which the main town of Kingscourt is located, County Monaghan and County Louth. As the Minister is aware, there are a number of issues associated with employment law that have not been resolved satisfactorily. Many of the workers in the plant have served for over 20 years but are receiving only statutory redundancy and a slightly higher offering from the company. This is not acceptable. It now seems to be common practice for companies to offer only statutory redundancy in the belief that the State will pay.

The announcement was made before Christmas in the aftermath of the budget. Had it anything to do with the budgetary announcement on redundancy payments? There was a warning in that regard at the time. The Minister must intervene. The staff in question are beaten down and totally disheartened. They do not seem to be receiving any support, certainly no official support. I plead with Lagan Brick, a very substantial company that relies on goodwill throughout the country, to use its goodwill and protect it by re-entering talks in the Labour Relations Commission. I urge the Minister to intervene on behalf of the workers and the brick industry in Ireland. It should not be closed down on a day when we are talking about doing everything possible to ensure job security. While we are talking of job security, we are allowing a very important industry, a brick factory, to close down. I ask the Minister for a substantial response. The workers in counties Meath and Cavan are looking forward to hearing it.

Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation (Deputy Richard Bruton)

I thank the Senator for raising this matter on the Adjournment. As he stated, the workers at the Lagan Brick factory in Kingscourt, County Cavan, have been involved in a protest outside the company's premises in a dispute over the decision by the company to close its operation on 15 December last, with the loss of 29 jobs. The union wanted to retain maximum employment at the plant and secure satisfactory redundancy terms for any workers that lost their jobs. Subsequently, representatives of the company and the trade union SIPTU attended conciliation talks at the Labour Relations Commission on 10 and 16 January. Following those talks, the company and SIPTU accepted proposals put to both sides by the commission to progress the issues in dispute. In line with these proposals, an independent assessor, agreed by both sides, undertook an examination of the trading position of the company, including an assessment of the viability of continuing manufacturing in Kingscourt. It was envisaged that the assessor would provide a report to both sides within a period of two weeks and that the parties would reconvene under the auspices of the commission on 30 January to consider the implications of the assessor's report and other outstanding issues, including the question of severance terms for required redundancies.

The assessor subsequently sought additional time to complete the report and the reconvened hearing took place on 6 February. Following receipt of the assessor's report, further progress was, I understand, made at the Labour Relations Commission on a number of issues, but agreement on the central issue of redundancy terms was not achieved. Following the hearing on 6 February, SIPTU stated that it would be seeking the intervention of the Labour Court in this dispute following the failure to reach agreement in the talks at the commission. However, I understand that Lagan Brick subsequently issued a statement contending it had fully engaged and made all reasonable efforts to settle the dispute, and that acceptance of the terms on offer was now best left as a matter for each employee to decide on as reasonable negotiation had, in the company's view, come to an end.

SIPTU claims the failure of the company to attend the Labour Court is in breach of the private sector protocol agreed by IBEC and ICTU in 2010, stipulating that parties utilise the machinery of the State — the Labour Court and Labour Relations Commission, or other agreed machinery — to resolve disputes.

I understand that, in a ballot conducted on Thursday, 1 March, SIPTU members in Lagan Brick voted almost unanimously to take strike action in response to the company's decision not to attend the Labour Court, and that seven days' notice of strike action was served on Lagan Brick by SIPTU on 2 March.

I regret that the company has decided against attending a Labour Court hearing, contrary to good industrial relations practice in that regard. The experience and expertise of the Labour Court offers the most appropriate and effective avenue for resolving such disputes. I urge the company to agree to avail of the services of the State's industrial relations machinery and I urge both parties to engage fully in the process. I urge the parties to put their difficulties and differences behind them and approach the process in good faith with a view to accepting the outcome of the process.

Ireland's system of industrial relations is, essentially, voluntary in nature and responsibility for the resolution of industrial disputes between employers and workers, whether in redundancy or other collective disputes, rests with the employer, the workers and their representatives. The State provides the industrial relations dispute settlement services to support parties in their efforts to resolve their differences.

Even what often appears to be the most intractable of disputes is capable of being resolved where both sides engage constructively and in good faith in this voluntary process. The principle of good faith implies that both sides in a dispute make every effort to reach an agreement and endeavour, through genuine and constructive negotiations, to resolve their differences. I urge the parties involved in this dispute to work together to break the current impasse by utilising the established machinery for dispute resolution, which is available to assist at short notice.

Senator Thomas Byrne

I have a number of questions. The last three paragraphs of page 2 of the Minister's speech and the first paragraph of page 3 should be included in a letter to the company. The Minister is making his remarks in the Seanad but they would have some strength if they were on his headed paper and sent to the company. He would not be doing anything wrong by doing so as he would be stating what he is stating in the Seanad. The remarks would have extra impact.

We must acknowledge how pitiful it is to have seen 29 strong, skilled workers standing at a brazier since before Christmas, the caravan beside them being their only shelter. In the event of the company closing down, as is planned, what does the Minister propose to do to retrain the staff?

I want the Minister to think about these issues and not just respond to me now, although I will be delighted to hear his response now if he wishes to give it. What does he propose to do to protect the brick industry and keep the jobs in Ireland? There is a strong export demand for the bricks that come from Kingscourt as they are well known.

I appeal to the media to consider this issue, visit the workers at the brazier, look inside their caravan and note the suffering they have had to put up with for the past 12 weeks. The media should highlight their plight as this would be of considerable assistance to the workers in dealing with the company.

Deputy Richard Bruton

I am happy to provide both sides with a copy of the comments I have made. Retraining options comprise a longer term issue that does not fall directly within my brief. There are considerable challenges to be faced in seeking to develop retraining options for people who have been in the construction sector. Part of the jobs plan we have been discussing involves determining where there are opportunities in the construction sector and how they can be developed in what is a very difficult period for the sector. Programmes such as Springboard are directly designed to seek to assist people to switch from one area to another and are resulting in success.

Industrial Relations

Senator David Cullinane

I welcome the Minister to the House. He will know that, during the Lisbon treaty campaign, there was much talk about the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and that commitments were given to trade unions that if they supported the treaty the issue of collective bargaining and trade union recognition would be dealt with through legislation. I understand collective bargaining is referred to in the programme for Government.

I have raised this matter not to convince the Government that what I propose is necessary, because it is in the programme for Government, which I hope the Minister supports, but to seek information. I want to understand what is involved and what will be necessary. Is it simply a matter of legislation or will we need a constitutional amendment? If the latter is required, I hope it will be part of the constitutional convention and will be achieved during the lifetime of the Government.

The Minister is reviewing the employment rights bodies in the State. This is welcome because it affords an opportunity to deal with a number of anomalies and problems in the system. I approach the matter from the perspective of seeking to strengthen workers' rights, entitlements, terms and conditions.

In the Minister's preamble, which was a discussion paper in respect of which he sought submissions, one of which was made by me, he refers to workplace disputes being resolved at the earliest possible stage at workplace level. This, however, can only happen through dialogue. There can only be dialogue when a company recognises the representatives of its workforce, that is, a trade union, if there is one. Surely, therefore, the Minister will agree it is good, right and proper that there be proper dialogue in which all employers recognise the representatives of their workforces, engage with them through dialogue and use the industrial relations machinery at our disposal in the State to resolve workplace disputes.

Is the Government committed to enshrining in the Constitution, if necessary, the right to collective bargaining or is it a matter for legislation?

Deputy Richard Bruton

I thank the Senator for raising this issue on the Adjournment.

While Article 40 of the Constitution guarantees the right of citizens to form associations and unions, it has been established in a number of legal cases that the constitutional guarantee of the freedom of association does not guarantee workers the right to have their union recognised for the purpose of collective bargaining. It has been the consistent policy of successive Governments to promote collective bargaining through the laws of this country and through the development of an institutional framework supportive of a voluntary system of industrial relations that is premised upon freedom of contract and freedom of association. There is an extensive range of statutory provisions designed to back up the voluntary bargaining process. The freedom of association and the right to organise and bargain collectively are also guaranteed in a number of international instruments which the State has ratified and which it is, therefore, bound to uphold under international law.

The 2007 decision of the Supreme Court in Ryanair v. The Labour Court cast doubt on the mechanisms that had been established in the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2001 and the Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004 to resolve problems between employers and workers on employee representation issues, where that could not be done through existing procedures. Prior to the outcome of the Ryanair Supreme Court case, the original legislative arrangements had been seen as a workable compromise. The legislative model for resolving issues relating to employee representation had reflected a shared commitment that, where negotiating arrangements are in place, the most effective means of resolving differences which arise between employers and trade unions representing employees is by voluntary collective bargaining. In the absence of a practice of voluntary collective bargaining, subject to agreed qualifying criteria, the industrial relations Acts 2001 and 2004 provided a mechanism by which the fairness of the employment conditions of workers in their totality could be assessed.

The social partnership Towards 2016 transitional agreement of 2008 committed to establish a review process to consider the legal and other steps necessary to enable the employee representation mechanisms that had been established under previous agreements and in legislation to operate as they had been intended. The agreement also provided for a commitment to bring forward legislative proposals to prohibit the victimisation of trade union members and the incentivisation of persons not to be members of a trade union. The review process did not result in any substantive progress being made on the issue. There is a commitment in the programme for Government to ensure that Irish law on employee's rights to engage in collective bargaining is consistent with recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. This process will require consultation with stakeholders, including employer and worker representatives, and a review of the experience of the operation of the existing legislative framework as put in place under the industrial relations Acts of 2001 and 2004 and the consequences of the litigation that has arisen in the course of the operation of these Acts. The programme for Government also contains a commitment to establish a constitutional convention. The Government has approved the establishment of the convention and has agreed in principle, arrangements for its structure and operation.

The programme for Government sets out a programme of topics to be considered by the convention and the Government does not propose to depart from that. The programme for Government proposes that the convention examine the following matters — review of the Dáil electoral system; the presidential term; giving citizens the right to vote at Irish embassies in presidential elections; provision for same-sex marriage; amending the clause on the role of women in the home and encouraging greater participation of women in public life; increasing the participation of women in politics; removing blasphemy from our Constitution; and reducing the voting age to 17 years. The programme for Government also makes it clear that the convention is free to consider "other relevant constitutional amendments that may be recommended by it". It is the Government's view, however, that the convention should deal first with the topics that were assigned to it in the programme for Government. To get the convention started, the Government proposes that initially it should look at two matters of reducing the presidential terms to five years and reducing the voting age to 17 years. This Government is committed to the implementation of its programme for Government commitment to reviewing our legislative provision for collective bargaining in the light of international jurisprudence. I would remind Senators, moreover, that the programme for Government is a five year programme. The established dispute settling institutions should continue to play an important role in disputes over trade union recognition. The established procedures can be improved and secured without introducing a mandatory requirement upon employers to recognise trade unions for collective bargaining purposes.

I am certain that satisfactory arrangements can be put in place that are suited to our constitutional, social and economic traditions, as well as our international obligations. I am also convinced that they can be framed so as to ensure continued success in attracting investment into our economy.

Senator David Cullinane

I asked the Minister to clarify if it would be necessary to amend the Constitution in order to legislate for a right to collective bargaining. In his response, the Minister said that it had been established in a number of legal cases that the constitutional guarantee to freedom of association does not guarantee workers' rights to have their union recognised for the purpose of collective bargaining. Is it correct, therefore, that it would require a change in the Constitution to establish the absolute right to collective bargaining? Is that a fair assessment of the situation?

Deputy Richard Bruton

It is not Government policy to introduce mandatory recognition of trade unions, as outlined in my reply. The policy is to seek to deal with court rulings that have occurred in this area and in particular to find a workable solution that——

Senator David Cullinane

If somebody were to request, for example, that there would be mandatory trade union recognition, would it require a constitutional change? I am not asking whether the Government would do it.

Deputy Richard Bruton

I do not have the legal expertise to advise the Senator on that issue.

Senator David Cullinane

That is the question I raised on the Adjournment.

Deputy Richard Bruton

Yes. To be honest, I do not know. It is not Government policy to have mandatory recognition, as it is essentially a voluntary system. The reason is that many investors do not recognise trade unions. We have a mixed system. What evolved under the industrial relations Acts, is that trade union representation was not recognised and there were still issues that needed to be resolved and a means of adjudicating on them in the Labour Court, that did not require mandatory recognition, was developed under the Acts. The ambition of Government is to get back to restore a system for dealing with such cases. It has not been Government policy to seek to introduce mandatory trade union recognition. I am not a constitutional lawyer, but if I can find information I will send it to the Senator.

Acting Chairman (Senator Pat O’Neill)

I thank the Minister for his co-operation. I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy John Perry.

Local Authority Housing

Senator Colm Burke

I wish to raise on the Adjournment the issue of elderly people who want to downsize their living accommodation as their house is too large, now their families have grown up and left. We had a programme in place that allowed local authorities to purchase those houses and provide alternative accommodation to them. I have come across a few cases recently where people were advised that this programme is no longer available to them. That is the context in which I tabled this motion. A significant opportunity is being lost. The value of property has dropped, the local authorities are trying to provide housing for families and we could have a situation where an elderly couple live in a four bedroom house, but all they require is a two bedroom house. They want to relocate to an area, where their neighbours are people of a similar age and services are nearby. Their needs are twofold, they want security and they can no longer afford to continue to maintain and heat their large house. At the same time, there is a major demand on local authorities to provide social housing but they do not have the money to build new houses. I wonder if we can restore that former policy. I understand that when it was in place it worked well, especially in areas where there were a large number of elderly people. I suggest that issue be examined by local authorities with a view to resolving a number of issues in the policy area.

Minister of State at the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation (Deputy John Perry)

I apologise on behalf of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan, who is on Government business. I am taking this Adjournment matter on his behalf.

I thank the Senator for raising the issue. There is no specific national scheme in place to assist elderly people who wish to downsize their living accommodation by selling their house to their housing authority and arranging for their housing authority to provide them with alternative accommodation which is suitable to their needs.

The matter is dealt with under each housing authority's letting priorities and allocations scheme. Under section 22 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009, housing authorities are required to make an allocations scheme in accordance with the Act. It is a matter for housing authorities to determine the priority to be given in the allocation of dwellings to households assessed as being qualified for social housing support. An allocation scheme is solely a matter for the housing authority concerned to make and implement, as it is a reserved function of the housing authority.

A number of housing authorities operate some form of downsizing scheme within their schemes of letting priorities. These schemes may take the form of "empty nest" or "sheltered housing" schemes and allow older people to sell their houses to housing authorities in return for access to social accommodation, usually in the form of old persons dwellings or sheltered housing, often to enable older persons to live close together in a common community. These schemes involve some level of financial contribution from the sale of the house to be provided to the housing authority in return for the provision of social accommodation, and the provision of accommodation is often in conjunction with voluntary housing bodies.

It is also open to a housing authority to allocate housing from its general housing stock if appropriate units are available which would suit older persons downsizing, whether they are existing social tenants or new applicants. It is entirely a matter for housing authorities, independent of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, to allocate housing based on the needs of each applicant.

Downsizing schemes are in place for a number of reasons. First, the accommodation may be too large to maintain if family members have moved out, or may be unfit for the needs of the owner occupier. Where the original house is sold to the housing authority and alternative housing is provided, the responsibility for maintenance rests with the housing authority. The financial circumstances of older persons may be taken into account as they may be unable to afford the maintenance and upkeep of existing accommodation.

Second, units are often specifically designed for older people, with fewer stairs and other adaptations for easier living. A number of such schemes operated by housing authorities take into consideration medical, compassionate or similar grounds. Third, in the case of older people living in a community with similar requirements, such schemes can provide independence and dignity for older persons, as well as encouraging a sense of community and companionship, in a safe, private and caring setting.

We are committed to supporting the issue of accommodation provision for older persons. Obviously the capacity to do so will be subject to the level of resources available to the housing authority. The Government's vision for the future of the housing sector in Ireland as delivered through the housing policy statement of June 2011 is based on choice, fairness, equity across tenures and on delivering quality outcomes and value for money for the resources invested. The overall strategic objective remains "to enable all households access good quality housing appropriate to household circumstances and in their particular community of choice".

Acting Chairman (Senator Michael Mullins)

Does the Senator have a final question for the Minister of State?

Senator Colm Burke

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. An opportunity is lost by not having a comprehensive policy in place. The housing market has been at a standstill for the past four years and there are many elderly people who wish to make the move and want the security. I ask the Department to examine the issue and put in place a comprehensive policy. The Minister of State will recall the 1980s when we gave a £5,000 grant to people for the surrender of local authority houses. Suddenly, this resulted in a large number of houses becoming available at low cost which in turn created its own social issues afterwards. However, the measure was not thought out to any great extent. This is an opportunity that is being allowed pass us by. The issue should be examined to ascertain whether a comprehensive policy can be put in place. We should not allow the opportunity pass us by where we can get good property and where elderly people would be well looked after. Given that we are losing out on all fronts I ask that policy be reviewed in that area.

Deputy John Perry

Under section 22 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009, housing authorities are required to make an allocations scheme in accordance with the Act. Obviously some local authorities do a superb job. The Minister, Deputy Hogan, has advised there is huge merit in the scheme. I have no doubt it is about the resources available in each local authority. In his overview of the governance of local authorities the Minister will examine the overall level of management in each local authority. While he may deem that a review of section 22 is necessary in respect of delegated functions, resources and availability of funding, the discretion of the manager and the elected members of each county council and their respective housing policies, I have no doubt the section is being used effectively by many local authorities. The message is that where people living in large houses can be accommodated in a friendly and restful home environment that has merits. I have no doubt the Minister will take on board the points made by the Senator in any review planned by him.

Election Management System

Senator Martin Conway

I ask that young graduates, professionals and people who are competent but cannot get a job in Ireland because of the appalling economic downturn be given the opportunity of a day's work on the day of the referendum on the EU fiscal compact treaty. It makes absolute sense and would send a clear message that the Government is serious about jobs and giving people an opportunity.

During the presidential election a number of people contacted me to say they were disappointed that people who had already served in various aspects of society, whether as members of An Garda Síochána, former teachers and so on, were getting the day's work in polling stations as presiding officers and polling clerks while they had no job. It is a straightforward, easy win for the Government to make a conscious effort to direct the registrars throughout the country to set up a panel of competent, capable, professional graduates or competent capable professional individuals who, through no fault of their own, are on the live register. I would go further and say that their social welfare entitlements should not be deducted because of the day's work. That would send a clear message to the people who are suffering and to their families and loved ones, that the Government is serious about equal opportunities and about ensuring the less well-off get the opportunity to have a day's income. Those who are already in receipt of pensions or in employment, but take a day's holiday in order to do this work, should be replaced by people who need a chance. This is not rocket science and it can be done. If there is a willingness it should be done and I sincerely hope it will be done.

Deputy John Perry

I thank the Senator for raising this important issue. The Minister, Deputy Hogan, is unable to be here as he is on Government business.

The primary role of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, in electoral matters, is to provide an appropriate policy and legislative framework for a modern and efficient electoral system. Within that framework local returning officers are responsible for all matters connected with the conduct of elections and referendums, including the selection, appointment and training of polling staff in accordance with the relevant provision of the electoral law. To assist returning officers the Department issues guidance to them in advance of each election and referendum. That guidance emphasises that the smooth conduct of polls is dependent on maintaining a cadre of sufficiently skilled and experienced people. Having regard to the overall objective of the smooth conduct of the polls, returning officers are advised to employ competent and efficient persons as polling staff. They are also asked to give consideration, wherever possible, to employing suitable persons who are unemployed and that point was raised by the Senator. The approach taken in the Department's guidance strikes the right balance. Clearly, there are competent unemployed individuals who could, with the appropriate training, undertake duties relating to the conduct of polls. However, it would be unwise to dispense entirely with the experience and skills of all of those who have successfully undertaken the role in previous elections and refrendums. That is not what the Senator proposes.

We are dealing with the fundamentals of our democracy. When someone votes at a polling station the tasks undertaken by polling station staff may seem quite straightforward to anyone familiar with electoral matters. However, polling staff must be able to deal, in accordance with the electoral law, with the myriad problems that can arise on a case-by-case basis. They must also be capable of carrying out the detailed instructions at the end of the poll, such as the completion of the ballot paper counts and handling spoiled ballot papers and the marked copy of the electoral register for their stations. Many of these tasks are critical for the next stage, the count.

To assist in maintaining consistency and the highest standards at polling stations the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government issues a manual for presiding officers at each election and referendum. Local returning officers supplement this with appropriate training to ensure that all staff are familiar with their tasks and responsibilities. Clearly, previous experience is important in building up the type of knowledge and understanding that ensures a successful conduct of polls. The correct approach is for returning officers to continue blending experience with new talent and that is important. Earlier the point was raised that opportunity should be given to people whenever possible. The Department will continue to encourage local returning officers to employ suitable unemployed people wherever possible for the conduct of the polls. Returning officers should do so while maintaining a cadre of sufficiently skilled and experienced people to ensure that elections and referendums are conducted to the highest of standards.

Acting Chairman (Senator Michael Mullins)

I thank the Minister of State. Are there final questions?

Senator Martin Conway

There is a perception that this work is a closed shop. Guidelines are only guidelines and it will be like judges' pay unless there is a willingness to meaningfully engage. I take on aboard what the Minister of State said about experience but a lot of these areas are systems driven. Once a system is in place they can be, and necessarily are to a large extent, foolproof. I hope that we see new blood. The closed shop image exists in many polling stations throughout the country where the same people have done it for years and nobody else is given an opportunity unless one of them dies.

We need to move away from that system. We need a citizens panel of competency that gives a fairer balance for what amounts to between €300 and €400 for a day's work. As far as I am concerned, it is an easy win. Instead of issuing guidelines we should be a little harder and deliver the message that it is Government policy to have at least a 30% to 40% employment rate of people who need the money. Some polling stations have three to four polling booths with two people assisting at each one. There is no excuse for this and action must be taken. I take on board the experience element but the job is not rocket science. It is important and needs to be done correctly but there are plenty of competent people that can do it.

Deputy John Perry

The tone of the reply which I have given on behalf of the Minister is in keeping with what the Senator said because the presiding officer has huge autonomy to recruit new people. For the presidential election there was quite a turnover of staff and new people were employed by presiding officers. The Minister will take on board the Senator's comments, which are important. There will be a message delivered direct to every presiding officer highlighting that when vacancies arise that a job opportunity be given to suitably qualified people. As the Senator said, the training is straightforward and should be easy to accommodate. I will express the Senator's concerns to the Minister. I am sure, from the comprehensive reply that I delivered, that such consideration is in the Department's mindset. The message will be relayed to each presiding officer that where a vacancy arises that preference should be given to a suitably qualified unemployed person.

The motion has merit and I thank the Senator for tabling it. The Government should listen to him and not give lip service but accept his recommendation that where new people are qualified they should be given a job opportunity.

Acting Chairman (Senator Michael Mullins)

I thank the Minister of State and the Senator.

The Seanad adjourned at 6.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 7 March 2012.