Before I call Deputy Joe Higgins, I repeat for the benefit of Members of the House that the Standing Order allows for a brief question on a matter of topical public importance.

There are 140,000 construction workers in the State, only 40,000 of whom are calculated to have the benefit of pension schemes. Building workers' unions have in recent days highlighted outrageous behaviour by a wide range of construction companies who have failed to put their workers on pension schemes. Incredibly, there is even comprehensive evidence of the most cynical fraud, whereby companies, some of them large and prestigious, deduct pension money from their workers' wages without putting them on the scheme. In other words, millionaire construction bosses are stealing from the hard-earned money of their employees. This has the most serious economic consequences for workers when they get sick or, in the case of premature death, for their families, apart from the emotional trauma.

Of the 30 construction workers who died tragically since January 2002, only eight were covered by pensions schemes. After six and a half years of this Government, why is such calculated abuse by a powerful industry allowed? Is it not appropriate that some of the lather which Government backbenchers have been working themselves up to in recent days about embryonic cells should be transferred into getting the Government to look after real, living, working, suffering and exploited human beings? The existing legislation is unworkable for the most part, cumbersome and open to huge delays. Will the Government introduce legislation to protect construction workers in this situation?

The legislation which governs this matter is the Pensions (Amendment) Act 2002 and the Pensions Board is the regulator of the issues the Deputy raised. In regard to the case of the IFI, the case has gone to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Generally, the Government's proposals for the past number of years have been to try to improve the scope and range of occupational pension schemes. We have done this in many ways, through procedures which have worked quite well. If there are abuses, the Pensions Board, as regulator, if it is not already involved in the cases to which the Deputy refers, would be glad to hear about them.

Over the years, some sectors of the construction industry have seen a lack of employers putting workers on pensions schemes, particularly occupational ones. Nonetheless, the Government has endeavoured to insist that they do so. The figure is something like 76%. Admittedly, there is still a large percentage of people not covered by pension schemes. In the various Acts, including the Pensions (Amendment) Act 2002 and other Finance Bill regulations in past years, we have endeavoured to make it easier and more attractive for people to have their own pension schemes.

I am not sure if the Deputy is referring to self-employed categories or those who are working directly for employers. Perhaps he will clarify that. In the self-employed sector there are attractive schemes and many sub-contractors are availing of them. If the Deputy is referring to people directly employed by contractors, the Pensions Board, as regulator, would be interested in what he said if it is not already dealing with the matter.

There is no question of "if"– there are abuses. Tens of thousands of workers are being denied their pension rights by powerful construction bosses as is demonstrable through facts and figures. It is not good enough to state that the Government is endeavouring to do this and that. The Government can have decent taxpayers in Mountjoy Prison within days of a peaceful protest against the bin tax.

That was for contempt of court. The Government did not do that. The courts did.

Allow Deputy Joe Higgins without interruption.

We know all about the unfortunate inability of Fianna Fáil Ministers, junior Ministers and backbenchers to close the stable door while the horse is inside. Instead they are haplessly trying to round them up as they gallop over the horizon. Perhaps the Minister could listen for a change. This is an instance in which the Government could do something.

Sorry, Deputy, you may raise one topical issue. You cannot move on to others.

The Government backbenchers were distracting me.

The Deputy should not allow himself to be distracted.

It is the Front Bench.

Amending legislation is required to protect workers' rights because the current structures are ineffective. We must force these often unscrupulous bosses to fulfil their responsibilities towards these workers and respect their rights. Perhaps the bosses could be sent to Mountjoy Prison if they do not, instead of decent taxpayers.

I am still not clear whether the Deputy is referring to individuals who are sub-contractors or people who are working directly for contractors.

I am referring to people who are working directly for companies.

In that case, the Pensions (Amendment) Act 2002 provides stringent regulations and penalties. For example, the DPP has taken action in the IFI case and is processing that action.

I did not bump into any employers in Mountjoy Prison when I was inside.

Allow the Taoiseach, please.

There are tough laws in this regard, which are being tested by the DPP. It is not correct to state that there is no legislation in this regard. If the Deputy is stating, as he has now clarified, that the Construction Industry Federation is in breach of that Act, the Pensions Board, as regulator, has total power to deal with these matters and implement the penalties, right up to action being taken by the DPP. That is contained in existing legislation, therefore there is no requirement for additional legislation.