Last Wednesday afternoon at three minutes to two, baby Grace O'Leary, 6 lb 6 oz, was delivered at Cork University Maternity Hospital. Baby Grace is known in Cork as the picket line baby. Her mother, Claire, has been picketing for seven and a half months now at Debenhams. Many people, myself included, feel that it is a real sign of foot dragging on the part of the Government that the dispute is still not settled after nearly the duration of a full pregnancy. Claire's colleagues are forced to picket again today in cold weather and in a lockdown because liquidators, KPMG, refused to give any guarantee that they would not attempt to move stock during level 5. The picket continues, despite a High Court injunction, and the threat of court summonses and even jailing. These workers, overwhelmingly women, want to know if the Government intends to intervene to resolve this dispute in time for them and their long-suffering families to have a decent Christmas.

The Taoiseach told Deputy Gino Kenny last week that he has a difficulty letting some moneys owed to the State from this liquidation go to the workers, as it would "create a precedent that would allow other employers to get off the hook from their obligations". Frankly, this is nonsense. It is a matter of indifference to an employer as to how moneys are divided up from the liquidation of a business. Not a single extra company will go into liquidation should the State intervene to ensure that Debenhams workers get their two plus two.

The fact that the Debenhams workers have been offered €1 million above the statutory redundancy has already set a precedent. The Government has pledged to bring in new legislation to strengthen workers' rights in a liquidation situation and to make sure that there is never again a case like Debenhams. If the Government is serious about that, it need not worry about precedent because surely the Debenhams' case will be the last of its kind. I believe the Government has options here. It can ask the liquidator to put moneys owed to the State towards the workers. It can instruct the liquidator to prioritise payment to the workers from sale of the stock. The stock is valued at a greater sum than the claim being made by the workers.

It can take the road being suggested by the ICTU by increasing employers' social insurance contributions, creating a new pot, and making an advance payment to these workers. Talented civil servants are working for the Government. The Taoiseach can ask them to find an alternative creative solution to this deadlock. Where there is a will there is a way. When will the Taoiseach meet these workers and their trade union representatives? Will the Government put something on the table to resolve this dispute and give these workers the Christmas they deserve?

I congratulate Claire on the birth of Grace O'Leary. I was aware of the pregnancy from my conversations with organisers of the picket over recent months and their concerns for Claire during her pregnancy in what has been a very difficult situation arising from the liquidation of Debenhams and the failure, in my view, to honour the collective agreement Debenhams had entered into with the workers. The workers are not being treated fairly.

I will meet representatives of Mandate to discuss the issue further and see if we can find a way to deal with this. It is not easy, and it is not simple. I have consistently warned that those who claim it is simple and easy are misrepresenting the situation. The idea that in every liquidation in the future the State would offer up whatever it was owed would be a real incentive to rogue employers of the future. Let us not pretend that in the future people could not exploit company law or exploit situations. The Deputy is suggesting setting a completely new precedent which would have significant implications that would need to be examined. We have committed to giving greater parity to collective agreements in future liquidation situations or equal parity to others. That should happen and the Government is prepared to introduce legislation to facilitate that.

In trying to resolve this current row it is about seeing what we can do to try to support the workers over and above what they will be receiving from the State. The State is honouring its role here and meeting its commitments on statutory redundancy. In this case the private sector has not met its commitments. That is the core of the issue. Historically the raison d'être of statutory redundancy has been that the State is there to give a very basic level of redundancy to those made redundant in the event of the failure of their primary employers to do so. That is always the context around situations like this.

Notwithstanding the real hardship and difficulties people are going through, it is not that simple to just change what has been established precedent in this matter and also to do so without a range of unintended consequences.

The demand is not for the statutory redundancy but for two plus two as the Taoiseach knows. Once again, he has told the House that it is difficult. No one ever said it would be otherwise, but it is a damn sight easier than standing 222 days on a picket line with winter kicking in and the threat of the law hanging over their heads. Previous taoisigh sat in that seat and grappled with far more complex issues, including armed conflict in Northern Ireland; I could give ten examples. The Debenhams liquidation should not be that hard to sort out. It is not mission impossible here.

I welcome that the Taoiseach is meeting representatives of Mandate. It is important that that meeting includes the shop stewards. Two and a half weeks ago KPMG met the workers at the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC. KPMG offered less than it did in September. Inevitably and not surprisingly talks collapsed. It is now the Taoiseach's turn. He is meeting the union and he should meet the shop stewards. He must put something on the table if this discussion is to have a chance of success and if these workers are to get what they deserve, a decent Christmas with their families.

I accept the Deputy has consistently raised this. He said that no one ever said it would not be difficult. I beg to differ; the Deputy has always suggested it would be very easy. From the get-go he suggested to the workers and everybody that this is easy and can be solved by Government doing X, Y and Z.

Deputy Barry has been suggesting that it is an easy thing to fix. It is not as easy as that. I have never said that. I have always said it is going to be challenging and very difficult. I respect the workers for the stance they have taken. I also respect the Deputy for the fact that he has consistently raised their case. We are going to see, with other colleagues in government, whether we can engineer some response here. It is extremely challenging and difficult. It is not a question of simply saying that whatever the State is owed in the liquidation can be taken out and given to the redundancy pot. That has wide-ranging implications and, deep down, the Deputy must know that.