Page 23 of the programme for Government states that the Government will review whether the legal provisions surrounding collective redundancies and the liquidation of companies effectively protect the rights of workers. There is no need for lengthy reviews; the dogs on the street know that the current legislation is inadequate. The Duffy Cahill report has been gathering dust on a shelf somewhere in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment for almost five years. With all due respect, that is the Tánaiste’s Department. The Debenhams workers are on the picket line for nearly a year at this stage. When will the Government do the right thing and implement the Duffy Cahill report and find a solution for the Debenhams workers?

That work is very much under way. The Company Law Review Group has done some work on the company law aspects of it. As the Deputy knows, the Duffy Cahill report does not recommend changes to company law and points out that so-called tactical insolvencies are already illegal and that there may be some need to change employment law on redundancy. Unfortunately, in my assessment, none of those changes would have made a difference in the Debenhams' case because there simply were not assets there. The assets, which included some stock and fixtures, did not add up to enough to discharge even the basic debts the company left behind. While we will make some changes in this area, sadly, it is not the case that it would have make a difference for the Debenhams workers, and it is unlikely to make a difference for future situations where there is a collective redundancy.

Deputy Ryan will have read the reports from the chairman of the Labour Court, Kevin Duffy, pointing out that there was no legal entitlement to two plus two on this occasion, and even a contractual entitlement to two plus two may not have existed because that applied in 2016 but not in the case of a liquidation.