Gerald Nash (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I have been actively seeking to address some of the concerns I, the trade union movement and individual workers have about false self-employment.

I am certainly well acquainted with the figures and trends over the past 15 to 20 years. They were very helpfully produced in the report on social welfare, PRSI and tax implications. That report was published in early 2018 if my memory serves me. Mr. Duggan is on record as saying the figures around self-employment remain broadly similar over an extended period. We all know those who are at risk and those who would attract our attention in terms of false self-employment status or miscategorisation of their status are those who are self-employed with no employees. I absolutely understand that. I understand and appreciate that the figures from the CSO are stable but I do not think there should ever be an acceptable number of people who are falsely self-employed. By their actions and because they are encouraged or in some cases forced to be self-employed, there is a fraud being perpetrated against the State. Workers are being deprived of the benefits they would otherwise be entitled to and they are also being deprived of their rights as workers. Just because numbers appear to be stable does not mean that we do not act. I am pleased that action is taking place but I will not be satisfied until we see some clear legislative action. As the system has essentially acknowledged, the code of practice that is in place at the moment is not fit for purpose and has not kept pace with developments in recent years. I do not believe the system will change or workers and the State will be protected until such time as we include in future legislation the updated statutory code. I will be interested when the time is right to establish precisely what that wants to do. I understand that the Minister may be interested in drawing some provisions from legislation I published myself which was unfortunately defeated on Committee Stage in the Seanad. She may be introducing some elements of that into proposed legislation. For the life of me I find it difficult to ascertain how with the best will in the world we can protect those who take cases to the scope section against victimisation from their employer. It is very difficult to protect somebody who is self-employed from victimisation because they do not have the status of an employee. I have had these discussions with people in the sector and would appreciate if Mr. Duggan could elaborate on precisely how the Department is going to do that. My understanding is that when an individual takes a case to the scope section in terms of their insurability or determination of their status, the presumption is that they are self-employed until otherwise determined. It is very difficult to protect somebody's interests or protect them against victimisation if they are not an employee from the perspective of the Department. That would be an important feature of the process going forward.