John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am sure Fianna Fáil has its own views on it. My fear is we will not progress it fast enough. I am conscious there are people in the Gallery and people and organisations watching the debate from home. Although they had much hope and optimism when the Bill was previously supported, ultimately, their hopes were dashed when it did not progress. It is imperative that we work on this Bill. Sinn Féin and I are willing to do all the heavy lifting and would welcome any support to try to get it through Committee Stage as quickly as possible.

As I said in my opening comments, the Bill will have an impact on many areas to the betterment of many lives. As many people have said, 80 is the new 60 and 60 is the new 40. We all know people are living longer and healthier lives. The Bill is fundamentally about choice and about giving those people the choices to continue working if they want to. As Deputy Mitchell noted, we would love to see all the changes that were introduced in 2012 amended and changed, and all those measures that have impacted on women and pensioners reversed. Outside of that, there are major challenges. Our older population is growing very quickly. As I outlined in my contribution, by 2046 we will have 1.4 million people aged 65 and older. This is a major challenge.

The Minister of State raised the old red herring of the impact the Bill would have on youth unemployment. It is a tired and flawed argument that was thrashed out back in 2015 when the Bill was first brought forward. The evidence is there to see in countries which have moved ahead and abolished the mandatory retirement age. The evidence indicates that reducing labour force participation among older people does not lead to increased employment for young people. Iceland, New Zealand, Sweden and Norway are among the top ten countries in the world for youth employment and for employment of older people. There is evidence that it does not impact on youth employment.

A 2014 report from the IZA World of Labor research institute found there is no trade-off between the employment of young and old workers. Higher employment for older workers coincides with higher employment for younger workers. Reducing the employment of older persons does not provide more job opportunities for younger people. The report also found that measures introduced in Denmark and France that reduced labour force participation for older workers saw falls in youth employment over the same period. A comprehensive 2008 working paper on the effects of early retirement on youth employment in Belgium found no positive link between early retirement and youth employment. The link has also been comprehensively dismissed on repeated occasions by the OECD, which stated in a report, "It is important to dispel a number of myths in this area ... the claim that fewer jobs for older workers results in more jobs for younger workers, though unfounded, is proving especially stubborn".

The argument that fixed numbers of jobs can be reshuffled between workers of different ages as a result of government policy is untrue. The OECD report found the more older workers were in employment the better it was for the economy and for youth employment rates. Instead of setting older workers against younger workers, we should try to maximise the valuable contribution older workers provide to the economy, including making full use of skills, experience and wisdom of older workers to train in younger workers and newer employees. Many people, when they hit the age of 65, which is a number on a piece of paper, feel their worth has expired when they are forced into retirement, in many cases, as a number of Deputies said, against their will, for many reasons, whether social or economic.

The Minister of State touched on employment contracts in the private sector. The retirement age is written into these contracts and it is permitted by law. The Bill will address this in both the private and public sectors. The Minister of State mentioned the issue of retrospective law. We understand that with any retrospective law there is potential for legal and constitutional challenge. This must be analysed and balanced on Committee Stage. Although we can get viewpoints from the Attorney General or from anybody else, good, bad or indifferent, all legislation the House produces is open to legal challenge. This makes the committee's work more important. It must ensure we get the Bill right. The responsibility falls on all of us here. We all agree with the principle of the Bill, which is to abolish the mandatory retirement age. We all need to get it to Committee Stage and get it right.

Many people are watching the debate and have been given hope by the words that have come from the Chamber. The vote will not be held until next week. The Minister of State has just indicated that the Government will not oppose the Bill and, therefore, there will be no vote. Real hope is coming from the Chamber tonight. It is imperative that we get it to Committee Stage as quickly as possible. The Minister of State has said we must wait until the reports come out. I will not outline my concerns around the Government's timeframe. However, we need to move on the Bill. People are watching and hurting.

More than 5,000 65 year olds are forced to sign on to receive a jobseeker's payment. The Minister of State has admitted that they have to sign on only once in that year and we turn a blind eye. Although they are forced into receipt of a jobseeker's payment, they do not have to go out and seek work. It is a serious anomaly that will get worse in 2021 when the pensionable age increases again and when it increases to 68 a few years after that. This serious flaw should have been addressed, but was not.

There is a serious problem for women as they are forced to take a lower payment because of the changes in pensions and PRSI in 2012. This is a real opportunity to address that and that is why it is essential the Bill moves on to Committee Stage, so it can be enacted. It means so much to so many people, and for so many reasons.

I thank the Minister of State, Fianna Fáil and my colleagues who have spoken on the Bill. It is a big achievement for everyone here. I am not sure how many other pieces of legislation have received such unanimous support from across the House. I am not sure if this is the first time it has happened but it is one of the first times in this Dáil. I am glad this is the case on such important legislation.

See this speech in context