Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am sharing my time with Teachta Cronin. A little like my comrade, Teachta Andrews, I still do not understand. I will go through what the Minister said.

I am very glad he recognises that none of the types of leave that he spoke about, and read out from his script, will address the issue of bereaved parents. That is a very important clarification that I am glad he made because, to be fair, he spent a lot of time talking about leave that would not apply to this particular group. I understand that context is important in all things but much of the Minister's contribution referenced leave that might be under way or coming, which will not impact in any way on parents who are bereaved. He also said he was not opposing the legislation, but he is not supporting it either. He is just standing in the way of it or trying to delay it.

I do not understand why we cannot begin to progress this. The Minister said he is concerned about the impact on employers but he agreed with me that most employers are doing this anyway, which they are. What they need, however, is guidance because they do not know. It is a tough thing. A lucky employer might never encounter this issue. Other employers might find themselves in a situation where they do. It is very useful if there is a legislative framework, and leave on a statutory footing, because everybody would know where they stood. As I said, the ESB or Tesco do not know whether somebody is bereaved. Bills mount up and people need to safeguard their wages.

The Minister also spoke about the need to wait for the dedicated and targeted research, which is being done by PLACES. That research is very welcome and I am sure it will inform other legislation but it will not refer to parents who are bereaved in the way that has been described. That research is on early pregnancy loss, which is different. That will not be relevant research. Essentially, the Minister is saying that this legislation will be delayed for a minimum of 12 months while we are waiting for "dedicated and targeted research", which is not dedicated to this type of bereavement leave or targeted at those parents. It is for that reason that there is genuine confusion.

It is a Government tactic to delay things by 12 months and to kick things down the road. I can only speak about my experience of where this has been done. It was not a good experience. It most definitely was not a good experience for the workers who were sold a pup, effectively, and told that 12 months were needed for dedicated, targeted research, consultation or whatever it is. In truth, precious little was done and those workers are still back where they were. They are still at the starting point. That time was, in effect, lost.

I urge the Minister to withdraw this amendment. I do not see that it is necessary. With the greatest of respect, I do not believe that he has in any way, shape, make or form, offered us a cogent or coherent reason why this cannot be done. If we are all agreed, and we are, we should be able to move on this now and not waste any time.

See this speech in context