Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)

The legislation proposed by the Minister, if enacted, will bring Ireland in step with an EU directive which should have been transposed into domestic law in 1983. While I welcome the fact that it is better late than never that the Government is attempting to provide these protections to Irish workers, I cannot help but wonder how many more workers could have been protected if this legislation had been brought in the eighties, as should have been the case.

The Government will say that workers who believe they may have benefited from this legislation can still make claims. Realistically, however, a lot of time has passed since 1983. The Government will know that the proportion of people who might have had unpaid wage claims from, for example, 1985, will be vastly higher than the number who will seek redress now.

The Protection of Employees (Employers' Insolvency) (Amendment) Bill 2025 delivers several important changes. The expansion of access to the insolvency payment scheme to include employees of employers who ceased trading without formally winding up their business is significant and must be welcomed. I am happy to note the Bill will also provide a new statutory process for employees in this situation to apply to have their employer deemed insolvent and to recover their outstanding moneys from the insolvency payments scheme. Extensive pre-legislative scrutiny was undertaken by the enterprise committee of the previous Dáil. I acknowledge my colleague Deputy O'Reilly for the diligent work done on this Bill to date.

I have some remaining concerns regarding the Bill. These relate to the ease of access for people who may wish to make claims. Will it be the case that a worker will need legal representation or is it the intention that, once it is done, it will be easy and accessible? Will it work through a website? How is it envisaged? Employment issues, by their nature, can be intricate, complicated and individualised. The last thing we want is for people who may have an entitlement to look at the process and think they would rather not engage with it because it is too difficult to do so. This should be something a person can make their way through without incurring the cost of legal representation, which, as the Minister will appreciate, would be a chilling factor for many workers. The more easily accessible and plainer the language is, the better. There must also be a communications and media strategy. This is essential as we want people to be able to access the system. For historical cases, it must be absolutely clear that people know they can still make claims in respect of informal insolvencies that happened as far back as the eighties.

While my party is supporting the Bill on Second Stage, I want the committee to look at the media strategy around it. If people are not aware of the entitlement, they may as well not have it. I also hope the committee will examine the Bill in light of the rights and entitlements a worker may have had by way of a collective agreement or enhanced redundancy. Is it the case that it only covers statutory entitlements?

On the cost of implementing the legislation, the Department has allocated almost €15 million in respect of the historical element. Last year, when the pre-legislative scrutiny was ongoing, some Department officials estimated that there might be up to 5,000 historical applications. On that reckoning, it seems the Department thinks the average award would be in the ballpark of €3,000. This is a small sum of money for the Government. For an individual, however, I have no doubt that it would mean a lot. Again, this goes back to the ease of application, which should be commensurate with the level of award allocated. I also want the committee to look at how these historical cases will be assessed and monitored. Is there any way - aside from the advertising campaign - historical applications can be encouraged to ensure all those eligible are able to access the fund? In a case where a worker has died in the 42 years since 1983, is there a possibility for a spouse or other relative to make a claim on their behalf? Has the Department given consideration to this? These are the intricacies that we must be able to stand over and to which the Minister must give attention.

The Bill is a welcome. I commend the Minister for bringing it this far. However, we have a way to go. Introducing a scheme which should have been introduced years ago does not get the Government off the hook for its failure to deliver on workers' rights. Sinn Féin has long stood with workers in their struggles. We believe legislation must prioritise workers' rights, especially their collective redundancy agreements. Those entitlements always need to be prioritised alongside wages or statutory redundancy payments. The Government has consistently failed to deliver on its promise to improve workers' rights and living standards. Despite its commitment to increase statutory sick pay, raise the minimum wage level and eliminate discriminatory pay practices, many of these promises remain unfulfilled.

The Government promised to increase statutory sick pay from five days to seven in 2025 and to ten from 2026. However, it has postponed this increase and left more than 1 million private sector workers without paid sick leave. This delay worsens financial and health hardships for workers and families. When we are in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, I absolutely do not see it as a contest between employers and workers. The greatest asset of any business is its workers. We must ensure that we have workforces that are respected and that their rights upheld in the same way as those of others. That is why collective bargaining is so important.

Similarly, the pledge to move forward on a living wage has been stalled. While most EU countries increased their minimum wage significantly last year, Ireland's minimum wage remains well below EU average. This contributes to Ireland's high rate of low pay, with 20% of workers earning below a fair living standard. The Government's reluctance to accelerate wage increases puts further pressure on low-paid workers amid rising living costs.

Promises to end discriminatory subminimum youth pay rates and improve migrant workers' wages have also been broken or delayed. The minimum wage for migrant workers on general employment permits is still below market levels and wage increases have been postponed. Additionally, the Government has delayed the raising of the employers' PRSI threshold, which would help to reduce the tax burden on businesses and support workers. Many other social commitments, such as pension reforms, hikes in child benefit and scrapping the means test for carers have been shelved or quietly rolled back.

The auto-enrolment pension scheme, which Sinn Féin supports, remains poorly managed and risks increased exposure to market volatility and privatisation. The Government claims economic uncertainty justifies these delays. However, a Red C poll shows that 56% of the public oppose these backtracks, with only 24% supporting the Government's stance. Voters who supported Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are particularly opposed, highlighting a disconnect between Government actions and public expectations.

The failure to honour promises has real consequences. It leaves workers more vulnerable, increases poverty and deepens inequality.

Instead of supporting fair wages and social protections, the Government is prioritising short-term economic narratives that give handouts to the wealthy and big businesses. I am again calling on the Government to honour its election promises and to stop paying lip service to workers in this State. For the workers we are seeking to protect here and other workers, it is vital to recognise that they are living in a real cost-of-living crisis. The cost of living extends to people trying to be able to afford their groceries and trying to pay their energy bills. We know that almost a half a million people are behind with their energy bills at present. It is distressing to see that the Government has at this stage ruled out any cost of living package in the budget. I ask the Minister to go back to the Minister for Finance and look at where people are in terms of the struggles families face right now to be able to afford to live and to be able to afford to have any quality of living. I always make the point that workers have never worked so hard and yet they have never struggled so much in just trying to make ends meet. Everything connects with everything else and employers need to demonstrate fairness and to have people who are properly paid for the work they do. We need to look at things like increasing productivity. This can be done by lifelong learning, by investment in education and by investment in training, all of those things. The first thing we examine must not always be a cut to wages. I hear it in all kinds of discussion, whether it be around water infrastructure or whatever else, seeing how much more can be got out of people's pockets. This surely has to be about putting some money back into workers' pockets and people's pockets, so that the contribution they are making to society is truly valued.

See this speech in context