Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I thank all the Deputies who contributed to this considered debate. I would like to respond to some of the matters raised.

Deputy Guirke asked about what is currently being done to support workers where a company is an insolvency. The State has always been to the fore in providing a safety net for employees in the event that their employer enters insolvency. Where the employer is unable to pay, the State covers eligible employees' statutory redundancy payment from the Social Insurance Fund. Where an employer is legally insolvent, the State covers pay-related entitlements, such as arrears of wages, minimum notice and employment rights awards also through the Social Insurance Fund. In addition, under company law, employees' outstanding pay-related entitlements are given preferential creditor status in a liquidation. Employees also have rights to information and participation as creditors.

Some Deputies spoke about the time it has taken for this Bill to come before the House. The matter was raised by Deputies Conway-Walsh and O'Flynn. This is legislation that Government is prioritising on the basis that it is complex but also it is a cross-cutting issue. The issues raised in the Supreme Court judgment required careful analysis and significant legal advice. That time has been put to good use. We have worked through many issues and developed a workable policy solution. Now we believe that not only do we have workable solution, but its implementation is practical. We believe that this will vindicate the directive-based rights of employees who have previously been unable to access them. We are determined to focus on making it easy to access the process. Employees should not be required to have legal representation.

I was asked whether an application may be made where the employee has deceased.

A person may apply on behalf of that employee, including on behalf of his or her estate. We also had questions raised by Deputy Lawlor regarding the historical cases. Our initial proposal was that historical cases in instances of two years could apply. However, we subsequently decided to change this to allow applications in exceptional circumstances for another two years, which gives a total of four years to apply. This Bill has catered to some of the needs with regard to historical events.

Deputy Gibney also raised the issue of how the requirement to serve notice on employers only applies to future claims deemed insolvent. In recognition of the challenge in tracking down employees from many years ago, this does not apply for historical cases. I am very happy to clarify this.

Deputies Conor D. McGuinness, O'Donoghue and Gould raised issues around the Debenhams workers. To clarify, this Bill is totally separate from the issues that were raised as part of the Debenhams case. This was already a recognised insolvency and liquidation. The Government has always sought to ensure that the concerns of the Debenhams workers were heard. The State's welfare employment and training services responded to the needs but also provided that safety net through the Social Insurance Fund for employees to ensure they received their statutory redundancy. These rights have been honoured and, indeed, in this case, the State honoured the Debenhams workers at a cost of over €13 million.

Deputies Nolan and McGrath raised issues and challenges around small businesses and the importance of trying to keep businesses supported. It is a key priority of this Government. Through the programme for Government, we have a very pro-business, pro-enterprise focus. Within our Department, we are now setting up the small business unit and within that, we will have the cost of doing business advisory forum. That will be very much focused on how we can support businesses with increased labour costs, regulatory burdens and energy costs. We want to ensure that businesses can remain viable while striking that balance with the challenges they face. Government did approve a memo recently around competitiveness and productivity. There are some short-term, medium-term and long-term challenges that we need to address. We have made changes with regard to an incremental increase to the living wage while protecting workers, and we will continue to protect workers around the minimum wage. We await the Low Pay Commission's report in July. However, we have never, ever refused any recommendation previously. We have always honoured employees because we certainly value fair pay for workers. We will continue to do that. While accepting Deputy Nolan's issues with regard to vulnerable businesses within hospitality, food services and retail, it is about striking the balance between protecting the business while ensuring that livelihoods are also protected.

We also want to be very clear with regard to real insolvencies. It is important to note that among the public and in the media, there is much commentary on corporate insolvencies or liquidations, restructuring and closures, and this often gives rise to conflicting figures. Our Department is currently working on analysis of closures in the hospitality sector and is very much focused on ensuring the data is fully accurate in its publication.

I refer to the Bill itself and the positive impact it will certainly make. It will ensure that a new cohort of workers is protected under the insolvency payments scheme. The Bill will provide for a new statutory process for an employee to seek to have his or her employer deemed insolvent. My officials have worked carefully to ensure this process is as streamlined as possible. The Bill is necessarily complex, but the aim is to ensure the process it underpins will not be. We have been very careful to ensure that workers are not burdened with an onerous process to navigate. The customer journey should enable workers to vindicate their rights through a clear and easy to understand pathway. We have balanced this with safeguards for employers who may still be trading and should not be deemed insolvent. We have also ensured that the system is robust to ensure taxpayers' money is protected. While the Bill itself is quite technical, its intention is clear, and it will require further enhanced protection for employees where their employers become or are deemed insolvent.

See this speech in context