Paul Gavan (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste is very welcome. Sinn Féin supports this Bill and has campaigned for statutory sick pay for several years. Indeed, today is very important day as it recognises the work of trade unions, which have campaigned tirelessly in this regard. It has been a sad fact that Ireland has lagged decades behind the rest of Europe when it comes to the provision of sick pay so the Bill is welcome.

I acknowledge what was said by Senator Ahearn. The Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment had a lot of good debates on this matter. Members of the committee had different points of view but all of us wanted to support the general thrust of the Bill. It is just a question of different perspectives in terms of where we think it hits the right note. In that regard, I suspect that Sinn Féin will table a couple of amendments on Committee Stage.

Sick pay is an issue that is very personal to me because in my work as a trade union official, particularly with low-paid workers, I found that no matter how sick they were they turned up to work because they desperately needed money. I am thinking of contract cleaners in particular. They were probably low-paid people with no sick pay provision and it was a real hardship. The lack of sick pay was something that many foreign nationals, in particular, could not understand because in many of their countries, poor and all as they were, sick pay was in place whereas it was not in place here. It is important to recognise and welcome the Bill in that context.

I wish to raise some points with the Tánaiste. There was a concern about the 13-week period. I recognise that it was a welcome amendment to cover people during the summer period. It is important to get that aspect right so that people who are laid off during the summer do not have to start from zero.

The joint committee had a big debate on certification. To be clear, Sinn Féin believes that certification is important in order to defend the integrity of the Bill. We are not saying that one does not need certificates. The difficulty is the reality of the healthcare system. If any of us phone our GPs today to ask for an appointment, we will have to wait. Certainly, I would have to wait a week or maybe ten days. There is also a cost element involved. I am conscious that with Sláintecare, all of us have signed up to the idea that there should be free GP care. Sinn Féin would make the following key point: while we wait for free GP care to be achieved, we would have thought that it would be reasonable to introduce a rebate scheme so that workers are not penalised for having to see a doctor and get a certificate. That is a reasonable point because all of us know the pressure that the GP system is under at the moment. We know we have a particular challenge in terms of the number of GPs. It just seems very problematic. If we do not put some kind of rebate system in place, many workers may choose to turn up at work sick rather than incur the cost of having to go to a GP. I was shocked to find out recently that the cost of a GP appointment in Dublin can be as high as €70, which is no small amount of money. That is a matter we need to revisit on Committee Stage. Sinn Féin is still concerned with the 13-week period. We may want to take a further look at that but I acknowledge the amendment that was made in that context.

The Tánaiste referenced some other points about workers' rights. I would like to pick up on a couple of them in the context of the broader issue.First, I hope we will see the tips Bill come back before the summer recess. We had a constructive engagement in this House on it several weeks ago. In particular, I hope the service charge issue is dealt with sufficiently. I know the Department has received many direct comments from workers and trade unions in respect of their experience in that regard. It is important that we get that Bill right. The likelihood is that it will not be revisited afterwards. Getting that service charge element dealt with properly so that workers are not exploited is a very important point to take on board.

The Tánaiste also referred to the living wage. I welcome any moves towards a living wage. It is an unfortunate fact that, right now, the gap between the minimum wage and the living wage is broader than it has ever been in recent years. My concern in respect of the Tánaiste's plans for the living wage is that he seems to be saying that the definition of a living wage put forward by the living wage technical group is not the right definition. I have not heard arguments as to why it is not the right definition. The difference is that, right now, a living wage is €12.90 an hour according to the living wage technical group, while the Tánaiste stated that, according to his calculations, the living wage should be €12.17 an hour. I am deeply uncomfortable about very well-paid politicians telling low-paid workers that they do not need €12.90 an hour and they will manage on €12.17. Let us be frank. With the cost-of-living crisis we are going through, no worker can earn enough money on either of those rates. I am not comfortable with that. We need a further conversation on why the living wage technical group rate, which has been accepted for many years, is now apparently not going to be accepted by the Government. It looks like a way to skimp on paying people a proper living wage. I have always maintained that people who work for a living should be able to earn a living. Unfortunately, for far too many people at the moment, that is not the case. I look forward to a further debate in that regard.

Sinn Féin does welcome the Bill. I look forward to constructive debates today and on Committee Stage and to seeing the onward progress of the Bill.