Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

This legislation is not just because of Covid. Certainly, Covid is forced on our minds in the context of the Bill. One of the first discussions I had when I became a Minister of State was on a Bill of this nature. It has been recognised for a long number of years that Ireland does not have a statutory sick pay scheme. Therefore, Covid or no Covid, it is an important move in the right direction.

I compliment all those involved and those who brought forward Private Members' Bills, including Senator Sherlock, that focused our minds on this issue. The Tánaiste has been very clear from an early stage that this was something he wanted to make sure we achieved throughout the lifetime of the Government. It is not just about Covid. Covid proved the necessity of this legislation without a doubt. There are arrangements in place whereby if someone has Covid, he or she is not encouraged to go to work. Enhanced illness benefit was brought in to enable that because there was a concern at the start of the pandemic that people who were employed for many years in many jobs might feel they had no choice but to go to work because of costs.

The Government is bringing in new legislation which provides new employment rights, which we believe will strengthen the employment right legislation overall. It is a positive measure and will make Ireland a more attractive place for talent to come. We also have to recognise that there is a huge cost involved in running a business, and labour costs are a massive part of that. Employers are generally quite responsible. The vast majority treat their staff extremely well. Even without legislation, they have implemented their own schemes and other employee supports. Generally, they do look after staff extremely well. This legislation is to make sure that everyone, no matter what job a person is in, has the option of a statutory sick pay scheme.

It is important that an employer-employee relationship is developed over 13 weeks before the scheme kicks in. I do not think that is unreasonable but the Senator clearly does, which is fine. We have discussed this on a number of occasions before this debate. The Government thinks it is important. I have given a very simple example of something that could actually happen whereby the employer would be left with that cost, yet there would be no relationship with the employee if that happens now.

I am conscious I am giving scenarios that would hopefully not happen but it could happen. There is a big ask of employers. I know the Senator does not necessarily understand that situation, but I do. The Department has to get the balance right. The Government wants to be able to sustain and create jobs and help small businesses to create jobs so that everybody benefits. People who take up work, offer their skills and talents, and do the job should be properly remunerated for their work. Having those jobs strengthens our position as a country to respond in many other ways, such as across health, education, public services and so on. It is important that we recognise that.

We cannot take jobs for granted either. I often find that sometimes people do take jobs, as well as the business owners and employers, for granted. We cannot do that. There is a big ask in this legislation of them, but the Government wants to get the balance right. I hope the Senator accepts that we will not be accepting his amendment, which would start the scheme on day one.