I acknowledge the Labour Party for bringing forward this Private Members' Bill. Remote working has shaped modern work practices and the labour market. I, for one, take the Bill seriously, as does the Government. For far too long opportunity was centred in major cities and larger urban areas. However, remote working has shifted that balance and today we see flexible and remote working transforming how people build meaningful careers while continuing to live, work, and raise families in the towns and villages they call home. The programme for Government recognises these myriad benefits and reaffirms the Government's commitment to promoting flexible working arrangements that benefit both workers and employers. I will touch on some of the Government's actions to fulfil this commitment in a few moments but I will first address the Bill, which the Government opposes for three key reasons. I will outline them in more detail during the debate. First, allowing employees to request remote work keeps a fair balance between flexibility and the need for businesses to stay competitive and viable. We all understand that not all occupations, industries or roles within enterprise are appropriate for remote working. It is not appropriate for the Government to step in and dictate the terms of individual employment arrangements via legislation in the way this Bill suggests. That is why the current legislation provides a right to request, not a blanket right to remote working. Second, giving the Workplace Relations Commission's adjudication officers the power to review the substance of employers' decisions and effectively direct which roles are suitable for remote work, would extend their role too far, effectively placing the WRC in charge of elements of business operations without insight into operational needs. Last, it is important to note that this legislation is still quite new. As the Deputy outlined, it is only two years in existence. Given that it will only be in place for two years next month, we are undertaking a statutory review of the remote working provisions of the work-life balance Act. Any changes should wait for the findings of that review rather than preempt it. CSO data shows that almost 1 million people now work from home at least some of the time, with over 500,000 working remotely for more than half of the week. There is no doubt that remote working has become highly valuable and important to many of us and the way we work today. I reject Deputy Nash's assertion that it has failed. The evidence shows that it is providing huge labour market opportunities and allowing for substantial balanced regional development in many towns and cities right across the country. This is reflected in the phenomenal public response to our recent consultation as part of the statutory review of the right to request remote work, with over 8,000 people taking the time to give us their views on what the law on remote working means to them. Clearly, it cuts across both their professional and personal lives, improving work-life balance, reducing commuting times and increasing time spent with their families. The right to request remote working is available to all employees through the work-life balance Act. We have not excluded any sector, industry or role from this right. It is important to state that. Ireland was among the first EU member states to introduce the legislative right to request remote working. It is worth noting that no member state has introduced a direct right to remote working, but rather European legislation in this space is aligned with our own right to request model, for similar valid and logical reasons. Our legislation provides a framework governing how employees may make a request and how employers must consider and respond to such a request. An employer may refuse a request having regard to their needs, the employee's needs and the code of practice. When refusing a request, the employer must provide the reasons for refusal in writing. Employers are required to respond to a request within a set timeframe. The legislation provides for redress to the WRC. An adjudication officer may examine whether the employer complied with statutory requirements. An officer cannot review or overturn the merits of an employer's decision to refuse a request. The legislation is underpinned by a code of practice that was drafted by the commission in consultation with the social partners. Their close relationship and partnership ensures that detailed guidance on the process is provided for both employers and employees. It has been placed on a statutory footing and can be submitted as evidence in proceedings before the WRC, the Labour Court or the courts. This Bill seeks to amend Ireland's current statutory framework significantly. As I mentioned earlier, the reasons the Government opposes the Bill are threefold. The current legislative framework strikes the right balance between flexibility and business competitiveness. We understand that the make-up of businesses across the country is predominantly small and medium-sized businesses. They account for 99% of all businesses throughout the country. We understand the significant importance of those businesses, and that is clear in terms of how the Government perceives the Bill introduced by the Labour Party. Deputy Nash believes the Government should define an objective basis for refusing a remote working request for all employees uniformly, regardless of the size, sector or industry. That would diminish the employer's discretion with regard to how or where their employees carry out their duties. It would have serious implications for productivity, competitiveness and also viability across certain sectors for employers who have between one and nine employees. It would have implications in particular for small and medium-sized businesses, which would likely be among those who are most impacted. Second, the Bill proposes to replace section 27 of the Act and to strengthen the powers of adjudication officers of the WRC. The section specifies that an adjudication officer shall not assess the merits of an employer's decision to refuse a remote working request. Such powers would effectively involve the adjudication officers directing employers on how to manage their business operations, despite the adjudication officers not having any involvement in or detailed knowledge of the employer's operational needs. I would also say that the legislation itself is only two years in existence. It is relatively young, as I mentioned. Ireland is among the first countries in Europe to introduce this legislation. We are reviewing the current effectiveness of the legislation and we will be laying the final report before the Oireachtas by the end of March. Despite the legislation, as I mentioned earlier, the CSO data have been very strong and significant in regard to those who are working both in a hybrid and fully remote manner. Over 987,000 people have reported working from home at least some of the time and over 557,000 people working from home more than half the time. That demonstrates the impact this legislation has made. In conclusion, remote working is here to stay. It is part of our modern workplace and our communities. It is certainly part of our national economy but it is and must be supported by legislation that is fair, balanced and grounded in evidence. For those reasons, to maintain balance, to avoid inappropriate interference with business operations and to allow the current review process to conclude, the Government cannot support this Bill. As Minister of State with responsibility for employment, I remain committed to promoting flexible and remote working arrangements that work for everyone, including employees and employers. Such arrangements must assist employers as they seek clarity and stability, and must enable communities across Ireland to see growth and opportunities.

Sentiment score: 0.12