2026-02-18

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time." This Government has driven hesitation and has stitched delay and employer vetoes into law. Only a few months ago, it vetoed our Bill to stop employers holding a veto over joint labour committees. It endeavours to leave workers with the allusion of flexibility but none of the protections of a just society. The result is a system that talks about modern work while quietly forcing people back into habits that no longer make sense. This Bill would facilitate the enjoyment by employees of an appropriate work-life balance, with due regard to the rights of employers to manage an effective and efficient work force. This Bill would promote access to employment, particularly for persons who face particular difficulties in taking up employment, such as people with disabilities or those who often find childcare difficult and expensive. It would result in reduction in traffic congestion and in carbon emissions arising from the number of employees commuting between home and their workplaces. It would result in a rebalancing of the population densities as people would not be forced to reside in the major cities while enduring extortionate rent and property prices. However, mainly, this Bill is about seriously improving the work-life balance of workers where it is reasonably practicable. That is the key here. This Bill also enshrines safeguards for employers. No employer should be forced into an agreement that jeopardises their business, their business's confidentiality or already agreed practices. For this reason, the Bill contains the following grounds. An employer may refuse a request if the arrangement is "not reasonably practicable." They may refuse if the nature of the employee's work does not permit that it be done at a remote location. They may refuse if it is not reasonably practical for the employer to reorganise the work done by their employees to facilitate remote working. They may refuse if the proposed arrangement is reasonably likely to adversely affect the quality of the employer's product or service, the quality of the work of the employee, or if the workspace at the proposed work location is not a suitable workspace for the employee to work in. This may be as a result of the need to protect business confidentiality or intellectual property and to comply with enactments relating to data protection, that the health and safety of the employee at work is not protected, that poor Internet connectivity and other infrastructural resources at the proposed remote location are not sufficient or that the proposed arrangement conflicts with the provisions of already applicable collective agreements. These are serious safeguards to allow employers the peace of mind when hiring new staff or engaging with current employees. This legislation would give workers an immediate and enforceable right to work remotely where their role allows, and it would end the sweeping right employers currently enjoy to refuse flexible and remote working arrangements. This legislation is about dignity at work, quality of life, and whether Ireland is serious about building a labour market or retreating to an outdated model built around control rather than productivity. In the past, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil legislated for the employer's right to say "No". As long as the paperwork is in order, the refusal stands no matter how arbitrary or outdated the reasoning. That is not balance; it is a blank cheque to employers. It is also important to say that this is not about forcing remote work into roles where it does not fit. It is about ending refusals based on habit, suspicion or a fixation with visibility rather than productivity. For many, this will be the difference between being able to work or not being able to work at all. As a Government and an Oireachtas we must lead on this. Take Enterprise Ireland for example. This State agency is reportedly requiring staff to return to the office three to four days a week, despite the fact its headquarters are in Eastpoint Business Park in Dublin, which is extremely difficult to access by public transport. The predictable result is more people forced into cars, adding to congestion and emissions. This directly undermines our stated climate and transport goals. When State bodies behave like this, they normalise going backwards and they give cover, or absolute encouragement, to the private sector to do the same. This legislation offers a clear alternative. It would expand participation, support regional communities and give people back hours of their lives currently wasted in traffic.

I commend Deputy Lawlor and my other Labour Party colleagues, in particular Deputies Sherlock and Wall, on bringing forward this important Bill, which I am glad to second. At its core, this Bill is about something very simple. It is about supporting people to work - to work to live not just to live to work. It is about quality of life. Despite what Government spokespersons might imply, workers in Ireland currently have no right to flexible or remote work. They have only a right to ask and a right to be refused. Many employers are very generous. Many workplaces have very sustainable accommodations made with hybrid and remote working but some have been unreasonable. We in the Labour movement are proud to stand for workers' rights; not workers' incentives, not employers' philanthropy or leniency but rights for workers. We are proud to be the party of the trade union movement that has delivered on workers' rights. We have delivered on rights for workers on low pay through mechanisms like the Low Pay Commission and on rights for freelancers through our successful legislation on collective bargaining for freelancers. However, at its core, this Bill is not just about workers' rights. It is also about tackling climate emissions. As Deputy Lawlor said, all of those currently sitting in cars in gridlock trying to get into offices where they do not need to be to be productive are contributing to increased carbon emissions. They are contributing to our failure to reach our climate targets. The Government has been shameful on delivering on public transport and on cycling and active travel infrastructure. One way the Government could help to deliver on reaching climate targets is through enabling workers to work from home where it is reasonably practical to do so. That is another core part of this Bill. This Bill is also about accessible workplaces. It is about ensuring greater access to work and to working life for those who, in many cases, are locked out of workplaces. I am thinking in particular of people with disabilities. In Ireland, we know disabled people are very poorly represented in our workplaces and we should be doing a great deal more to facilitate working careers for people with disabilities and disabled persons. One key way to do that is to facilitate flexible and remote working. I also reference others such as women who are locked out of many workplaces due to lack of access to affordable childcare and early years education, women who disproportionately bear the burden of care at home and who are, therefore, in particular difficulty when it comes to being forced back into workplaces where they do not have to be physically present in order to be productive. If people are spending two, three or four hours a day in a car, which many people who contacted me and my colleagues are doing currently, commuting to their workplace when they know they do not have to be present in the office to be productive, they are not only contributing to climate emissions and having a very poor work-life balance, they are also not delivering for a Government that is talking about productivity and enterprise. As a party of job creation and of jobs, we want to ensure sustainable workplaces and to enable employers to retain skilled and high-value staff - women, men, disabled persons and people from all walks of life who should be facilitated. Finally, with the Government's approach to this Bill, with the sort of obstructionism we have seen on this Bill, it appears Fine Gael in particular, but the Government all together, has abandoned any pretence at a workers' rights agenda. The former Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, engaged in rhetoric about workers' rights but we have seen from this Government the stalling of the Labour Party's pregnancy loss leave Bill, a U-turn on sick pay and a VAT cut that took money from the pockets of taxpayers and put it in the coffers of big builders and burger barons. This Government is not taking workers' rights seriously. What we in the Labour Party are trying to do is to redress the balance, to ensure workers have a reasonable right to work from home and to work flexibly and to ensure we build sustainable and accessible workplaces for all.

Today in Nenagh, I had the privilege of announcing 307 new homes being built, on top of over 300 announced previously by Whitebox and Quantum homes. A total of more than 600 houses will be built. Why is that so important? Nenagh is effectively in the centre of the country and is one of the best towns in Ireland. Many of the people who are going into these homes are local people or people who desire to live there but who want to work from home or partially work from home through blended working. Nenagh is a commutable distance to Dublin, Shannon, Limerick or Galway one or two days a week but it is certainly not commutable five days a week. This Bill ensures those workers will have the opportunity to live among their community, to access all of the services they need, including childcare and schools, and to live among their families. It will enable them to be around their elderly parents, to spend more time at home and in their community, to go to the gym and not to spend three to six hours in their car. What this Bill does is create something the Government should be very interested in, namely, better spatial and regional planning by ensuring people can live in rural towns and regional areas. That is something this Government does not progress enough. This legislation is all about work-life balance. We work to live but we do not live to work. This Bill distinguishes my party, the Labour Party, from every other party in this House. This is what the Labour Party is all about. It is the party of workers, the party that ensures workers come first. Workers should come first but when it comes to this Government, they do not. This Bill will ensure workers have better lives, that many of the social issues, challenges and costs they face and the environmental issues we all face are dealt with and helped because this is the right thing to do. We talk a lot about workers and productivity but workers are far more productive when there is balance in their lives. As politicians, we should know this. We should know this as workers who come here every week. Why can we not practice what we believe in? This legislation will ensure better productivity. It will also ensure workers can live across this country and make a contribution, that they can have balanced working lives in Nenagh, Roscrea, Thurles and many other regional towns across Ireland.

To be clear, this Bill is for those who can work remotely. It is not a promise for every role or sector. We know remote work is not feasible for everybody but where it is reasonably practicable, we must make it a worker's right. That is what this Bill seeks to achieve. It is not about forcing the hands of employers or imposing rigid rules. It is about giving employees options, the choice to work remotely where it makes sense while respecting the operational needs of businesses. It is about fairness, clarity and flexibility. The benefits are real and not just for workers. We would have less traffic, less pressure on public transport and early education, a better work-life balance, stronger communities and a more sustainable economy. This Bill puts a simple framework forward around something that already exists and already works in practice. We proved in 2020 that we could do this and we have been continuing to prove it during severe weather warnings which are becoming more frequent. Where remote working is possible, people should have the choice to work from home. Where that choice is given, we can support employers to put the right systems in place so it happens efficiently, responsibly and without risk. This is about common sense and adapting to the world in which we now live. When most people were required to work from home during the pandemic, we saw a profound shift in how families managed care. Remote work changed daily routines but, more importantly, it changed responsibilities. Women's participation in the workforce increased because flexibility gave them a real choice - the choice to go back to or to stay in employment. Their ability to progress and to balance care without being forced out meant their participation increased. At the same time, many men became more involved in everyday care, collecting children from school and crèche, attending appointments and sharing the mental load that had mostly fallen upon women. This was not just a temporary adjustment and it showed what was possible when work was designed around life and not the other way around. Giving families the right to remote work does not reduce productivity but redistributes care, strengthens equality and supports healthier, more resilient families and communities. In my constituency of Dublin Fingal West, a father of four told me that during Covid for the first time in his life he was able to collect his child from crèche. It was his fourth child and yet it was the first time he was able to do the pick-up and drop-off, to stand at the door, to talk to other parents and to be part of the everyday rhythm of care. This was something he missed entirely with his first three children. His company has since continued remote working and this has changed his whole family dynamic for the better. It has allowed him to be a more present parent, to share responsibility at home and to build stronger connections, not just with his child but with his community and with other parents. This Bill does not force remote work. It gives workers the right to remote work and to have their request for an entitlement to remote work and remote working arrangements treated fairly. It is balanced, practical and reflective of the world today. This Bill, proposed by my colleague, Deputy George Lawlor, should be supported because there are no downsides to it. The only downside is the Government's bizarre decision to block it. The Minister and his staff can work remotely. I can work remotely.

We are debating this Bill this morning because the previous Government's so-called Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, which is less than three years old, has abjectly failed working people. Then again, we should not be surprised because it was set up to fail. We said that at the time and the proof is there for all to see in the operation of the terms of the Act in the WRC's annual reports. The debates on that Act were a waste of Dáil time. That legislation was an act of fraud perpetrated against commuters in my county of Louth and elsewhere. It was tokenism of the very worst kind. For a time, as my colleague, Deputy Bacik, said, Fine Gael almost had some people persuaded that it had some kind of Pauline conversion to the cause of improving workers' rights but the reality can be found in the empty formula contained in the 2023 Act, the utterly meaningless right "to request" the opportunity to avail of remote or flexible work. This Bill gives the Government the chance to correct the mistake it made in 2023. The evidence of that mistake is all around us. The Act, as adopted, is simply not working. This is one of the key workers' rights questions of our time. I am dealing all of the time with the fallout of this Government's failure. We have return-to-work mandates being imposed on workers, no questions asked and no quarters given. This is creating childcare chaos and very real financial worries for families. Hours are being spent in traffic and people are dealing with unreliable and stretched bus and train services. We all know the impact but I am not sure this Government necessarily cares or understands it. I will give the House an example of the human impact, if I may. Earlier this week a man in Dundalk was in touch with me. He works in the IFSC as does his partner. He was hired during Covid and he has worked very productively from home. He is now being pulled back into the office for most of the working week, with a full five-day return on the cards. He moved to the Dundalk area for more affordable housing. The understanding was that he could work remotely and that the arrangement would continue. I ask the Minister of State to listen to what he said: Now we find ourselves commuting sometimes a four hour round trip if traffic is bad, increased travel costs, parking, tolls, diesel, car maintenance, additional childcare costs, not to mention quality time lost to the commute. And all for what? To say we clocked in to the office. That is the long and the short of it. The laws we have at the moment let poor managers and bad businesses off the hook. The cohort of people who are angry with this situation need to be listened to. They are the young, ambitious, highly educated professionals who have paid an exacting price for the Government's housing and childcare failures. They are people with a very real stake in society, who need the social contract to work. The ability to work remotely gave them the opportunity to come up for air, a chance to breathe. In so many cases, that opportunity is being taken away unilaterally and without any recourse whatsoever to any legislative protection or remedy to support them and to bring some semblance of balance to the question and to their lives. The legal framework needs to change. I strongly believe there will be a political price paid by Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil if this Bill is rejected, and if the changes we want to see are not ultimately introduced. We will continue to campaign on the key question of workers' rights in modern Ireland.

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.

We have heard a load of waffle from the Minister of State with responsibility for employment. It is the most anti-worker speech I have heard in this Chamber. He has given a speech, as Minister of State for employment, about the "right to request remote working" that is the biggest load of waffle he could ever say to any worker who believes that they should be given a right to remote working. It should not be lost on any of us that this Chamber is full of politicians who engage in a variety of flexible work practices in order to do our jobs to the best of our abilities. We work from different locations and we have different hours, depending on our day. That is an experience felt by workers across many sectors. The Covid-19 pandemic showed just how many sectors and roles can operate well with flexible, remote and hybrid work. The Bill proposed by my colleague, Deputy Lawlor, would represent great progress. It would stand firm against the push we have seen by employers in some sectors to walk back the progress that has been made. We can see the benefits from other European countries, including a reduction in commuter chaos in cities, better work-life balance, practical benefits for parents and increased activity in local economies. We can see that hybrid and remote work benefits workers and their local economies. Many workers have based their school runs, where they live and how they get to work around flexible work practices. Flexible working practices are key to the future development of rural Ireland. The Minister of State mentioned the CSO on a number of occasions. The CSO has found that 38% of people would consider moving if they could work remotely. Many of us from rural Ireland leave our home towns for cities to study and work. We know there is evidence that indicates people are relocating more to rural and regional areas from the cities of Cork and Dublin. The benefits of remote work to parents in employment is massive. Many parents living in rural Ireland face larger gaps in the provision of childcare and have to undertake longer commutes to accommodate work and childcare. The reduction in hours spent commuting benefits rural workers who can often live at a greater distance from their place of work. The State has estimated that remote working, largely due to the reduction in the amount of time spent in cars, can save 164,407 tonnes of CO2 per year. In conversations on this matter, we often fail to recognise people with illnesses, disabilities and accessibility issues. Flexible work opens up the job market for these people. It removes the barrier of inaccessible workplaces. It allows someone who may not be within commuting distance of their workplace to seek accommodation suitable to their needs. Creating greater opportunities for people with disabilities needs to be a policy priority for the Government. People with disabilities who worked from home during the pandemic cited the biggest benefit as being greater autonomy in managing their disabilities. I want to touch on Cork city very quickly. The transport plan included just one mention of the proposed Cork Luas. We have been told that a railway order application is expected to be lodged, yet we do not have an assured route, public consultation or timelines. These are just meaningful words, while Cork continues to battle commuter chaos. In conclusion, I suggest to the Minister of State that if he is going to stand up and say he is Minister of State for employment, he should not be so anti-worker.

If the Minister of State looks at the TomTom Traffic Index, he will see that people in Limerick - the city I represent - lost 74 hours in traffic congestion last year. That is three whole days wasting away at the Mackey roundabout, on the Corbally Road, in Raheen, on the Dock Road, on Henry Street, on the M20 and on the N7 - the list goes on. What this Government is doing in opposing our Bill here is saying to people that this is grand and that they can spend an entire week of their lives in the car every single year. Remote working has benefited our city and region enormously. It has enabled people to move home from cities like Dublin, where they would have had to live because they work there, to raise their families and have a better quality of life. It allows young working professionals to avail of lower house prices and contribute to their local economy and community. The Government's so-called work-life balance legislation is so weak and watery that workers are being marched back in to the office. The Minister of State talks about us being a leader on this. In countries like Portugal, if you have a child up to the age of eight you have a statutory right to work from home without prior negotiation. In 2022, the Dutch Parliament, under a centre-right government, made working from home a legal right. If an employer in the Netherlands declines it, they have to provide a weighty business or safety reason to do so. The burden of proof that is being placed on the company in these jurisdictions is much higher than it is here. The Minister of State cannot really compare us to the Continent because most of these things are delivered through collective bargaining.

Hear, hear.

There are much stronger sectoral agreements. My bottom line is this: if the job works on Wi-Fi, it does not need diesel. What I would say when I look at big business in this country is that if your management style only works when people are sitting in front of you, that is not leadership or mentoring; that is control freakery. The reality that is evident with regard to this Bill this morning and other matters is this is not a Government for workers. This is the most anti-worker Government I can remember in recent years. Fine Gael constantly says it will make work pay but the reality is that under Fine Gael, it is workers who have to pay. This Government has delayed the living wage and backslided on the increases in sick pay. School secretaries, caretakers and probably special needs assistants, SNAs, and teachers now, have all gone out on strike and 18- and 19-year-olds are paid less than the minimum wage. The fact of the matter is that this Government has a magic money tree provided that you are a property developer, an institutional developer or a fast food tycoon. They will be looked after and the rest of us have to pay.

What we have here is a philosophical difference between the Minister of State's Government and the Labour Party and others in Opposition on workers' rights. For a moment, let us set aside all the climate benefits, the work-life balance benefits, the benefits for commuter towns and economies and the anti-congestion advantages. We will set them aside because philosophically, that is something we on the left would say. Let us set aside all the really good, strong evidence that has been accumulated through multiple studies by the trade unions, including SIPTU, Fórsa, the Financial Services Union, FSU, and others. Of course trade unions would say that; they are, philosophically, on the left. Let us look instead at the evidence from agencies that would be philosophically more in line with the Government. Let us look at what IBEC is saying. Even IBEC recognises the benefits of flexible work. It says it wants anchor days in the office but it knows there are economic and productivity benefits to flexible work. Let us go even further by looking at the International Monetary Fund, IMF, and Harvard Business School. Neither of them are bastions of workers' rights, but both of them have produced reports stating that productivity increases and improves for companies when there are strong, flexible work rights. This is something the Government should be leading on, based on that alone, but it is not. Its failure to legislate is based on vibes and not on evidence. The evidence is on our side on all levels - productivity, work-life balance, anti-congestion, improved transport and improved climate benefits. The evidence is all on our side. Yes, Covid-19 turbo-charged this but I remember being in a working group with Deputy Nash when I was a councillor, along with then Councillor Mark Wall and others in the Labour Party. We came up with a commuter strategy in 2017 or 2018 that had working from home as a central plank. We have spent nearly a decade trying to make this into a real right. This Bill would also strengthen equality. Flexible work particularly benefits parents, carers and people with disabilities. Without legal protections, these workers often negotiate from a weaker position and sacrifice career progression but, again, in line with consistent policies from this Government, these groups are left behind. The only people who are disadvantaged by the right to work from home are the owners of office buildings in large cities and large towns. The Government is not looking at the bigger picture. It is not looking at protecting the workers - the people who keep this country going. A defined legal framework, such as that set out in this Bill, would limit disputes and create better workplaces for all. Rather than providing for the right to refuse work from home, as stipulated in the current legislation, we must ensure hybrid arrangements are set down in a proper law. If we look at the impact of flooding on our road networks in recent weeks - car parks in our major commuting towns and the arterial roads coming into our major cities have been affected - we will see that no number of extra lanes on our roads, which is what this Government wants, will work. We want to see a greater improvements in buses, high-frequency rail links and metro links. All of that needs to be done, but our right to flexible work - the right to work from home or from within one's community at community work hubs - can be strengthened almost immediately. That would have a real impact in terms of improving congestion. The Government is standing still. It is not legislating based on evidence; it is legislating based on vibes and it is letting workers down again.

Sula bogfaimid ar aghaidh, I would like to give the young visitors in the Gallery today a big welcome to Leinster House - céad míle fáilte.

Over recent years, we have seen that the shift to home-based work and the explicit right to request remote and flexible arrangements can deliver real benefits if managed well. This approach has the potential to shape a fairer and more productive workforce with increased morale. Since the right to request remote work was introduced in 2024, the Workplace Relations Commission has handled roughly 60 complaints. That number reflects both progress and gaps that must be looked at and closed. For thousands, flexible and remote work has been life changing. This shift has helped many people to stay in the workforce and has opened doors for people across the country. A right to flexible work is, in a sense, part of a modern economy. Along the way, we voiced concerns and worried that the code of practice might tilt the balance too far in one direction and not adequately protect both workers and business interests. What the code establishes is the right to request remote work, requiring a detailed explanation from the employee about why he or she is seeking this arrangement. Some factors that are considered, such as the distance between home and workplace, felt like over-reach and warranted careful review. The right to remote work demonstrates tangible benefits for workers and employers in the broader economy when implemented thoughtfully. The observed complaints are a signal to improve process, not a rejection of remote work itself. The balance between worker rights and business needs is essential. Ongoing refinements are needed. A rigorous but fair framework helps to sustain participation in the labour market and supports a modern and inclusive economy. We know that workers face a number of hoops when seeking to access remote working. These arrangements can be refused, altered, withdrawn or terminated at will. There is a practical side to this debate that touches people's daily lives. Working from home has real benefits for our transport and road networks. It reduces congestion, slows wear and tear on our roads and eases pressure on public transport systems. Across the country, people are paying significant tolls, and these costs rise year after year as congestion grows. If people can work effectively from home or a remote working hub, we can relieve some of the pressure on already strained transport and road networks. The right to request remote working legislation is not just a legal reform; it is an opportunity to listen to workers and employers, learn from real-world experiences and make practical improvements. When an employee's remote working request is denied, we should bring that example forward and look at where improvements can be made. The right to request remote working should empower people to do their jobs effectively while ensuring fairness, consistency and accountability in how decisions are made. It is a chance to strengthen the law, learn from lived experiences and implement reforms that reflect the realities of modern work and modern life. We commend the outstanding contribution of communities across Ireland that have established remote working hubs in local centres, GAA clubs and vacant buildings. Sinn Féin recognises the value of remote work during extreme weather events. While current legislation may not fully protect workers in such circumstances, enabling remote work can offer significant advantages to both workers and employers. We acknowledge that not every role can be performed remotely. Therefore, we emphasise that the legislation should safeguard the interests of both employees and employers. We see a need to establish a fair and well-structured framework that balances employees' rights to flexible working with the operational requirements of employers.

I thank the Labour Party for bringing this Bill to the House this morning. I listened to the Minister of State's speech. He and the Government really need to wake up to the fact that remote working can benefit not only workers and their families, but local businesses and communities as well. The Minister of State knows that coming from a county like Mayo. He also knows that if people with disabilities - really capable people - were given the opportunity to work remotely, they could live in their own communities and work in a way they wish to and in a way that would be hugely beneficial to employers. We can have that conversation in a constructive and inclusive way that can benefit everybody. It is about quality of life. The Minister of State will know from his past football experience about all the clubs that are amalgamating in Mayo because we do not have the people living in rural Ireland. How many of those people are living and working in Dublin, which is already congested? Is it any wonder that Dublin has won more All-Ireland championships than Mayo? The solution that could lead to Mayo getting the Sam Maguire Cup is to have proper remote working so that people can live there and do not have to truck up to Dublin and move all their lives here, but can live in Castlebar. Deputy O'Reilly should not laugh. This is a very serious issue, but there is nothing here but opportunity. We have long argued for the right to request remote and flexible working. I point the Minister of State in the direction of the Good Jobs Employment Rights Bill in Northern Ireland, which was brought forward by the Minister for the Economy there, my colleague Caoimhe Archibald. That legislation addresses many of the work-life balance issues that could be incorporated here. This is about progressive rights of workers. The imbalance must be addressed. I look forward to the results of the public consultation that the Government has conducted to review the right to request remote working in legislation. This Bill provides a fair and structured framework for requesting remote working, whereby requests can only be refused on a clear and objective grounds. It is reasonable. That is why we are asking that employers be fair and reasonable too. Most of the employers and the employers' organisations that I speak to want to get this right. The Government needs to work with them to ensure they do. Yesterday we spoke about families being priced out of urban centres as a result of house prices increasing by almost 50% since 2020. We are going to have people paying mortgages in their eighties if the Government does not look at things differently and use opportunities like this.

I thank the Labour Party for bringing forward this Bill today. I have long been a proponent of remote working. I attended a conference in Tubbercurry in 2018 that was organised by Grow Remote. It was one of the first conferences it held about organising work in this way. It had another one the year later in Athlone. I attended both of them because I saw the opportunity that remote working offered, particularly for rural areas. As has been mentioned, many rural communities have set up hubs. There is very poor Internet in many areas despite the roll-out of broadband. The roll-out has been very hit and miss in many rural communities. These hubs offer an opportunity for people to come together and be able to work remotely. The biggest opportunity is for employers. I have spoken to many employers. The opportunity to have somebody who can work from home means that employers often do not have to get additional office space when they have to expand and grow. It is a win-win for everybody at all times. I was very disappointed to hear the Minister of State's speech. It was so negative and stuck in the past. I often meet people who, because they cannot work remotely, think nobody else should either, which is a stupid concept. It makes sense for people to be able to do it. It makes sense for the economy. It makes sense for people not just in rural areas but in urban areas as well. It takes away congestion. It offers people flexibility in their lives. It has umpteen advantages for business to allow them to grow. Many of the back-office activities can be done from somebody's home. We often find when we ring the Oireachtas lines to speak to people who work for the Oireachtas that they are speaking to us from home, whether it is about a social welfare issue, a tax issue or whatever. It is because they have the opportunity to it. If we are able to ensure that people who work for the Oireachtas or work for the Government can work remotely, it makes absolute sense that people in the private sector should also have the same right and that we should guarantee those rights. In that context, I absolutely support what is proposed in this legislation. Government should look at it again and realise that it is really behind the curve on all of this. The future is to ensure that workers have the flexibility and that employers also have the flexibility to be able to employ people wherever it suits them best to work.

Once again Government seems to be immune to the lived realities of people's lives. Both in theory and practice, remote and flexible work has proven its value. Workers delivered, businesses functioned and the economy kept moving, and yet Government came out with this diluted right to request that often ends in refusal. This is the lived reality of commuters in my constituency. A commute can take an hour and 45 minutes each way. That is three and half hours a day, five days a week. Across a 46-week working year that is 805 hours, the equivalent of over 100 working days a year gone. Those commutes are starting earlier and earlier because of congestion. For those paying at least an M4 toll each day that is €3.60 each way or €1,656 a year after tax simply to get to work. That is before fuel, insurance and maintenance on their car. Government speaks endlessly about modernisation, climate targets and regional development. Remote work and hybrid work advance all three of these. It reduces congestion, cuts emissions and keeps workers and families in their own communities. It gives them the opportunity to support local economies, businesses and shops, and it brings life back into smaller towns and villages. Yet workers are still forced to justify what has already been proven to be workable. If a worker is spending the equivalent of 100 working days a year commuting, if they are spending over €1,600 just to get them to work, then Government's so-called right to request is nothing more than a bureaucratic box-ticking exercise designed to create the illusion of a right but not an actual right. We need a genuine right to work remotely and flexible working hours. We need options that are based on fairness, reasonableness and consistency.

We need to see remote work become a right and not just a perk as it is now. It should be an entitlement for workers for whom it is available and not a norm when it makes sense for all the reasons that have been outlined. It is clear to us that remote working has clear family benefits, social benefits and environmental benefits as well as those benefits to the community that are often unseen and unremarked upon in this debate because, simply put, people have more time. This is about workers' rights. There are health benefits and environmental benefits. It supports economic growth and rural diversification. It keeps our rural communities alive when this is the norm. Remote and hybrid working reduces commuting time and increases personal autonomy which is strongly associated with higher life satisfaction, better mental health and improved work-life balance for workers. For every 1,000 remote jobs, over 220,000 hours are saved in commutes every year. That time goes back into people's families and local communities. There has been a lot of research by the Western Development Commission on this, along with the University of Galway and others. Those statistics show that almost 25% of people who work from home for some part of the week volunteer their time in the community. Organisations that benefit include the GAA, other sporting organisations, Tidy Towns, the RNLI, and any number of rural and community voluntary groups. Remote workers spend more of their income locally during the working week when they can work at home, supporting local businesses and keeping them going, sustaining additional local jobs through secondary economic effects. Every 1,000 remote jobs brings €13 million into their local economies every year. This is a no-brainer. Promoting remote work is the way to go. The Minister of State's negativity in response to this Bill is unwarranted and unhelpful and it underlines an attitude from Government that views rural areas as secondary. We need to see remote work become the norm and we need to see Government legislate or support this legislation. It is one or the other.

I thank the Deputies for introducing the Bill this morning and for giving us a chance to discuss a topic which I have discussed in this Chamber many times before. When I was thinking about the legislation as I was walking over here, I was reminded that the first case I took as a shop steward was for teleworking as we called it. It moved on to be e-working and now we call it remote and flexible working. The attitude of employers, as demonstrated by the Fine Gael Minister of State here this morning, was always the exact same: it is as if it is some sort of treat and something that workers can get if they are good but it was never going to be a right. I almost laughed when the Minister of State's predecessor brought in the right to request remote working - sure I had that in the last days of the last century. We could always request it but we did not have a right to have it fairly considered which is what workers need. Employers have consistently refused this but never advanced a single decent reason as to why. Sure they do not need to for as long as they have the old green Tories in place in government doing their work for them. Workers should, of course, have the right to remote working but workers are not stupid. The Minister of State expressed concern that people might look for it who would not be entitled to it. People who do jobs that are amenable to remote work should have the opportunity to do that. People who cannot are not stupid; if they are working in a job that does not facilitate remote work, they know exactly what that is like. Should this legislation proceed to the next Stage - the Minister of State has indicated fairly clearly he does not want it to which is very regrettable - I hope we will have the chance to include within it an amendment that Sinn Féin might table on the right to disconnect. Along with the right to remote work, there has to be a balance in terms of the right to disconnect for workers. I was somewhat disappointed to see that was not in this legislation but I appreciate that not every piece can be in every Bill. Workers should have the right to remote work. The Minister of State knows it well. Does he only work when he is sitting at his desk? No. He works in a variety of environments but he is not unique. Loads of workers can do that and all they need is the Government to get out of their way to give them that opportunity.

For families remote working can be life exchanging and it has been life changing for many. It has meant they are able to juggle the responsibilities of work and family life. We know that women are often excluded from the workplace because of these issues. Allowing people to work from home is not allowing them to take it handy or to doss but what it means is they are able to have work-life balance and a home-life balance. Many people still have childcare but the difference is that at 5 o'clock they can finish rather than commuting to collect their children and then commuting back home. It makes a real difference to people's lives. I represent a constituency covering part of Cork city which has gridlock with traffic. Allowing people to work from home will get them out of cars and get cars off the road. It is a win right across the board. Right now, there are no solutions to the gridlock in Cork and based on what other Deputies have said it is the same right across the State. Every city and every town has huge issues but the Government's attitude to workers' rights is shockingly poor. We need solutions. The Government will suggest using public transport but the bus service is a joke. When they turn up, they are not on time if they turn up at all. We are talking about the northern ring road which will not be built for ten or 15 years and the northern distributor road will be another ten years. That means ten more years of gridlock in Cork because of this Government. No good comes from people sitting in their cars for hours on end. We brought in a traffic plan in Cork that actually made matters worse. It stopped the right turn over St. Patrick’s Bridge and Christy Ring Bridge and just kept people in traffic for much longer. Until we have a proper traffic plan and until people are allowed to work from home, workers will face impossible commutes. This is a workers’ rights issue, but it is much bigger than that. It is about families and people, and this Government’s attitude must change when it comes to workers’ rights.

Everyone has spoken about and will continue to speak about the absolute advantages we have all seen and heard from those who have the capacity and ability to work remotey. There are huge logistical savings for people in relation to childcare when they are working from home, as Deputy Gould said. As Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh said, it is also about facilitating those with disabilities. A lot of work has to be done regarding access and facilitating people into work, but in certain circumstances, it would facilitate an awful lot of people going into employment. In fairness to the Deputy, she pointed out that one thing missing from Mayo in relation to its road to all-Ireland glory is remote working. I think the Minister of State, therefore, should have a particular interest in it. We all know about the gridlock that is happening, whether it is everybody leaving my town of Dundalk on the M1, with Google Maps on, not because they do not know the way to Dublin but because they want to check where there are going to be hold-ups, accidents or whatever else. People get forced to use the Port Tunnel for €14 just because they have run out of time on the road because there are too many people on it. It could also be anyone trying to drive round Dundalk on a Friday afternoon, because they will find that very difficult. Government TDs, however, have absolutely celebrated the amount of money that has been provided to Louth County Council. It is €10,810,650, and that is welcome, although it would be a lot more welcome if it was more than what the county council was given last year, which was €10,992,550. I assume that costs have not gone up at all in the last while. I would ask the Minister of State to convey to his Government partners that a request has been submitted by Louth County Council for €1.2 million to address damage done to roads from flooding. We all know about this. LMFM and everybody else has a pothole search at the minute, and it is not a very hard competition to engage in. Regarding remote working, there is no facilitation for cross-Border workers. Companies, employers and individuals, North or South, cannot now work from home. It is not allowed. We all saw that when PayPal closed its offices. There is a necessity for cross-Border engagement on this matter. A bilateral agreement then needs to be made with the British Government to facilitate this.

Go raibh maith agat.

There is a lot of talk about a shared island, but we need to facilitate those in Border areas, in particular, and throughout this island who should be able to work remotely. As has been said before, a right to request remote working is not much of a right if it is always refused.

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Labour Party for bringing this legislation forward. Remote and flexible work is a vital part of our lives now. It is a huge opportunity for many to find a better work-life balance, for businesses to innovate and for local communities to benefit from development and commerce happening in a more geographically balanced way. The Social Democrats have always championed the rights of workers and will always do so. Remote working, in particular, is an area I have long championed. I will also introduce a Bill in the coming weeks that will deal with remote and flexible work. The goal here is to build a sustainable, flexible, remote working regime that provides the necessary framework to facilitate a fair, clear and transparent approach to remote working. The current system is confusing because it is so unintuitive. When the right to request was introduced, it was sold to the public as an important change that would have a real impact on how people could work remotely and flexibly. That illusion, though, was shattered by the realisation that the refusal of a request can be for arbitrary reasons, not based on business needs or any objective necessity whereby work cannot be done remotely. The frustration felt by people at this is tangible when you speak to anyone affected. They cannot understand why this Government would bother legislating for a right to request that is so weak when they could already ask their employers for changes to their working arrangements and be refused arbitrarily. The way work has changed means people can do their jobs effectively from anywhere. Caithfimid cinntiú go bhfuil ár ndlíthe ag coinneáil suas leis sin. We all understand that not every job can be done flexibly or remotely but we have advanced in leaps and bounds when it comes to the number of jobs that can. It is not that long ago that the concept of online meetings, hybrid working and working from home in general were very foreign concepts to many people. For many, it was impossible because they did not have the Internet at home or the required technology to have virtual meetings or because those they worked with were not familiar with these tools. Many of these barriers have gone now and we have the chance to create a meaningful and participatory workforce, particularly for groups historically excluded, like single mothers and people with disabilities. We have whole businesses that communicate, create, market and deliver services completely online. This has meant less time spent commuting and more money going into local businesses and economies, more parent-friendly workplaces and a better work-life balance. Despite these developments, however, and more people are in fully remote jobs, we are also seeing workers with hybrid and flexible arrangements being ordered back to the office by both private and public sector employers. This is often without consultation, without warning and ignoring the fact that people have shaped their lives around the flexibility that is now being taken away from them. Is léir le blianta beaga anuas go bhfuil buntáiste ollmhór ag baint le hobair ón mbaile, go gcoinníonn sé airgead sa phobal, go gcuireann sé le saol clainne agus saol pearsanta daoine, agus nach bhfuil drochthionchar aige ar an obair a dhéanann daoine. Tá sé cosúil leis na haonaid Gteic sa Ghaeltacht agus tá ionaid don chianoabair ann ar fud na cruinne. Má táimid ag iarraidh toradh na hinfheistíochta seo a fheiceáil, caithfimid níos mó a dhéanamh. We had a golden opportunity to enshrine remote and flexible working, but we have been let down with a right to request remote working that is not a right at all. The current framework grants employees only a right to request remote working, which, for an increasing number of employees, is refused or revoked. Like so many aspects of workers' rights in Ireland, we have created a system where the employee has no power and the refusal of something that may make no difference to their productivity but will make a massive difference to their lives can be arbitrarily refused. The current Act leaves people with hours-long commutes, the financial and climate burden of running a car, the daily strain of rushing to and from work and the stress of managing family lives. We know all these things can push people out of the workforce, particularly women, single parents and people with disabilities. It leaves us with congested roads, packed trains and buses and decreased revenue for small local businesses. We need a real right to remote and flexible working, and that is what this Bill seeks to do. I read an op-ed by a Government TD this morning that referenced this Bill and framed legislation for a right to remote working as pitting employers against employees. This framing does a huge disservice to our role as legislators and the importance of clarity and transparency for both employers and employees. The right proposed in this Bill and in my own upcoming legislation is couched in what is reasonably practicable in a workplace and gives certainty to all involved on what is expected of them. The framing today that this Bill goes too far does not acknowledge that this Bill and any suggestions around remote work have always been caveated with the understanding that not every job can be done remotely or flexibly. The Minister of State spoke at length on the current legislation but failed to see the point that the current legislative regime does not have any reasonable ground or objective criteria to apply to requests. It is wholly opaque and only feeds the frustration of arrangements being unreasonably denied in a way that is completely legal. Nobody should have to deal with an unjust decision like this being fully supported by our employment legal framework. We need a real system defined by reasonable expectations of employers and employees, with an entitlement from day one. A right to request remote work has been a source of frustration for so many workers, who realise that when their request is unreasonably denied, their "right" is not particularly useful in changing their situation or helping them to deal with an unfair denial of remote and flexible working arrangements.

There needs to be a massive change in the approach to remote work in legislation to formalise it as a legitimate labour entitlement and a right and to ensure that remote working is harnessed to support people and communities. Ireland needs a national target for remote work. We need to facilitate and support companies to support workers to ensure that the right and access to remote employment is available for workers across this country. We should not be reverting to them versus us, as has been referred to. This is about making Ireland work for people and making it work for communities across the country. Officials from the GAA recently appeared before the housing committee and presented their report about the future of the organisation and rural depopulation. It is called No One Shouted Stop - Until Now: The GAA’s Response to Ireland’s Demographic Shift. Bills like this and the one my party colleague Deputy Gibney is bringing forward are telling us to yell "stop". We need to support villages, towns and communities in order to ensure their survival. This is a golden opportunity. Remote work is a golden opportunity to allow people to live in communities, inár mbailte, inár sráidbhailte, ar na hoileáin agus inár nGaeltachtaí. Rural GAA teams are fighting for their lives - ag troid ar son a saoil – agus nach cuid den réiteach é tithíocht inacmhainne freisin? They are all interconnected - affordable housing, public transport and remote working. They need to work together. Ireland is not working for so many people who are going out to work. They are stuck in traffic and cannot provide care for their children and disabled people. This affects so many people and our Gaeltachtaí. It is not working, and remote working can play a fundamental role in ensuring people have more balanced and more sustainable lives rather than tearing themselves apart, commuting for hours and struggling to get back to children. We need remote work to be supported properly.

I thank Deputy Lawlor bringing this important legislation forward. I have never been very good at striking a good work-life balance, it has to be said. I doubt many in this Chamber are. I have always been a hard worker, perhaps even obsessive, but one of the great things about being human is the opportunity to grow and evolve, to develop the ability to rest and experience joy, to cultivate relationships and to enjoy life to the full. That is what this Bill is about. There are, of course, jobs where remote working is not possible, for example a TD, and there are parts of jobs or specific times where in-person collaboration is paramount for the task at hand. The Bill does give due regard to this, despite what a backbench TD might write in The Journal, including the capacity of the remote location to support the carrying-out of tasks and duties as required by the employer. However, it goes further than the current legislation in empowering workers contribute positively to their work culture while engaging in remote work. During Covid, I was working with a startup in health technology doing really interesting things in connecting people to remote care. This company had taken seriously the question of enabling people to work remotely for several years before Covid. It was ahead of its time not just in considering the concept of enabling workers to engage fully but also in how the company's operating practices and culture supported people to do their best work and attracted exceptional talent regardless of geography. As a Dublin-based company, we were able to hire people in Cork and Galway and even in the far reaches of Donegal. There is an exceptional opportunity to use remote work to re-energise rural Ireland, ensuring that high-income labour opportunities are more equally distributed and that the associated spending power becomes part of local communities. I urge the Government to consider this Bill as a matter of utmost importance for workers, companies and the communities we are trying to build.

I thank Deputy Lawlor for bringing forward this legislation. As a Minister in the previous Government, I was proud to lead on the introduction and passage of the original work-life balance Act of 2023. As we know, this introduced a right to request remote working for all workers. It also introduced the right of certain workers to request flexible working, which included remote working but also flexible work schedules or reduced working hours. That legislation also introduced some other important improvements in workplaces. It extended the right of women returning to work from maternity leave to request breastfeeding breaks. Originally, the right had been for only six months. It is now for two years. It introduced five days' unpaid leave for medical care purposes and, importantly, it introduced paid domestic violence leave, making Ireland one of the first European countries to do so. When these provisions, particularly the provisions around remote working and flexible working, were introduced in 2023, they were novel. Now, in 2026, it is right that we review and strengthen the rights that were given to employees in 2023. That strengthening is particularly important in light of the push-back on remote working we are seeing from many employers. We are seeing that from large international companies and some SMEs, but we are also seeing it from some semi-State organisations. I am particularly disappointed to see the latter take place. All elements of the State should be supporting remote working because the State is seeing the benefit from it. People can now have significant roles in our Civil Service and public service but do not just have to be based in Dublin or in the commuter counties. They can be living all across the country. The legislative change Deputy Lawlor is putting forward fundamentally understands that our economic health is intrinsically linked with the well-being of workers, students and carers in our country. That economic health is linked to the ability to live, travel and pursue lives in a way that is facilitated by the State. I hope the Minister and the Minister of State hear that the mood across this House is to strengthen and broaden the rights around remote working, not just to leave the status quo as it is.

I thank Deputy Lawlor for bringing forward the Bill. We Donegal TDs are geographically isolated and, as some Deputies have said, when it comes to working, people think living in Donegal is akin to being in a different country. Remote working in Donegal does work, has worked and will continue to work, and I believe this Bill will enhance that. When we talk about practical experiences, we are talking about people who travel from Inishowen into Letterkenny. They might leave nearly an hour to go out and have an hour's drive to come back in the evening. Then, when they come home, they have to take their kids to their activities. This is adding up every single day with the likes of soccer and GAA, but no matter what, these activities have to happen to allow the communities to thrive. Making sure this work-life balance is in place is vital, but it is also vital to ensure that rural communities thrive. At the moment, without this being brought in and coming to pass, these communities are dwindling. For Donegal, the benefits are clear. Remote working reduces commuting costs. It supports families with their responsibilities and retains skilled workers. They need flexibility for arrangements that are made, particularly with the situation we have in Donegal with the defective concrete crisis. Many households have been displaced and forced to leave their homes due to structural defects. They are balancing their work with inspections and repairs in their homes. Remote work allows them to do this and remain employed while managing these disruptions to their lives. Supporting this Bill is not about limiting employers. It is about creating a fair, clear framework where employees and employers can engage constructively. I urge all members of Dáil Éireann to push this because they have to go back to their constituents and when they are telling them about their work-life balance, we have a responsibility to try to improve their work-life balance.

Addressing this issue of remote working in the Chamber on 21 January last, I said, "These working conditions must be based on a legal framework, giving an entitlement to these arrangements." This Bill, which I warmly welcome, does just that. It gives workers a clear, enforceable legal right to work remotely and ends refusals based on tradition, preconceived ideas, antagonisms and vague and spurious reasons. Remote working is here to stay. It is more productive, more family friendly and reduces unnecessary travel. It coincides with transport, climate and housing policy and helps, of course, to regenerate rural Ireland. The Bill is also timely as we have seen recent moves by banks, IT companies and even Government Departments attempting to force workers back to the office. There is a real appetite for this type of working. A recent survey by the Fórsa trade union found that 86% of members were interested in remote working and 80% were interested in the hybrid situation of working at home and working in the office. A legal framework must also cover areas such as protection against forced returns to the office. An arbitrary, blanket or full-time return to the office should be outlawed. There must be a right to disconnect. Workers must be protected from a situation where they are forced to work after working hours. It must also be voluntary. It must not be a compulsory situation. Workers must have the right to opt in or out. There must be an equality of rights between remote workers and office workers. The former must have the same rights, protections and promotional opportunities as office staff. Obviously, health and safety guidelines must also be included in the legislation, which will include things such as workstations and mental health. Particular groups such as carers and staff with particular health needs must also be covered in legislation. I welcome and support the Bill and I thank Deputy Lawlor for tabling it.

I thank Deputy Lawlor for tabling the Bill, which would represent significant improvements on the current situation whereby workers have no right at all to remote working. What Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael legislated for was a right for employers to refuse reasonable remote working requests. I was on the enterprise committee at the time when the Government Bill went through. ICTU came in and told us the Government's law was utterly pointless. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael knew exactly what they were doing in bringing in totally pointless legislation that was effectively written by IBEC. The responsible Minister at that time was Leo Varadkar. He is now going around portraying himself as a kind of progressive champion of workers' rights and other causes but that is not what he did when he was in office. He actually misled the committee at that time by claiming that the right of appeal to the WRC was not intended to be a solely procedural right and that a reason for refusal must be valid. He said that it would not be a case of an employer just ticking a box and saying "No", but that is precisely what the legislation provides for. It is precisely what has happened and Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael knew this at the time. The Labour Party's Bill would much improve the situation because it would give workers the right to work remotely where reasonably practicable and it sets out only limited grounds for refusal. That is what workers need. I would still argue that the Bill has too many concessions to employers. If an employer refuses a request unreasonably, one option in the Bill is to resolve the dispute by getting the employer to pay one month's wages in compensation. One month's wages for someone spending the rest of their working life at that company is not a lot when commuting in heavy traffic for hours every day and only seeing their kids for a few minutes before they go to bed is the reality for so many working families today and is completely unnecessary. The right to remote working should be made part of the Government's obligations to cut emissions by half by 2030 under the climate Act. We had an excellent briefing yesterday by the Climate and Health Alliance, which spoke about how important it is for people's health to cut down on air pollution from traffic. More remote working would mean fewer kids with asthma and fewer older people suffering from COPD. It would be a win-win for almost everyone, apart from the David Brents and Denis O'Briens of the world who want all of their worker drones back in the office where they can keep a close eye on them and restrict any space for autonomy. Billionaire Denis O'Brien says that remote working was a mistake. He is a tax exile swanning around on a superyacht. We need a Government that puts workers' rights first.

Where an employee can work at home, it should be facilitated. It can be a massive plus for a worker. It can reduce stress. Obviously, it can reduce the cost of the daily commute, and in certain cases, it can lead to a significant increase in productivity. It can also be good for the local community as it brings people back into local towns and villages during the day. We do live in a city state, unfortunately, where people are commuting from Connacht, Ulster and Munster into Dublin on a daily basis. In many small villages and towns in this country, you could play hurling on the main street in the middle of the day with the lack of traffic and the fact there is nobody there. It is an employee's market at the moment. In my experience, many employees do get the right to work at home because they have more influence and power in this market given that there is nearly full employment. There are also costs to this and that should be recognised. In some situations, it does lead to a fall in productivity. In some situations, the home is full of distractions in terms of family, pets and so on. It can also lead to a fall in communication. Microsoft Teams, WhatsApp and Zoom are not rich forms of communication. In-person communication is a far richer way for people to engage. Human relationships are very important for the functioning of any business and on many occasions this can be done in person far better. I have noticed in the past that at-home working can cause many difficulties. As a TD, during Covid, trying to get in touch with a civil servant and communicate with a person was nearly impossible for years when trying to get simple work done in those situations. Young people learn less when they work remotely because the natural flow of communication in the situation is not there. They find it harder to impress their managers and develop in a business in a working-at-home situation. Remote working hubs are a good hybrid solution in many ways because they get people out of their homes and into a collegial working environment. It also means that people are located locally. I understand that, in fairness to it, Deputy Lawlor's Bill has significant protections for employees and I appreciate that it allows for the WRC to make decisions, although I would be cautious to see how this would work in practice. The issue we have in the main for workers at present is the fact this city is the most congested in Europe. The average speed of traffic is slower than it was in the 19th century with horses and carts because of a lack of public transport. We really need to focus on that.

I thank the Member for bringing the Bill forward. I am conflicted about it. There is great sentiment to it and the heart is certainly in the right place. The Bill proposes amending the Act of 2023 to strengthen employee entitlements, limit refusal and objection grounds and delete section 20(2). I note, however, and these are just observations I have on the Bill, that it encourages and formalises a dispute culture in the workplace. I have concerns about that. I am concerned there would be a likelihood of an increase in complaints to the WRC and the Labour Court regarding same. I have heard Members in the House speak about employees, vilify employers and speak about them being billionaires on superyachts. I think that Deputy has been watching too many Bond movies because most of the billionaires I know, or know of or have read about, and I do not know too many billionaires personally, all work hard. They are working on their businesses and they are going from project to project. I do not think they are going around on superyachts as our friend in the socialist party believes. I have concerns about the Bill because I question bits and pieces of it. There is the question of mentorship. When people start off in a business and they are working from home, they are isolated. They are very much isolated in their homes. There are also health and safety issues and questions about the general data protection regulation, GDPR, and the entire system around this, the legal rights people have, the protection of data, the protection that people have in the home and health and safety in the home.

That is in the Bill.

I have read the Deputy's Bill, thanks, unlike other Deputies. There are also questions about the broadband infrastructure. I do very much have sympathy for the Bill but I have questions around it. It needs a little bit more tightening-up and a little bit more work. I would be quite happy to assist Deputy Lawlor in that way. The other side that I see goes back to isolation and loneliness. Many people who start off working in this country, in particular people who have come to this country, do not have an entire network behind them and do not have groups of friends. Tremendous things have happened in small companies and big companies where people have got involved in local societies and GAA clubs. At Boston Scientific in my constituency, we see the number of external clubs it is involved with and the fundraising and charity work it does. We have to be sensible about how working in a big workplace, or even a small workplace, can benefit people and not just through being mentored in the workplace.

Many people, especially those in rural Ireland, stand to benefit greatly from fair, balanced and practical remote working arrangements. Reduced commuting, more time with family, lower carbon emissions and the ability to work closer to home are meaningful gains that improve quality of life and support regional development. However, we must also ensure balance. Employers need clarity, practicality and safeguards and workers need a system that is genuinely accessible, not one that is bogged down in bureaucracy or easily refused. A right in legislation must be a right in practice. On a personal note, I do not know much about work-life balance. I spend most of my weekends working 17 or 18 hours every day, so I am not any example. My staff, who are mostly female apart from one, Ellen, Margaret, Valerie and Paddy, all work around the clock, not because I ask them, but because they are inundated with work. I will take this opportunity to thank them. I also have a chance now when I have not had a chance previously to talk about home working and the short-term letting Bill that the Minister is very much involved in. This is an opportunity where people have been working at home and have been able to carry it out. It is mainly females. I have to give them the respect that it is them who have been delivering the short-term letting through Airbnb in rural locations. I attended a meeting last week in a committee, which is not my committee. We spent three hours there fighting for these people who work at home and want to continue their work at home. It now looks like it is going to be taken from them. If the Minister does not drop the planning requirement prior to the new regulations being brought in for people who are in the business for many years, he is going to ruin many of these great people who work at home. Remote working is great but again in rural Ireland we need better infrastructure, better Wi-Fi, and better mobile phone services. From driving all over west Cork I know there are so many places with no service and other places where in the middle of a call it drops. It is a great idea but in rural Ireland we need much better infrastructure to be put in place first.

The 2023 legislation introduced by the Government was a good first step but it needs to go further. Employers have to give a written reason they are refusing it if the right to request is used. However, in the Farrell v. Salesforce case in 2025, the WRC upheld a complaint because the employer did not respond within four weeks in terms of the deadline. The employee got €1,000 in compensation. It shows that the law has some effect. However, we need to go further because we are falling behind countries like Spain and Portugal that have much more robust right to work from home legislation as well as the right to disconnect. This Bill brings it to the next level. We definitely need to have more opportunities. There are certainly different circumstances where people cannot and will never be able to work from home but there are so many others where they can. It impacts in built-up suburban areas like in Dublin where so many people are caught up in congestion. However, as Members from more rural constituencies have pointed out, it also brings jobs and opportunities and keeps people in local communities. I have mentioned previously the practice of allowing software companies that have a lot of international employees to continue to set up shop in Dublin. They should be decentralised around the country, using broadband technology to be able to work from home or else use hubs and create the extra school places that are required. In the context of Dublin, people talk about the lack of opportunities for shops to stay open with people working from home. That is because planning is done badly. We need to actually build more houses in Dublin so people can actually live and work here and replace that type of commuter.

We are here today to debate a Bill with the right to remote work in its Title but a title alone does not make it a right. It is being sold as a right to flexible and remote work and I do not believe it is. In all other countries I am aware of, remote work arrangements depend on employer-employee agreements or specific conditions in law or regulation. Employers must consider the request, though they can still refuse for legitimate business reasons. I said this during the previous Labour Private Members' time on the same topic. What varies across countries is that there is a spectrum of how strong the reasons have to be for a business to refuse a request to work remotely. It is still, however, based on a right to request. The current legislation in place since 2024 could be strengthened but the entire premise of this Bill is that with the right legislation, we can force employers into it and I fear that is counterproductive. It risks entrenching them in pro-office views and never get to the economic, social and environmental impacts that remote work can deliver. I am sorry that I believe this Bill lacks innovation and misses the opportunity that remote work offers our workforce and our economy and that is to make Ireland a world leading centre for the rapidly growing remote-first sector, to get remote-first companies set up in Ireland, for remote companies to recruit here in Ireland and the halo effect that would have on our workplace culture. For a country that excels in jobs strategies through IDA Ireland, Enterprise Ireland and our local enterprise offices, this is the next big channel for us to leverage. I am talking about full PAYE employment, bound to Irish taxes and pensionable, with career progression, but not bound to a physical location. Grow Remote reports there are over 100,000 remote jobs advertised in Europe every month with salaries averaging nearly €20,000 higher than in Ireland's five lowest-income counties. We should be talking about national targets to win those jobs for Ireland and to benefit communities all over the country; building the infrastructure to support and sustain those targets; using the National Training Fund to build a pipeline of talent through programmes that develop remote work skills for workers, managers and leaders; expanding supports for existing companies that make remote and hybrid stick; and scaling community programmes to continue to connect remote workers on a local level. It is time for the next step. We need a much bigger step than we had before; a new national strategy at scale that will have the halo-effect that we need.

Gabhaim buíochas le gach duine a bhí ag caint faoin mBille seo. Nuair a bhí mé sa Chathaoir, bhí mé ag éisteacht le gach duine. Bhí go leor daoine ag caint faoin trácht agus rudaí atá sa saol faoi láthair, go háirithe i mBaile Átha Cliath thuaidh. Bím i gcónaí ag caint le daoine. I commend Deputy Lawlor on the work he has put into this Bill. It is good to know he is not just a good opera singer; he is also a real legislator. I welcome what the Minister said and for that reason, I will vote with the Government and opposing the Bill. My constituency is in north Dublin and I was speaking to one of my own staff members in the Oireachtas last night. When someone with a disability who commutes to work starts to work, the review of their travel pass needs to be changed because we should not be penalising people with disabilities for working. There is an impact on their mental health when they get out, go into Dublin and then have their travel pass removed when they go to work. That needs to be changed. I have raised it consistently in this House and I would love it to be looked at again. With the cost of disability and everything they are facing at the moment, that is something that needs to be highlighted. When people are commuting from north Dublin, there are pinch points for people in their cars and people with disabilities who cannot get public transport. There are some I have constantly raised in East Wall. It is one of the big arteries into the city centre. With the change to the traffic flow, if someone is turning right, it creates an entire bottleneck. I would love that to be changed. The other is on the main road. I said this yesterday to the Taoiseach. People are commuting to work from Baldoyle or Bayside. If someone is turning right up to St. Anne's Park, the entire bottleneck happens again. We need infrastructure throughout the country that works hand in hand. We cannot be pitting cyclists and commuters in cars against each other. We must look at other cities that do it successfully. The installation of cycle paths should not impede and create bottlenecks in East Wall and on the main road. I have raised it again in this House and the real sense of urgency among local residents. Diversions are proposed again. I commend Labour and Deputy Lawlor on the Bill. There are constructive proposals and I encourage the Government to take them on board. With the review the Minister said the Department is bringing-----

Come over, comrade.

What are they saying?

Come aboard.

I will never join a party. The review the Minister said the Department is bringing are not only opposing works, they are also managing them and I welcome that. It is very important we listen to people with disabilities and address the issue I raised.

This Bill is framed as a progressive step towards modernising employment, yet it is a deeply flawed legislation that risks undermining productivity, weakening organisational cohesion and placing disproportionate burdens on the employer. While the intention behind the Bill may be admirable, its practical consequences are far from beneficial. First, the Bill seeks to erode workplace culture and long-term innovation. Organisations thrive on shared environments where ideas circulate freely. Turning remote work into a legal entitlement shifts the default away from collective spaces and towards isolated, individualised work patterns. That may feel empowering in the short term but it undermines the very fabric that makes companies resilient and dynamic. Second, the administrative burden this Bill imposes on employers is significant. Every request will be formally assessed, documented, justified and potentially appealed. This is not a trivial process. It diverts time, resources and managerial attention aware from core business activities. For small and medium-sized enterprises, already stretched thin, this becomes yet another layer of bureaucracy that slows decision making and increases operational costs. The Bill effectively treats employers as adversaries rather than partners in shaping flexible work arrangements. Finally, the Bill risks deepening inequality rather than reducing it. Remote work is far more accessible to white-collar professionals than for workers in manufacturing, healthcare, retail, logistics and countless other essential services. By elevating remote work to a legal right, the Bill creates a two tier workforce: those who can benefit from the entitlement and those who cannot. Instead of promoting fairness, it amplifies disparities and fosters resentment between groups whose working conditions are already vastly different. Finally, the Bill is not the balanced, forward-thinking legislation it claims to be. It imposes rigid rules on a diverse economy, burdens employers with unnecessary bureaucracy, weakens workplace cohesion and risks widening social and economic divides. Flexibility in work arrangements is indeed important but it must be achieved through co-operation, not compulsion. This Bill gets that balance very much wrong and for that reason, it should be firmly opposed.

I thank all Deputies for bringing forward this Bill and for their contributions. As outlined by the Minister of State, Deputy Dillon, the Government opposes the Bill. The position is grounded in balance to support flexibility for workers and competitiveness for business. Remote working is now well-established and is a feature of our modern labour market, improving work-life balance and shaping how we are as a people and live and work. The Government recognises its value and has already put in place one of the earliest legislative frameworks in the EU to support this. Our framework is comprehensive. In addition to the legislative right, employees and employers are supported and encouraged to utilise this right and comply with the legislation through a code of practice on remote working in addition to the code of practice on the right to disconnect. Through the work-life balance Act 2023, every employee in the State has a right to request remote working. No sector or occupation is excluded. Ireland has taken a leading role in establishing a clear and workable procedure governing these requests. There is a day one right to request remote working, which means that a worker can request this right on the very first day of their employment. If approved, the remote working arrangement can commence after the completion of six months continuous service on the part of the employee. This service requirement allows time for the employee and employer to build up an effective working relationship before commencing remote working arrangements. The Bill proposes to delete section 20(2) of the Act, thereby removing any service requirement. Especially in the light of what is effectively the full right to remote work also proposed in the Bill, this risks undermining the trust-based nature of arrangements between workers and employers, which can and are facilitating pragmatic and flexible remote working arrangements that work for both parties. In contrast, the current legislative framework strikes the right balance by ensuring that employees can access meaningful entitlements while employers retain the prerogative necessary to organise their operations effectively to improve productivity, competitiveness and secure operational viability. The Bill seeks to seriously, and in the Government's view, adversely alter this framework by creating an entitlement to remote work, unless deemed not reasonably practical by the Government through legislation or by the WRC adjudication officers who, as appropriate to their role, have little or no detailed knowledge of business operations. Essentially, the Bill would place the ultimate decision-making power in the hands of a third party without direct knowledge of the business's day-to-day requirements. It is a position of the Government that the proposal could have negative impact on employee-employer relations, business viability, competitiveness and productivity, particularly for small and medium sized enterprises which operate on very tight profit margins. It is the objective of the Government to foster a competitive business environment, alongside strong employee protections, to ensure Ireland continues to develop into a great place to work and live. We do not believe this proposal would contribute to that goal. It is also important to emphasise the legislation underpinning remote work has been in operation for less than two years. Despite this short period, remote working has become deeply embedded. CSO data shows that almost 1 million people now work from home at least some of the time, with over half a million people working remotely more than half of the week. These trends demonstrate that remote working is succeeding under the existing framework. I reiterate that the Government is currently finalising a statutory review of the review of the remote working provisions of the work-life balance Act. We must not pre-empt the outcome of the review process. Introducing legislative amendments at this point would be hasty and short-sighted. For these reasons, the Government must oppose the Bill. Our objective remains clear: to support flexible working arrangements that work for employees and employers while safeguarding the operational needs of employers to run competitive, productive and viable businesses. We are continuously working towards the objective through a number of cross-government streams. As mentioned by the Minister of State earlier, the Government continues the national rollout of high-speed fibre broadband to enable remote working across Ireland, as well as the provision of funding for connected hubs and tax relief for remote working expenses. This year, we also expect to receive the findings of NESC's research into the evolution and important impact of remote and hybrid working in Ireland. Along with the working in Ireland survey, this will inform evidence-based policymaking in the area of remote working in the coming years. In addition to remote working, workers can also explore other forms of flexible working, such as part-time working and flexible working arrangements for parents and carers, to improve their work-life balance or to enable them to enter the workforce. A code of practice and access to part-time working was recently approved by the Minister of State and placed on statute. The Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act also provides the right to request a flexible working to parents and carers. The Minister, Deputy Foley, will undertake a statutory review of the flexible working provisions of this Act later this year. We will continue to support and promote remote working and flexible working right across Government. However, this support and promotion must be measured as well as balanced, taking into the account the needs of both employees and employers to ensure a competitive business environment, alongside strong and forceful protections for all of our employers.

I thank my colleague Deputy George Lawlor for raising this very important workers' rights issue. I listened in disbelief to the Minister of State earlier and just now I listened to the Minister as well as they outlined the Government's opposition to this Bill. The Minister of State said "allowing employees to request remote work keeps a fair balance". The only fair balance here is for the employer.

Hear, hear.

Has the Government not been monitoring the WRC cases on their legislation? It is crazy that the Government would consider a right to request that is simply not working as fair. How out of touch can it be with the thousands of workers in this country who can work from home, but given what has happened in the WRC, are simply not in a position to put additional pressure on themselves and their families by taking a case? That is what is happening. I recently tabled a motion on commuter chaos. That, too, was opposed by Government. That motion included simple solutions to try to improve the work-life balance of thousands of commuters and their families, yet Government opposed it. Is Government totally opposed to the work-life balance of those who are commuting and can work from home in a hybrid or flexible way? The legislation that my colleague has brought forward does not give carte blanche to remote work. It will not force anybody into remote work. It will not erode workplace culture, as has been said by some speakers. It acknowledges that remote work is not for everybody and includes rights for employers to refuse remote work - a part of the Bill that has been acknowledged by some employer organisations. The Minister compared our right to request remote work with our colleagues across the EU. What he forgets, and maybe we should ask whether it was a deliberate attempt to forget, is that these countries have proper public transport. In many cases, they are subsidised by the state.

Hear, hear.

In many of these countries, these issues are dealt with through sectoral agreements and bargaining, which are, unfortunately, so absent in this country. The Minister goes on to say that over 8,000 people have taken part in the Government consultation. Does he think that this unprecedented response is a clap on the back for the Government policy? I assure him that this response, given the thousands that have contacted my party, is far from a clap on the back but rather a cry for help from a Government that simply is continuing to ignore workers in this country. The Minister mentioned CSO figures this morning. I ask to stand, maybe for a couple of hours on the M7-N7 and the M4-N4. Then he will get the figures that he needs to influence any debate on this legislation in this House. The Government should lead by example, yet a large percentage of the thousands of calls that we have received are from Government employees who for some reason, after years of remote work, are being called back to the office. Why is this the case? Is it to justify filling office space that a departmental concern was raised two months ago? State bodies are forcing workers back into the office. That is a fact. I have spoken recently with Grow Remote and as have colleagues in the House. I have listened to their experiences and the potential that this sector represents for this country. They have a very detailed training programme that could allay many of the fears that employers, and, indeed, the Members who have spoken on this Bill have raised. The Government should embrace that training and encourage it and work more closely with Grow Remote. Finally, I assure the thousands of workers who are leaving their rural communities, villages and towns to spend hours in traffic that the Labour Party is listening to them. It would seem today, from the entire Opposition, that it is also listening in to this debate and supporting those thousands of workers. It is a pity that Government has chosen to close its ears, once again, and is saying that there is nothing to see here. It is becoming the norm for Government. Maybe it is time for another pause and for Government to turn up its hearing aid.

I am proud that the Labour Party is bringing forward this Bill and I thank my colleague Deputy Lawlor for all his work on this. The Minister's rejection of our Bill speaks volumes of what the Government is about. Having listened to the answer provided by the Minister of State and the Minister, we know clearly what the outcome of the review will be at the end of this year: nothing to see here, all is fine, move on. The Government, five years ago, had a bit of backbone in reluctantly recognising that advancing workers' rights was good for workers and good for their workplaces, families and communities. It was a Government that recognised there was a mutual benefit from affording workers decent and basic rights, in legislating for sick pay and in publishing a remote work strategy that recognised all that remote work opportunities could bring to locations across this country and bringing more people into our workplace, and in commissioning research on early pregnancy loss and its impact on women and on the workplace. Even the Taoiseach talked about introducing minimum pay for construction apprentices. All we have seen from the Government, since 2023, is a back-pedalling and retreat to a culture of distrust of workers and a failure to recognise that any gains to workers might make them more productive and better in their workplaces. This Government has disgracefully abandoned the expansion in the number of sick days to ten. That was promised by the previous Government. There has been neither sight nor sound of the sub-minimum national minimum wages and the outrageous situation where adults are effectively paid as children in workplaces. The Government hypocritically laments the lack of construction labour, yet does not do anything about construction pay, and in respect of the Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, we only have to look at the WRC cases over the past two years to see that, in the words of one employment lawyer, the legislation is a "toothless tiger". With 72 cases taken, 12 found against and one found for, we need not see anything more. The reality is that if you do not have a child under the age of 12, access to remote and flexible work arrangements remains a perk for good behaviour in this country, and that you have to be in the workplace for six months. It means that access to remote and flexible work is down to luck, rank or pay. Of course, we know that on average the better paid employees are, the higher the rank, the greater the autonomy and the greater the possibility of accessing remote and flexible work arrangements. We feel passionate in the Labour Party about levelling the playing field in workers' rights and ensuring that every worker, where it is appropriate to their job, is afforded a real right to flexible and remote work. We feel really strongly that if the Government is serious about cutting emissions from commuting, if it is concerned about getting more disabled people into the workplace and if it is concerned about lone parents and getting them into the workplace and ensuring greater gender equality, the answers are staring the Minister in the face. Our Bill is about keeping more workers in full-time employment. There is an irony here that between 2020 and 2021 there was actually an increase in the number of women in full-time employment. We all know the reasons for that. They were working from home and they were able to get the balance right. Our Bill is about recognising the enormous inequality, particularly for young workers, that is being perpetrated by this Government in that workers cannot buy or rent homes close to their workplaces. They are having to live many miles away and commute for hours every day just to get to their work. It is about opening up workplaces to people who face enormous barriers trying to access the labour market. Ireland has a shameful record in having the highest number of jobless lone parents and jobless disabled persons compared with every other EU member state. We have had words, strategies and all sorts of actions from Government over the years that have amounted to nothing and yet there is a piece of work that could be done in the workers' rights space in affording people access to remote and flexible work from day one of employment and this Government has refused to do that. It is about reducing emissions. Of course, we see the disaster. The Government has not even bothered to issue its climate action plan. The Government cannot, because it is at sixes and sevens as to what to prioritise at present, yet transport is the second highest emitter. If we are serious about climate action and reducing emissions, we have to get more people off our roads, ensure less congestion in the communities that I represent and ensure that workers have flexible and remote working arrangements. I thank all my colleagues here who have been fighting for this, not only this year but over the past four years since the Labour Party started talking about it. While there were real signs of positivity in 2020, and I recall the then Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, talking about the potential of remote work but that has all since retreated. It is regrettable that this Government is so narrow-minded and insular with regards to all the opportunities that remote and flexible work can afford.

In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed until the weekly division time this evening.