Ollie Crowe
Industrial and Commercial Panel · Fianna Fáil · Ireland
“It establishes an AI office of Ireland as a strong independent institution at the centre of our AI regulatory system and empowers our competent authorities with the investigative and sanctioning tools they need.”
“This new office will have an important role to play in addressing those concerns and enhancing AI literacy across a wide range of areas, including in businesses. Ireland has been a tech leader for many years.”
“We need to ensure that we are prepared as effectively as possible for all those outcomes and this office will be an important resource in meeting that challenge. As the Minister of State is aware, Article 73 of the AI Act requires our competent authorities to have adequate technical, financial and human resources.”
“I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, to the Chamber this evening. Fianna Fáil welcomes and supports this Bill which as the Minister of State outlined will give effect in Ireland to the EU Artificial Intelligence Act and establish the domestic enforcement architecture necessary to ensure the world's first comprehensive AI regulat…”
“I welcome the Minister of State's confirmation that this power is limited and constrained, and does not extend to the key functions, the findings of the adjudicator, the determination of administrative sanctions or the role of the courts. That is a welcome and important clarification. I welcome the Bill.”
“I raise the proposal reforms to the criminal legal aid scheme, which are due to come into effect on 1 July. As Members are aware, strike action began in courts across the country in recent days and is expected to continue today and tomorrow.”
The complete record
Every one of 221 lines we hold for Ollie Crowe, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 5.
“Over time, however, it became clear that the law did not fully cover every situation required under EU law, particularly where an employer ceases trading but does not enter a formal insolvency process. This gap created uncertainty and, in some cases, hardship. Employees could find themselves in a situation where their employer had, effectively, shut down and wages were unpaid, but because no formal insolvency step had been taken, those employees were unable to access the State scheme. Obviously, this is an unjust situation for any employee to be in and it needed to be addressed by legislation, which this Bill does. The primary change this Bill will provide for is to give effect to the Supreme Court judgment in which the court found Ireland had not fully transposed Directive 2008/94/EC, which protects employees' pay-related entitlements.”
“I welcome the Minister of State to the Chamber this afternoon. Fianna Fáil welcomes and supports this Bill, which will make changes to the insolvency payments scheme that protects employees' pay-related entitlements if their employer becomes insolvent. As the Minister of State outlined, the Bill strengthens the safety net for employees when their employer goes out of business. It ensures that workers are not left without pay or legal remedies simply because a company collapses in an unexpected or irregular way. Under existing legislation, the Protection of Employees (Employers' Insolvency) Act 1984, employees can claim certain unpaid entitlements, such as wages, holiday pay and some statutory awards from the State's insolvency payment scheme when an employer becomes formally insolvent, for example, through liquidation or receivership.”
“For the main ISA schemes, the incentive is the improvement the tax liability. Canada has a scheme under which $7,000 can be invested each year in products linked to the stock market, with tax-free returns, and also a separate retirement savings plan. Sweden offers an investment savings account with generous tax-free limits and low tax on the remainder. If we are going to have a scheme that encourages investment in stocks, it is vital we do a significant educational campaign because only a small percentage of people in Ireland invest in this way. There are obviously a wide range of options as to how the scheme will be designed. It would be helpful if the Tánaiste could find time to come to the House for a debate on the topic before the scheme is announced.”
“I raise the issue of the new savings scheme which the Tánaiste said this week will come before Government in the coming months. This is a hugely positive move. Anything that can be done to build awareness of such a scheme among people from all financial backgrounds should be welcomed. As members will be aware, there are a number of countries which have schemes that may be worth examining. In the UK, for example, the individual savings accounts, ISAs, allow savers to put a maximum of €20,000 away each year with returns not liable for tax on interest or on investment gains, and no requirement to disclose them in a tax return. A government top-up is available for special so-called lifetime ISAs, through which people can save to buy their first home or for retirement.”
“We will not oppose the Bill and we will work to ensure that any changes strengthen both staff protection and the integrity of the education system as a whole. Supporting educators when they are harmed while doing their job is not controversial; it just must be done.”
“If paid leave needs to align more closely with medical certification, that should be examined. If medical costs require clearer coverage, that should also be examined. If psychological supports need stronger statutory footing, that needs to be done. If language within the scheme can be improved to better reflect compassion and dignity, that too should be examined. Our teachers and SNAs work in increasingly complex environments. They do so with professionalism, patience and care. When they are injured in the line of duty, fairness must be the guiding principle. This Bill allows us to have that discussion in a structured way. It allows us to consider whether the balance between protection, sustainability and prevention is correctly struck. Fianna Fáil will engage constructively.”
“Alongside this, the occupational health strategy, including the 24-hour employee assistance service and access to counselling, provides important supports. However, the existence of support structures does not negate the need to review whether the assault leave scheme itself remains fit for purpose. Fianna Fáil will not oppose this Bill because it provides an opportunity to review and, where appropriate, strengthen the framework. The Department has already commenced a review of the scheme in consultation with education partners, including unions and management bodies. Any changes must be agreed through that process and approved within the public expenditure framework. That is responsible governance. Responsible governance also means listening, examining the evidence and ensuring that policy reflects the lived realities in schools today.”
“In rare but serious cases where a staff member cannot return to work due to permanent injury, early retirement provisions may need to be examined to ensure fairness and dignity. These are not radical proposals. They are grounded in workplace equity. Recent publicly reported data indicates a significant increase in assault-related leave in recent years, including a marked rise since 2022 and hundreds of cases in a single year. That trend demands a measured response. It is important to remember that boards of management are the legal employers of teachers and SNAs and have statutory obligations under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005. Risk assessments, safety statements and preventative measures must remain central. The Health and Safety Authority has oversight responsibilities in this area.”
“At present, the scheme does not cover medical expenses arising from an assault. Many believe that where an injury is sustained in the course of employment, the injured staff member should not be left covering upfront medical costs. In addition, there is a strong case for ensuring structured access to psychological and specialist supports as a core part of the response, not simply as an add-on. Another consistent concern is parity between teachers and SNAs, as SNAs, particularly at primary level, are frequently at the front line in supporting pupils with high care needs. Any scheme must treat teachers and SNAs equally and transparently. The principle of equal treatment is fundamental. There is also the difficult question of long-term incapacity.”
“The existing leave of absence following assault scheme provides three months, or 92 days, of paid leave in a rolling four-year period. It is extendable, in exceptional circumstances, to a maximum of six months, or 183 days, at full pay. Any additional absence reverts to the sick leave scheme. When introduced, this was a meaningful recognition that assault-related injury is not ordinary illness. However, concerns have been raised that the fixed time limits do not always align with medical certification. If a staff member is medically unfit to return to work beyond the current threshold, there is an argument that paid leave should reflect the full certified recovery period, rather than automatically reverting to standard sick leave provisions. There is also the issue of immediate costs.”
“We must also acknowledge the difficult truth that injuries occur, including bruising, biting, hair pulling, physical strikes and, in some cases, far more serious harm requiring hospital treatment. For a small but important number of staff, the consequences are not short term. Some are living with long-term or even permanent injuries. Others experience psychological trauma, including anxiety and post-traumatic stress, whether from being assaulted or witnessing serious incidents involving colleagues. This debate is not about blame. The vast majority of educators are deeply committed to the pupils they support. They are the first to say that children, particularly those with additional needs, must never be stigmatised. However, recognising the complexity of the classroom cannot mean minimising the impact on staff when injuries occur.”
“I welcome the Minister, Deputy Naughton, to the Chamber. I especially welcome Sophie, Shane and everybody in the Gallery. Senator Shane Curley cannot be here this evening, so I will speak on this topic. The Senator was a teacher prior to his election last year and I spoke to him while preparing these words in order to benefit from his extensive experience in the sector. I have also spoken to teachers and SNAs, particularly those in special education settings. The picture they describe is clear: the demands of the job have intensified and the number of incidents involving injury to staff has increased significantly in recent years. We are talking about professionals who go to work every day to support children, many of whom have complex additional needs, and do so with enormous dedication and compassion.”
“However, I would like to see Ireland lead on addressing the reciprocal royalties issue and take the opportunity the EU Presidency provides to do so.”
“Obviously, as the Minister and Members will appreciate, that is a significant income drop for anyone, including artists. Given Ireland's reputation for the arts and culture, it would make sense for this to be a priority action for Ireland during our EU Presidency later this year. We are well positioned to win support across member states on this topic and we have no shortage of capable arts advocates who would be willing to share their stories and explain why we need to address this. I am a little surprised it has not already been done, given that the court decision was almost six years ago at this stage. I invite the Minister to give his views on this matter. This Bill is welcome and needed. It will ensure that Irish copyright legislation is compliant with our international obligations and compliant with EU law.”
“Historically, EU member states were able to address this by simply taking a reciprocal approach and limiting payments to performers from countries that did not treat EU artists equally. However the court ruled that EU member states could no longer take that action on their own as this is an area of law where there is a collective European approach. The decision to take reciprocal action must be done at an EU level. The court’s decision causes an obvious unfairness in the absence of European action in this area, as the result is that EU countries must now share royalty payments more broadly with non-EU performers, even when the same does not apply to EU performers in non-EU countries. This has resulted in significant income losses according to research, with Dutch performers indicating a 16% drop in income.”
“The legal framework in terms of copyright and intellectual property is strengthened and clarified by this Bill which helps the creative sector and will aid the sector in continuing to make a substantial contribution to the Irish economy as a whole. As the Minister will be aware, one of the major issues which came from the 2020 European Court of Justice case I referenced earlier and which has continued to generate debate during the progress of this Bill is that of royalties from non-EU countries. The court ruled that EU member states must pay royalties to performers and producers from non-EU countries if those countries are signed up to certain international copyright treaties. The difficulty arises where some of these non-EU countries, most notably the United States, do not fully pay equivalent royalties to EU performers in return.”
“As Members will be aware, Ireland has a fantastic reputation across the globe for the arts. We want to ensure that continues to be the case and we continue to encourage creativity to blossom in this country. As the Minister has said previously, the sector makes a very significant contribution to the Irish economy. Arts Council research published last year showed that the total spend associated with attending arts events in Ireland is over €1.5 billion annually. This includes a significant indirect economic benefit. Beyond direct ticket sales, an additional €664 million is spent in the broader economy on services related to arts events including in hotels, restaurants and bars across the country.”
“I thank the Minister, Deputy Burke, for joining us this afternoon in the Chamber. Fianna Fáil welcomes and supports this Bill, the purpose of which, as the Minister outlined, is to address a gap in the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000, as amended, due to the incorrect transposition of an EU copyright directive. The gap was identified following a European Court of Justice decision delivered in September 2020 and a subsequent High Court decision in February 2021. The case was essentially about the distribution of royalty payments earned from users of recorded music between music producers and performers. It is a short Bill but it is an important area. It is essential that we have an effective and fair legal framework in place to support copyright and intellectual property.”
“We need to enhance our legislation and such revenue should be confiscated and redistributed to those who can show they were the victims of these crimes. It is clear that under current legislation, these social media companies are not making a sufficient effort to stop these ads and they will only do so when laws are introduced that make a real impact on their bottom line. I would be grateful if the Deputy Leader raised this matter with the Minister for justice.”
“I want to raise the issue of the research published by Revolut this week that estimated that social media platforms earned €32 million from serving scam advertisements to Irish users in 2025. Those who fall victim to such scams in Ireland tend to lose approximately €1,500 and Irish users are seeing over 160 scam ads per month. There is also the psychological effect on victims to consider, as they tend to suffer from a loss of confidence and a lack of certainty. The Revolut report concluded that these platforms should invest resources in better detection systems in order to ensure their reputation is not damaged, but these social media platforms are the source of these crimes and it does not seem just that, for their hosting, they should be taking tens of millions of euros as a result.”
“As I have said more broadly, it is unacceptable that such major infrastructural projects are stuck in the planning system for years. I ask the Leader of the House to raise the issue with Ministers and ask them to come to the House to discuss how planning reform will change that.”
“Clearly it is needed because how long this process is taking and how much frustration it is causing for all stakeholders involved beggars belief. The Galway Chamber of Commerce this week said that the continuing traffic gridlock is limiting the growth of Galway and threatening further inward investment. That would certainly be my understanding and I believe it has done that for some time, particularly with regard to multinationals establishing a base in Ireland for the first time. I am led to believe that Galway's traffic chaos has been a significant negative in such cases over the last number of years and other cities have benefited as a result. I do not think anyone is saying that the ring road alone will solve all our traffic woes, but it is a significant and much-needed part of the solution.”
“I raise the issue of the Galway city ring road and the urgent need for clarity on whether it will be granted planning permission. As Members will be aware, this saga has been going on for decades, during which time the other major cities of the country have all seen significant upgrades to their roads infrastructure. Galway remains reliant on the same limited road network it relied on 40 years ago, which results in gridlock across the city on a daily basis. The most recent revised planning application was made in 2023. It is now 2026 and we are being told that a decision can be expected in the coming months. It is absolute insanity that a major infrastructural priority has been stuck in the planning process since 2023. I know the Government has prioritised reform in the area.”
“The European Commission is investigating, which is welcome, but it is important for the Government to take swift and decisive action on this matter to make it clear that such illegal or harassing content will not be tolerated for a moment. I know the Attorney General and the Minister for justice are examining whether the established legal framework is sufficiently robust to protect people from digital harms like these. It is vital that works move quickly and that legislation is brought forward immediately if needed. This is a sensitive topic which has affected a significant number of women, especially, across the country already.”
“Timely and effective implementation will reinforce Ireland's commitment to responsible AI development and strengthen Ireland's position as a centre of regulatory excellence. A whole-of-government approach remains essential. Ireland's strategic role makes this legislation significant. As we have heard, effective AI Act implementation supports competitiveness and Ireland's attractiveness as a location for innovation by providing a coherent regulatory framework. As Ireland prepares for the 2026 EU Presidency, maintaining momentum is vital. There are serious concerns about AI and privacy or illegal content. We have seen this become a major issue in recent weeks with the controversy about Twitter, or X, as it is now named.”
“In seeking to maximise the potential of AI, we must also ensure appropriate safeguards for its use are in place, as would be needed with any resource. Members will be aware that budget 2026 secured €1.5 million in start-up funding to establish the AI office of Ireland by August 2026. I believe that office will be essential in ensuring safe, suitable usage. As the Minister of State outlined, it will co-ordinate EU AI Act implementation, promote transparent and safe AI adoption, and oversee a national AI regulatory sandbox where innovators can test solutions with compliance experts. The regulation of artificial intelligence Bill 2026 is an important step in this area and is required to fully implement and enforce the EU AI Act in Ireland.”
“As the Minister of State has outlined, the national digital and AI strategy is currently being reviewed and updated to ensure it is appropriate in the goals and ambitions it sets out. The updated strategy will include a number of priority targets to drive effective adoption of digital and AI across the economy and society over the years ahead. The challenge of ensuring that SMEs have the resources required to build capacity should be a priority target. As we are all aware, SMEs are the backbone of the Irish economy across the country and every opportunity we have to provide better resources to those businesses needs to be fully taken. I am sure the Government will take the necessary measures relating to AI to ensure that happens.”
“I welcome the Minister of State. She is a regular visitor at this stage and is doing an excellent job. The Government has taken a logical approach to ensuring we maximise the use of AI to ensure we fully realise the benefits. As members will be aware, in 2025 the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, advanced significant AI policy initiatives related to the programme for Government's commitment to harness the digital and AI revolution for modern public services and economic growth. There is huge scope and potential for AI to transform how SMEs operate day to day. That will require resources and support so that these businesses and their staff have the necessary capacity to fully utilise AI.”
“I move: That Seanad Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion to which Article 20 of the Treaty on European Union relating to enhanced cooperation applies to establish enhanced cooperation as described in the draft Council Decision authorising enhanced cooperation on the establishment of a Loan for Ukraine, a copy of which was laid before Seanad Éireann on 21st January, 2026.”
“Given all of the above, the Government has advised that it is not appropriate to make such fundamental changes to the remuneration of young persons, apprentices and interns as proposed in this Bill.”
“A forthcoming consultation on apprenticeships is expected to yield evidence on wage levels, and on wage and training costs, and will inform the development of evidence-based policy on the remuneration of apprentices. The Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science plans to bring the next action plan for apprenticeships to Government for approval in 2026. This action plan will strive to further grow apprenticeship opportunities to meet the Government targets of 12,500 annual registrations by 2030. For interns, arrangements that may be described as internships are not defined by Irish legislation and the use of the word "intern" has no bearing on the determination of the employment of the individual engaged.”
“In January 2026, subminimum youth rates will increase by 4.8% in line with the planned increase in the national minimum wage. In relation to apprentices, it is long-standing policy that they are not covered by the minimum wage so as to promote and encourage employers to focus on training apprentices. When the national minimum wage was introduced in 2000, it was determined that apprentices should be excluded from the Act to promote and encourage employers to focus on training apprentices, while at the same time recognising the cost to employers in terms of time invested and productivity foregone. There are existing industrial relations structures for the negotiation of apprenticeship rates.”
“When talking about this issue, we must acknowledge the recent significant increases in the minimum wage, which show that the Government continues to commit to fair wages for the lower-paid workers in our economy, but also in the context of the Government's introduction of a range of measures to assist workers, including a statutory sick pay scheme, the right to request remote working and other supports. Subminimum youth rates are based on a percentage of the national minimum wage. When the minimum wage rises, young people on these rates see an increase in their wages. It is also important to highlight the very real progress we have made in raising the national minimum wage in recent years. Since 2020, the national minimum wage has increased by 33.7%, from €10.10 to today's rate of €13.50.”
“It stated that the Government will need to give its findings and recommendations detailed consideration and deliberation, and highlighted the potential need for the Government to take its own legal advice on the matter. It is important to acknowledge the challenges that the enterprise sector has faced over the past number of years. We know that the use of subminimum youth rates is largely concentrated in the accommodation, food and retail sectors. These sectors have reported facing considerable cost pressures. As part of the measures designed to bolster businesses' resilience and to support competitiveness, earlier this year, the Government agreed to defer a decision on subminimum rates until 2029.”
“Fianna Fáil welcomes this debate and, in line with the recommendation from Government, we will be opposing the Bill. As has been outlined, the Bill seeks to include young people, apprentices and interns within the full application of the National Minimum Wage Act 2015 and to extend entitlement to remuneration of the full national minimum wage to these groups. The National Minimum Wage Act allows for lower or subminimum rates of the minimum wage for employees aged 20 years and younger. Those aged less than 18 can be paid 70% of the full minimum wage rate, while those aged 18 or 19 years can be paid 80% and 90%, respectively, of the full rate. As has been outlined, the Low Pay Commission recommended the abolition of subminimum rates in March 2024. The commission highlighted in its report that this is a very complex issue.”
“I would be grateful if the Leader of the House would raise this with the Department of foreign affairs and the relevant Ministers.”
“Given the close economic ties between Ireland and the United States, with US companies employing 245,000 people in Ireland, this is obviously particularly important for us. Those economic ties have been built on free travel between our countries with very few restrictions. We must ensure that remains the case. It is important to note that currently, this is only a proposal. In the notice published regarding it, custom and border control said it would accept public comments on the proposal for the next 60 days before a final decision is made. Having said that, it is potentially a very damaging proposal. We need to use that timeframe for an EU response. It needs to be made clear at that level that this proposal is unworkable and illogical.”
“As Members will have seen, it was reported yesterday that the US customs and border protection is adding social media as a mandatory data element of the electronic system for travel authorisation applications which tourists from dozens of counties, including Ireland, require when travelling to the United States. The data element will require applicants to provide their social media for the last five years. The criteria as cited on the US federal register are so wide-ranging that tourists or business visitors could be stopped based simply on Facebook, Instagram or TikTok posts critical of the US. There has already been a great deal of criticism of this proposal and it is clearly warranted. This is a massive overreach from a country which has long prided itself on free speech.”
“I move: That Seanad Éireann approves the following Scheme in draft: Credit Institutions (Eligible Liabilities Guarantee) (Revocation) Scheme 2025, a copy of which was laid in draft form before Seanad Éireann on 2nd December, 2025.”
“Today the remaining obligations are outdated, unnecessary and fully replaced by stronger European rules. Revoking the schemes is not only logical; it is good regulatory practice, it reduces duplication and it reflects the stability that now exists in our banking sector. For these reasons, Fianna Fáil supports the motions to approve the Credit Institutions (Financial Support) (Revocation) Scheme 2025 and the Credit Institutions (Eligible Liabilities Guarantee) (Revocation) Scheme 2025.”
“The reporting requirements alone under the CRR are far more extensive than anything contained in these older schemes. Banks must report detailed financial, operational and risk data on a regular basis; they must comply with strict rules on remuneration, conduct and governance; and they remain fully subject to the obligations that come with being regulated entities in the EU banking system. In short, all the meaningful protections are still very much in place, and none of those protections depends on these now outdated guarantee schemes. The guarantee schemes introduced in 2008 and 2009 played an important role during a time of financial stress. They served their purpose well and helped safeguard the State's financial system at a critical moment. That moment, however, has passed.”
“Revoking the schemes will remove obligations that no longer have any purpose; eliminate duplication between outdated national requirements and the modern EU regulatory regime; provide clarity for the banks that the remaining legacy provisions from these guarantee schemes are now fully closed out; and support a cleaner, simpler regulatory framework. It is important to note that this does not in any way relax the oversight of Irish banks. The core prudential obligations that matter - those covering capital, liquidity, risk management, transparency and reporting - are all governed by EU legislation, including the capital requirements regulation and directive. These are comprehensive frameworks that apply to all credit institutions in the EU and are enforced by the Central Bank of Ireland.”
“The contractual obligations arising from the original guarantee agreements were formally released in 2022, and the broader European regulatory environment has completely changed since 2008. Despite this, however, some obligations contained in the schedules of these schemes technically remain in place for Bank of Ireland, AIB and Permanent TSB. These obligations relate to areas such as restructuring, board representation, commercial conduct, remuneration, transparency and reporting. While once necessary, all these requirements are now fully duplicated, and in many cases expanded on, by EU law and by the Central Bank's supervisory framework.”
“It guaranteed a wide range of bank liabilities for a two-year period and imposed strict obligations on banks that availed of the guarantee. Before CIFS expired in 2010, a second scheme, the ELG scheme, was developed. This scheme provided a more limited guarantee, mostly for deposits and certain types of bank debt. The ELG scheme was extended several times, and while it closed to new liabilities in 2013, guarantees remained in place until 2018. These schemes were essential at the time. They helped stabilise our banking system, maintain confidence and ensure that depositors and businesses had the security they needed during an economic crisis. Today all guaranteed liabilities under these schemes have expired.”
“I am speaking on this issue because Senator Casey is away in Brussels this week. Fianna Fáil supports these motions because they are practical, timely and necessary. They recognise how far our banking system has come since the global financial crisis and they remove obligations that are now outdated and fully replaced by modern European regulation. These schemes were created in 2008, when Ireland faced a financial emergency. Our banks were under severe pressure, and urgent action was needed to stabilise the system and protect depositors. The Oireachtas passed the Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Act 2008, giving the Minister for Finance the power to provide a State guarantee. This led to the CIFS scheme.”
“I move: That Seanad Éireann approves the following Scheme in draft: Credit Institutions (Financial Support) (Revocation) Scheme 2025, a copy of which was laid in draft form before Seanad Éireann on 2nd December, 2025.”
“This legislation is both welcome and needed. It reflects the changing demographics of the country, with people living longer lives than ever before. It provides people with the opportunity to continue to work and contribute to our strong economy if they so wish. It supports the long-standing policy to encourage and support longer and fuller working lives, where older people are facilitated in continuing in employment, if they so wish, until the age at which they can first access the State pension. I am happy to support the Bill and expect it will receive broad support in this House as it did in Dáil Éireann.”
“People are healthier than ever nowadays, with Ireland having a life expectancy of 82 years, one of the highest in Europe. Many are eager to continue working but are not able to do so due to a mandatory age limit. We are also much more aware now of the negative impact thatforced retirement can have on the mental health of those who wish to continue working. Wherever possible, we should allow people to have choice in this area and to make decisions based on their own capacity and their own personal circumstances. I appreciate that this is outside the scope of today’s Bill but with the Minister of State in the House, I wanted to take the opportunity to raise this issue. Thankfully, we are living in a period of full employment. Indeed, there are employers across the country who have positions they cannot fill.”
“As the Minister of State has said, this legislation will implement a key commitment included in the Government’s response to the Pensions Commission recommendations and implementation plan. What people want in the pensions area is certainty and clarity. They want to know what they will be entitled to and at what age it will be delivered. As the Minister of State noted, this is part of a broader package of pension reforms being rolled out by the Government. The provisions in this Bill are an important step in improving the predictability of retirement income for employees and helping to protect workers when they are approaching retirement. These reforms will enhance the clarity and certainty people are seeking when it comes to pensions. As part of those wider reforms, we should examine mandatory retirement ages in general.”
“I welcome the Minister of State to the Chamber this afternoon. I also welcome this legislation, which, as she outlined, will allow workers whose contract has a retirement age of 65 or under to work to the State pension age of 66, if they so wish. It will allow those who wish to bridge the income gap experienced by persons who are required to retire at an age lower than the age at which they can access the State pension to do so. Workers may still retire at 65 as per their contract if they so wish, but there are many people who are happy to continue to work for an extra year and this change in employment law will allow for this. A number of people in Galway city and beyond have raised this issue with me in recent years, so I am happy to see that this Bill will address it.”