Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 24 Nov 1955

Vol. 153 No. 8

Committee on Finance. - Social Welfare (Temporary Provisions) Bill, 1955—Committee and Final Stages.

Question proposed: "That Section 1 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Kennedy

I suggest to the Minister now on the Committee Stage that he change the wording of Section 1 to read as follows:—

Where a person is entitled to a pension under the Old Age Pensions Acts, 1908 to 1955, in respect of the week commencing on the 23rd day of December, 1955, any amount payable to him in respect of that pension for that week shall be increased by a sum of £1 4s.

I differ from the Minister inasmuch as he says he does not stand for a means test; I stand for a means test in all pensions because of our economic position, the smallness of the island on which we live, the main occupation of our people and the small farms on which they live, together with the frugal means of existence that exist for the majority of the people. But I make that suggestion to the Minister now, in relation to Section 1, on the principle that he has taken us to task on our small allowance of 1/6. We will stick to that figure. I say to him that, when we gave the 1/6, we gave it to every category in receipt of an old age pension. On that basis, I suggest to him now that he change the wording to read "£1 4s. 0d." instead of "a sum equal to that amount"—a sum equal to what they now get. The Minister is silent!

Mr. Corish

I replied to Deputy Bartley on the same point a few minutes ago.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 2.

Question proposed: "That Section 2 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Kennedy

On Section 2, I suggest to the Minister that the same principle obtain—that he change the wording to "an amount equal to £1 2s. 6d." per week. I will not repeat the argument.

Mr. Corish

Neither will I.

Mr. Briscoe

When I was speaking on the Second Stage, I think the Minister challenged me to quote the Tánaiste.

Mr. Corish

I did not. I asked the Deputy if he had the quotation.

Mr. Briscoe

I have it now. At column 75 of Volume 153 of the Official Report the Tánaiste said:—

"We accept that as the average consumption in respect of that class in the community and we arrive at a situation in which for them the increase in the price of tea will represent an additional charge of 6d. per week approximately."

That is a definite statement from the Tánaiste that in his estimation, on the advice he had, the average increased cost per person in the class to which this Bill refers would be 6d. per week. He goes on to say:—

"The Government have been most anxious to see, therefore, what could be done, as evidence of their goodwill, of their sympathetic understanding of the difficulties of these people, as evidence of their desire to help them, to shelter them from the impact of this increase in tea prices and they have decided that it will give to these persons, that is, to old age pensioners, widows, blind persons and long duration disability benefit recipients, a compensatory payment..."

Mr. Corish

Of their basic allowance.

Mr. Briscoe

——of their basic allowance, but all through it the intention was, and it was understood, that they would have 6d. per week, because he goes on further:—

"...of their basic allowance in one single payment which will offset the additional cash cost in one year of the increased price of tea..."

The Tánaiste definitely says that the compensation will equal the additional cost which he assesses at 6d. per week. There is no getting away from that. It is there in black and white. He goes on further:—

"...on the assumption that the increase reaches 2/- per lb., which it need not do. The result of that will be that 160,000 old age pensioners will get that benefit.

Mr. Lemass: Sixpence a week?"

That is the 6d. per week to which the Tánaiste had referred earlier.

"Mr. Norton: Twenty-eight thousand widows will get that benefit."

Here the Minister for Social Welfare interjects and says:—

"Mr. Corish: It represents £250,000.

Mr. Norton: Six thousand blind persons will get it and 18,000 long duration disability benefit recipients will also participate."

Nobody reading that part of the Tánaiste's speech could take any interpretation from it other than that everybody was going to get the full compensation for the impact of the increased cost of tea. Now the tea did not go up 2/-; it went up by 2/4.

Mr. Corish

I am glad the Deputy has come down on somebody's 2/8 anyhow. We are improving.

Mr. Briscoe

As far as I know. It certainly was in excess of 2/-. It is at least 2/4. However, we will not quarrel about that. Now, in view of that statement, does the Minister think he is doing justice to the Tánaiste's and the Government's promise by giving the same people an increase of less than 2d. per week as compensation for the impact of the increased cost of tea? That is the position. But that is not what was understood. I do not know whether it is what was intended. I take it the statement was made with the best intentions. It certainly is not now working out on the basis as suggested. I think the Minister ought to amend Section 2 in order to bring better compensation to the people. There should be an increase to the figure suggested by Deputy Kennedy.

Mr. Corish

I do not know what words mean at all, if they do not mean what Deputy Norton says.

Mr. Briscoe

What did he say?

Mr. Corish

The Bill is designed to effect exactly what he said. I am quoting the very same words as Deputy Briscoe quoted.

Mr. Briscoe

Quote them all.

Mr. Corish

Let me quote from columns 75-76 of the Official Debates:—

"...they have decided that it will will give to these persons, that is, to old age pensioners, widows, blind persons and long duration disability benefit recipients, a compensatory payment of their basic allowance..."

That means that the old age pensioner in receipt of 9/- will get compensation to the extent of 9/-. I do not think that could be any clearer.

Mr. Briscoe

The Minister has not quoted column 75 at all, but column 76.

Mr. Corish

It has been described as columns 75-76. Deputy Briscoe should be able to trace it, as he used it.

Mr. Briscoe

Column 75 is not included in that statement.

Mr. Corish

Are we agreed that compensation will take the form of a compensatory payment of their basic allowance?

Mr. O'Leary

They are only trying to delay it.

Mr. Corish

And which will offset the additional cash cost of the tea.

Mr. Briscoe

Does he not include that?

Mr. Corish

It is a matter of opinion whether it will compensate them or not. The Deputy may differ from me on that. What is in this Bill is what was promised by Deputy Norton, the Tánaiste.

Mr. Briscoe

I will not accept that. It certainly leaves room for very grave doubts.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 3 and 4 agreed to.

SECTION 5.

Question proposed: "That Section 5 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Briscoe

Would the Minister answer the point I put?

Mr. Corish

On the numbers?

Mr. Briscoe

On the duration of the Bill.

Mr. Corish

It is only intended for this year.

Mr. Briscoe

That is right.

Mr. Corish

That does not necessarily mean that either I or this Government will do anything to take away any rights in money or otherwise from the old age pensioner.

Mr. Briscoe

Will the Minister not reintroduce this Bill for next Christmas?

Question put and agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment and received for final consideration.

Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

Mr. O'Leary

They would hold up the Bill until after Christmas, if they could.

Mr. Kennedy

We are not going to be shouted down.

Mr. O'Leary

Pass it now.

Mr. Kennedy

At column 75 of Volume 153 of the Official Debates, Deputy Norton, the Tánaiste, said:—

"We accept that as the average consumption in respect of that class in the community and we arrive at a situation in which for them the increase in the price of tea will represent an additional charge of 6d. per week approximately. It may be less, but it certainly will not be more—it will be in that vicinity."

That is the sentence in the Tánaiste's speech which conveyed the idea to the House and the general public that the old age pensioners, the widows and orphans and the ordinary people mentioned in this Bill would get an increase of 6d. a week. Our complaint against this Bill is that there is a rigid application of the means test. We stand for a means test in all social services but there is too rigid an application of the means test in this Bill. The 6d. a week has not been given in this Bill to a number of people, namely, recipients of old age pensions, widows and orphans and long-term disability recipients.

The Bill is niggardly. It has not followed the principle of the Bill produced by Fianna Fáil where a flat increase of 1/6 was given. I got up to make that point clear and I think I have made it fairly clear.

Mr. Corish

The Deputy should remember that this Social Welfare Bill is not in the same nature as a Bill that would provide for a weekly increase. Neither I nor the Government would depart from the principle followed out in respect of increases to old age pensioners. When we gave the increase of 2/6 per week on 29th July, it was applied to all classes. That principle was not departed from and it is not intended to depart from it.

This is a Bill to provide compensation for certain people in receipt of social welfare benefits to offset the expected increase in the price of tea. The Tánaiste promised that we would compensate them to the amount of the weekly amount they will receive. That is exactly what is being done.

Deputy Kennedy describes this as a niggardly Bill, which reminds me of something which I forgot to mention. The maximum even in this Bill is not 24/-. A sick man who has 24/- a week sickness or disability benefit and who has a wife and an allowance for her to the extent of 12/- will, on this particular date before Christmas, receive an extra 36/-. I do not know exactly what the members of the Opposition are trying to get at, or whether they are trying to play down this Bill for the purpose of the Limerick by-election or some other purpose. We were threatened with the Limerick by-election in the course of this discussion, but let me come back to the main point. We are compensating these people to the extent of £253,000. That is no mean sum, especially when we remember the refusals we got from Fianna Fáil when they were in Government when we advocated certain small increases in social welfare benefits. I do not think the record in respect to increases in old age, blind and widows' pensions in the last 12 months has been too bad, to say the least of it.

Question put and agreed to.