asked the Minister for Finance the cost to the Exchequer of raising the incomes of persons living below the poverty line.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Poverty Level Figures.
17.
As the Deputy was informed in a reply to a question (No. 3) on 19th April last, there are no official statistics available which would enable an estimate of the kind sought by the Deputy to be made.
It might assist the Deputy, however, were I to point out that the 250 per cent increase in total social welfare expenditure since year ending March, 1973, is costing the Exchequer £197.3 million yearly. In pursuit of the Government's objective to relieve poverty the number of welfare beneficiaries has increased from 708,000 in March, 1973, to 949,000 now.
I take it the Minister has no figures for the poverty level? Apparently, the Taoiseach's Department have no figures for the poverty level. In view of the fact that a commission was set up to deal with the widespread poverty problems mentioned from time to time by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Welfare and of the comments recently made by the National Prices Commission—have these been brought to the Minister's attention?—could the Minister give some indication as to the number of people living below the poverty line?
The fact that the number now in receipt of welfare benefits has increased by 241,000 since March, 1973, is a clear indication that there are now fewer people below the poverty line than there were then.
The Minister may not be aware that there are more people below the poverty line now than in March, 1973. Can he give any indication of the Government's reaction to the National Prices Commission's comments regarding the vast number of people who are undernourished and unable to provide for themselves the type of diet necessary?
There are 241,000 people better off now than they were when Deputy Dowling's party were in control of the affairs of the country. The Deputy suffers from the great weakness of being unable to recognise the truth when he does not like it.
In view of the fact that the Department of Social Welfare have indicated that there is a very acute problem and that the Government of collective responsibility of the Coalition decided not so long ago that as the problem was widespread and acute they would set up a separate commission, can the Minister indicate now the number living below the poverty line?
The number living below the poverty line now is much less than in 1973——
How many?
The definition of poverty line, as the Deputy knows, is not a very scientifically calculated matter but the reality is that a greater proportion of our people are now in better circumstances than they used be and those who, through no fault of their own, are in some difficulty, are receiving greater assistance from the State than they received formerly. We are sure that we are going about the solution of this problem in the right way. It has to be done within available resources. We must generate the resources necessary to relieve human misery and difficulty. We have been very successful in relieving a great deal of human misery during a time of immense economic problems created by global forces. Now that we have moved away from that situation, it should be easier in the future to provide more relief than it has been in the past.
Could the Minister say whether in the 241,000 figure unemployment assistance recipients are also represented?
I can give a breakdown by a number of classifications but I have not precise figures in relation to unemployed. Certainly the number of unemployed people has increased. One reason why it has increased is that there has not been emigration over the past few years to relieve the pressure, a relief which used be available to our predecessors in office——
Would the Minister answer the question?
There are 1,800 additional persons in receipt of maternity allowance; 7,200 in receipt of invalidity pension; 18,500 in receipt of retirement pension. All these are additional figures. An additional 17,900 are in receipt of old age contributory pensions; an additional 7,430 in receipt of widows' and orphans' pensions; an additional 5,300 in receipt of deserted wife's benefit which was not in existence in 1973; an additional 48,200 in receipt of old age non contributors pensions, an additional 1,189 in receipt of deserted wife's allowance; an additional 8,268 in receipt of unmarried mothers' allowance which was not in existence in 1973. There are 3,625 in receipt of single women's allowance which did not exist in 1973 and there are 644 in receipt of prisoner's wife's allowance which did not exist in 1973. This clearly points to the validity of my statement that there are now 241,000 people in receipt of welfare benefit and, therefore, saved from sinking below the poverty line now compared with 1973.
Has the Minister admitted that in that number there are unemployment assistance recipients?
Of course, there are.
That is what I wanted to get from the Minister.
Would the Deputy like to name any country in the world other than the OPEC States where there are not more people unemployed?
There are none as high as ours, with such a bad record.
No country in the world inherited such a high figure of unemployment as we did when we went into office in 1973.
And you made it twice as bad.
I suggest the Deputy has lost the argument and should leave the matter rest.
(Interruptions.)
A final question.
In view of the fact that it has been stated that 125,000 are living below the poverty line, what steps are the Government taking to ensure that these people will have at least a reasonable standard of living?
We shall pursue the policies which we have successfully pursued during a time of great global stress over the past four years. Some time between now and next February we shall receive a vote of confidence from the Irish people to persist in these policies.
Will there be any relief in the meantime for these 125,000 people?
The Government having relieved 241,000 in years of immense global difficulty, the 125,000 should have no difficulty in being looked after.
Order.