Deputy O'Connell reported progress on the Supplementary Estimate.
Vote 49: Social Welfare.
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £21,700,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1977, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Social Welfare, for certain services administered by that office, for payments to the Social Insurance Fund, and for sundry grants.
—(Minister for Social Welfare.)
Deputy O'Connell concluded.
My remarks on this Supplementary Estimate will be brief. It is a pity the Minister's officials are not here to take note of this and they might make a correction. The Minister says he has made savings to the amount of £1,890,000 on old age non-contributory pensions, £500,000 on childrens' allowances, £305,000 on widows' and orphans' non-contributory pensions and £206,000 on social assistance allowances, totalling £2,901,000. Is the Minister aware how these savings have been made? There are social welfare officers at present in Kerry and, to say the least, they are the most inhuman beings that any Department ever had. I should hope that when a social welfare officer would call to an applicant, he would be kind and courteous in seeking information. There is a particular officer operating from the Tralee office—I shall not name him—who has terrorised old age pensioners, people living alone. I shall give a glaring example of a particular case in my own town. I wrote to the Minister about it and his private secretary replied: perhaps the Minister never saw it. This is a case where a social welfare officer called on an old lady whose means had changed. She had been keeping boarders but, due to circumstances beyond her control— she was not up to it any longer—she had let them go.
The Supplementary Estimate does not permit the Deputy to make an attack on an official.
I prefaced my remarks by referring to where the Minister has made savings and I want to tell him how the savings were made. They were made in a cruel and harsh fashion, if this case is typical. I am certainly entitled to describe how these savings were made, with all due respect.
So far the Deputy is not relevant. He is attacking an individual, which is not permissible, and I shall not allow it.
I am attacking an individual who is extremely inhuman. He called to this old lady who told him the facts of her case. The next thing he said was: "I will search the house to see if there are boarders here. Let me look into the wardrobes". In this day and age a search warrant is required before a person goes into a house. The gardaí are required, not a social welfare officer. That is only one of many cases. The officers of the Minister who visit old age pensioners should at least be kind and courteous in seeking information which I am quite sure will be volunteered.
I have another case in South Kerry where a woman social officer called to an old age pensioner. The pensioner had to threaten her with boiling water to get her out because she was so aggressive. The Minister is a good Minister and I have no doubt that he is not aware that this is happening. I would like him to send specific instructions to those social welfare officers reminding them that old people are easily intimidated; they react in a way that a young person would not react. They only want their rights. If the officer explains their rights to them I am sure everything will be all right. We always had a good situation in Kerry and I trust we shall have it in the future. This is the total of my remarks which are made in a constructive spirit.
I am glad of the opportunity to speak on this Estimate. The whole social welfare code should be of concern to all sides of the House, how it is framed and how it will develop in the future. I am a bit concerned that for some months past and during the election campaign the Government did not seem to give social welfare any priority or have any policy on it or to have considered it in any depth. I am concerned that we might get back to the pre-1973 era when social welfare benefits and attitudes to them were really those of the poor law days. Any discussion on social welfare should be based on the idea of something that we must plan and which must be developed in a humane, Christian way.
The Minister said that he intended to fix benefits at the cost of living index value. That is right as far as it goes, but it means there is no immediate increase for social welfare recipients. That is not the type of policy we should have. We must be forward-looking and innovative. Every budget should bring out new ideas regarding the concept of social welfare. In the area of non-contributory pensions, where assistance is involved, the income limit should be raised substantially. This scheme was introduced in the past four years. The idea was good but it should not be allowed to stagnate. If we want to give people real increases we should, I think, increase the limit of the income that over the years they may have provided for themselves. Otherwise, people will not be encouraged to provide themselves with some little income. Therefore, I ask that the income level be raised so as to encourage people to provide a little for themselves to supplement the non-contributory pension they may get. I consider this important.
In the whole area of old age pensions and assistance for pensioners we have done a good deal. I do not think any side of the House should claim credit for doing this type of thing. I am concerned with one aspect. I believe people should get some assistance by way of a supplementary housing grant, because if a person occupies local authority housing he has the benefit of subsidised housing and that is very good.
I am sorry but these are all policy matters which may not be discussed on a Supplementary Estimate.
We are talking about sums of money made available for assistance——
The Deputy is advocating new policy matters which come under the general Estimate. He will have every opportunity to discuss policy matters on that Estimate.
Before I have that opportunity the budget will have been introduced and we will merely be talking in pious platitudes.
We cannot discuss or advocate what should be done in the budget on Supplementary Estimates.
We are voting money here which basically is for assistance and I am saying that if we have such money for assistance it should be spent in the areas I am talking about. It is no good coming in and saying we are voting £21 million for assistance and that we all agree with that—end of story. Surely we are entitled to mention areas in which we believe such money should be spent. It is unreasonable of the Chair to rule me out of order when I believe I am being reasonable and am not making unreasonable points. There are many things I could say but I do not wish to take issue with you.
I do not make the rules. They have been there for many years. We cannot discuss policy or administration on a Supplementary Estimate.
Surely we can mention items like assistance.
Such matters can be mentioned provided they come within the subheads of this Supplementary Estimate.
I wholehearedly agree with providing money for assistance. I said that if the income limit for a non-contributory pension was raised that would improve the life of a non-contributory pensioner. I cannot see how this impinges on this Supplementary Estimate. I think you are being very restrictive on this. I believe we should be given an opportunity to say something on it. I spoke about assistance for housing. A person who owns his own house has a waiver of rates, which is assistance. A person who lives in a local authority apartment receives assistance by the subsidised rent. An old person who has to rent private accommodation has to pay the market price. Some type of housing assistance should be given to such people. There are many old people living in such accommodation who will not complain and are possibly the worst off in our society. We may be discussing policy but the Minister will be discussing this coming near to the budget.
I ask the Deputy to get away from this because it is advocating new policy. He can deal with every item of assistance that is being operated at the moment.
Those who spoke this morning, with all due respect, were not confined to what this document says. I am rather amazed at the attitude of the Chair.
The Deputy should not argue with the Chair. I had the same difficulty for an hour with Deputy O'Connell. The Deputy should have been here then. He got around it much better than Deputy O'Brien but I cannot help that. The Deputy cannot talk about assistance for housing which is advocating new policy. He has done it now so that is all right.
The point is noted.
I asked a question yesterday about paying the wife's unemployment benefit to her and the Minister did not have any plans. If the wife writes to the Secretary of the Department and requests that payment be made to her I believe it should be done. There is a lot of hardship in Dublin in relation to this. It might not be very costly to implement this.
Free electricity and free fuel benefits have been referred to. Assistance is provided here. There should be a choice of cash payment or free electricity allowance or a cash payment in preference to free fuel. This would be of great benefit to an old lady living in rented accommodation. A lot of this accommodation has slotmeters. Once the ESB find that the electricity account is not in her name she is not entitled to the 300 free units of electricity. A cash payment should be made to that person because she is putting her 10p into the meter and is probably paying more money than if the meter was in her name.
The Minister should consider assistance for school meals and free milk. I know he is concerned about the health of the people and has said that preventive medicine is the best form of medicine. I believe we should use some of the money provided by Europe to provide such benefits for our children. The Minister's Department should take over the free milk scheme. I believe the cost would be very little. Most schools have management boards so the best way to administer this would be to hand over the money to them and let them arrange it. This would cut administrative costs. A hot meal should be provided in the schools. This could be provided by people on the spot so that administration would not be very high. If a block grant was paid to school management boards they could look after the scheme.
I would like the Minister to look at free travel in the case of an elderly person who is confined where he or she lives in the centre of the city and that person's daughter lives 10 miles out in Clondalkin, Blanchardstown or one of the new housing areas. That person is probably not very well-off but is the only person to look after her father or mother in the centre of the city. The Minister might consider looking at free travel in such cases where it is proved that an elderly person is confined to his or her home. It is a great hardship on that person's daughter having to come in every day to look after her father or mother.
It would be very difficult to operate.
I know that but I believe this matter should be looked at. Money could be saved on home help if assistance was provided for the person living in the suburbs. The elderly person who is confined at home by illness will not be using his or her free travel so the benefit could be transferred to the person living in the suburbs. As I am not permitted to open up the debate on social welfare I ask the Minister to have a look at the matters I have mentioned. I ask him not to revert back to the pre-1973 days when it was, live horse and you will get grass. I hope we have gone away from that mentality for ever. I am not accusing the Minister of trying to squeeze the less well-off in our society. However, Government policy might determine something else. The Minister should spell out a four-year phased programme on social welfare. When we came into office in 1973 we did this. We made a start by reducing the age qualification for old age pensions over a number of years and we ensured that increases related to the cost of living. That helped in a positive way to increase the living standards of people. When we are talking about social welfare we must not consider only the economic aspect. We must consider the matter having regard to human needs.
I previously raised the question of post offices being inadequate to deal with social welfare matters. Social welfare is here to stay but I do not think that our arrangements for paying benefits are appropriate or can deal with the situation. The present system is not adequate. On many occasions I have seen long queues of people waiting for their pensions and other benefits. We must try to improve the situation.
Deputy O'Connell referred to employment exchanges. From my experience of the exchanges in Dublin the sooner they are dismantled the better. We should invest money in ensuring that social welfare centres do not rob people of their dignity. Employment exchanges have always created a feeling of despair and this is an area which we have neglected for too long. When we are building new towns we should incorporate in the plans social welfare centres to meet the needs of the areas in question. A whole range of services could be centred in a place convenient for those availing of them rather than locating the points in the centre of Dublin.
I wish the Minister well in his office. I have no doubt he will administer in a humane way. I would ask him to assert himself in Government to ensure that the moneys required for improvements in social welfare matters are obtained. In this way the work started in 1973 will be continued.
A number of points were raised during discussion of this Supplementary Estimate. I shall try to deal with some of them but perhaps others might be left to another occasion, either when we are bringing in legislation or when the Estimate as a whole is being debated.
Deputy Boland and Deputy O'Brien asked for a statement, policy or commitment in regard to the social welfare classes. I have no hesitation in indicating my policy and that of the Government in this regard. The thrust of the manifesto was, of course, primarily concerned with the economic situation and the need——
To garner as many votes as possible.
—to restore the economic situation as rapidly as possible. The manifesto stated that it would be an aim and objective of the Government to ensure that at least social welfare allowances kept pace with the cost of living but, of course, that is only a basic minimum objective.
It is the firm policy of the Government and it is my policy to ensure that so far as possible the social welfare classes share as fully as possible in the increasing prosperity of our community. I do not think anyone in this House would be prepared to accept a situation where certain sections could forge ahead, could win for themselves increased incomes and better conditions while at the same time other sections were allowed to lag behind. It will be our aim to ensure so far as possible that the various sections who need assistance will get it as generously and as readily as circumstances permit. It will be our aim to bring about positive improvements from time to time as circumstances permit. Certainly we have as a basic minimum objective to increase social welfare allowances as the rate of inflation or the cost of living demands.
Deputy O'Connell referred to the need for a development plan with regard to social welfare. I am sure that would be the objective of every Minister for Social Welfare: to try to get out of the treadmill of annual necessities and to look ahead and bring about long term, positive and comprehensive improvements. Certainly that would be my approach. There are a number of areas in the social welfare field where major steps forward can be taken. As Deputies know, we have published a discussion document on a national pensions plan and very shortly I shall be bringing out another discussion document of the same kind on the question of insurance for the self-employed. These are two very large areas to which our attention will be directed in the years ahead, as Deputies know, there are other areas that require attention. As resources become available it is the intention of the Government to endeavour to perfect the overall welfare structure, to endeavour to have it as comprehensive as possible.
Deputy O'Connell said that we should aim at the total elimination of poverty. We would all like to think that such a situation could be brought about. It is our ultimate objective to eliminate the last vestige of poverty from our society, but whether that can be achieved in a modern community is a question to which different people will give different answers. I do not know if it will ever be possible to so perfect the welfare machinery that there will be no pockets of poverty left anywhere. Human frailty will always be with us. There will always be those who, no matter how we perfect our machinery, will fail to achieve reasonably satisfactory standdards of living. However, our objective is clear. We are clear as to the state of affairs towards which we should work consistently. The matter is not only one of elaborate comprehensive schemes but of trying to ensure that these schemes are directed towards the areas that are appropriate and that those who really are in need are in a position to avail of the different schemes. This brings me to a matter that was raised by a number of Deputies, that is, the question of providing better information in an effort to make the general public more aware of what is available and of trying to ensure that all those who are entitled to benefits succeed in availing of them.
My Department have that task in hand in a very active way. It is a continuing process. Some Deputies discussed the supplementary welfare allowances in that connection and said that there is much confusion about this scheme. Perhaps that is so but the scheme is not fully operational yet. However, I have here an excellent form published by my Department in pursuance of their policy of modernising and simplifying forms. I think any Deputy would agree that this form is as near to perfection as one could find in this area. It is a simple, clear-cut form which gives all the information necessary in regard to the scheme and it has attached to it a claim form. If Deputies are not aware of the existence of this form I shall be glad to make copies of it available to them. It is a sample of the sort of work we are trying to do in the Department. We are trying to make steady progress in simplifying all forms, in making them more comprehensible and in making it easier for people to fill them in. I subscribe fully to the view as stated here that many of the people who need to avail of these schemes are lacking in the necessary degree of education or experience that would make it easy for them to complete the forms. Very often they have to be assisted in this task. I assure Deputies that the policy in regard to simplifying all forms is a very positive activity of the Department and that it will be pushed ahead.
Fairly recently I came across a form which horrified me somewhat. This form is one that is sent to old people who lose their travel passes. In order to be supplied with replacement passes they are required to fill in the form I am talking of. To say the least the form is unnecessarily bureaucratic. I have fed it into our simplified machinery process and I trust that a much more simplified version of it will emerge for availability to the general public.
Would the Minister accept that there is a need for a simplifying process in relation to the whole myriad of forms?
Yes. I am very conscious of that, but very good work has been done and is continuing to be done in this area. The best I can do is to promise the House that the process will be pushed ahead as rapidly as possible.
Deputy Boland and other Deputies, too, mentioned the question of the new telephone subsidy scheme. One of the problems in relation to the introduction of any scheme is that people fasten on to the ways in which it can be improved. The very introduction of a scheme tends to highlight other needs. However, what is important is that a start is made and we have made a start with this telephone subsidy scheme in respect of old persons living alone. The scheme will be very restricted and will apply only to about 6,000 persons. Nevertheless, it will be a useful scheme. Its basic purpose is to ensure that people who are living alone will be enabled to have access to assistance, medical or otherwise, when the need arises. Initially, we must take the view that in the case of two persons living alone one is available to seek assistance.
Would the Minister make it clear that only those old people living alone and who already have telephones will be eligible for participation in the scheme? In other words, that if an old person living alone wished to have a telephone installed he would have to meet the capital cost of the installation.
The Deputy may question the Minister when he has finished.
Yes. That would be £48. What we would be paying would be the annual rental on the telephone.
The question of school meals, too, was raised. Because of the current development in regard to milk, the question of free milk was associated with the question of school meals. As Deputies know this question of free milk is the subject of an adjournment debate later. Therefore, I shall not say any more about it at this stage.
I would reaffirm what I said the other day, that is, that the question of school meals is one that needs to be examined. My information is that the scheme is not very satisfactory. It is very limited and is not a very high quality scheme. I am not sure what can be done about it. The difficulty is that because of the number of school-children involved anything that one would wish to do to improve the situation would prove very expensive. It is something I propose to look into in some depth. There are other Departments, agencies and bodies involved in this area and I propose to have discussions with them to see what should be done about it. As Deputies know my Department only come into this at second hand. It is the local authorities who are responsible for the scheme, for deciding whether to introduce the scheme and to a large extent our role is secondary. We pick up the bill to the extent of 50 per cent.
It is not the local authorities but the urban authorities who are responsible.
Yes, this is confined to urban areas and the Gaeltacht.
As far as extending the scheme to other areas is concerned, would the initiative rest with the Department?
It would rest with the Government because Education and other Departments would be involved. If anything were to be done it would have to be undertaken at Government level. However, the first thing to do is discuss the existing scheme with those involved in its administration, with social workers and people in the community generally to see what their views about the situation are.
The comprehensive scheme which they have in Great Britain is not regarded as satisfactory. It has very undesirable aspects. I do not think we could accept that as a model. I want to sound a warning note that anything that might be contemplated should be understood to be very expensive indeed.
Reference was also made to the payment of part of unemployment or other benefits to a wife and her children. This is one of these very delicate and sensitive areas. Officials administering these schemes have to be very circumspect in their approach. Because we are dealing with human beings, there are so many variables that it is difficult to settle upon a single idea which will always be the right thing to do and which when it is universally applied will be satisfactory. As Deputies know, every day we come across new cases. We think at any given time that we know all the possible difficulties, circumstances and complications that can arise, and then we come across another case which adds a new dimension of complications to these human problems.
I will not say that nothing should be done, but I want to make it clear that all these things have to be very carefully thought about. The important thing is that when you do something or make a specific change you must be absolutely sure you will not be doing more harm than good. That is the test. The difficult decision is to try to summon up enough experience of those who are involved in the practical administration of these schemes to ensure that whatever change is made or whatever improvements we try to bring about are improvements and not the reverse.
Deputy Boland also referred to the anomalies in the social welfare code particularly where a widow suffers a loss of pension on reaching pension age. That is typical of the sort of thing I have been talking about. Widows are favourably treated in respect of their capital. When they come into the old age pension situation, a different set of circumstances applies and what Deputy Boland says can occur. Wherein is the solution to lie? The cold logical thing to do would be to remove the favourable treatment the widow has before she reaches pension age but I do not think that would be acceptable to any of us. This is typical of the complications that can arise in devising and in the administration of all social welfare schemes. On that point we undertook in the manifesto to look at these anomalies and that work is well advanced.
I am becoming very familiar with this manifesto.
Oddly enough I find the manifesto referred to much more frequently from the opposite side of the House.
Yes, we are becoming experts on it.
The Deputy will admit that we are getting on with implementing practically everything in it. For my part we are tackling those anomalies. We brought in the free telephone subsidy scheme. We reduced the stamp by £1 and so on. The Deputy can be assured that that manifesto will be gone through religiously and scrupulously and implemented.
Deputy Boland was wondering about some change in regard to the unemployment assistance for small holders. I want to assure him that there has been no change in that regard recently. He will recall that a change was made under the 1977 Act which removed the notional method of assessment for those with valuations of over £20. That came into effect from 1st April, 1977. Perhaps it is the implication of that that the Deputy was referring to.
On the free fuel scheme, I am meeting with Dublin Corporation as soon as possible to discuss the difficulties and anomalies associated with that scheme. I want to make it clear that the fact I have not met them so far is not their fault; there were problems on my part in being able to find the time to meet a deputation from the corporation. I hope to do that fairly soon and to review with them the operation of this free fuel scheme which gives rise to a lot of frustration and annoyance on the part of a number of people.
Deputy Fergus O'Brien advocated a further easing of the means test for non-contributory old age pensions. That is something to which we would all be sympathetic but it is one of these things that has to await consideration in the context of the annual budget.
Deputy John O'Connell referred to the very attractive concept of a minimum income. That would be something very attractive indeed. I suppose it would be idyllic if we could bring about a situation where every member of the community could be guaranteed a minimum income and if he was not able to earn that by his own efforts the State would intervene to make sure that he was brought up to the minimum.
Do they have it in France?
Not in the sense I am talking about. That brings up the question of the new concept of negative income tax. As Deputies know the purpose of negative income tax is to try to treat each individual in the community as an entity. All that he is entitled to pay to the State and all that he is entitled to get from the State would be added up and there would be a single payment made to him which either brings him up to the minimum or a certain amount would be taken away from him. That notion has been around for some time. The British have been going into it fairly carefully and they have published a few papers about it. On paper anyway it certainly appeals to my mathematical mind and I would love to think that we could have one big central computer doing all the calculations and making sure that there is just one single payment or demand.
The previous Minister for Finance was not too well received when he floated that idea a year or two ago.
I do not think he understood it.
The Minister only has a fairly hazy idea himself, as far as I can see.
The Minister to conclude. Income tax does not arise. Deputy O'Connell raised this and it requires legislation.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle is a very wise and honourable man, very experienced, very mature and very lenient with us. He presides over us with great dignity and graciousness, but I must point out that negative income tax is only a title, it is in fact a social welfare concept.
The Minister agrees it would require legislation.
Touche. Deputy Boland also referred to delays. Unfortunately there are delays, but we will try to do better. Delays arise because of the large volume of complaints and appeals and we will just have to try and perfect our machinery, improve our processes and deal with them as expeditiously as we can. Delays can be very annoying and frustrating for the people concerned and can bring hardship in certain cases. We will continue to use our best endeavours to eliminate delays to the greatest possible extent. As I said originally, and in keeping with the rulings of the Chair, this debate on this Estimate has served to bring forward matters which are of concern to Deputies and to which I will endeavour to direct attention. I suppose that a more comprehensive debate must await the budget, or the Estimate for 1978, or perhaps legislation.
Does Deputy Boland wish to ask a question? Not too many, please.
The number depends on the number the Minister did not answer. There are six areas.
Be brief.
One was the suggestion that the electricity allowance might be paid in certain cases to people who are not living alone but who are living with somebody else in straitened circumstances. The second point was in relation to the footwear scheme which is subsidised and is referred to in the Estimate, which I suggested was the cause of an amount of criticism and was in need of revision. The third was the concept that after benefits came to an acceptable level, they should be index-linked rather than that there should be an annual sort of trumpet day at budget time when an increase in one area is announced but not in another. There is also the difficulty where home help allowance is withdrawn in the case of a home help who stays overnight with an aged or infirm person, and the suggestion that the wife or husband of a travel permit holder should be entitled to free travel even if the permit holder is not accompanying them, especially in the case where the permit holder is hospitalised and the spouse is going to visit them. The final and most important point, because the Minister managed not to answer this question last week as well, because the clock and other influences saved him, was the suggestion which has to be dealt with about abolishing the social welfare contribution in respect of people under 21 years of age and introducing a graduated rate of contribution in respect of people who do not work a full week, so as to stimulate employment.
That surely is a policy matter not a question.
I think it arises under section 3 (f).
It is a policy matter.
Strictly speaking it is not a social welfare matter. If my colleagues in the Economic Departments and in the Department of Labour and those who are primarily concerned with employment decided upon this as a policy matter then the Department of Social Welfare would implement it. Basically it is an employment policy matter as distinct from a strictly social welfare matter. I will consider all the other points mentioned by the Deputy. The question of index-linked social welfare benefits is not just a policy matter but a matter of major fundamental long-term policy.
I appreciate that. I am endeavouring to help the Minister in his battle with the Department of Finance.
Vote put and agreed to.