I move:
That a sum not exceeding £1,595,945,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1987, 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.
The Social Welfare Estimate for the year ending 31 December 1987 is for a net sum of one thousand, five hundred and ninety-five million, nine hundred and forty-five thousand pounds (£1,595,945,000) pounds. The Government are providing £49.6 million pounds or 3 per cent more than on last year's outturn. This Estimate is the general taxpayers' contribution to financing social welfare expenditure this year. It is equivalent to some 62 per cent of the total. Of the remaining expenditure, 26 per cent or £670 million is met by employers and 12 per cent or £310 million by employees through PRSI contributions. When account is taken of this and various other minor sources of income, the total social welfare bill comes to £2,600 million.
Who pays for social welfare? I would like to illustrate the contributions made by the different contributors to social welfare expenditure because I think that it is important to be clear about what money is coming in and where it is going. The situation can be illustrated as follows:
£ million |
£ million |
|
Social Insurance Fund |
||
Contributions of Employers |
649 |
|
Contributions of Employees |
310 |
|
Contributions by General Taxation |
417 |
|
Other |
2 |
1,368 |
Occupational Injuries |
||
Contribution by Employers |
31 |
|
Other |
1 |
32 |
Social Assistance |
||
Financed by General Taxation |
1,200 |
|
Total Expenditure |
2,600 |
The level of contribution to the social insurance fund which is made by employers is 11.3 per cent and by employees 5.5 per cent on earnings up to a ceiling of £15,500. Where does the money go? It goes essentially towards paying for expenditure on the benefits and pensions payable out of the social insurance fund to PRSI contributors. The main items of expenditure are:
£ million |
|
Old age contributory and retirement pensions |
394 |
Widows' and orphans' contributory pensions |
222 |
Unemployment benefit (including pay-related benefit) |
282 |
Disability benefit (including pay-related benefit) |
248 |
Other benefits, including deserted wife's and invalidity |
222 |
Total |
1,368 |
With regard to using resources effectively, the magnitude of this existing expenditure has to be borne in mind when considering improvements in social welfare. This specific point was made by the NESC ("A Strategy for Development"), which commented that the sheer scale of the social programmes is such that modest developments in social policies can have significant budgetary implications.
Given the level of this expenditure, it is more important now than ever before that every social welfare programme without exception be examined to ensure that the resources involved are directed to those in greater need. I am also concerned that all administrative costs are examined in detail and that areas where savings in administration can be made without affecting efficiency of the service are identified.
With regard to broadening the social insurance base, expenditure is, however, only one side of the coin, the other being the income or revenue side. Additional expenditure on social welfare can be financed only through additional contributions or through extra taxation. I am examining the question of broadening the social insurance base to bring about a greater degree of equity in the financing of social security as a whole. At present, the self-employed rely on means-tested social assistance pensions and on whatever private pension arrangements they may make. This leaves many of the self-employed and their dependants without adequate insurance cover and having to rely on means tested old age and other payments. The cost to the general taxpayer of non-contributory old age pensions this year is £286 million.
Both the Commission on Social Welfare and the NESC referred to the need for broadening the social insurance base. The National Pensions Board are also at present examining this issue in the context of a report they are preparing for me on the provision of pensions related to earnings. There are practical difficulties in this area but I am examining this area to try to overcome these difficulties.
As regards the economic climate, this year's budget was the first step in our Programme for National Recovery. We had to take tough decisions to ensure that a stable course was charted for the future. We have to accept the need to contain the overall level of public expenditure. This level depends on the performance of the economy and clearly our present levels of expenditure and debt could not be afforded and demanded corrective action.
Total current Government expenditure has risen from less than 30 per cent in the early seventies to over 41 per cent in 1980 and to nearly 50 per cent in 1986. This resulted in an increase in the current budget deficit from less than 1 per cent of GNP in 1970 to 8.5 per cent in 1986. The decisive action taken in the budget will reduce this budget deficit to an estimated 6.9 per cent of GNP this year. This action was essential to ensure the firm financial base which is a prerequisite for our Programme for National Recovery.
The Exchequer borrowing requirement will be reduced from 13 per cent of GNP in 1986 to 10.7 per cent this year. Our approach is the only way when one considers that our national debt now stands at £25 billion and costs the State nearly £2 billion annually to service.
The main purpose of the Government's strategy is to achieve growth in the economy and provide employment. The fiscal measures taken in the budget to bring spending under control are inter-linked with development measures which will lead to faster economic growth. There are already very definite positive signs of a response in the economy. Exchequer borrowing is being reduced. There are signs of increasing business confidence which will lead to a pick-up in investment. Inflation has slowed to around 3 per cent and interest rates have responded to the measures taken in the budget. In addition, further improvements are expected in the level of our exports.
I am glad to say that there is now a general level of awareness of what needs to be done. We have set the scene for recovery and we are now vigorously implementing our Programme for National Recovery which will benefit the whole community.
On the 3 per cent general increase, the major provision in the budget was for a 3 per cent increase in all weekly payments from July, at a cost of some £30 million this year. In the present financial climate the scope for increases in expenditure is very limited. Deputies will remember that the Coalition were not prepared to give a general increase until November with consequent hardship for the lower income groups.
Our 3 per cent increase will maintain the real level of payments of over 700,000 social welfare recipients as it is in line with the expected rate of inflation in the year ahead. It also maintains the significant increase in the level of payments which has been achieved over the last ten years. Over that period there has been an increase of over 44 per cent in real terms in payments to the long term unemployed. Other long term payments have increased by over 50 per cent and short term payments by about 34 per cent. All these are real increases and I might add that it was the increases given by previous Fianna Fáil administrations which contributed most significantly to the general level of real increase which has been achieved over the last decade. It is my intention that adjustments in the social welfare area in the coming period will provide greater scope for improving the position of those on the lowest levels of payment.
The second main improvement which I am making is in the family income supplement scheme, at a cost of some £1.5 million. This scheme provides cash support for workers with families who have low incomes and who are only marginally better off working than if they were claiming social welfare benefits. I am concerned to ensure that workers who are married with children and for whom the extra income from employment over and above social welfare payments is marginal, have every incentive to take up work by availing of the benefits under this scheme. Having such workers productively employed is beneficial for the workers themselves, their families and for the country as a whole.
In our Programme for National Recovery we expressed our commitment to this scheme. I will be closely reviewing its operation, particularly with regard to the poor take-up on the scheme. Only some 5,600 families availed of the FIS during last year despite the extensive advertising. To encourage wider use of this supplement I have substantially increased the amount payable from mid-July.
The rate of supplement is being raised from a third to 50 per cent and there are also increases in the prescribed income limits for qualifying for FIS. As an example of the effect of the improvements which I am introducing, a married man with five children on a weekly gross income of £135 and a take-home pay of about £114 will be entitled to £28.50 per week as a supplement from mid-July as compared with £15 at present. This is clearly a major benefit to workers on low income who have a family to provide for.
Another major improvement in the social welfare system which I am bringing into operation from October next is the extension of the treatment benefits scheme to dependent spouses of insured persons. Under this scheme insured persons qualify for dental treatment, optical treatment and the provision of hearing aids. The scheme is of tremendous practical benefit to insured people and provides a very visible return for the contributions which they pay. I believe that the benefits of the scheme should also be available to dependent spouses, particularly women in the home and I am delighted to have been able to make provision for it this year. I regard this step as a major and historic breakthrough especially for women in the home. About 300,000 dependent spouses will be eligible for treatment as a result of the extension at a cost of £1.5 million to the social insurance fund this year. Those who will benefit will include not only the dependent spouses of people who are actually at work but also the dependent spouses of unemployed people who were in insurance and of pensioners. The wives of the unemployed and of contributory old age, retirement and invalidity pensioners will all become eligible for dental and other treatment benefits.
This is a very positive move by the Government and there is widespread support for it in the Oireachtas and in the community in general. There have been consistent requests for this extension from many groups, particularly those representing women who are working in the home. Many thousands of these women have suffered too long because they have been deprived of access to State-funded services in the past, especially dental services.
The implementation of the extension of benefit to spouses will involve the revision of the formal agreements under which dentists and opticians contract to provide these services to eligible persons. New agreements, providing for the extended eligibility, are being prepared at present and will be sent shortly for signature to the dentists and opticians on the Department's panels. Other dentists and opticians who are not on the Department's present panels may, of course, also apply to enter these agreements and thereby become members of the relevant panels.
This year's budget provided for significant improvements in the social welfare area — when viewed against the current economic climate. Our record in this regard is consistent with the priority Fianna Fáil have given down through the years in good times and bad to safeguarding and whenever possible improving the position of the poorer sections of the community.
As well as improving the level and quality of our services it is very important that we try to ensure that people who are forced to have recourse to the social welfare system are not locked into a situation of permanent dependence on social welfare payments. People must be able to look with confidence to the future. The new Jobsearch scheme is a major initiative designed to help people who have become long term dependent on unemployment payments.
Up to now the attitude adopted by the State towards the unemployed was, generally speaking, a paternalistic and passive one. It ensured that they had a certain basic income and it provided guidance and training services through the National Manpower Service and AnCO. It was left largely to the initiative of the unemployed themselves to seek employment and to avail of the various facilities provided by the State. These agencies are now giving a priority to the long term unemployed to enhance their capacities and prospects in an increasingly competitive jobs market.
The concept behind the new national Jobsearch programme is that the resources in the State agencies dealing with the unemployed — my Department, the National Manpower Service and AnCO — should be used directly and actively, rather than passively, to help those out of work, especially those unemployed for some time, in their search for jobs. This is the first time that the various agencies involved have come together in this way to help those who need them most. The aim is that by the end of December next 150,000 of those on the live register, especially the long term unemployed will have been referred by my Department for interview by the National Manpower Service. This interview will help each one to assess his or her qualities as a potential employee and assist in the search for work.
To cater for those for whom it is not possible to find employment immediately, the programme provides that 40,000 manpower scheme opportunities will be made available for those interviewed together with 12,000 places on the new Jobsearch courses. The Jobsearch course involves a four week programme of practical instruction on how to look for a job backed up by career advice, interview skills and assistance in self-presentation. There is free access to newspapers, telephones, typing and photocopying facilities, postage and travel allowance.
This course was introduced on a pilot basis in three centres — Letterkenny, Tallaght and Limerick. A survey of those who participated showed that they regarded the courses as helpful. Over 80 per cent believed that they were worthwhile while 76 per cent stated that they got greater confidence in looking for a job. These pilot schemes provided a basis for the design of the new scheme with 12,000 places now being made available as part of a national programme.
The programme is fully operational and 26,000 people had been interviewed up to 5 June. Almost 7,000 of these have been referred to job vacancies or to placements in social employment schemes or training programmes. A further 1,538 have entered Jobsearch courses. Over 3,000 have been referred back to social welfare for review and decision on their entitlements.
The purpose of the Jobsearch programme is to be of positive and practical benefit to unemployed people. I accept, however, that there are some persons who are not genuinely available for work or genuinely seeking work and yet they continue to draw their unemployment payments each week. Such persons will, of course, come to my Department's attention through refusing to attend the Jobsearch interview or to accept a job or a place on a Jobsearch course, or a manpower programme. Those who put themselves in that position will have their claims reviewed by a statutorily appointed deciding officer who will examine each case in the light of the individual circumstances.
I must emphasise that this is the normal practice followed by my Department in all cases of that nature. There is no way in which anyone can deprive a person of what he or she is statutorily entitled to under the Social Welfare Acts. Where the deciding officer is satisfied that the statutory conditions as regards availability and "genuinely seeking work" are not being fulfilled, unemployment payments will be withdrawn. However, as in the case of all deciding officer decisions, the normal right of appeal is available to the claimant. I want to stress that Jobsearch is a positive help to those who are genuinely unemployed and seeking work. They have a lot to gain and nothing to fear from it.
As well as making whatever improvements are possible in the quality of the services I am also very conscious of the need to examine closely the way in which the services are actually delivered to people. This is important for a number of reasons. First it is essential that the services my Department provide should be available to people in the simplest and most accessible manner possible. People should be able to feel that the service is there for them and not the other way around. Secondly, from the viewpoint of efficiency it is very important that the social welfare system should operate in a streamlined way and that any inefficiency in the way services are delivered should be identified and put right.
The way ahead as I see it is to provide as much as possible of the services on a local basis in a comprehensive and integrated way. I will shortly present my plan for the streamlining and regionalisation of the social welfare services.
Deputies will be aware that many of the services of my Department are already provided locally to a considerable extent. There is a countrywide network of 130 local offices whose main function has been to administer the schemes of unemployment benefit and unemployment assistance. Means testing for the non-contributory payments is carried out by Social Welfare officers who are located at a total of 93 centres around the country. The supplementary welfare allowance scheme, which is also means-tested, is administered on behalf of my Department by the health boards through an extensive network of offices throughout the health board regions.
While there is a good network of offices throughout the country the problem facing people seeking social welfare benefits is the number of different centres they may have to deal with. Take, for example, a person who is claiming unemployment assistance. He or she makes a claim at the local employment exchange which must be referred to the local social welfare officer to carry out a means test in the applicant's home. This can take a number of weeks. In the meantime, the applicant may be referred to the local community welfare officer of the health board with a view to payment of supplementary welfare allowance while waiting for the unemployment assistance claim to come through. The community welfare officer generally carries out an on-the-spot means test and payment is made immediately. I see a clear need to rationalise this situation where the client is in effect subjected to two different means tests in order to secure unemployment assistance.
Discussions have already begun between officials of my Department, the Department of Health and the health boards with a view to rationalising this whole area. The means tests will be examined in detail with a view to ensuring consistency in their application so that all groups are treated equally. This examination will also identify the scope that exists for simplifying the criteria and the procedures in use. This would make for ease of administration and at the same time make the application of the means tests more easily understandable to claimants. It would in turn reduce the relatively high number of queries and appeals against decisions on means. These discussions will, in particular, cover the ways in which the duplication in means testing carried out by officials of my Department and the health boards can be progressively reduced.
In a number of centres the local employment exchange manager, the social welfare officer and the health board official now work closely together and they have reduced the time taken to process unemployment assistance claims from several weeks to a few days. This has dramatically reduced the "interim payment" role of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme operated by the health boards in these areas. Another advantage of this local co-operation is that it provides better control across the various schemes in dealing with fraudulent claims. I propose to extend this arrangement to other offices around the country as soon as the necessary accommodation and computer facilities become available.
I am also conscious of the need to provide as much information as possible in relation to the services through a nationwide network of information offices based at employment exchanges. I will be anxious to extend the computerised inquiry service which is already in operation. My intention is to increase the number of points throughout the country at which individuals can receive comprehensive information about their claims and entitlements generally, including claims for persons and disability benefit which are processed centrally in Dublin.
Developments in computerisation provide us with opportunities to improve the delivery of services. Computerisation of the employment exchanges is a priority area. We are also developing computer links to provide closer working arrangements with community welfare officers of the health boards who are often the first point of contact with claimants. Ready computer access to up to the minute data on social welfare claims enables the community welfare officer to take the appropriate action. Access has already been provided to the South Eastern Health Board and to some community welfare officers in five other health boards. It is my intention that access will be available to all eight health boards before the end of the year. The level of computerisation and of the development of telecommunication networks within the health boards themselves are key factors here.
It is my intention to develop an integrated approach to the delivery of social welfare services generally through the introduction of "One-stop-shops".