asked the Minister for Social Welfare if, in view of the severe difficulties and additional expenses faced by low income families with school-going children at the resumption of the school year each September, he will consider introducing a special payment to assist such families; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - School Expenses.
14.
I introduced a variety of measures in this year's Social Welfare Act which gave low income families substantial increases in income over the full year.
In addition to introducing a minimum child dependant allowance of £10 per week, the personal rate for the long term unemployed was increased by 12 per cent which, when added to the increase of 11 per cent given in July 1988 brought the total increase since last year to almost 25 per cent. In the same period, a long term unemployed husband with a dependent wife and five children received an extra £26.80 per week bringing their total, including child benefit, to £145.90 per week.
As part of the social welfare package, the Government also tackled the problem faced by families of workers on low incomes through a special scheme of tax exemption, together with improvements in child benefit and family income supplement.
In addition, for the first time ever, the Government recognised the special difficulties of widowers and deserted husbands with children, on low incomes by introducing an allowance scheme for them. The cost of the overall package is £71 million in 1989 and an estimated £155 million in a full year, including the tax exemption for low paid workers.
Assistance is available under the exceptional needs provisions of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme and the footwear scheme to meet the additional expenses faced by low income families with school-going children at the resumption of the school year. The amount paid for exceptional needs provisions relating to children's clothing, including school uniforms, is expected to be £0.5 million in 1989, covering 20,000 children. A further £1.8 million, covering 157,000 children, was provided for the footwear scheme.
The question of any further additional payments is a matter to be considered in the context of the budget.
I accept that some increases have been paid during the year but I should like to ask the Minister if he is aware of the report prepared by Mary Daly which indicates that parents preparing their children for school in the month of September go through extreme stress. Is he aware that mothers make extreme sacrifices for their children at that time and that often they go hungry so as to provide for their children? Will the Minister accept that parents must face a massive outlay at that time of the year? Is he aware it is estimated that at least £50 per child is required in that week in September? For parents with four children and on a low income the figure of £200 is outside their reach.
This is a long question and the Deputy appears to be imparting information rather than seeking it.
Is the Minister aware that in the month of September many parents have to resort to moneylenders to assist them in purchasing clothing and so on for their children?
The Deputy has made his point.
The Deputy will be aware that in 1982 I doubled the child dependant allowance in September. I was conscious of the difficulties faced by parents at that time of the year. The Government who followed us decided to stop that allowance and they had their own reasons for doing so. I will have to give further consideration to the best way to help such people at that time. The Deputy will be aware that the provision of clothing is a great difficulty at that time and I will have to consider how best to target resources to deal with that expenditure in the context of the forthcoming budget.
Will the Minister agree that to send people to community welfare officers for a clothing or footwear allowance is a stigma at a stressful time for parents? Will he accept that the best method to help those people in the month of September is to pay an additional child benefit payment? Will he accept that for those on social welfare benefits he should double the dole payment in that month? Will the Minister accept that it is not right that people should have to queue for such benefits, thereby highlighting their abject poverty to their neighbours?
I am anxious to dispose of Deputy Ferris's question within the prescribed time.
The payment of a clothing allowance is important, particularly in the month of September. With regard to the Deputy's suggestion that we should use the child benefit scheme, I should like to tell him that it is an extremely broadly based scheme and that I do not consider it to be the most suitable mechanism for making that payment. I have had meetings with community welfare officers and they indicated to me that the greatest problem such people face is the provision of clothing for their children. They welcomed the steps I took to rationalise the footwear scheme throughout the country. People in the different categories are now aware of their entitlements under that scheme. I will look at this matter further if and when the resources become available.
I must call Question No. 15.