Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 12 Mar 1992

Vol. 417 No. 3

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Household Budget Data Research.

Paul Connaughton

Question:

1 Mr. Connaughton asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he agrees with the findings of research conducted in connection with household budget data collected in 1987, that the weekly cost of rearing a young child up to four years of age was £19.60 and the cost of rearing an older child from five years to 14 was £28.20 per week, both figures being based on 1987 costings; if he will outline the 1992 figures; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The Deputy is referring to a research report published by the Economic and Social Research Institute in December 1988 entitled Equivalence Scales and Costs of Children. The report estimated that in 1987 the weekly cost of rearing a child under five years of age was £19.60 and the weekly cost of rearing a child between five and 14 years of age was £28.20. The corresponding weekly costs in 1992 terms are approximately £22.90 and £32.90.

From July 1992 the combined weekly values of payments to various social welfare beneficiaries by way of the increases of their weekly payments for their children and their child benefit entitlements will range from £16.15 to £19.85 for one child and from £32.30 to £39.70 for two children.

The ESRI report also estimated that the weekly costs of rearing two children aged under five years is £28.30, in 1992 terms. From July 1992 all weekly social welfare payments for two children will exceed this amount, from a minimum of £32.20 to a maximum of £39.70.

In this year's budget, the position of families was improved considerably. All weekly payments will be increased by 4 per cent from July, which will more than maintain the real value of payments. In the Programme for Economic and Social Progress, the Government stated their commitment to reach the priority rate recommended by the Commission on Social Welfare by 1993. The lowest rates of payment will be increased by £3 per week from July, in line with this commitment.

Other measures to benefit families include the increase in the income limits for the family income supplement, which will mean increased payments of between £9 and £11 per week for most recipients. Payments under the back to school clothing and footwear scheme have also been increased by £10 per child to £35 for a child at primary school and to £50 for a child at second level school. This allowance is paid to recipients of long term social welfare payments for children up to 21 years of age who are in full-time education.

The Government are very aware of the particular needs of families and, under the terms of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress, an additional £69 million in 1990 terms will be devoted to child income support over the next ten years. The appropriate measures will be adopted in the light of up to date information on child and family circumstances and taking account of available resources. The issue of the level of child income support itself and the research in the area, including the report referred to by the Deputy, will be considered in this context.

As this is the first time the new Minister for Social Welfare is answering during Question Time, I wish to take the opportunity to wish him well in his portfolio.

Thank you very much.

The Minister states that all social welfare payments have been increased by 4 per cent as a result of the budget. Does that increase extend to the child benefit scheme?

If that is so, may I take it that the Minister considers it reasonable that the child benefit scheme is worth just £4 a week? I quoted the findings of a report based on 1987 figures, which indicate that it now costs more than £31 a week to raise a child from between five to 14 years of age. Surely there is something terribly wrong with the way that society and the Government treat children and women, too, who, unfortunately, have the most to do with the rearing of families. There is a great imbalance in this regard.

If everything in society were perfect and if the Government were flush with money or if any previous Government had been in such a happy position, perhaps some credence could be given to what the Deputy says. The way I look on the child support scheme is in the context of all the benefits I have outlined, which are quite substantial in anyone's vocabulary and cost the State a great amount of money. When all of the child support schemes and the other benefits referred to are added together it will be realised that we have arrived at the figures recommended by the report.

In the study on which the report is based use was made of particular modules and it had a scientific foundation. That is not universally recognised as being the absolute basis for a study. Other experts in the area would have calculated their findings on a different basis.

I am satisfied that the income support available under all child benefit and the support schemes operated by the State are sufficient.

Could I——

A brief question, please, Deputy. Let us not forget the time factor in dealing with priority questions.

Could I suggest to the Minister that, based on his own figures, it would cost £192 per week to rear a family of six?

Other studies provide statistics that show that the figure cannot be arrived at in the way the Deputy has calculated, that is, by simply multiplying the £32 by six.

Mothers have to do it that way.

Studies suggest that the cost depends on the age of children. The older children are the more expensive they are to keep. Various statistics and expert studies carried out in this area show that it would not be right to merely multiply the £32 by six, as the Deputy has done. That is not the way experts in the area make their calculations.

It might not be the opinion of the experts but it is the practicality.

Top
Share