I wish to thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, for giving me the opportunity to raise this matter. In July of last year the then Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy McCreevy, issued the controversial Directive 14/92 to community welfare officers restricting the discretion they enjoyed under social welfare legislation to make exceptional need payments. A number of payments were restricted but most hardship was caused in that community welfare officers could assist with only one ESB bill per year, to a maximum of £100.
The directive was strongly criticised by the Democratic Left Party and by a number of welfare organisations. Considerable hardship was caused for those on the lowest incomes who found that an important safety net previously available to them was whipped away. The number of disconnections of electricity increased and it is likely that many other families denied this supplementary welfare allowance turned to illegal moneylenders to pay their bills and keep the lighting and heating in operation.
The impact of the directive can be seen from the fact that while in September 1991 community welfare officers in the Dublin region of the Eastern Health Board area were able to assist 1,435 families to pay ESB bills, in September 1992, shortly after the Minister introduced the directive, only 1,026 people received help. Under that directive those people are now precluded from receiving help until September of this year.
Following strong public criticism the then Minister, Deputy McCreevy, told the Dáil on 14 October last that it had not been his intention to limit the discretionary power of community welfare officers who make these payments and that he would issue a further directive to clarify the matter. While neither Dáil Deputies nor members of the public were allowed by the Department of Social Welfare to see the original directive or the so-called clarification Directive 18/92, Deputies know from experience that community welfare officers were obliged to continue applying the original directive limiting assistance with ESB bills to one occasion a year, and the consequent hardship continued.
On 4 March last the Minister of State at the Department of Social Welfare, Deputy Joan Burton, told me she was reviewing the supplementary welfare scheme. During debate on the Social Welfare Bill last month the Minister, Deputy Woods, said he would be shortly issuing a code of practice for dealing with fuel debts which would replace the directives issued last year. However, this has not been done and people are still being denied necessary support. Often at this time of year, when arrears have accumulated during the heavy use winter period, bills are at their highest and people need urgent assistance. I appeal to the Minister, pending the publication of guidelines, to withdraw the circulars which have caused so much hardship and to allow community welfare officers to make payments as needed, as was the case prior to July last year.
The supplementary welfare system is intended as a scheme of last resort. It is designed to support and assist those who are desperate and who face real hardship if not helped. Over the years it has ensured that thousands of children who would otherwise be cold have some degree of comfort and that those who would otherwise go hungry have decent meals. The community welfare officers have done an exceptional job in recent years in administering the system despite its inadequacies and the growth in poverty. Community welfare officers are now doubly disadvantaged because Fianna Fáil and Labour Deputies and Ministers claim that these directives have been overturned and people are consequently blaming the community welfare officers for not giving them assistance. This Government has been trying to con the public by claiming that most of the McCreevy dirty dozen cuts have been withdrawn, while the fact remains that the majority of them remain in place and continue to cause hardship.
The Minister, Deputy Woods, and the Minister of State, Deputy Joan Burton, have contested my statements about the cuts. Perhaps they will accept the verdict of SIPTU, the biggest trade union in the country and an affiliate of the Labour Party, who, in a statement issued last Friday pointed out that in only four of the 12 areas had there been some easing of the cuts.
