Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 24 Nov 1993

Vol. 436 No. 2

Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Social Welfare Cuts.

Bernard Allen

Question:

5 Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will make a statement on the recent media reports that, during recent negotiations on the Programme for Economic and Social Progress between the Government and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, the Government agreed that they would withdraw the remainder of the dirty dozen cuts; if this is true, the cuts that are being withdrawn; and the reason for the situation that still exists whereby a man, his wife, and two children have been told that they will only receive £72.30 graduated disability benefit when, in fact, if he was in receipt of unemployment assistance, he would receive £130.30 and the only satisfaction that he has got is that he has been told that he can apply for supplementry welfare allowance and that he may receive it.

I am aware that the question of rescinding the so-called dirty dozen cuts of last year has been raised by the social partners in the context of negotiations leading to a new Programme for Economic and Social Progress type national agreement. My position in relation to those measures is quite clear. I have spoken at length in this House in the recent past on the measures themselves and the initiatives I have taken to modify them so as to minimise their impact on certain categories of people. I am committed to an ongoing review of the remaining measures and further adjustments considered necessary will be looked at in the context of the forthcoming budget.

Disability benefit is payable to those people who fulfil certain statutory conditions and who are unable to work due to illness. Those who have contributed to the social insurance fund or whose contributions are deficient may apply for supplementary welfare allowance.

The graduated payments of disability benefit were introduced as a consequence of the extension of social insurance coverage in 1991 to all workers, including part-time workers earning £25 a week or more. It would not be equitable to make full-rate payments of unemployment and disability benefit to persons with earnings as low as £25 a week. The payments made are scaled in such a way that they protect the person in times of sickness or unemployment at a rate that offers a similar or better standard of income. The introduction of graduated payments arose from the extension of coverage to people not previously covered.

It appears from the particulars furnished by the Deputy that the individual in question would have had average weekly earnings of less than £35. This would entitle him to a graduated personal rate payment of £25. In addition to this he would also be entitled to a further £21.70 in respect of his spouse and £25.60 for his two children, making a total weekly payment of £72.30.

Where a person has insufficient contributions or earnings to quality for a full social insurance payment, they may qualify for an assistance payment at a higher rate by way of unemployment assistance, if fit to work, or supplementary welfare allowance, both of which are payable subject to a means test.

Can the Minister comment on the statement by the Minister of State at the Department of Social Welfare, Deputy Burton, that the ghost of the dirty dozen should be buried? In other words, she was asking us to forget the promise she made prior to the general election last year. Can the Minister now confirm his commitment to eliminating the remaining nasty nine which affect mostly women? Last night I took the trouble to read out the nine cuts in the House. Can the Minister state his position in relation to each of the nine cuts?

We are getting into the debate which will continue tonight. The Minister of State was trying to get the Deputy to realise that there are much wider issues involved, that they should be taken in a more general context and, indeed, that many of the measures had been reviewed. The measures introduced in 1992 were reviewed in the context of the 1993 budget and a number of initiatives has been taken to alleviate particular difficulties identified in the course of the review. The measures still in force will continue to be reviewed in the light of their impact on social welfare customers and any further necessary changes will be made.

The Deputy has talked about numbers. I do not want to delay the House, because we are short on time at this stage, but I should say that a number of the measures have been changed and improvements have been made in disability benefit, treatment benefits for various categories, unemployment assistance, unemployment benefit, supplementary welfare allowance and in a variety of other measures. This was done very specifically and certainly we will look at the other measures on an ongoing basis.

I would remind the House that we have just 15 minutes to deal with four priority questions tabled by three Deputies. I would like to facilitate all three, so I beg your co-operation.

In view of his statement just now, is the Minister accepting that the dirty dozen have not been reversed? Is he now accepting that the statement made by the Minister of State at the Department of Social Welfare, Deputy Burton, on the "News at One" radio programme on a Sunday some months ago was completely inaccurate? She said last night that the ghost has to be buried because these promises are now haunting her. In relation specifically to the case mentioned would the Minister agree that there is a high level of confusion and insensitivity in a system where a person classified as ill by his Department is advised to go to a crowded community welfare office to beg for a supplementary welfare allowance? Will he now look at the anomalies and the injustices of that system?

While the Deputy has not given me the details of the system, we can deal with the case to which he referred. The Deputy's comments suggest that the person has less than £35 per week and therefore while sick is getting £72.30 per week. In terms of a just and equitable treatment for part-time workers that is a fair arrangement. We will look at the operation of that scheme further. This new system was introduced to extend benefit to part-time workers and applies right across the board. The Minister of State is right in saying that the bulk of these measures has been adjusted.

The Minister of State said they were withdrawn.

There is no point in getting into an argument about it.

Question No. 6 in the name of Deputy Allen.

Top
Share