Willie Penrose
Question:27 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his views on the reported growth of inequality between the richest and poorest deciles during his administration of his Department. [31617/01]
Other Questions. - Income Inequality.
The data available for analysis of the differences in share of income between deciles is provided by the ESRI through its analysis of the living in Ireland survey and by the Central Statistics Office through the household budget survey. The results of each of these surveys are not directly comparable due to differences in the methodology used but, at present, the recently released results of the household budget survey, which was carried out between June 1999 and July 2000, provide us with the most up to date data on income shares between deciles. The latest data from the ESRI refers to the 1998 living in Ireland survey.
The findings of the household budget survey revealed that the ratio between average weekly disposable income of households in the highest income decile compared with those in the lowest decile was 13 to one in 1999-2000, compared with 11 to one in 1994-95. However, when one looks beyond the headline figures, one can see that in real terms households at all income levels are now substantially better off than they were in 1994-95. It should be noted that the results of the household budget survey do not reflect the fact that calculation of income does not take account of household size and composition. Households in the top income deciles are larger and are much more likely to contain two or more employees. For example, 80% of the top income decile households had two or more employees compared with only 0.4% of the lowest income decile.
This is further reflected in the results of the 1998 living in Ireland survey which showed significant reductions in the levels of consistent poverty in Ireland since 1994. Consistent poverty fell from 15% in 1994 to 8% in 1998, and we are, therefore, well on our way to achieving our revised national anti-poverty strategy target of reducing this number below 5% by 2004. I expect further progress on this front once detailed figures for 2000 are published.
Additional InformationThe success of policies over recent years in combating unemployment and reducing the level of consistent poverty demonstrates a tangible improvement in the lot of people on lower incomes, notwithstanding the very rapid increase in average incomes driven by economic success and, particularly, the significant increase in employment.
Our commitment is to strive towards the creation of an inclusive society where everyone has the opportunity and incentive to participate in the social and economic life of this country. We have given practical effect to that commitment in our economic, labour market and budgetary policies over the term of this Government.
Will the Minister agree that one of the fundamental legacies of this Government, as Mr. Noel Clear of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul said last week, is the rampant growth in inequality that has taken place over the past five years? The Minister has admitted today that this society is more unequal now than when the rain bow Government left office. The highest decile is doing much better. Does the Minister agree that, as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and the Combat Poverty Agency have reported, the richest 10% of our population owns a quarter of the national income, the poorest 10% owns only 3%, our rate of child poverty is the highest in the European Union and that our women and older people have a high rate of poverty? In summary, the Minister is handing on a legacy of serious inequality and a society more divided than ever. While people will acknowledge that national income has increased, the Minister has failed in his major remit.
I do not agree for one minute with the Deputy's assertion. People such as Mr. Clear and others conveniently forget that 300,000 jobs have been created since this Government came into office.
The Minister did not create them.
Mr. Clear asked for £40 and the Minister gave £8.
People who would have been on social welfare and in receipt of assistance from St. Vincent de Paul were in work. It is important to give figures in relation to the percentage increases for social welfare recipients. Between 1994 and 1997, the old age pension went up by 9.8%. Under this Government, it went up by 48%, albeit over a slightly longer period.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): So did the balance of payments.
The old age non-contributory pension went up during the period 1994-97 by 10%. Under this Government, it went up by 56%. Every other figure shows similar growth. Short-term unemployment assistance went up 11% under the rainbow coalition but by 43% under this Government. I do not accept the Deputy's assertion. Consistent poverty has been halved during this Government's term in office.
Does the Minister agree that there has been significant progress in relation to the reduction of consistent poverty by this Government and the previous Government? Does he further agree that there has been a substantial increase in relative income poverty, and that this is accepted by all of the agencies who work in this area? When are we likely to see the national anti-poverty strategy review published? There was an expectation that we would see it before the budget. When is the Minister to publish this report?
Does the Minister agree that, in the course of the last five budgets, the top 30% in our society have received just over 55% of all additional resources? There was some progress made in this year's budget but not in the previous four. Is that not an appalling indication of where the priorities of this Government lay in relation to helping to lift people out of poverty?
I do not accept that. I challenge the Deputy—
The Combat Poverty Agency have said it.
—and I challenge any independent observer to look at the record of this Government and that of the Rainbow Coalition. That is the only yardstick we can go by. For the second year in a row the Combat Poverty Agency – who would normally criticise a Government – has come out in favour of the policy direction which this Government has taken.
The Minister did not make that agency's target.
If Members read any of the Sunday papers they will see, particularly in relation to Deputy McCreevy's record as Minister for Finance—
The Minister has not read that.
—it will confirm that the rich have not benefited but that the poor have.