I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important legislation. The Bill affects a large number of both young and old people. I welcome many of its changes. The Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs has given support to community groups which have done a tremendous job, particularly for the elderly by bringing them out for meals, etc. I welcome the role the Department has played in this. I welcome many other aspects of what the Minister has done over the past five years.
I take umbrage at the Minister over the lack of support for farming, an issue I have raised with him on a number of occasions. Departmental officials have heard me speak on numerous occasions about farm assist and the damage it has done to the farming community. My party and I wanted family income supplement to be extended to farming groups, small shopkeepers and small private industries. That would have ensured everyone was on a level playing pitch. However, there seems to be a view in Government that farm accounts cannot be trusted. Perhaps when one remembers the recent stories about the activity of some accountants – I can think of a former Taoiseach who did not keep his accounts well – one will realise the reason there is mistrust about farm accounts.
It is unfair that farmers are not treated in the same way as everyone else. I urge the Minister, even at this late stage, to reconsider the position. Farmers are as entitled as small shopkeepers and other small business holders to claim family income supplement. Singling out farmers is discriminatory.
Up to 40,000 farmers marched through the streets of Dublin in protest and one of the guarantees they received – which was designed to keep them quiet – was that the farm assist scheme would revolutionise the system of supports to small farmers. What has happened? Very few additional farmers obtained payments under the scheme and some lost out. I fully appreciate the reasons for that. Some were transferred from disability benefit to farm assist payments because it was slightly beneficial, while others were transferred from widows or widowers pensions. However, there was only a minor increase in the total number of payments. As a result, massive numbers of people have had to abandon farming. The figures will show that there has not ever been such a move away from farming.
Young people are no longer prepared to enter farming because they realise there are no real supports on which to rely if hard times occur. Four agricultural colleges have closed down during the lifetime of the Government. There is no doubt that the suggestion by a group established by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Deputy Walsh, that there will be no more than 20,000 full-time farmers by 2010 will become a reality. That is one of the commitments the Government made which will actually come to pass. Farming will become a thing of the past because no worthwhile safety net was put in place. Safety nets were put in place for others, but not for farmers.
During my time as a member of the Joint Committee on Family, Community and Social Affairs, I was glad to be involved in ensuring that some level of pension would be paid to those who did not have ten years' worth of stamps paid following the introduction of PRSI for the self-employed in 1988. We received agreement from the Minister that these people would be paid pensions on a pro rata basis. However, when the matter finally came before the House for finalisation, it emerged that only a half pension would be paid to those who had paid PRSI for five years or more. Is it fair that someone who has paid ten years worth of stamps should be paid a half pension? I accept that these people may not have been working full-time for ten years after 1988, but many of them paid the full ten years worth of stamps. They were glad to receive some form of payment, but just because they were born two or three days on the wrong side of 5 April they lost out and received no recognition for the other five years worth of stamps they paid. At this late stage I beg that this matter be reconsidered and that these people should be paid pensions in respect of the sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth years in respect of which they paid stamps.
While I am on the subject of elderly farmers and old age pensions, I received a telephone call today from a farmer in my constituency whose animals were taken away by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development and slaughtered at Henshaws. The man in question did not even know where they were going or what was going to happen to them. He trusted the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. This old age pensioner has in his possession a cheque for £1,500 which is not worth anything to him. He has had no promise from the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, whose officials removed his animals, when or if he will be paid. If we are to be sympathetic towards people such as the man to whom I refer and if we want to ensure the survival of rural areas, we must ensure that they are treated with courtesy, decency and honesty.
I welcome the change in child benefit payments. It is approximately four years since my party's leader, Deputy Noonan, our then spokesperson on finance, suggested that the only way of dealing with child care problems would be to dramatically increase the level of child benefit payments. Such an increase has been granted this year and we welcome that fact. However, a large number of child care places have been lost because of a lack of co-ordination between the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Social, Community and Family Affairs, Education and Science and others. There is a need to reconsider the position in this area. Female partners in couples on low and middle incomes are finding it difficult to remain in work because of a lack of affordable child care. Action must be taken in that regard.
The Minister spoke at length about carers. I appreciate that changes have been made in the carer's allowance in recent years. It was not recognised for a long period that these people needed support and much remains to be done. If there is not sufficient money available to provide support to all carers, more serious consideration should be given to the cases of those who are in real need. I was approached by a home carer recently who informed me about a woman for whom she cares whose daughter-in-law must provide care on a 24 hour basis. Her husband works in an ordinary job and works overtime to try to maintain the family. As a result, they are disqualified from receiving carer's allowance. It is sad that someone who provides 24 hour care receives no recognition. This woman can only travel to town to shop when her husband is at home.
I will comment on the situation of people who were obliged to travel abroad in the past in search of work who are entitled to free schemes, etc., if they are on a pension from the UK, Germany or some other country. I came across an anomaly the other day involving a person with a UK pension who has been living here for several years who is not entitled to claim living alone allowance. That is unfair. The woman in question was informed that because she was not receiving any payments from the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs, she was not entitled to the £6 living alone allowance. She was obliged to leave Ireland in the 1950s because there was no work here for her and she is costing the State nothing now. I urge the Minister to ensure that the position is rectified. I do not believe that, under the Bill, the living alone allowance is available to the person in question who is living on her bare pension. That should not be the case. This woman has no other income or means and simply because she is not entitled to apply for an Irish pension she cannot obtain the living alone allowance.
The position of widows and widowers has improved in that either is now entitled to obtain a pension. I welcome the increase in the dependant allowance that can be made as a once-off gesture, after death, to the surviving spouse. However, a major problem continues to obtain because widows are still linked to carers. If a widow is in receipt of a contributory pension, either on foot of her own contributions or those of her spouse, there is nothing to stop her from taking a full-time or part-time job. However, if she remains at home to care for one of her in-laws, for example, she is not entitled to claim an allowance. There is a law which says that if a person is a carer and is in receipt of social welfare payments, no allowance can be paid. That is something which a Government claiming to be so generous in relation to social welfare must take into account and must make sure is available. I welcome one change made during the course of this year whereby, if a husband or wife dies some weeks before 5 June and the other partner is a carer, that person will get the respite grant. I appreciate the courtesy of the Minister and his officials when I raised that matter and I hope it will apply on a permanent basis. I am aware of a situation in which two ladies were caring for two gentlemen, one a spouse and the other a neighbour, and both died on the one day. The neighbour carer got the £400 respite grant, as it was then, but the widow who really needed it was transferred to the widow's pension and would not have got the respite grant. I am glad the Department's response was generous and I hope that will be carried through in the regulations for this year.
The Minister and his backbenchers have highlighted the great increase in the amounts of money paid in recent years but they failed to recognise the costs. The cost of housing has increased dramatically during that period, as has the cost of rented accommodation for people on social welfare. That is a major problem. As Deputy Daly has already said, many elderly people in rural areas are still without toilet facilities. While the means to deal with the problem are available, it often takes so long to put it into operation that the person has died in the meantime. A much more co-ordinated effort is needed in that regard. While the problem does not rest directly with the social welfare people, it is indirectly a social welfare problem. There is often extra cost as a result of people not being housed properly and not having carers at an earlier date. The lack of bus services in many rural areas is another issue which needs serious attention. There is a major problem of loneliness which puts great pressure on people to go into homes for the elderly when that is not the best solution for them.
I particularly noted Deputy Daly's comments on education. The education grants for people coming off social welfare are beneficial. However, for those who have not ever been on social welfare, but whose families have been on it, the education grants are entirely unsatisfactory. In the case of a single mother or a family on disability benefit who are trying to educate a son or daughter at a third level college in Dublin or elsewhere, the only grant available is in the region of €2,000 and a small increase was given last year. This needs to be completely reviewed. In my Constituency of Cavan-Monaghan, there is one of the highest levels of drop-out from third level education and that is partly because people cannot afford to continue. That forces people into the dole queues. In the event of a downturn in the economy, as is now the case, those without a CV showing an adequate level of education find it much harder to get employment. The Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs and his Government colleagues must look more closely at that situation. A low level of participation in third level education leads to many problems for families.
I will turn to another issue which the Leas-Cheann Comhairle may say is not the responsi bility of the Minister of State, Deputy Moffatt, but it is relevant to the situation in Cavan. I refer to problems in relation to medical cards, which were available to approximately 37% of the population when this Government took office. Prior to the introduction of medical cards for over 70s, that figure had dropped dramatically because the means test has not been increased to take account of increases in income and social welfare rates. The Minister for Health and Children said the increase in social welfare rates would not cut off people from the medical card system and that, if they were cut off, they could re-apply. However, the reality is that a person with an income of £101, or less than €130, is not entitled to a medical card. A person on an income of around £200, with a spouse and three children, is not entitled to a medical card. This is a major problem, especially in rural Ireland, including the constituency I represent. A person who has not got a medical card cannot get a bus ticket for free travel. That is just one of the benefits linked to the medical card, without which people are forced into a poverty trap and enormous pressure is placed on families. I would have expected the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs to see this difficulty and try to deal with it. It is absolutely essential to have that situation rectified.
In general terms, I pay tribute to the officials in the social welfare system. There have been great advances and there is now a much more courteous and helpful attitude towards people seeking social welfare services. It was disappointing that it took such a long drawn out process to resolve the industrial dispute in Letterkenny, which caused great problems for people awaiting their entitlements, including child benefit. I urge the Government to ensure that the appeals service works better. I know of a person who has had to wait for months on end to have an appeal heard in relation to the farm assist scheme. People who are living in poverty need to have their cases dealt with promptly. I urge the Government to provide sufficient personnel to ensure that the appeals system operates properly. While I welcome many elements of this year's budget, we have still a long way to go in eliminating poverty traps. I look forward to the opportunity which parties on this side of the House will have after the general election to rectify those problems.
