Vol. 657 No. 4
68 Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her contribution to the Government strategy to address fuel poverty in light of the rising cost of fuel; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [24896/08]
In the previous Question Time, I indicated that persons over the age of 75 years would not be required to use the social services card. However, I should have stated that they would not be obliged to use it in the first tranche this year. An information campaign will be launched to support them in this regard. Given the discussion on the economic downturn, I wish to reassure people that the Government is committed to ensuring support for everyone in a vulnerable position.
The first question relates to a relevant and important matter, namely, fuel poverty and the rising cost of fuel. Fuel poverty is an issue that involves the Departments of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and Social and Family Affairs.
My Department's role is to assist social welfare recipients with heating costs, both through their basic payments and the household benefits package with fuel, electricity and gas allowances. These schemes have been improved significantly in recent years. For example, the fuel allowance is now payable for 30 weeks and benefits 290,000 people at an aggregate cost of €170 million this year. The payment rate has also increased to €18 per week or €21.90 for recipients living in designated smokeless areas. Electricity and gas allowances under the household benefits package are payable throughout the year to more than 355,000 pensioners, people with disabilities and carer households towards their heating, light and cooking costs at an estimated overall scheme cost of €159 million in 2008. The supplementary welfare allowance scheme can also be used to assist people in certain circumstances with specific heating needs due to infirmity or a particular medical condition.
The income maintenance needs of those on social welfare payments have also been met in recent years through significantly increased primary social welfare rates. Government policy is focused on increasing these rates to ensure that people can meet their basic living costs, including heating costs, throughout the year and also achieve an improvement in quality of life. Since December 2001, overall inflation has increased by 27% while energy product prices have increased by 65%. However, increases in social welfare payments have been between 71% and 88% in the same period.
A number of organisations, including Sustainable Energy Ireland, the Combat Poverty Agency and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, are engaged in action research projects on energy efficiency. My Department is co-operating with these projects, including providing funding for one project. Reports on these fuel research projects, which are expected by the third quarter of this year, will help to inform Government policy on fuel poverty.
Any changes to social welfare programmes to assist with heating costs will be considered in a budgetary context. However, the main focus of the Government will be on increasing social welfare payments in real terms to enable social welfare recipients to better meet heating and other needs.
While the Minister may have the results of the surveys by the third quarter, winter will have started by that time and people will be suffering. The Minister will be aware that the Institute of Public Health in Ireland believes fuel poverty levels are unacceptably high in the Republic. While the relevant statistics are old, she will also be aware that we have the highest incidence of winter mortality in Europe. While more people are bound to die during winter, the reasons include fuel poverty, according to the institute.
While the Minister mentioned that the Government cares about this issue, actions speak louder than words. A risk obtains in this situation. I assume the Minister is aware that the price of domestic heating oil increased by 47%, in excess of €1,200 or €1,300 per tank per year, between May 2007 and May 2008. How does she intend to address this matter? While I welcome Government focus on increasing social welfare rates, the fuel issue must be addressed specifically. Given the Minister's comments, I am concerned about whether she will really enter the rounds of negotiations to bat on this issue. Will she confirm to the House whether she intends to seek an increase? I am not asking for a token increase of an extra week to try to keep everyone happy or to prevent them from stating that they received nothing. I am asking for a real increase to reflect inflation in fuel prices.
Yesterday, Age Action Ireland put it to me that elderly people will need to make a choice between food and fuel this winter. This would be unacceptable in the Ireland of 2008. I want the Minister's commitment that she will ensure elderly people and lone parents need not make such a life or death decision.
I have discussed the important issue of fuel poverty with the Ministers for Finance, Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Given that fuel price increases affect a considerable number, the Government is anxious to ensure that it does not further disadvantage the vulnerable. The Deputy is wrong in stating that the issue is not being addressed.
There has been no response.
A primary contributor to fuel poverty is not the absence of money to pay for fuel, but the inefficiency of household heating systems. For this reason, the work being carried out by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on housing standards and energy issues is important. It should not just be a case of giving pensioners money to heat houses if that heat is going straight out the window. For this reason, it is important that Departments work together.
Deputy Enright referred to the Institute of Public Health in Ireland's figures on winter mortality rates, namely, excess deaths during winter over other months. Some 70% of those deaths are due to cardiovascular disease, 69% are due to respiratory illness and 40%——
As a direct consequence of houses not being heated properly.
Not necessarily.
According to the institute——
The Deputy's time has expired.
Some 40% of those deaths relate to housing. Given that houses must be of a certain standard, it is important that the Government continue to support initiatives in this regard. Last year, we increased the fuel allowance by one week. Its amount has been increased over a number of years. An income disregard of €100 over the contributory pension was introduced for those who could avail of it.
May I ask a supplementary question?
No, the Deputy's time has expired.
69 Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her attention has been drawn to recent research undertaken by the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice, which indicates that many low-income family types are unable to meet basic living costs; her views on the findings of the report; and the way she will act upon it. [24771/08]
I welcome the recent research by the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice, which clearly demonstrates the considerable progress made by the Government since the publication of its original research entitled, Minimum Essential Budgets for Six Households, in late 2006. This is one of a number of research models and presents some useful information. The updated findings will be studied with interest by the Department. The recent update shows significant improvements in the position for most household types. In particular, pensioner couple households and lone parents or couples with younger children have seen their positions improve dramatically.
The decisive steps taken by the Government in the past two years on a wide range of fronts have addressed some of the problems and challenges identified in the 2006 report and in similar studies. Such actions include the introduction of the early child care supplement and increases in social welfare rates and the national minimum wage. Social welfare pensions have increased by €30 per week and basic welfare rates by €32 per week since 2006. These increases have been well in excess of both inflation and wage growth. Child benefit rates have increased by more than 10% in the same period while the qualified child allowance has been significantly restructured and enhanced. Other measures have included improvements in the means testing arrangements for a range of schemes, such as jobseekers allowance and disability allowance, which are designed to encourage recipients and their spouses or partners to work, thereby increasing total household income, changes in the upper earnings limit for one-parent family payment and improvements in the family income supplement focused on larger families.
The Government remains committed to improving the standard of living of welfare dependent and low-income households significantly and to implementing the national action plan on social inclusion, a key objective of which is the elimination of consistent poverty. We will continue to pursue these policies having regard to available resources.
I asked for the Minister's opinion on the research conducted by the partnership. We would all acknowledge the work of its constituent members in respect of poverty. What are the Minister's opinions on the partnership's findings? While the research established that there have been improvements in many sectors, the partnership's approach to measuring what is required to survive and make ends meet among various family types is a different approach from that taken by the Minister's Department. After the partnership examined 27 family types, it found that 15 types were making ends meet. The remain 12, however, were not.
What is the Minister's opinion on the research and its approach to measuring the adequacy of income? Has the Minister considered adopting that type of approach in her Department? Rates have been set in the Department for different categories of social welfare recipients. Annual increases in benefits tend to be made in line with inflation. The approach proposed in this respect is different; it takes account of the different types of family compositions and the costs involved. One of the key areas to which recognition is not given is the difference in the child care costs associated with children of different ages. For example, whether it be child dependant allowance or the child benefit payment, will the Minister accept there is a world of difference in the costs involved in rearing a two year old and a 16 or 18 year old? Does she consider that the approach taken by the Vincentian Partnership has some merit and might be adopted by her Department?
As I said initially, this is only one of a number of research models. Many models and figures were presented by the various groups I met in recent weeks. They each come up with different measures. One of them is the Vincentian minimum essential budget, which is only one such method. It proposes an income level of €265 per week for an unemployed single male. An alternative, which is frequently put forward, is that of 60% of the median income, which proposes an income level of €223. Another is the benchmark model which proposes an income level of 30% gross average industrial earnings. Different people use different models. Therefore, it is not correct to say that any one model is better than another.
I did not say that.
No, therefore, there is no question of us simply adopting one model over the others.
The Government has already accepted that there are different cost implications for different groups. The early child care allowance was introduced in the first instance because of the particularly high child care costs involved in rearing very young children. That is why children under the age of six were particularly targeted in that respect. The child benefit payment targets families with children. The success of targeting pensioners has been indicated by the reduction to 2.2% of the number of people, particularly pensioners, living in consistent poverty. Therefore, the Government recognises that different people and groups need to be targeted in different ways, but our overall aim is to ensure the general rate of social welfare payments will continue to increase.
The time allocated for this question has expired. We will move on to Question No. 70.
I thought a second round of supplementary questions was allowed.
There is a time limit of six minutes for priority questions and the time allocated for this question has expired. Two minutes is allowed for the initial reply by the Minister and four minutes for subsequent questions and replies.
Perhaps the Chair would indicate when we reach a certain time to ensure that a second round of supplementaries is allowed.
There is very little time for these questions. I have to go by what is provided in the relevant Standing Order.
70 Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the contingency plans in place to ensure that customer services are not affected by the ongoing industrial dispute within her Department; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [24897/08]
The Civil Public and Services Union, CPSU, the union which represents clerical and supervisory grades in the Civil Service, is currently engaged in industrial action in pursuit of a claim for the extension of flexi time bands in the Department. Initially, the industrial action commenced with the withdrawal of co-operation with the implementation of a new time and attendance system by the Department. The implementation of the new system had been agreed in November 2006 as part of the Department's Towards 2016 modernisation action plan, progress on which has been the basis for pay awards under the agreement.
Industrial action was escalated with effect from 28 April 2008 to include the withdrawal of lunch-time service to the public at the Department's local offices and not answering telephones during the lunch-time period across the Department. Discussions at a departmental level were unable to resolve the issue. Following the intervention of the National Implementation Body, the parties were referred to facilitation discussions at the Labour Relations Commission. At the end of two sessions, on 29 May and 12 June, agreement was not reached.
The CPSU escalated industrial action, with effect from 16 June, to include not answering telephones in all of the Department's offices and a ban on overtime. However, on foot of a statement issued by the National Implementation Body on 19 June 2008 and the agreement of both the Department and the CPSU to engage in further discussions at the LRC, the CPSU stood down the escalated action that had been in effect from Monday 16 June. In accordance with the recommendation of the National Implementation Body the discussions at the LRC are to be completed by 1 July 2008.
Pending resolution of the dispute the Department's local offices will be closed and telephones will not be answered during lunch-hour. However, apart from this, services are being provided as normal.
Clients who may be unable to attend at a local office during current opening hours may continue to make application for various payments by post. Application forms are widely available at post offices, citizens information bureaus and on the Department's website www.welfare.ie.
It is not envisaged that the current dispute will lead to delays in payments, but the matter will be kept under review. I was reassured to hear the assistant general secretary of the CPSU state in an interview on national radio that "nobody's payment will be affected" and that it will continue to be a priority that "nobody suffers in terms of payments".
Some improvement in resolving matters has occurred since I tabled this question last week. As I was not allowed raise and get a response to this matter on the Order of Business, I raised it by way of tabling this question.
Has a backlog of work been created as a result of the industrial action to date? I appreciate the Minister said the industrial action has not caused the stoppage or prevention of payments to people, but is there concern that such industrial action has created or will create in the period up to 1 July a backlog of work in the Department's offices? I received correspondence, which I am aware the Minister also received, as it was copied to me, from people who experienced difficulty contacting the Department's offices and who have complained to us on that basis. This is the key issue, namely, whether as a result of the inconvenience caused by the industrial action a backlog of work has been created and, if it has, how the Minister intends to address it.
I am not aware of any backlog and it is unlikely one would develop at this stage, particularly now that the escalation of the strike has been stood down. It is important that people realise that given that applications must be made in writing, that they will be dealt with. People should download the relevant forms or obtain them from the Department's offices and submit their applications.
Our intention always is to serve the public. We want to ensure the best possible service continues to be delivered, as is the case in all the local offices throughout the country, and to ensure people can get the information they need and have their applications processed.
At present, local offices will be closed during lunch-hour and telephones will not be answered during that period. Hopefully people will be able to contact the offices during office hours outside lunch-hour. Given that the people concerned will engage in further discussions at the Labour Relations Commission tomorrow, I sincerely hope both sides can reach a resolution of the dispute in the interests of the public.
Difficulties arose initially about flexi time hours. Some concern was expressed that if the dispute escalated, which hopefully will not happen now, it could affect the agencies under the remit of the Minister's Department. Does she have an concern about that or has that issue been brought to her attention?
No it has not been brought to my intention that there is any danger or likelihood of that happening. It is probably a bit early to be discussing these issues, given that discussions on this matter will take place at the Labour Relations Commission tomorrow and that the advice is to have it resolved before 1 July, which will be next week.
71 Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the work that has been carried out by her Department in relation to the commitment in the programme for Government to examine the possibility of introducing paternity benefit. [24802/08]
The question of introducing a paternity benefit payment would depend on establishing an underlying entitlement to statutory paternity leave in the first instance. Responsibility for issues relating to paternity leave rests with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Following commitments made in the social partnership agreement Towards 2016, a working group led by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has been convened to review the level of provision of both maternity and paternity leave. The group is currently examining various options and is due to conclude its deliberations before the end of 2008. The work of the group will be informed by the commitment in An Agreed Programme for Government to increase, over the next five years, paid maternity leave by five weeks, to make all leave after the first 26 weeks available to either parent, and to examine the possibility of introducing a statutory entitlement to paternity leave and shared parental leave. The Department participates in this group.
While male employees are not entitled under Irish law to either paid or unpaid paternity leave, they may be entitled to parental leave. Parental leave entitles both parents who qualify to take a period of up to 14 weeks' unpaid leave from employment in respect of children aged up to eight years. There is no provision for a social insurance based payment for periods of parental leave, but employees may be entitled to credited contributions to maintain their social insurance record for the period.
The introduction of paid paternity leave would have significant cost implications. For example, the estimated full year cost of introducing a paternity benefit, on a similar basis to maternity benefit, would be €273 million. The question of how such a payment would be financed would have to be examined.
There is a recognition in the programme for Government of the need to support parents in spending more time with their children. The Government also made a commitment in it to examine the possibility of introducing paternity benefit. It seems little progress has been made on that. That area comes under the remit of the Minister's Department. I do not understand why consideration of such provision must be deferred until the working group in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has completed its business. Does the Minister believe it is right that the State should support fathers in spending time with their infants within the first few months of their lives? There are major pressures on a couple when a baby is born. There is a recognition of this in the provision of maternity leave and parental leave. The problem, however, is that parental leave is unpaid. Therefore, a father will suffer financially if he takes leave from work to spend time with his partner and new baby. This is a regressive situation. We should be facilitating parents in spending more time with their children. Is the Minister prepared to move ahead in this regard in respect of the responsibilities which fall within her Department?
It is not possible for the Department of Social and Family Affairs to move ahead without an entitlement being established. However, the establishment of an entitlement to statutory paternity leave comes under the remit of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. That is why we are working together in the working group. The Government has always shown itself to be committed to parents. The provision in the programme for Government for an additional five weeks paternal leave to be available to either parent after the first 26 weeks indicates the importance we place on facilitating both parents in being actively involved in the rearing of their children.
However, entitlement to statutory paternity leave would first have to be established, after which a scheme would have to be devised to facilitate it. After that, questions arise as to how much it might cost and where the money would come from. All these issues are being considered by the working group, which is due to report by the end of the year. This process is being led by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform but my Department has a key role as the prospective administrator of any potential provision. I look forward to the working group's report.
We are talking about paternity benefit. Entitlement would be based on the person's insurance record, which comes within the remit of the Minister's Department. I do not see the difficulty in establishing that entitlement, just as entitlement may be established in respect of any other social welfare payment. That is what the commitment in the programme for Government is about. Parents are seeking a provision for paid parental leave, however small to begin with, which they can take within a few months of a baby being born. That is the time when couples experience most pressure. I see no difficulty in establishing that entitlement. Given the commitment in the programme for Government, the Minister should lead the way on this. It is not necessarily a question of providing the same type of entitlement as already exists in respect of maternity benefit but of at least providing a small amount of paternity benefit for those early weeks of a child's life.
It is my intention to await the report of the working group, which is due at the end of the year. The group will consider all the implications of the introduction of such a statutory entitlement, including cost and issues relating to competitiveness. These are significant implications which must be considered by each of the relevant Departments. The report is due at the end of the year, after which there will be three and a half years of the Government's term remaining to implement its recommendations.
Is the Minister personally committed to the introduction of such a benefit?
I await the outcome of the report.
Does she have a view on it?
72 Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the progress made to date on the development of a national carers’ strategy, which was due to be completed by the end of 2007; when this strategy will be completed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [24899/08]
The development of a national carers' strategy is a key Government commitment in both the national partnership agreement, Towards 2016, and the programme for Government. The focus of the strategy is on supporting informal and family carers in the community. While social welfare supports for carers are a key issue in the strategy, other issues such as access to respite and other health services, education, training and employment are also important.
Co-operation between relevant Departments and agencies is essential if the provision of services, supports and entitlements for carers is to be fully addressed. For that reason, an interdepartmental working group, chaired by the Department of the Taoiseach, was established to develop the strategy. Developing the strategy involves consultation with Departments and bodies not represented on the working group. The Department of Social and Family Affairs, on behalf of the working group, has met with a wide range of organisations including the Equality Authority, Combat Poverty Agency and the Citizens Information Board.
A request for submissions from the public was published in regional newspapers in early March. The closing date for submissions was 18 April 2008. There was a good response from individuals and organisations and the submissions received are currently being examined.
Towards 2016 commits the Department to hosting an annual consultation meeting of carer representative groups and relevant Departments and agencies. Such a meeting was held on 23 January 2008. The theme was the national carers' strategy and groups were given an opportunity to comment on the draft terms of reference and to raise other issues considered relevant in the context of the strategy. It is intended to hold a second meeting with carer groups.
The commitment to the development of a national carers' strategy also includes a commitment to appropriate consultation with the social partners. The first of two consultation meetings with the social partners was held on 8 May 2008. Key issues raised were recognition for carers and their work, access to suitable health services, income support, training, gender issues and balancing employment and care.
It is intended to publish the strategy later this year. In the meantime, substantial improvements have been made to supports for carers as weekly payment rates have greatly increased to €214 per week for carers aged under 66 and €232 for carers aged over 66. The level of the respite care grant has been in creased to €1,700 per year. Qualifying conditions for carer's allowance have been eased, notably with the increased earnings disregards which now stand at €332.50 for a single person and €665 for a couple, thus exceeding the Towards 2016 commitments in this regard.
At the meeting of 23 January to which the Minister referred, the impression was given to those present that work would commence as soon as possible on the strategy and that it would be completed by mid-2008. Next Tuesday, 1 July, is mid-2008. The initial deadline was the end of 2007. What is the Department's policy on deadlines? Does it follow the Government's lead on issues such as decentralisation in respect of which the Taoiseach told us yesterday that while a three-year commitment has not been delivered six years later, it does not matter and we must move on. The commitment to finalise a national carers' strategy is six months overdue and it remains a work in progress.
Will the Minister offer a firm deadline as to when the strategy will be completed? Will she provide more detail on the depth of the consultation that is taking place? There is concern among carers that they will be presented with something which does not meet their needs. There was some discussion at the meeting of 23 January and a position paper was presented at the last meeting with the social partners. The three agencies to which the Minister referred are State agencies or at least related to her Department. Carers and their representative bodies are concerned that the issues of most concern to them may not be addressed in the strategy. They do not even know whether it will include short-term, medium-term or long-term aims and what they will entail.
I appreciate that various Departments and agencies are involved in the process but, as the Minister acknowledged, her Department is providing the secretariat. While the Department of the Taoiseach may be the lead Department, much of the work falls to the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Will the Minister provide a clear timeframe for the publication of the strategy and for its delivery?
It was not possible to meet the deadline of the end of 2007 because the section of the Department dealing with this issue was also working on the Green Paper on pensions, which involved a broad range of consultation, as well as the development of new arrangements for payments to nursing home. However, since this process began, there has been a significant level of positive consultation. The request for submissions has produced submission from 50 organisations, 100 from individuals and some 360 which came through questionnaires.
The Carers Association of Ireland held a series of regional seminars at the end of last year which allowed individuals to put forward their views on the strategy. The association has compiled those contributions into a report which I will launch next week. In the last fortnight I have met representatives of the Carers Association of Ireland and Care Alliance Ireland, the former representing individuals and the latter voluntary organisations. Both groups had an opportunity to put forward their views. All these consultations are feeding into the development of the strategy.
Many of the issues being raised by carers are more relevant to the Department of Health and Children than to my Department. At the same time, because they have such wide-reaching terms of reference, they would impact directly on my Department. The work is ongoing under the Department of the Taoiseach and the target is to complete it by the end of the year.
It is not fair to suggest that the meetings being held by the Carers Association of Ireland are part of the reason that the carers' strategy has been delayed.
That is not what I said. That is part of the consultative process.
The association was consulting its own members. In addition, it is always available to consult with the Government with a view to achieving progress. The Minister has told me what I already know. What I seek is a firm deadline. I appreciate that the pensions issue had to be dealt with, but I am not sure what role the Department had in the nursing homes issue. These matters have been on the agenda for some years and to point to them as reasons for the delay in the national carers' strategy is a lame excuse. Will the Minister provide a definitive timeframe for final publication of the strategy?
My Department is not the lead Department on this. The intention is to publish it later this year but there are other Departments involved. It is being led by the Department of the Taoiseach.
