James Browne
Question:36. Deputy James Browne asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection her plans to address the unemployment black spots in County Wexford; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [50465/17]
Other Questions
Question No. 35 replied to with Written Answers.
Job Initiatives
What are the Minister's plans to address the unemployment black spots in County Wexford? Could she make a statement on the matter?
The official measure of unemployment is sourced from the quarterly national household survey, QNHS. The most recent data show that the unemployment rate fell from a peak of 15% in 2012 to just over 6% in mid-2017. The number at work has increased from just over 1.8 million in quarter 2 of 2012 to over 2 million in quarter 2 of 2017. That is an increase of just under 230,000 people with new jobs. Within the south-east region, which includes Wexford, unemployment has fallen from a staggering 19% to 8.1% over the same period, and the number in employment has increased by 29,000 to 214,900.
While the data from the QNHS are not available at county level, trends in the live register can give an indication of underlying trends in local unemployment. Overall, the live register in Wexford has fallen by almost 42% in five years, close to the reduction of 44% nationally. In the year to October 2017, the live register number in Wexford has fallen by 1,741 people, or almost 14%, again closely in line with the national trend.
The Government's primary strategy to tackle unemployment since 2012 has been twofold. First, through policies set out in the Action Plan for Jobs, the objective is to create an environment in which business can succeed and create jobs. The policy now includes a specific regional action plan for jobs for the south east that has seen over 8,000 jobs created in the area over the past two years. Second, through Pathways to Work, we ensure that as many of these new jobs and other vacancies that arise in our economy are filled by people taken from the live register. Under this policy, the employment service and activation supports provided by my Department are heavily concentrated on the areas of highest unemployment, including those in Wexford. For example, case officers in Wexford are currently working with over 1,400 people in identifying suitable employment and training opportunities. Almost 3,000 referrals to training and educational opportunities took place in 2016. A total of 1,165 of those training opportunities have been made to date in 2017, an increase of over 33% on the same period in 2016.
I acknowledge the Deputy is concerned about his region but the policies we have put in place, both through activation and the Action Plan for Jobs, are working. We will continue to give extra support to Wexford until its figures are in line with the national trend.
My question concerns the unemployment black spots, particularly those in County Wexford as outlined in the recently released CSO figures. The south east in general and parts of Wexford in particular continue to suffer unnecessarily from high unemployment. I say unnecessarily because there is a huge untapped potential in terms of the economy in County Wexford, particularly in light of its proximity to Dublin and Europe. I am particularly concerned that, in the broader statistics of decreasing unemployment, local areas with persistent unemployment will be lost in the statistics and forgotten. It will take targeted measures to address the high levels of unemployment in certain parts of Wexford. I am especially concerned about unemployed people under the age of 25 and those over the age of 55. Will the Minister outline the specific programmes to target youth unemployment and unemployment among those aged over 55, particularly in circumstances where individuals have been unemployed long term?
It is astounding that the number of unemployed people in the south east rose from 181,300 in 2012 to 214,900 in 2017, an increase of 15.5%, whereas nationally unemployment rose by only 11.5% in the same period. Specific care, attention and extra resources are being given to the south east. The unemployment rate in the south east is still relatively high at 8.1% given that the national average is 6%.
In terms of unemployment black spots identified in the census, it is important to recognise that the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection's services through the Intreo offices, jobs clubs, JobPath and other activation measures are focused on unemployed individuals as opposed to specific areas. This means that those areas where unemployed individuals are most concentrated get the most supports. That is currently what happens and it will continue to happen in the south east. We will work to ensure that the success realised in recent years in terms of the improvement of employment levels in Deputy Browne's area will continue. We will keep working until everybody who wants a job can get a job.
I acknowledge that there has been employment growth but the south east, particularly Wexford, still lags behind the rest of the country. High rates of unemployment continue to be a feature in parts of County Wexford.
In the context of activation programmes and trying to get individuals back into the workforce, I am concerned that some of the activity in this regard is not being pursued in an intelligent manner. I am aware of many people both under the age of 25 and over the age of 55 who suffer from obvious mental health problems. They have difficulties remaining in mainstream employment but they are being taken off community employment, CE, schemes in circumstances where, for example, they are contributing to local society. I refer to meals on wheels schemes, village renewal schemes and work in community centres. Those people are being forced into training and start-your-own-business schemes for which they are plainly not suitable when it would be good for their mental health and for the community if they were allowed to remain on the schemes to which I refer. The concerns of individuals who are experiencing difficulties should be addressed.
Within the Department, ten activation case officers in County Wexford work deliberately and in a very focused way with those who are unemployed to ensure that we get them employment-ready and help them to link up with the jobs that are available and, thankfully, being created in Deputy Browne's area.
I wish to correct the record. Nobody is taken off a CE scheme or a Tús scheme. Conditions attach to those activation programmes. For Tús, there is a one-year condition attaching.
Are people not taken off those schemes after a certain period, for example, three years?
There are conditions attaching to all of the activation schemes but nobody is taken off them.
People are not allowed to stay on them indefinitely.
That is not the same as what Deputy Browne said earlier.
People are taken off the schemes after three years.
The position with regard to people coming to the end of their period on schemes is entirely different to the suggestion that they are being taken off them.
They are taken off after a period.
The Minister should be allowed to conclude.
The Minister, rather than being obtuse, should address the substance of the issue.
Deputy Browne should not call me obtuse. Terms and conditions attach to every activation scheme. The current terms and conditions with CE schemes are two years and three years, with an extension to seven years in a person's total working lifespan. Nobody is taken off a CE scheme. People come to the end of their term and have to go to other activation programmes, as is the norm. The CE schemes are under review in the context of changing those terms and conditions to reflect some of the things Deputy Browne suggested. He should please not misrepresent the schemes that were established by his party some years ago.
The Minister is dealing in semantics.
I call Deputy John Brady to introduce his question.
Could I just say that case officers are working-----
I am sorry but we must move on.
Employment Rights
John Brady
Question:37. Deputy John Brady asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the steps she is taking to address the growing problem of bogus self-employment; if her Department has examined the amount of PRSI being lost due to same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [50581/17]
I wish to ask the Minister what actions are being taken by her Department to tackle bogus self-employment, which is rife within the construction and media sectors. The result is a loss of PRSI contributions and a loss to the Exchequer in general. There are also major implications for workers' rights and entitlements.
Deputy Brady is aware that this is a particular bugbear of mine. Bogus self-employment arises when an employer wrongly treats a worker as an independent contractor in order to avoid paying tax and social insurance contributions. There are no official data on the extent of bogus self-employment but I wish there was. It is not clear whether the problem is growing but, anecdotally, we are all aware that the norms within working environments are changing.
The recent data from the quarterly national household survey records 312,000 individuals as self-employed in 2017, which accounts for 15% of the overall number of people in employment. The survey does not show any significant increase in the numbers claiming to be self-employed, nor does it show any significant disparity between Ireland and other European countries. It is a case that we all have a problem and that we have had it for a long time and have just not addressed it. I hope the House collectively wants to fix that.
Social welfare inspectors inspect a wide range of businesses as part of the ongoing compliance operations. Inspections are conducted jointly between the Revenue Commissioners and the Workplace Relations Commission. Where evidence of non-compliance is detected, the matter is pursued. Officials also investigate specific claims brought to the Department's attention by either individuals or organisations. The relevant section in the Department is the scope insurability section. The section determines the employment status of individuals at their request or on the request of a company. Where a misclassification of a worker as self-employed is detected, the correct status and class are determined and social insurance arrears are collected. Under the Social Welfare Consolidation Act, there are specific offences concerning employment contributions. On conviction, fines and-or imprisonment can ultimately imposed.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
Any worker who has concerns about his or her employment and PRSI status should contact my Department and the matter will be investigated.
The classification of a worker for PRSI purposes is increasingly complicated by what is termed "disguised employment". The latter involves intermediary employment structures and certain self-employment arrangements. My Department is concerned that such mechanisms are being used to reduce the amount of PRSI and tax being paid, with a subsequent loss to the Exchequer and the Social Insurance Fund. An interdepartmental working group, comprising officials from my Department, the Department of Finance and the Revenue Commissioners has completed a report on this issue. The Minister for Finance and I are considering the report with a view to its publication in the near future.
The Minister indicated that 312,000 people are registered as self-employed within the State. There is not just anecdotal evidence of bogus self-employment in the construction sector, it is also a feature in the information technology, IT, and media sectors. In January 2016, the then Ministers for Social Protection and Finance launched a joint consultation on the use of intermediary-type structures and self-employment arrangements. A public consultation process was initiated and a total of 23 submissions were made to it. Last month, I tabled a parliamentary question to the Minister and was informed that the two Departments are working on the issue and that the submissions are still being assessed. The public consultation took place 20 months ago. We need action. What is the status of the report and when will it be published? The issue is very serious. I will refer to other areas in a moment but I would first like the Minister to respond.
We are not still considering the 23 submissions. They have been considered. My real concern is that there were only 23. The report is being considered by me and the Minister for Finance. I expect to be able to publish it in the next couple of weeks with a view to determining actions we will take at the beginning of next year to address the issue.
My concerns are twofold. It is not my job to collect social insurance contributions but it is my job to spend the money from those contributions.
If I had what we all perceive to be the shortfall of employers' PRSI to spend, we could have a really different conversation in this House on how to spend it. Equally important to me are employment rights, which is my responsibility, for those people who find themselves in positions where they are forced into self-employment as opposed to real employment. I am determined to fix that early next year. If there is a bonus of getting a couple of million euro or a couple of hundred million euro extra in social insurance contributions, I will enjoy having that conversation at the committee on how to spend it.
A couple of weeks ago before the social protection committee, the Minister said she hoped to bring this report to a sub-committee of the Cabinet. Has that happened? We know there is much money lost to Revenue and through potential social insurance contributions. The overall loss to the Exchequer could be €80 million.
The Minister also touched on inspections being carried out by the Department but I ask for specifics on that. I am not sure what exactly officials or inspectors from the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection are looking for when they go into check this type of employment, whether it is on a building site or elsewhere. Perhaps in the first instance they check if somebody is in receipt of a jobseeker's payment and working as well. That does not cut to the chase. There are people who are forced into self-employment who are losing out on their entitlements as employees. For example, they should be entitled to sick pay, holiday pay and all the other entitlements that go along with that. It is a serious problem not just in the construction industry, as I stated, but in other areas.
How many of these inspections have been carried out and in what type of employment? Have they just targeted the construction industry? Have they gone to places such as RTÉ, for example, and what exactly are the inspectors looking for? I would like more specifics on the inspectors.
The Deputy might be confused as there are many different inspectors and sections in our Department. The inspectors who look after this have nothing to do with trying to figure out if a person is on a jobseeker's payment. That is somebody else's job. The inspectors involved with assessing insurability contributions go into a job and see that a person is in class S when he or she should be in class K. They will reflect that and get it changed. It is about working with both the employer and employee to ensure the right classification of a social insurance contribution is made on behalf of employees, and if it is not, to back-track it and ensure dues to the State are paid.
There is also the scope section within the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection. Any of the people suggested by the Deputy who may find themselves in positions where they know they are not really self-employed can make a complaint or inquiry to the Department any day of the week and we will follow it up. The problem is these people do not do so. They do it in small numbers. My belief is many of the 312,000 people perhaps do not know about the scope unit and we will address that in the new year.
I am not sure I said the report was going to a sub-committee of the Cabinet. That might have been the other report on the pensions anomaly. I have so many reports coming out of my ears at this stage, it is not funny. This report is not going to a sub-committee of the Cabinet but it is going to Cabinet in the next couple of weeks. The only reason I am holding off is because I am not prepared to send a report to the Cabinet without clear, precise, specific recommendations as to how we can address the matter. That is what I am considering now with the Minister for Finance.
Will that be before Christmas?
Absolutely.
Pension Provisions
Clare Daly
Question:38. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the progress on addressing problems in regard to the distribution of financial assets in a pension scheme (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [50585/17]
I sympathise with the Minister as, like her, I am following so many pensions investigations and I am not sure what she thinks this question is about or even what my office thinks it is about. In my head, it covers two elements. The first is a progress report on the investigation sought by the Minister from the Pensions Authority into the Aer Lingus second supplementary pension scheme. It could also potentially address the review of the annuity matter we discussed in a Topical Issue debate some time ago.
Scheme trustees have duties and responsibilities under trust law, under other relevant legislation and under the Pensions Act 1990, as amended. The duties of pension scheme trustees include administering the trust in accordance with the law and the terms of the trust deed and rules. I had previously confirmed that the matter relating to the scheme we spoke about recently has been raised by my Department with the Pensions Authority. It has informed me that an examination of the scheme is being actively pursued. The Pensions Authority will assess if there has been a breach of any legal obligations and take any necessary action if such a breach is found. I am not in a position to tell the Deputy when this will happen, and I know that is probably frustrating. In fairness, the authority is doing a good deed for us and it is not within my gift to tell it to hurry up. The authority will revert as quickly as it can.
There is another matter that is not reflected in the question. I know the Deputy has some amendments to the Social Welfare Bill and I spoke to her colleague yesterday evening when we were debating the Bill. The amendments will be ruled out of order in regard to this Bill. They are not suitable for this Bill and they would be more appropriate for the social welfare and pensions Bill. I ask her to put down the amendments again to that Bill.
I thank the Minister. I suppose the reassurance that staff and members of the scheme want is to know the investigation is still being actively pursued. There is a worry about a time delay. I remind the House we were dealing with a case where a second supplementary pension scheme had €100 million in it was sitting there for two years, belonging to people who had retired in the meantime and other people who had a right to access those benefits. It was being bled by management charges, payments and so on, basically haemorrhaging value. The big concern for staff is that after pushing for assets to be distributed for almost two years, finally getting the most appalling distribution mechanism that anyone could have thought and putting a block on that, the danger is that the investigation may lead to moneys not being distributed for a further period. I ask that we keep the pressure on. It is probably the reason for this question. There are many people with entitlements who have been treated quite shabbily.
We requested the investigation at the Deputy's request. I am very happy to have done that. We saw this parliamentary question come in this week and we contacted the authority again, which gave us the assurance that the investigation is being actively pursued. I hope the Deputy appreciates that I am not in a position to give her a date on it, but we will keep in constant contact to ensure the matter is finalised.
I thank the Minister. There are broader matters linking to this scheme, the wind-up and annuities being purchased for pensioners. This morning, a joint life annuity allowing for 1.5% inflation per year would cost €37 for every €1 of pension. We discussed last week the need to seriously address that area. There is some form of consultation that the Department will initiate in that respect. It is incredibly urgent, given the number of pensioners who need to access funds, who are essentially being bled dry and whose schemes are losing money because of what needs to go to annuity purchases. The only winners in that are the big companies and it is to the detriment of others with the reduction of benefits in the scheme. We need an urgent review of all aspects of the area. Many of the issues with this scheme are linked to the so-called minimum funding standard and liabilities being calculated on annuity prices. This is quite urgent and we must progress the matter.
The Deputy knows I agree with her. The Pensions Act 1990 is the legislation that must be amended but the Taxes Consolidation Act allows flexible options. That is the area where what we are discussing must be reflected. I have written to the Minister to ask him to do so. When we launch the public consultation on pension reform, it will be the time to sit down and determine exactly what is in the best interests of the people the Deputy and I represent so we can make the changes reflecting what they want and need.
Social Welfare Benefits Eligibility
Aindrias Moynihan
Question:39. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the way in which the group of persons which will become eligible for the telephone allowance in the period of time when the fuel allowance is not payable will receive their entitlement; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [50590/17]
The introduction of the telephone allowance was welcome, although it was introduced in a limited fashion because of the fuel allowance and living alone elements. I am concerned that people meeting those qualifying criteria during the summer months, when the fuel allowance is not available, will lose their entitlements. We are trying to establish how the Minister intends to identify them and ensure they get their payments. I am speaking particularly about people whose incomes fall below the threshold of the fuel allowance.
If I am to be really honest, I was not 100% sure about what the Deputy was asking but now I am sure. Is the Deputy's concern that when the fuel allowance is not being paid, people will not get their telephone allowance?
They absolutely will.
The determining factor for people who receive the telephone allowance is that they have to be in receipt of a payment or the fuel allowance. We cross-reference anybody who is in receipt of the fuel allowance or other payments and he or she is entitled to receive the telephone allowance which will be paid on a weekly basis. The two conditions will determine who will receive it, but once it is decided that a person is to receive the allowance, he or she will receive it every week. I hope that makes sense.
The group of people who become eligible during the summer months to receive the fuel allowance will not be able to apply for it until September. How are persons whose incomes fall during the months of April, May, June, July, August and September to be identified? Will they have an opportunity to make an application for the fuel allowance to ensure their telephone allowance will be payable during the summer months, or will they be excluded until September when they can apply for the fuel allowance? I want to ensure those who meet the eligibility criteria will receive the relevant payment.
I understand totally what the Deputy is saying, but I do not know the answer. I know that people can only apply for the fuel allowance on a bi-annual basis. If in May a person thinks he or she might qualify for the fuel allowance, he or she should be able to apply for it at that stage. I will reflect on the matter and revert to the Deputy. In order to receive the telephone allowance one has to qualify for a social welfare payment and the fuel allowance, but it is not right that the opportunity to apply for the fuel allowance only arises twice a year. That is not what we were trying to do in the budget. I thank the Deputy for his question.
Question No. 40 replied to with Written Answers.
JobPath Programme
Aindrias Moynihan
Question:41. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection her plans to introduce flexibility into the JobPath programme whereby JobPath co-ordinators may have leeway when dealing with persons who have a guarantee of employment in the near future or who may be employed on a seasonal or part-time basis to excuse them from JobPath while maintaining their benefits; the number of persons on the JobPath programme who have employment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [50552/17]
This issue has arisen regularly. People who want to participate in a community employment scheme or various other schemes believe they are trapped in JobPath and Turas Nua. They are looking for flexibility in order that they can switch back and forth between the most appropriate schemes to allow them to up-skill and move on in their careers and lives without being trapped in Turas Nua.
All persons in receipt of a jobseeker’s payment are required to be seeking full-time work, a condition which a person must satisfy at all times. Customers referred to JobPath who are also working part time will have all activities, including meetings with their personal adviser, scheduled around their work commitments. The JobPath contractors are required to be flexible in the provision of the service in that respect. For those customers who take up seasonal work when engaged with JobPath, the service will offer in-work support and customers will not be required to attend meetings with their personal adviser until the employment ends. The customer effectively comes off JobPath for the period of their seasonal work and come back onto the scheme when they are finished.
In the case of jobseekers already in part-time or seasonal employment, the focus will be on opportunities to increase the level of employment in their current role, or look at possibilities in other areas, including training, which may provide a more sustainable income and for a move away from jobseeker payments.
On the number of clients who have gained employment, it will take time to accumulate a sufficient number of clients who have completed their engagement period with the service for complete and robust outcome data to be available. However, the most recent cohort report published on the Department’s website indicates that 19% of jobseekers who engaged with JobPath between July 2015 and March 2016 are now in full-time employment.
Does the Minister accept that people who want to participate in community employment schemes are being excluded? This issue has been raised a number of times, including in my office in recent days. There is a constant flow of queries and many Deputies will have had the same experience. If a person has a guarantee of a job or an opportunity to participate in a community employment scheme or avail of various other opportunities and is then pulled towards Turas Nua, he or she feels obliged to take that route. People believe they are losing out on the opportunity to participate in community employment schemes or the opportunity to avail of an internship or participate in the vocational training opportunities scheme, VTOS, and that they are being excluded from what would be an opportunity to up-skill in being pulled into a one-size-that-does-not-fit-all scheme such as Turas Nua. The scheme has been in place for a number of years and is due for review. The original contract was for four years. The provision of flexibility to allow people to take the other routes, without having to enter the Turas Nua scheme, as some feel pressured to do, is one of the issues that must be identified.
There is no competition between activation programmes. Tús, the community employment programme, Seetech and Turas Nua are all providing activation programmes which are slightly different for different people, but there is no competition between the community employment programme and JobPath as activation measures. They are different streams of processes supported by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection to try to get people into work.
One solution may suit an individual better than another.
That is why we choose very carefully who is sent to JobPath, the commmunity employment programme or Tús. With respect, each of them provides a different level of training or work experience to make sure people are job-ready. JobPath provides participants with a guaranteed service which includes not only one-to-one support and training but also a continual counselling and advice service to make sure they will be matched with the jobs available or that they will be retrained in order that they can make themselves available to fill the jobs available. However, there is no competition across the range of employment schemes. Each has been designed to specifically address a particular section of the market.
There have been some complaints in recent months that people are finding it harder to fill CE schemes because people are on another activation measure, but no one has ever told me that there is a problem filling CE schemes because they are on Tús, the rural social scheme, RSS, a partial capacity payment or an invalidity payment. There is no draw here from one section to another. We offer services in this Department which suit the needs of particular people at particular times. JobPath is doing its job particularly admirably, considering that it has a 16% success rate.
Question No. 42 replied to after Question No. 43.
Social Welfare Eligibility
Pat the Cope Gallagher
Question:43. Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection her plans for the social welfare entitlements of seasonal and part time workers (details supplied); the steps she has taken to deal with this matter thus far in her department; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [50387/17]
Pat the Cope Gallagher
Question:57. Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the status of the review of entitlements for seasonal and part-time workers as committed to by the former Minister for Social Protection on 24 of November 2016 on Committee Stage of the Social Welfare Bill 2016; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [50386/17]
We missed Questions Nos. 40, 44, 45 and 48.
The person who had tabled the question was not present.
The next question is supposed to be Question No. 40 in the name of Deputy Ruth Coppinger.
We have passed that question.
Why did we pass it?
We have moved on to the next question.
The Deputy is forfeiting his time in order that the Minister may answer it now.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 43 and 57 together.
In his previous role as Minister for Social Protection, the Taoiseach gave a commitment on Report Stage of the Social Welfare Bill 2016 in the Dáil that he would ask officials to examine the issue of jobseeker’s benefit and the treatment of part-time and seasonal workers, including those categorised as having subsidiary employment. My officials have recently completed a report on these issues which I am considering in detail.
To qualify for jobseeker’s benefit, a person must be unemployed, be available for and genuinely seeking work, have had a substantial loss of employment and as a result be unemployed for at least four days out of seven every week. The jobseeker’s benefit scheme provides significant support for individuals who can work up to three days a week and receive a jobseeker’s payment.
Seasonal work can be full time, part time or casual, depending on the type of work involved. A seasonal worker who is employed on a full-time basis would not be entitled to a jobseeker’s payment while in that seasonal employment. Contributions paid during this time can be used to re-qualify for jobseeker's benefit, subject to scheme conditionality.
My Department operates a fast-tracking system for customers who sign off on their jobseeker’s allowance or jobseeker’s benefit claim to take up work or a training course for a period of up to 12 weeks, which reflects the seasonal nature of the work in some instances.
In these cases, the claim is not closed but payment is suspended temporarily for the duration of the work or training course. When the person signs on again after the period of work or training, the claim can be reactivated without delay and payment restored. Where a person exhausts his or her entitlement to jobseeker’s benefit, he or she must pay 13 additional PRSI contributions after the last day of payment in order to re-qualify. The 13 contributions needed to re-qualify for jobseeker’s benefit can be paid in respect of full-time employment, seasonal employment, part-time employment or casual employment. If a seasonal or a part-time worker meets this requirement, he or she may re-qualify for jobseeker’s benefit. If a person does not re-qualify for jobseeker’s benefit or has used up his or her entitlement to jobseeker’s benefit, he or she can apply for jobseeker’s allowance.
It is important in the interests of equity and fairness that the conditions for receipt of a jobseeker's payment apply to all recipients, including those who could be categorised as seasonal and part-time workers.
The Minister has told us what the regulations are at the moment but her predecessor and the Taoiseach gave a commitment in this House, to me and Deputy Willie O'Dea, that a report would be prepared within three months. That was 12 months ago. It is very hard to explain this to those on seasonal or part-time work who make a very important contribution to farming, fishing and tourism, and something has to be done about it.
The Minister met with a delegation of seasonal and part-time workers during the IFA briefings here in Dublin some months ago so she is familiar with the case. These people play an essential part in the various sectors to which I referred. I am aware of the need to build up contributions for 13 weeks after a claim but these things are not practical for those people and the whole purpose of the report is to allow the Minister to consider introducing new regulations that would be practical.
The subsidiary income threshold of €12.70 per day, or €63 per week, is totally unfair and this must be dealt with. I know the Minister is committed to looking at this but there can be no further procrastination. Can she give us a definite date when she will have the report and will make recommendations?
I can give a definite date as to when I had the report as I received it yesterday. I cannot give the Deputy all the recommendations because the report is incredibly complex. I did meet the representatives of these workers, although I do not know if it was the Deputy or somebody else who organised it for me. I understand the exact situation that pertains to the people in the Deputy's county but one cannot make changes to a scheme just to reflect a small number of people in a small part of the country without having far-reaching effects on everybody else. I need to consider the report very carefully, which I will do this weekend, and I will come back to the Deputy with the recommendations I am planning to make to address the issue affecting the people he represents.
I agree that the subsidiary payment is small and this might be one of the easier things to reflect on in the report. I ask the Deputy to give me a little time to reflect on the report. I will come back to it and we will resolve this issue.
I appreciate that the Deputy cannot legislate just for part of the country. We are different in Donegal but we are not that different and we have the same seasonal workers in various parts of the country such as Wexford, Waterford, etc. We have waited 12 months so we can wait another few weeks for the Minister to reflect on the report, as long as she is prepared to introduce the realistic recommendations which are contained within the report. Perhaps the Minister and I could also have a chat on the margins of the House at some time.
I am not trying to be smart but I think the people I met in Donegal are special because seasonal workers in the rest of the country are not quite in the same position. In the next couple of weeks, the Deputy and I can talk about how we can specifically fix the issue affecting the people he represents.
Child Maintenance Payments
We are very short on time so I ask Deputy Kenny to forgo his 30 seconds to introduce his question.
Joan Collins
Question:42. Deputy Joan Collins asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection her views on whether there is a problem regarding the issue of maintenance recovery in relation to lone parents, particularly lone parents who have proven abuse issues with a parent of their child; and if she has instructed her Department to examine resolving this issue in order that the child involved benefits from child maintenance. [50321/17]
Gino Kenny
Question:49. Deputy Gino Kenny asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if her attention has been drawn to the fact that women who are victims of domestic abuse and in receipt of social welfare payments are being informed by her Department that they are in danger of losing their single parent payments unless they try to obtain maintenance from their abusers and that women in these situations are being put at risk by having to contact their abusive partners for financial support; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [50469/17]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 42 and 49 together.
We had a conversation about this under an earlier question. The Family Law Acts are the civil legislation that requires a man or woman who wants to claim maintenance from their spouse to go to family mediation or seek redress through the courts. There is a condition in the one-parent family payment in my Department that a parent must make all reasonable efforts to get maintenance from the other parent for the upbringing of their children, which is as it should be. However, in the past week a very brave young woman went public with her story of how she fell between the cracks of what should have been a robust process but was a process which actually failed her.
I met that lovely lady and her gorgeous little man on Friday and we spoke at length of her experience. I heard of the language that was used towards her and the letters she received and I gave her my commitment that I would resolve the issue. Since then, I have met with Women's Aid which is kindly going to take the letters away and redraft them so that, if they were accidentally received by someone in a vulnerable position, they would not make that person as fearful and full of dread as Kate - which is not her real name - was during the week. They will return the new draft to me in the next couple of weeks.
We also agreed that Women's Aid would draw up an accredited training programme for me and give it, in conjunction with our staff development unit, to anyone who is involved in front-line services in the Department so that they are equipped to deal with specific instances of domestic or sexual abuse when people present for that purpose.
If a woman or a man arrives in a local office and tells us of an experience of domestic violence, we will believe them - end of story. There will be no requirement for court orders or protection orders or other legal structures in such cases. We will believe the person presenting and we will make changes to our internal IT systems so that their electronic record shows no letters for maintenance recovery will ever again be sent to them.
I am quite happy with the Minister's comprehensive response. I hope this situation will never happen again to any individual presenting in this way. I am glad the person did it and I take the Minister on her word in this case.
I wish to put on the record of the House my gratitude to the lady in question, who was here earlier on. If she was not brave enough to go to a young journalist, Ellen Coyne, this week, I do not think I would have been aware of this case. We had heard anecdotal evidence but "he said-she said" scenarios are very difficult to work on. This lady was exceptionally brave. She is a fabulous young woman with a most beautiful son. I thank her and wish her every success in her future.
Questions Nos. 44 and 45 answered with Question No. 40.
Question No. 46 replied to with Written Answers.
Question No. 47 replied to with Written Answers.
Question No. 48 answered with Question No. 40.
Question No. 49 answered with Question No. 42.
Social Welfare Benefits Eligibility
John Brady
Question:50. Deputy John Brady asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the procedures in place for homeless persons in need of social welfare assistance in cases in which they are unable to provide an address; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [50584/17]
I was looking to come in on the previous question but I will put my question instead. What provision is in place for people who are homeless to access social welfare payments such as jobseeker's benefits or any other entitlements?
Under the social welfare system, homeless people have entitlements to the full range of social welfare schemes, including supplementary welfare allowance, SWA, subject to the normal qualifying conditions. The SWA can be paid while a person is awaiting the decision on another payment, for example, disability allowance or jobseeker's allowance. People who are unable to provide evidence of address can access the basic SWA during the period when they engage with homeless services and seek to stabilise their situation.
In Dublin, where the homelessness situation is probably at its most acute, there are arrangements in place that focus on maintaining individuals on their primary weekly social welfare payments for a period. This gives them some flexibility while they are seeking to regularise their accommodation arrangements. This approach means they maintain access to the other services that are made available by the Department, including activation programmes, CE schemes and the Tús initiative.
People experiencing homelessness who have queries about their entitlement to weekly social welfare payments should contact the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection through their local Intreo offices, where they will receive the same level of care and assistance that we hope to provide to everyone who presents at our local offices.
I thank the Minister for her reply. It would be remiss of us not to express our condolences on the deaths of two homeless people on the streets of the capital city over the past 24 hours. I do not think anybody really wants to be homeless. The provision of a payment is an essential tool in trying to help people to get off the streets. We need to put money directly into people's pockets. There is an element of discrimination here. The Minister mentioned that specific provision has been made for homeless people in Dublin to access social welfare payments, but such provision is not being made in any other part of the State. Homeless people in 25 counties cannot access minimum or basic social welfare payments. I ask the Minister to explain the discrimination or discrepancy that seems to exist in this regard.
There is no discrimination. A specific protocol was established for Dublin because, unfortunately, the problem of homelessness is more prevalent here than in other parts of the country. I reiterate that anyone in any part of the country who is experiencing homelessness can avail of weekly social welfare payments and supplementary welfare allowance payments through their local Intreo offices. Payments are maintained for a number of weeks until people can regularise their position with some sort of relatively normal accommodation through the homeless agencies around the country. Specific protocols have been established for Dublin because the Dublin divisions experience homelessness on a greater scale than other areas of the country. We are focusing on maintaining individuals' primary social welfare payments, as well as other services, such as those relating to activation, that they receive while they are engaging with homeless services in Dublin. We want to ensure that they are in a position to regularise their accommodation. Our overarching principle is to ensure that the services of the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection, including weekly payments, are available to people in these circumstances. Our primary ambition is to help people to get back into employment, thereby enabling them to afford to look after themselves. It is not the case that people have to be in regular accommodation before they can get weekly payments. We will do everything we can to assist people to get into regular accommodation and to regularise their housing arrangements.