JOINT COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AND FAMILY AFFAIRS debate -
Tuesday, 16 May 2006

European Anti-Poverty Network Ireland: Presentation.

Chairman

On behalf of the joint committee, I welcome the delegation from the European Anti-Poverty Network Ireland, EAPN. Mr. Joe Gallagher is chairperson of EAPN Ireland, Frances Byrne is the director of the OPEN network of one-parent family organisations and an EAPN Ireland board member, Louise Richardson is the national co-ordinator of the older women's network and an EAPN Ireland board member and Robin Hanan is co-ordinator of EAPN Ireland.

Before the delegation commences its presentation, I am obliged to say a customary few words with which some, if not all, of the witnesses will be familiar. Members are reminded of the parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members are also reminded that if there is a possibility that a conflict of interest will arise, they should make a declaration of interest either now or at the start of their contributions. I draw witnesses' attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but that this privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before it. It is generally accepted that while witnesses have qualified privilege, the committee cannot guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses appearing before it. I ask Mr. Gallagher to commence the presentation.

Mr. Joe Gallagher

My name is Joe Gallagher and I am chairperson of the European Anti-Poverty Network. I will proceed on the assumption that members are aware of the work of the EAPN. On behalf of the members of the European Anti-Poverty Network, I thank the joint committee for the opportunity to present our proposals.

This is an opportune time to discuss the national anti-poverty strategy, NAPS, given that plans for the eradication of poverty in Ireland will be brought before the European Union in September. For many years, the EAPN has been attempting to highlight to citizens and the Government the importance of the national anti-poverty strategy, a key aspect of efforts to eradicate poverty in Ireland. Public awareness of the NAPS needs to be enhanced to add to the debate on the elimination of poverty.

The presentation notes that new guidelines insist that the strategies to achieve the agreed target to make a decisive impact on the eradication of poverty by 2010 should include clearer budgetary policies and monitoring arrangements than heretofore and that these must be prioritised as national strategies for the eradication of poverty. Under the same heading, it is noted that the NAPS should be linked with the forthcoming national development plan, which includes programmes under the Structural Funds. Ireland is acknowledged to be a rich country with a number of deficits, some of which are highlighted in the EAPN proposals. These deficits are not necessary and the objective of the EAPN is to eradicate them.

Mr. Robin Hanan

The new national action plan against poverty is to be submitted to the European Commission by September. The Government has indicated it expects to have a draft approved in June. We have, therefore, a relatively short period to put together and discuss the main priorities for the plan.

The new plan will be the third national action plan to have been drawn up under the European Union strategy. It will be an interesting plan in that, for the first time, the Government has been asked to name three or four new priority areas for action that will achieve a decisive impact on the eradication of poverty by 2010. In each of these areas, it has been asked to identify the specific targets to be reached by 2010, interim targets for the next two years, the budgets and resources that will be allocated from Structural Funds and own resources to achieve these targets, monitoring mechanisms and solid targets that will be reached along the way.

As Mr. Gallagher noted, Ireland has become richer and is in a much stronger position than it was nine years ago when the national anti-poverty strategy was written. The European Anti-Poverty Network has identified four areas that should be prioritised for the next round of the national action plan against poverty. These are: the need for action on achieving strong targets on adequate income; the need to establish targets to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to access resources and supports to take up quality employment; the need to introduce a major programme to upgrade public services, particularly those which affect people living in poverty, and to ensure those on low incomes have access to quality public services; and the need to consider, as the European guidelines stress, the question of good governance and involving people in decisions which affect their lives. I will address the first two priorities, while Ms Richardson will discuss the third and fourth.

On the issue of income poverty, the existing national anti-poverty strategy set a ten-year target for reducing consistent poverty to 2% or, ideally, eliminating it by 2007. The approach taken to measuring poverty in Ireland is different to that used in the rest of the European Union and most of the developed world. The concept of consistent poverty combines the ideas of having a low income with not being able to afford basic commodities such as a pair of shoes, a warm coat, home heating and so forth. The indicators used in this measurement need to be updated because the items considered absolutely basic to survival in society ten years ago have changed. Ireland is nowhere near achieving the target of eliminating consistent poverty or reducing it to 2%, which was set ten years ago. For this reason, it will be necessary to identify the changes to be introduced in forthcoming budgets aimed at achieving these targets.

Ireland must also examine the concept of relative poverty, the approach to poverty used in every other country in the European Union and by the European Union institutions and the United Nations. Relative poverty is used to describe those whose incomes are below 60% of average income. Consistent poverty and relative poverty tell us different things about society. The former tells us how the condition of people living on the lowest income changes over time and what items they can afford to buy that they could not afford to purchase a few years previously. The latter tells us more about how income is distributed and who is gaining from the growth in wealth.

The European Commission made a strong statement about Ireland in its most recent report on social inclusion, pointing out that in Ireland, Spain, Greece and Portugal, poor people not only benefit less from overall prosperity in their respective countries but are more likely to be subject to more persistent forms of poverty and social deprivation. The most important target to be included in the next action plan is to reduce relative poverty rates to at or below the European average. At present, Ireland ranks worst in the European Union in terms of relative poverty alongside Slovenia and Greece. The relevant figures are set out in a series of charts. The action plan must also detail how measures to achieve this target will be funded and what changes to our welfare and taxation policies will be introduced.

Ms Frances Byrne

As other colleagues have said, it is great and very timely to be invited to appear before the committee. One of the successes of the Celtic tiger is the end of mass unemployment. This is very welcome but we are concerned that there is still a very high level of unemployment among particular groups, including lone parents, people with disabilities and early school leavers. There are other emerging issues, one of which is the worrying growth in the number of working poor. This is a Europe-wide phenomenon. With demographic changes, the need for a flexible retirement age will become more relevant to older people.

The members have received our proposals. EAPN Ireland and EAPN Europe are highlighting the issue of employment as an issue that has not yet been addressed. Given that Government policy suggests work is the best route out of poverty, we are calling for urgent action in a number of areas. These include increasing the minimum wage, better provision for early childhood care and education and better active and preventative labour market measures. We know that community employment works for some groups but it needs to be more focused. The jobs initiative and social economy programmes also work but need to be strengthened.

Improved integration of those furthest from the labour market is required because there are still people for whom a job is not a reality. We are highlighting the plight of migrant workers, particularly those who have been exploited, as we have heard in the media. It may be possible to have a bridging visa for immigrant workers who can demonstrate that they have been exploited. Without it, as members of the committee know, migrant workers are tied to their employer and their choices are very limited. The right to work must be restored to asylum seekers so they will not be dependent on social welfare and direct provision.

EAPN Ireland and OPEN, the national network of lone parent groups, have done some work on poverty traps, which work is available on both organisations' websites. OPEN has focused particularly on lone parents in light of the Minister's proposals. The work has led to some grave concerns. Charts on the initial work, which were updated for budget 2006, are included in our submission.

We have considered the position of lone parents, in particular, and cohabiting couples. Both types of family are subject to the Minister's proposal. Our work indicates that where two lone parents are working and one has a child aged five and the other a child aged eight, which is the cut-off point in the Department, the latter will see his or her family income falling by over €4,500. We will formally request an opportunity to make a separate submission on this.

If work represents the Government's preferred route out of poverty, we want substantial proposals to be made within the NAPS plan to address it. The deficits are still present. It is a simple matter of the social welfare system not having kept up with the economy.

Ms Louise Richardson

I am thankful for the opportunity to make this presentation. I wish to talk about two points, namely, access to quality services and participation. There is a certain overlap between the two because if people cannot gain access to services, it is impossible for them to participate.

Ireland has historically lagged behind many other EU countries in terms of the quality of services available to those on low incomes. We are all aware that we can now afford to bridge this gap. It is essential that there be planning and investment programmes to upgrade public services to provide for those on low incomes.

Studies have shown that the level of spending on services is related directly to poverty levels, as are effective management and focused spending on the needs of poorer people. We are concerned about the public transport system, particularly for disabled people, older people and those in isolated rural areas. We are also concerned about the health services, education, and housing and accommodation. The lack of appropriate and accessible services in these areas greatly affects poorer people.

The ineffective provision of education and child care directly perpetuates poverty from generation to generation. This is not acceptable in the Ireland of today. If we are genuinely to put a stop to this, it is vital that targets, plans and investment programmes be put in place. These are all interlinked. Having targets is not sufficient as there must also be plans and investment.

International experience has shown that the participation of people affected by decisions is essential to achieving effective outcomes. To enable people at the lower end of the economic scale to participate effectively and democratically, it is important that they have adequate and suitable training and information.

In Ireland we have a strong community sector of which we can be proud. It needs to be built on to enable people to participate genuinely. We would like to resource the community sector to support and represent people in poverty. I would like to see the people themselves adequately informed and trained so they can have a voice.

We want to emphasise the importance of joined-up government at all levels. This is why being able to make a presentation to this committee is so important to us. The co-ordination of the different Departments and organisations will effect change in a positive way.

There is a need for a systematic plan to ensure effective democratic participation. It is an equality issue that involves ensuring that all people, be they lone parents, disabled, elderly or migrants, have a genuine sense of ownership in the country and a say in the way policies that affect their lives are made.

Deputy Stanton

I welcome the delegation and thank it for its very concise and well-researched submission. The delegates stated the main ten-year headline target in the 1997 NAPS is to reduce consistent poverty to 2% or, ideally, eliminate it by 2007. What is the current position in this regard and where will we stand in 2007 if the current trend continues?

The Minister said to me on numerous occasions that income poverty is relative. He suggested that when some people become wealthy they are relatively well-off but that everybody gets wealthy together. He implied that the measure is silly and that all the other countries in the developed world, including the EU and UN, are wrong and that we are right. What is the reaction of the delegates to this view?

I feel a bit punch-drunk when I read the statement that Ireland has the highest rate of relative poverty in the European Union. Does this include all 25 member states? I note that Mr. Hanan is nodding. It is a scary statistic.

On the integration of those furthest from the labour market, the submission states there is "a need for a ‘bridging visa' for migrant workers who can demonstrate that they have been exploited and the right to work must be restored to asylum seekers". The employer controls the work permit and, therefore, if an employee feels aggrieved that he is getting insufficient time off for lunch, working too many hours or working in poor conditions, for example, he is afraid to complain to any agency because he fears the work will be withdrawn and that he will be told to go away, thus leaving him in limbo. Is this correct? Does this not indicate that the current system is a form of bonded labour, which is only a step above slavery? Does a similar system exist in other European countries? If not, what other work permit systems exist?

Everyone emphasises the need to take up appropriate and quality work and there seems to be pressure on people to go out to work. Someone recently said to me that the most valuable form of work one can do is to rear one's children. In a way, however, that is regarded as being less important than participating in the economy. Is there a danger in this over-emphasis on going out to work? I am not suggesting people should not do so but maybe they should have more choice.

We need 73,000 social housing units and we read every day that house prices are rising in increments of €30,000 and €50,000. I was told last night of houses in an estate which went onto the market at a certain price and before the day was out had risen by €50,000. This has a serious impact on people of low means and no means.

The school drop-out rate is extremely high. Over 1,000 students drop out every year between primary and secondary levels. I was asked to be brief although we could continue to discuss this topic for a week, never mind ten minutes.

The register of electors is all over the place and is the subject of much discussion. Voter turn-out and voter apathy are important issues and people can be empowered if they vote and make a difference. I am aware of the work of the Vincentian Partnership for Justice but many people remain apathetic about the political process and do not want to engage in it. If the process works properly, however, it can deal with these matters.

Last week in the Dáil we suspended our very modern Standing Orders for the day and the EU Commissioner for Agriculture came into the House for a wide-ranging debate. Have the delegates considered how we do our business and how we might advance the reform agenda in here, and make it more relevant to the public?

Mr. Hanan

Until two years ago when the 2001 figures were examined it appeared that consistent poverty was effectively fading away. When compared with what modern Ireland can afford, the measures used were basic, for example, not being able to heat one's house. In December 2004 the Central Statistics Office changed from using household surveys to broad social surveys, in other words, going from door to door to talk to people. It found that the level of consistent poverty using those indicators was far higher than anyone had realised. It is approximately 8%. This has been dropping but is much higher than anyone realised when the last plan was written nine or ten years ago, or in the subsequent planning. It should be taken more seriously than it is.

We have argued within the European Anti-Poverty Network that the Irish idea of consistent poverty tells us something useful about our society. Relative poverty, however, also tells much about how we plan our society and our economy. Countries which have invested in strong welfare systems and public services over the past 50 years have a low level of relative poverty. This has very little to do with how rich or poor a country is.

When relative poverty levels across Europe are compared, Turkey has the highest among non-EU members. Among the EU member states, Slovakia, Ireland and Greece have the highest levels. That does not mean that people who are poor in Ireland are poorer than those in Bulgaria but that compared to the wealth of our society people are falling behind. As our country gets richer we need to do what many other countries did, particularly those in Scandinavia, to ensure that wealth is spread more evenly. The position of a child trying to attend school, or an adult trying to participate in society, relative to that of their peers decides to what extent they will participate. It is not a question of being richer than one's grandparents and being able to afford shoes when they had none, but of how one takes part.

The basic system of immigration permits a couple of years ago left the migrant worker in the hands of the employer. That led to significant abuse and poor bargaining conditions. There have been improvements recently and the permit in most cases is held by the employee. When someone leaves employment it should be possible for him or her to have a bridging visa which allows him or her to stay a few months while looking for work again. Those people are vulnerable and often disappear into the underground economy.

Some of my colleagues would like to respond to other points. I am interested in Deputy Stanton's comment about the visit of the EU Commissioner and different ways of doing business. Many people across Europe, including the National Action Plans Against Poverty are learning about different ways to involve people who do not vote. The Vincentian Partnership for Justice initiative is on a small scale but in the areas where it has run citizenship programmes there has been a large increase in the turnout. There is a need for strong citizenship programmes in schools and in communities which have a poor turnout. The committee would probably feel more strongly about that than we would. Many people do not see the relevance of voting because they are not sure what difference it will make to their lives.

Ms Byrne

The balance between working outside the home and parenting is thrown into sharp relief by the Minister's suggestion regarding lone parents. We all know that it affects two-parent and one-parent families. The FÁS labour market review has acknowledged that debate has not taken place in Ireland.

Since the Minister launched his proposals, my organisation has held a series of consultations around the country where the issue of choice has come up. This is linked to the age of children which is clever because the desire to go out to work increases as children grow up. Our European counterparts often comment on the fact that mothers stay at home here. Therein lies the sting because we discuss this mainly in respect of women whereas we need to have a broader discussion about work-life balance and particularly about parenting which, as Deputy Stanton says, is the most important job one can do.

We hear horror stories about people queuing for four days to buy houses based on plans, while the prices double and people are gazumped. The underbelly of that is the housing situation which affects those in poverty, for example, of the 73,000 people on the local authority housing list, approximately 43,000 are parenting alone, mostly women but also some men. If memory serves, at some stage in the past year one of the housing organisations said approximately three quarters of those on the housing list are single people with or without children. That poses serious challenges.

Ms Richardson

We all agree that rearing children is important. It is the rearing of children and not going out to work that have ensured a large number of older women live in poverty. There are so many facets to each of these issues. Our organisation advocates the right to flexible retirement to enable people to build up pensions and supplement their incomes, particularly as people are living longer. Those who have devoted their lives to child-rearing do not qualify for social welfare benefits and live below the poverty line.

The issue of Oireachtas reform was brought up. I would be interested in discussing it another day.

Is Ireland out of step with the rest of Europe on poverty alleviation? It is difficult for those on adequate and above adequate incomes to realise what it is like to live below the poverty line. Take the case of an older woman living on her own on a non-contributory pension. It is an enormous struggle for her to maintain her accommodation, if she is not living in public housing, or to purchase a confirmation or first holy communion present for a grandchild. That is the poverty we are describing.

Deputy O’Connor

I find this discussion fascinating. I strongly support the notion of groups sharing their views in the Oireachtas. Deputy Stanton pointed to the example of the recent Europe Day proceedings in the Chamber. It was interesting to hear the Commissioner tell people off skilfully. I will not say on which party she was picking. I am chairman of the Irish-Ukraine parliamentary friendship group. Last year I visited Kiev and was fascinated by the reforms they had initiated in parliamentary procedure. Business in the chamber is relaxed. Members can read newspapers and answer their mobile phones. In a way the Oireachtas committees are attempting this approach in that they provide an informal atmosphere in which people can share their views.

I sometimes wonder about the definition of "poverty". Many Members will have contact with families who are clearly poor, yet they have a brand new DVD player. I came from a Dublin of a bygone era where I understood what it was like for families to be poor and struggling. I do not mean this in a patronising way. Fortunately, the economy has come on since.

I was interested in Ms Byrne's comments on lone parent support initiatives. Deputy Stanton and I attended the Farmleigh forum on supporting lone parents. I sought out the views of many lone parent support groups in south-west Dublin. I understood most were positive in their reaction to the ideas on cohabitation. Other members have commented on the citizenship issue. Tallaght is no different but I could bring members there where the voter turn-out is very low at20%. It is very important to promote citizenship. All Members make an effort by bringing young people to the Oireachtas. We must identify citizenship as an issue and get a positive message across. We can then all compete for their votes. We have 400 days to think about this.

I do not mean to pick on Ms Byrne but several times she said "if work is the way". If it is not, what is the alternative? I came from a background where I had been unemployed for a while, got a job and was unemployed again. I was made redundant three times and hope I will not be made redundant again. I was involved in establishing the group Get Tallaght Working which argued that there was a need for jobs, saying "work is the way". I am interested in learning more about Ms Byrne's views on this. If the Government's policy on employment is incorrect and giving people the opportunity to work is not the way, what is the alternative?

I was impressed by the presentation and wish the delegates well.

Chairman

I do not want Ms Byrne to expand too much on that topic. She will be addressing the committee with another group in the future. There will be a full meeting with Ms Byrne, Ms Candy Murphy and others at which they will go through the pros and cons of the lone parent supports issue. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs will also attend the committee in a few weeks. I will allow Ms Byrne to give a succinct response to Deputy O'Connor who always has his finger on the pulse.

Ms Byrne

If our groups in Tallaght are anything to go by, Deputy O'Connor is in no danger of being made redundant. We noted that only one quarter of the lone parents in our member groups voted in the last general election. We now run a voters' programme for which the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice has provided a team of 25 trainers who inform lone parents on the political system. The groups in Tallaght know exactly who Deputy O'Connor is.

Deputy Stanton

He is safe then.

Ms Byrne

Deputy O'Connor picked up on my acknowledgement that the Government's policy is that work is the best route out of poverty. I am questioning it not because I disagree with it. However, I come back to Deputy Stanton's point that if everyone is working outside of the home, who will mind the nation's children, support the elderly and provide care, sometimes provided on an unpaid basis. If work is the best route out of poverty, we need to see the welfare to work policy, which we are highlighting in our proposals, catch up with the Government's policy. The Government has been excellent in job creation but there are several issues, of which the welfare to work policy is one. For example, when people go back to work, they lose their medical card, rent supplement and other benefits too soon. If one asks a parent to consider taking a job but losing a medical card for her child, the answer will be a flat "no". That is not being precious. Obviously, the medical card is hugely important to others. We have put this repeatedly to the Minister for Social and Family Affairs. That is what we need for lone parents and the other groups left behind by the Celtic tiger for whatever reason. With other lone parent groups we have broadly welcomed the Minister's proposal, but we have some key questions about what he is trying to do. We have acknowledged that outside his Department there is a also good deal of work to do.

Deputy D. Wallace

The disadvantage of speaking after Deputy O'Connor is that everything has been said. I welcome the delegation. Its presentation was excellent — brief, to the point and easy to follow. The group has the support of this committee, whose members have a common interest in the well-being of the people we represent. We rarely have a political debate in this committee because we share one voice. The Government, the Minister and committee members are committed, and we have made major progress from a weak background. Finance does not always solve problems, as the delegation pointed out, even when people are regularly given more. One person may have a 32-inch television and I might have a 21-inch television. Why have I not got a 32-inch set? It is because of my circumstances.

We must continue to monitor the situation. The timing today is appropriate because of the September presentation on these issues by the Government at EU level. We have a particular interest and listened to the delegation. Hopefully, together we can continue to have an impact on the most vulnerable in society. I am sure we all agree the Minister is not alone interested, but determined to make an impact. That is what we want to hear as members. In turn, he listens to us. Hopefully, we can continue to improve the lot of the public who depend on us as legislators, voluntary groups and NGOs to articulate their needs, which many of them unfortunately cannot do themselves.

Mr. Hanan

A number of Deputies made a point about how this committee can move the agenda forward. We are pleased that the new guidelines for the national action plans refer to involving national parliaments in drawing up the plans. We argued for this at European level quite strongly. We have quite a good innovation record in this country, with many new ideas coming forward. Poverty-proofing, for example, which has probably been discussed regularly by this committee, was a new idea put in place by Ireland and is a strong way of ensuring that policies line up with the fight against poverty. We have seen very strong institutional changes — the office of social inclusion, the Combat Poverty Agency, and the Cabinet committee to fight poverty, headed by the Taoiseach. What we do not have is a serious public debate about what we must do about poverty. Everyone in the country knows about the Common Agricultural Policy but few know we have a similar strategy to make a decisive impact on the eradication of poverty by 2010. This committee and public political debate generally can do a lot to bring this debate into the open. It is one thing to have very strong strategies but if an issue is not talked about daily in the Dáil or on "Morning Ireland", for example, it tends to slip down the agenda when people are fighting for money at budget time or when hard decisions are to be made.

Accordingly, we are grateful for the chance to be heard by this committee. We hope the committee will get a chance between now and when the Government makes its decision, to talk to Ministers or civil servants involved in drawing up those decisions. We must bring the debate into the public and see what the Government will do to make a decisive impact on poverty by 2010, or whether it will just produce a series of strategies on paper. We want to know if we will see that political drive, which we see in the all-party consensus here around the table, where people feel it is important that poverty be at the centre of decisions. It somehow slips down the agenda when other interests are competing for attention.

Chairman

I thank the delegation for attending. It is an opportune time to make this presentation and we will be airing the delegation's views to officials and to the Minister in the not too distant future. He will appear before the committee in the next few weeks, in early June. As my colleagues noted, it is always better that the witnesses at the coalface, who work with various groups, make a presentation rather than simply send in submissions. That does not have the same impact. We are always glad to facilitate the witnesses. Sometimes acquiring a venue slot is the greater curtailing factor than our willingness to engage. We tried to facilitate the witnesses at the first available opportunity and were delighted to do so.

We have had a valuable discussion. I know Frances Byrne will be attending again soon, and Deputy O'Connor had better be at his sharpest that day. She is quite capable of fielding a ball and hitting it back again, as I know from previous experience. We thank Joe Gallagher, Robin Hanan, Louise Richardson and Frances Byrne for attending and look forward to further exchanges in the not too distant future.

Mr. Gallagher

I thank the committee and the Chairman. The input was interesting and we go away today with some encouragement that the parliamentary process and governance are working towards the eradication of poverty. The concept of the NAPS will get broader coverage and its development will work towards the eradication of poverty. I say that on behalf of the membership of EAPN, which is diverse, and spread around the country.