I welcome Professor John Monaghan and ask him to introduce his colleagues.
Post-Budget Analysis: Discussion with Society of St. Vincent de Paul.
Professor John Monaghan
Thank you. It is a great pleasure to be here. I would like to introduce Mr. John Mark McCafferty, who represents the society in the social partnership process. He has many years experience in those type of bodies and brings invaluable experience to those areas of discussion. He will speak around various aspects of our presentation. I am sure members know Ms Audrey Deane. She is a national social policy officer and her main areas of interest would be health and education.
This reminds me of being at Mass when I was a child, with all the women on one side and all the men on the other. I am sure that was not intended here. There was a wonderful display yesterday of all the women in the Dáil, and I congratulate them on that.
It happens to be Government and Opposition members.
Professor John Monaghan
I did not spot that.
I am not in government.
That is disputable.
Professor John Monaghan
We have brought copies of the annual report we launched earlier this week, which we will leave with the clerk to the committee for distribution later. I will draw on one or two aspects of the report.
On 1 December we launched the annual report for 2007. Members will recall that 2007 was apparently the good year, at least in part. Many things happened, but in that year the society spent €46 million helping people in need. Our overall turnover was approximately €55 million. We spent more than €7.6 million on general assistance covering various bills but, even more frightening, we spent €5.6 million on food. A total of €3.4 million was spent on education, covering everything from pre-school, through primary school into third level, and more than €3.4 million was spent on energy bills. It must be remembered that this was even before the huge increases in energy bills. We were spending a great deal of money in 2007 and there were severe problems to be faced. Part of our difficulty was convincing the public and often the Government that there were problems.
From September 2007 onwards, we began to notice a significant changes in terms of the increase in the number of people calling to us and the problems they were experiencing. We were witnessing the onset of the recession long before most other people, given that we have 9,500 volunteers who visit people every night of the week. Our members contribute 2 million to 2.5 million volunteering hours a year to making between 300,000 and 350,000 visits. We not only know the problems people face but the areas in which they experience problems. We become aware of the difficulties people face at an early stage, for example, when people who have lost their jobs come to the conferences seeking help.
Matters became extremely difficult in 2008. One of indicators of that was that the number of calls for assistance to the society increased, on average, by 40% for every month this year throughout the country. The number of calls for assistance particularly at the end of August, when parents could not afford to buy new books and uniforms for their children going back to school, increased by approximately 70% compared to the previous year. Therefore, the number of calls for assistance has increased dramatically. The people in our Dublin offices receive between 250 and 300 calls a day for assistance. An extra person had to be taken on to man the switchboard.
The problems people experience are severe. This is due not only to the downturn in the economy and the people having lost their jobs, but to the staggering price increases, with which we have all had to cope, in fuel, gas and electricity, although thankfully the price increases in gas and electricity expected next January now appears unlikely. None the less the current prices are extremely high. The prices of basic food items such as bread, milk, tea and butter have increased by between 10% and 35%. If members read today's edition of the Irish Independent, they would have noticed an article on another report revealing that ours is the fourth most expensive country for commodities. Therefore, we are aware of the significant problems being experienced by people.
One of the difficulties we face is that the demand for assistance has increased dramatically. The number of volunteers has not increased at the rate at which we require them. This is the week of our annual appeal. We are concerned about asking for increasingly more help from the very generous members of the public at a time when they are finding it difficult. Some of our conferences throughout the country are running out of funds such is the demand and this is before the worst and darkest days of winter and the Christmas period. People are experiencing considerable anxiety, pain and fear. It is difficult for parents of school-going children, living in poor circumstances, when their children are surrounded by the glitz of Christmas, the excitement at this time of the year and the Christmas trees and they come home from school talking excitedly about what they and their friends would like for Christmas when their parents have little money and perhaps even less hope. Therefore, the work of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul will have to continue at an even greater pace throughout next year.
That is my opening comment on what we have experienced. We would like to raise a number of issues with the committee in the context of the difficulties we face and, more importantly, those faced by the families we visit. The issues include the impact of the budget on welfare and education costs. We will focus on aspects of education costs that members might not have considered. Other groups have spoken about school numbers, substitute teachers and class sizes. We will not deal with those issues not because they are not important to us, which they most definitely are, but because we want to deal with aspects that may not appear so obvious that are likely to have a damaging effect not only on the people concerned but on the economy. These aspects are having an impact and they need to be addressed. We want to discuss the issues faced by people who are unemployed and the provision of skills training for them. Not surprisingly, we also want to deal with the issue of the impact of health care costs. We also wish to deal with the challenges our society, as a charitable organisation, will face in the coming year. We wish to deal with what we perceive to be the challenges facing the Government, while not being unmindful of the difficulties confronting it at this time.
I can ask my colleagues to speak on these areas or perhaps members would like to ask us some questions.
The representatives should speak first.
Yes. Professor Monaghan's colleagues might make their contributions and then I will invite my colleagues to ask questions.
Mr. John Mark McCafferty
I will mention briefly the impact of the budget on social welfare recipients. The society acknowledges and welcomes the rate increases in benefits, but given the context of the increase in people's needs and the number of people seeking assistance, outlined by Professor John Monaghan which I will not rehearse, the rates are inadequate. Food, energy and rents costs are all big contributors to these pressures facing many families. That is the experience of the families we visit.
Also, there was no increase in the living alone allowance and among older people it is those who live alone who tend to be living in poverty or most at risk of poverty. There was no move to address that need.
In terms of tackling fuel poverty, we acknowledge the increase in the fuel allowance. It was a small one, but an increase nevertheless. However, many groups do not receive the fuel allowance. We realise that tackling fuel poverty requires more than the making of payments. As Professor John Monaghan said, we must acknowledge the substantial increases in gas and electricity prices in the summer and the impact that has had on all of us, especially those on the lowest income. I am aware that the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security is examining this issue in terms of electricity supply.
The cost of energy is a live issue even though the cost of producing it is lower now than it was in recent months. Nevertheless, it is at a historically high level and we face a challenge in dealing with that. Energy costs are related to the standard of house in which one lives. It is all very well if one has the means to insulate one's house, but if one is in the private rented sector, how will support to address such need be distributed? How will fuel poverty be tackled among those households?
I am mindful that approximately six months ago the society was part of a wider delegation, including the Combat Poverty Agency, Sustainable Energy Ireland and the Institute of Public Health, that examined the issue of fuel poverty. I thank the committee for writing to the Minister on foot of that meeting regarding the urgent need to address the issue of fuel poverty. I will hand over to my colleague to deal with area of education.
Professor John Monaghan
Before doing so, I wish to add to a point covered by Mr. John Mark McCafferty. Deputies will be aware of the CSO figures published last week which showed that thankfully, the number living in consistent poverty and at risk of poverty has reduced, but members should bear in mind they were figures for a good year. We are convinced at the end of 2009 — certainly when the 2008 figures are published — it will be revealed that the number living in consistent poverty will have definitely increased. The measure of consistent poverty is based on living on a very low income and also being deprived of basic necessities as food and fuel, as mentioned by Mr. John Mark McCafferty.
We need to put the budget increases in context. The increase of €6.50 in social welfare benefit was welcome and it, together with the €2 a week increase in the fuel allowance, amounts to €8.50. However, if one lives in a social housing unit, one's rent could have increased by €5, which would leave one with an increase in benefit of only €3.50. When account is taken of the staggering increase in the food and energy costs and bearing in mind that the families with whom we deal spend a far greater proportion of their very low incomes on basic necessities such as putting food on the table, keeping the house warm and the lights on, one will realise that the increases, while welcome, were inadequate. Consequently, people will be much worse off at the end of this year. It would be great if it were not the case but sadly that will be the position.
I wish to refer briefly to the area of health care provision, which is an important issue for the society. We visit many families. Three principles underpin the work of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. We offer friendship and support for people in difficult times and help them to move from where they are to a better place. That means not doing things for them but with them. One of the ways we do that is by helping them to stay in education, move on from there and get a job. Consider the positive announcements over the past week, not just the job losses. This morning there was an announcement of 150 jobs in research in the IFSC. Last weekend there was an announcement of 50 jobs being created in research in Renishaw in Swords, 150 to 200 jobs in Internet services in Galway and more than 100 jobs in software in Maynooth. All those jobs require educational qualifications. The industries that provided the type of jobs available in the past, whereby people could leave school early and take up work, are gone and probably will not return.
In those circumstances, some of the changes that were made in the budget particularly affect families living in less disadvantaged areas; the most disadvantaged areas are still being supported, thank God. In the budget €7.5 million was taken out of a scheme that provided school principals with money for free books in non-disadvantaged areas. In addition, in those areas the costs for transition year are up to €1,000. The budget also removed child benefit from 18 years olds and increased the third level registration fee. Take the example of somebody living in one of the dormitory towns around Dublin or any of the cities who has just lost his or her job. The family will find it very difficult to keep young people in school. If they seek school books next year from the principal of the primary or secondary school, the books will not be available. They will have to go to the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. God knows we are spending enough on that. When one considers the cost of transition year, the fact that the family will lose the child benefit and the amount of money they will have to find for third level, it would not be surprising if many of the young people from low-income families decided not to stay in school. Their parents cannot afford it. If that happens it will not only be those people but also the economy that will lose badly.
There is a range of things happening that, to us, defy economic logic. We talk about trying to keep young people in disadvantaged areas in school so why cut 3% from the school completion programme budget, making it more difficult for them to stay in school? In the event that they leave school and we try to help them get some type of skill, why cut VTOS and Youthreach to make it even more difficult? In the case of their parents, why cut €8.5 million from a further education programme for adults? At a time when people are losing their jobs they need further education.
Our approach to the education issue is not in any way to imply a lack of sympathy on the matter of class numbers; far from it. We understand the difficulties. However, while everybody may very well have a chance of going to third level or secondary school later on in life, no child gets a second chance at primary education and certainly not preschool. That is a real issue for us.
Ms Audrey Deane
I wish to comment about the early years care and education. It is usually called child care, but we take a broader, more developmentally positive view in terms of the best possible quality care for our children, particularly in the year before they go to school. The statistics are obvious; it is a no-brainer. The more money that is pumped into that sector and the more deprived and disadvantaged children who get regular, consistent access to good quality early years care and education, the greater are the long-term benefits. There has been research from Heckman and Perry and other extremely robust long-term longitudinal research on this issue. That view must be heard by the policy makers. Indeed, I heard Ms Sylda Langford, the director of the Office of the Minister for Children, ask last week why they do not get the message. She went on to comment that there should be a social policy unit within the Department of Finance. Quite frankly, it is an economic argument. If there is investment in the care of our most vulnerable, youngest children, the long-term benefits will pay off for everybody in society. They are much less likely to have worse health and become involved in the criminal justice system and other such areas.
We were quite shocked about the early education strand of the DEIS programme, the education strategy for disadvantaged poorer areas. This was a particularly targeted programme, down to the job descriptions being written, which was going to ensure that the children in these disadvantaged areas would get the best quality start, if they were in a child care setting, in the year before they went into junior infants class. It would have cost only €700,000 to get it up and running and it was ready to go, but it did not go anywhere. These short-term decisions are being made in economically challenging times but they are the wrong decisions. We believe in a knowledge economy, which means children from many backgrounds get access to good quality education. Instead, we are seeing the erosion of that and we are extremely unhappy about it.
That is aside from the fact that child care costs in this country constitute 17% to 20% of income. They are 8% in the rest of Europe. There are many problems we need to address. Leaders in our political system need to ask these questions. If we move on to health——
Professor John Monaghan
Excuse me, I wish to make another point about education before moving on to discuss health. Something that happened over the summer, which I am sure was never intended to have a damaging consequence in the area of education, is having severe consequences. It is the change in the method of funding community crèches. We have 31 resource centres throughout the country. The society is not just about delivering bags of coal and giving people food. We have 850 social housing units and the 31 resource centres include crèches. We run 18 hostels, 14 holiday homes for children and eight youth clubs. There is plenty of activity. This is where we are spending our more than €45 million.
In our community-based crèches we are trying to help people to move from welfare to work. Now, however, having done that, many of the families we are dealing with are finding it impossible to pay the increased crèche costs associated with that. I have no doubt that the people who instigated the scheme thought it was a great idea and made the change for the best of reasons. They intended to target the money at the poorest families. That is great. However, the unintended consequence was that many of the families we had moved from welfare to work now have to give up work because they cannot find the extra €80 or €90 per week per child. That is insane. At a time when we should be encouraging people to move from welfare and into whatever jobs are available, taking these actions which can only be described as economic idiocy just does not make sense.
Before proceeding to discuss health, there is a side issue. We have mentioned low-income families. There is also the problem of people being made redundant and the issues surrounding that. We can discuss health after that.
Mr. John Mark McCafferty
Unemployment is now very obvious and topical. We are experiencing its impact. Moreover, the families we assist are at the receiving end of redundancies and increased unemployment. In the budget there were changes in the number of contributions required for entitlement to jobseeker's benefit. That was coupled with a reduction in the period over which the benefit is paid. It means a greater number of unemployed people will be on the means tested jobseeker's benefit in the next year, which will mean a consequent drop in income for those families. That is a concern for us. We are also hearing anecdotally about waiting times for receipt of claims. That is a big concern in terms of weekly cashflow for families and households.
The second point is about education and skills training. We are hearing, particularly in rural areas, of many lower skilled younger people leaving the country. Emigration is becoming a reality. That underlines the need for sustained investment in lifelong learning and adult education. We are passionate about preschool education but also about the need for other supports to underpin people's participation in adult education.
Professor John Monaghan
To return to the point about jobseeker's allowance and the means test, there are already instances of families approaching us, where the husband or wife was made redundant some months ago. It might be the wife who was working and the husband was at home or the husband was working and is now unemployed and the wife has a small job. Up to this they could get by on the job seeker's benefit because it is based on PRSI. The difficulty we will experience — it will probably hit us as a time bomb later on, throughout the summer — is when a wife, who may have a few hours working in a supermarket, finds that income is taken into account. The consequence could very well be that the overall level of income coming in could drop dramatically. We are starting to notice elements of that and families we visit are afraid of it. Please do not underestimate the fear that is out there among people. They are concerned about themselves and their families.
On the final point that Mr. McCafferty made, it seemed to us to be incredibly strange that, at a time when unfortunately more and more people were becoming unemployed, one would cut 500 places off a back-to-education initiative. It just does not make sense. Surely, rather than having people languish on the dole, we should be trying to get them back into education and improve their skills so that when the economy picks up they will be in a position to take part.
In many ways it goes back to the kind of thing that happened 30 or 40 years ago. When Donough O'Malley introduced free secondary education, people said it was mad. Others brought regional technical colleges to parts of the country where nothing was happening and they were told they were mad. Look at what happened, however. When the world economy started to grow, both those actions had the effect of providing a very good, well educated work force which was available for that uptake. Surely now is the time to be investing in education and re-training, thus ensuring that back-to-work and back-to-education initiatives are rolled out, rather than the other way around. There is a real problem with that.
I will protect Ms Deane now and let her make a contribution. I then propose to turn to my colleagues.
Ms Audrey Deane
Thank you, Vice Chairman. I will keep it brief. We are here because we want to give the committee an insight into the reality of life for an increasing number of households and particularly those with children. We know that some 17,000 people lost their jobs last month alone and the number of people out of work is 277,000. The reality for those people is not easy. They are facing increasing tensions and challenges from all parts, including funding their children's education. They are thinking that they cannot afford private health insurance and are back into the residual public health service. That is not a funny place for many of those people to find themselves.
One million people in this country earn less than €15.50 per hour. Some 20% of the work force, which is just 2 million, earn less than €10 per hour. More and more of those people are ringing us because they cannot cope. Never mind the fact that Christmas is coming, they cannot make it on their wages.
I will make a brief comment about health. The CSO figures, which came out literally a few days ago, tell us some stark things. I had the pleasure of hearing the chief medical officer of the Department of Health and Children telling me even more shocking figures yesterday about the steep social gradient in health inequality. It means that if one is poor, one is much more likely to be sick, and will die earlier. That is the bottom line. Unfortunately, there are now 55,000 people who are living on a very low income and who do not have medical cards. We must ask ourselves some really hard questions about why these systems are not working to support them. Some 28,000 people are now living in consistent poverty, which is deprivation. Some 60% of them are on the minimum wage and they do not have medical cards either. We must ask ourselves why. At the same time, the accident and emergency charge is going up to €100, as is the drug refund scheme. These are all trigger points for such families and we will come across more of it. We feel that some of the budget decisions were wrong because they are hurting the most vulnerable in our society. I thank the committee for its attention.
Thank you very much. I turn to my colleagues. I remind them that because of a possible vote in the Dáil, this meeting must conclude by 11.45 a.m., although I do not wish to place restrictions on anybody.
I will be as brief as I can. I welcome the witnesses and thank them for their presentation. To some extent, what they have outlined is not a surprise to many of us. Over the last three weeks in the Dáil we have gone through the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which is currently before the Seanad. We have even drawn on the Society of St. Vincent de Paul's statistics to highlight the difficulties people are facing. We have tried to have some of these issues addressed, but without success unfortunately. I want to deal with some of the issues that have been raised and to question the delegation a bit more. One of the most frustrating things which needs to be dealt with is the lack of overall cohesion between different Government Departments in dealing with poverty. Ms Deane mentioned the need for a section in the Department of Finance. She is probably aware there is a Cabinet sub-committee on social inclusion. I was shocked to learn two weeks ago that the sub-committee had not met since last February. It did meet two weeks ago for one hour during Committee Stage of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. We broke for an hour while that sub-committee met.
If we are to bring about the necessary changes, savings and increases, there must be some sort of interdepartmental co-ordination. What the delegation outlined in terms of education and health issues is not a matter for this committee, although it obviously affects everybody. Technically, however, the Cabinet sub-committee needs to deal with those matters. That demonstrates the problems that are in the system. That Cabinet sub-committee must meet to deal with such issues, but I am not convinced it is happening sufficiently at the moment.
The delegation outlined cost factors, including fuel and child care, which disproportionately affect lower income households. Ms Deane cited a figure of between 17% and 20% for child care costs, but it is more if one is less well off. That is part of the difficulty people are facing.
The Society of St. Vincent de Paul obviously deals with people from all sorts of backgrounds. I remember the delegation made a comment last year that its previous contributors were now seeking contributions from the society. What percentage of those coming to the society are working? In the current climate it is harder to talk about the working poor because the live register figures are rising all the time. We cannot afford to stop examining that issue, however, because it has not been dealt with sufficiently.
I am consistently coming across self-employed people who are losing their jobs. The applications for social welfare assistance are based on their last returns in 2007. I have one instance of a couple who have had no income since June. The wife has been refused disability payment, based on her husband's income last year, but he has not earned a penny since June either. The Department should understand that such people, who have children, have no money whatsoever in the approach to Christmas. Is the society coming across more situations like that? That issue must be dealt with.
A fortnight ago, we had a meeting on fuel prices but I was extremely disappointed with the lack of progress in energy poverty. The group told us what we knew about what payments are available. The issues include how much the payment is, as well as the fact that the houses are unsuitable. I have to question a budget that increased the payment under the Sustainable Energy Ireland initiative for house extensions. Therefore, people who could afford to do up their houses got a bigger increase than the warmer homes scheme, which is for the lower paid. We then went almost cap-in-hand to industry to support the warmer homes initiative, which is for those who cannot afford to do it themselves. Yet we gave an increase to those who can afford to do it themselves. I would have done it the other way around, asking industry to assist the scheme for people who could not do it themselves. Maybe it is easier to persuade them to give it to lower income people, but the way it was done shows the lack of attention the area is receiving.
We will be repeatedly seeking increases to the fuel allowance, but not dealing with the underlying causes in order to make a difference. At the rate we are currently going, I calculate it will take 50 years before all the current stock is dealt with. One is talking therefore about wasting money for the next 50 years unless the matter is dealt with. Perhaps the delegation could comment on that matter.
From the food perspective, why are people coming to the society? Is it that they are just not able to meet their bills, are they choosing other things over food, or is it that they do not have the means to budget? How is it impacting? Does it impact on those who are predominantly on social welfare or those working as well?
Returning to the fuel issue briefly, I have found, and know well from my colleagues who are members of the Joint Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, that the Commission for Energy Regulation, CER, makes decisions based on submissions it receives. It seems CER has predominantly, until the last decision a few weeks ago, looked at the submissions from utility companies. Does the Society of St. Vincent de Paul make submissions? I appreciate the society is busy with what it has to do. Has the society received any such attention?
The utilities got their last increase in the summer based on high oil prices. There is a motion in the Dáil, which will be voted on tonight, commending them on not getting another increase, but because the price of oil has fallen so dramatically, there should be a decrease. I commend them on that without a difficulty, and I am happy to do so. There is a big difference. I am interested in the society's views on whether it feels it is being listened to by CER in that regard.
On education costs, there is nothing with which I disagree. More people will be eligible under the back to school clothing and footwear allowance but that benefit has been totally wiped out by the ending of the book scheme. Individual teachers have approached me about it. While not to take away from the headline issue of class size, teachers are really worried about the book scheme. It was worked in such a way that there was no stigma attached. It really was working within the schools, although it probably needed more funding. The fear is about what will replace it and how will schools manage. The schools do not have the funds to deal with it. The same may be said of the school completion programme.
Many of those attending Youthreach are from the lower socio-economic groups. The attention given to this or the importance placed on Youthreach, or lack thereof, is shown by the fact that it has been a pilot programme for 19 years. Has any programme in the world, not to mention in Ireland, been on a pilot basis for that length of time. The message is that the programme is not seen as important because it is still a pilot programme. Either it works or it does not. I believe it does and it should be given the status of a full and recognised programme.
I did not understand what Ms Audrey Deane meant about the €700,000 programme and the early child care system. Following the other contributors, she might tell us a little more about that.
I welcome the delegation from the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and congratulate them on the society's continued outstanding work. As Deputy Enright stated, as Opposition spokespersons, we have been over all the budget cuts a number of times in recent weeks here, dealing with the budget itself and the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, but it has been worthwhile for Government members of the committee to hear from the society just what it is like at the coalface.
The impact of the budget has not yet started to hit and people are in for a shock. Members are in for a shock at the reaction they are likely to hear from their constituents in January next when a number of these particularly vicious cuts start to hit. In particular, I refer to the jobseeker's benefit changes, which will cause severe difficulties for families over the coming months. As I stated, I am not sure that people are really aware of the extent of those changes.
I am conscious that there will be further implications, apart from the fact that many families will find themselves far worse off and their entitlements will be reduced. There are many other changes that have not yet been identified. For example, if certain categories are only entitled to jobseeker's benefit for nine months, that will have a knock-on impact on the family income where the other member of the couple is working, in the denial of assistance for that person.
There are real issues of waiting times. I came across a case recently where a person's jobseeker's benefit ended in the middle of November and the person cannot get an appointment for a means test until 9 January next. The person will be almost two months, throughout the Christmas period, without any payment because of waiting times. That situation is mirrored throughout the country. The staffing provision is completely inadequate to deal with the present level of demand. That is something to which the Government must wake up because it is causing real hardship.
The other impact of the changes to jobseeker's benefit about which I am concerned is where a person is now only entitled to claim for nine months. There is a requirement for the back to education allowance that one must be in receipt of a payment for 12 months and those people will be denied an opportunity to get back into education and improve their chances of being employed again. There are all kinds of long-term implications involved in these changes.
Mention was made of the changes to rent supplement where people who are in receipt of social welfare — those concerned are predominantly social welfare recipients — in receipt of rent supplement will get an increase of €6.50 a week in their welfare payment and will then be the subject of a clawback of €5 in rent supplement or, indeed, mortgage interest supplement. Those people now will receive a net increase of a mere €1.50. In real terms, that is a reduction in their level of income and that will have serious implications for them.
In light of the extent of the budget cuts, what does that mean for social partnership? Our understanding was that social partnership, apart from pay agreements, was to deal with the wider picture of what is happening in society and, obviously, disadvantage was to be one of the main planks of that. Has social partnership failed the poor now? It is difficult to understand how a budget like this could be produced by the Government and how it could get through — I can only come to the conclusion that social partnership has failed the poor.
Mention was made of the living alone allowance. That is a hobby-horse of mine and I have raised it several times with the Minister. I have asked the Minister whether she accepts the findings of the Vincentian partnership's work and the minimum essential budgets, where a single pensioner needs approximately 70% of a couple's income to survive because the overheads are the same whether for one or two persons, but she did not seem to accept them.
I believe that important work has been done and it is very detailed in identifying exactly what the expenses are for people living on low incomes. Is there any prospect of moving that research forward to the point where it is accepted at departmental or ministerial level? It is difficult to argue with the figures in that detailed research, but the Minister does not seem to accept them. I wonder can that be addressed at social partnership level. Has the society been in with the Department and confronted the officials on those figures?
Mention was made of a number of Society of St. Vincent de Paul conferences running into real difficulties from a funding point of view. Will the delegates speak to us a little about its funding? Is there a pattern where those conferences are finding pressures? Is it in the commuter belt? I ask them to give us an overview of what is happening nationally.
I listened carefully to the members of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul explain how difficult matters are out there. I can assure them we, as public representatives, know. We are meeting it every day in our clinics and elsewhere. The budget increase in the social welfare allowance alone, for example, is an indication of how difficult matters have become. The figure has risen from €15 billion to €19 billion, a massive increase. The Government is aware of the major problems encountered.
Our guests referred to people's difficulties in heating their homes. This is a matter in which I have always had an interest and I am of the view that we have been badly let down by the local authorities in providing proper insulation and ensuring houses are brought up to standard. New energy rating standards for houses will come into effect in the new year and there will be pressure on local authorities and the Government to begin to make progress on this matter. I tabled a motion at a recent meeting of the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party that the action required in this regard be used to reflate the economy. The motion was passed. If we take action such as that to which I refer, it will assist in the creation of 25,000 to 30,000 jobs. It is important that a stimulus be provided over and above that contained in the budget.
I should——
I did not interrupt the Deputy when she was making her contribution. Her party supports the concept of millionaires being granted medical cards. Resources are scarce and we must ensure the position on medical cards is addressed. The social conscience of those in opposition is not great.
I support people such as our guests who do great work in communities. It is our job to do the best we can for them. I am sure our guests will agree that the economy has been beset by serious problems in recent months. We are trying to do the best we can but I must admit that this is probably not good enough. I have always been of the view that if we can do better, we should do so. When money was available, we invested it and ensured people such as our guests were catered for. I found that the most efficient way to spend money in the economy was to do so through their organisation. Great value was obtained for this taxpayers' money. When it is necessary to spend taxpayers' money, it should be given to organisations such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul to disburse.
I am of the view that those on low incomes should have access to medical cards. It is for this reason I believe the Government made the correct decision on medical cards. Those on lower pay should have them. As dole queues lengthen, those in them will receive medical cards. However, an income ceiling has been put in place to ensure those on the highest incomes will not receive them.
The figure for those unemployed has risen from 201,000 in October to 277,000. That is a shocking increase in such a short period. Ireland is not exempt from the turmoil in the global economy or the effects of the banking crisis. The domestic economy has been adversely affected in recent months. The position on the contamination of pork products is extremely serious, particularly when one considers that the sector is responsible for a huge number of exports.
Who was responsible for causing the crisis?
It is very bad manners to prevent people from speaking. No one on this side interrupted when members on the other side were making their contributions.
I am happy to offer the Senator my protection.
I will continue to support the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. Its efforts are greatly appreciated.
I call Deputy Byrne. I will afford to her the same level of protection I offered to Senator Butler.
I thank the Vice Chairman. Professor Monaghan has stated it is a privilege for our guests to be here. It is our privilege that they are present. I am a huge admirer of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and served on the conference in my parish for many years. I had the privilege to work closely with the late Mr. Noel Clear. In fact, I am one of his protégés. I met him when I was seven years old and the impact of that meeting has remained with me ever since. Sadly, we commemorated the third anniversary of his death yesterday. He was a man who touched many in the community in which I live.
I became increasingly angry as I listened to some of the comments made. I visited a flat complex in my area recently and as I was climbing the stairs, someone shouted to ask me if I was a representative of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. When I got to the top of the stairs, I was met by a girl who brought me into her flat. Despite the work Dublin City Council has done in many flat complexes in recent years — I refer to its great efforts to assist people by installing proper windows, doors, etc. — it was obvious from the girl's flat that she was living in poverty. What I saw reminded me of my past experience as a member of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. When I was leaving the flat complex, I was very moved and realised again the value of the work done by those who volunteer for the Society of St. Vincent de Paul.
Reference was made to fuel cuts and the €2 increase in the allowance. As I stated at a recent meeting, it costs €3.45 to purchase a bag of sticks in Homebase. Therefore, it is the place to go.
Reference was also made to the cuts in education and the book scheme. As someone who left school at 14 years and who, as such, has no formal education, I am of the view that giving a child a book and teaching him or her to read and write provides him or her with opportunities for the future. The cuts in the book scheme are an absolute disgrace. We can continue to provide the Society of St. Vincent de Paul with millions of euro, but if we do not protect the education system, each generation that grows up during the next 40 years will be adversely affected.
I do not want to discuss child benefit. However, I am aware of the impact the changes will have on people in my community. Young people will be obliged to leave school because their parents would rather that they were not there. Such individuals, particularly those in leaving certificate applied, LCA, classes, will be placed at a huge disadvantage.
I have attended more meetings that I care to remember during the past year on the Government's child care subvention scheme. This was probably the most disastrous development during the past 12 months. Lone parents who are struggling to survive and who are placed on community employment, CE, schemes are obliged to give up their places. They cannot afford, as a result of the subvention, to continue to take part in such schemes. I thought that we wanted to encourage people to remain in education, provide them with a better standard of living and place them in environments where they might thrive rather than ensuring they are kept down. They will be kept down as a result of the reduction in the child care allowance.
I do not envy those who volunteer for the conference of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul in my area. People are bringing huge food parcels to Sunday mass and leaving them under the "giving tree" in order that they might be distributed among others in the parish.
I have known Senator Butler for many years and I am concerned about the remarks he made. In addition, I am of the view that the Minister does not understand what it is like to have nothing or the meaning of real poverty. She is completely out of touch with what is happening in communities. It would do her a great deal of good to visit some of our inner city flat complexes and discover the nature of real poverty.
The Vice Chairman stated he would afford me some protection. I hope he will do so. I am extremely angry about this matter and of the view that members on this side do not have a voice. I am in my second year as a Member of the Dáil and of the opinion that I do not have a voice because those in government, particularly Members on the back benches, are not listening.
I admire Deputy Cyprian Brady and others for the work they do on the ground in the inner city but it is time for him to wake up, listen and take note of what is happening. Poverty is alive and well in our communities and on our doorsteps. If he does not believe me, he should put on his runners and take a trip into the flat complexes in the inner city to witness the poverty there. Perhaps next year the Society of St. Vincent de Paul will not need as much money as it wants this year next year if the Government does something for the poor. This issue is about poverty and nothing else. The society has been at the top of my list all my life. I have worked with the organisation and I admire the work its volunteers do on the ground. If the committee has a voice, I hope it is on behalf of the poor because nobody in the Government is listening. I am sorry to be emotional about this but it is a reality that the people doing the work represent the Society of St. Vincent de Paul.
That is appreciated.
I refer to the mortgage issue. I was contacted by a lady recently who was laid off from a good job last year. She has a new mortgage and no other bills but she cannot make ends meet. She was completely distraught. She works for three days but she receives no payment from the Department of Social and Family Affairs because of this. She asked her employer to reduce the number of days she worked in order that she could claim benefits. I agree with Deputy Byrne that the Government is not listening to us. Could the Society of St. Vincent de Paul lobby the Government to encourage the banks to place a moratorium on mortgage repayments? I visited MABS with the lady and we went through her budget but she cannot make any more savings. The bottom line is she does not have any money. She is a prudent, careful lady with no money. No matter how the person in MABS tried to help her, she still has to pay a large sum off her mortgage every month. Her house will be repossessed. The country has bailed out the banks and Fine Gael believed it was the right thing to do at the time but it is the turn of the banks to look after the people. I would like the SVP to lobby and advocate on behalf of people such as this.
People who paid PRSI and incomes taxes for years and who are claiming jobseeker's benefit are not entitled to a Christmas bonus. Has the SVP a view on that? This is the only social welfare payment on which such a bonus will not be paid and that is downright mean and unfair.
I was contacted recently by a lady with a €400 ESB bill. She was never in debt in her life but her electricity supply was cut off because she did not have the money to pay her bill. Is the organisation coming across many people like her?
Deputy Shortall referred to people's benefits being cut after nine months. Those who recently signed on do not even realise that. I shudder to think how people will cope in a few months. I admire everything the society does. The town of Athlone has a number of conferences and the collection will take place this weekend. The SVP generates a great community spirit and I applaud the representatives for what they are doing.
I apologise I was not in attendance for the presentation but I had to be in the Dáil for the debate on the pork issue, which is extremely serious for my constituents, and I hope the representatives accept that.
The work of the society was raised at a major meeting in Cavan last Monday night by a senior county councillor who has been involved in the society all his life. He made it clear the organisation was not only dealing with the normal run of people this year but also middle income earners who were reasonably well off but who have suddenly found themselves without a job and in crisis. As Senator McFadden said, Fine Gael supported the Government regarding the bail-out of the banks but, unfortunately, the Government has not got its to work on the ground, which is a serious issue.
I refer to the issue of the living alone allowance. I appreciate this being raised by Deputy Shortall, who has an urban background, but if it is bad for people living on their own in the city, it is much worse in rural areas where people must have a car and so on. They cannot abandon the car, for example, because their loved one has moved into a nursing home or passed way. The allowance is crazy. With all due respects to those who talk about difficult times, the allowance was not changed when times were good. It was totally ignored.
More people are in receipt of medical cards but that is because they are losing their jobs and not because the means threshold has been increased. The food industry in County Monaghan provides low skilled work and, as a result, low incomes while the furniture industry has been lost. It is difficult to comprehend that only 32% of the county's population has a medical card whereas 52% of the population in County Donegal has a card and it stands at 39% in County Carlow. The threshold has been a bugbear of mine for many years with it being applied rigidly in some counties and laxly in others. There is a major difference in the interpretation of the scheme among community welfare officers. The income statistics for Monaghan and Carlow do not correspond to medical card provision. A total of 10,000 medical cards were lost in Cavan-Monaghan, which has a population of 110,000, whereas only 8,000 were lost in Cork, which has a population of 450,000. This does not add up.
There is a major problem in the health service in that the budget for our area is much smaller per capita than anywhere else. If one is not in receipt of a medical card, one will not be given the book or closing allowances or the school transport ticket, which is a major issue in rural areas. Those who have four children, with two in primary school and two in secondary school, must pay €300 each for school transport.
I assure the representatives that we appreciate their work more than ever but it is sad that, following the economic boom over the past 15 years, many people are still struggling. I admire Deputy Byrne. I did know her that well until we spent a few days together on tour but her commitment to the poor is unquestionable. She did not raise issues to make political points earlier. She did so on the basis of her understanding of the position on the ground. Until we all understand and acknowledge it, the problem will not be addressed. It is hard for people who cannot access a cent while money is being absolutely wasted at the highest level, which has been proved by various inquires in recent times.
I thank the society for its work. How much of its budget is funded by the Government? How much of an increase was provided this year?
I thank Professor Monaghan and his team for their presentation. My constituency is blessed to have the St. Vincent de Paul headquarters in it. Day in, day out I see evidence of the work the society's 9,500 members do and I have always been impressed by the society's willingness to work at the coalface.
With regard to previous comments, in the current economic climate the problem for Government — just like anyone with a household budget — is it cannot spend what is not coming in. Nobody on the Government side likes making the changes we have had to make as a result of the position we are in, but we must continue to protect the most vulnerable in society and ensure they are looked after. In order for us to do that ——
The Government did not do that. It spun it that way, but that is not what it did.
What we have done is increase the budget in this area. The Department of Social and Family Affairs is one of the three Departments that received an increase in its budget. We have increased the allowances in many cases and will continue to take account of increased costs. If there is one thing Opposition Deputies are right about, it is that the situation is going to get worse.
The Department of Finance usually looks five, ten or 15 years ahead when preparing its finances, but we must only look one year ahead and try and see where we will be this time next year. In order for us to continue to support the most vulnerable in society, we must make changes in other areas, and that is what we have done.
The Government is not doing that and should stop making out that it is.
The Society of St. Vincent de Paul has proven over many years that it has an important role to play in how we continue to protect vulnerable people. The society will continue to be supported and this will be clear to those on all sides of the House. I wish the society well with its work. I guarantee my continued support and assure the society that whatever we need to do from a budgetary point of view to protect the most vulnerable people, we will do it.
Thank you.
That is a misrepresentation of the facts. The Deputy should stop deceiving people and be honest about what is being done.
I am being honest.
I ask members to address their remarks through the Chair.
I welcome our guests. Like others, I acknowledge and recognise the good work done by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. I live in Donaghmede, an area I represent, and have lots of dealings with the society there. Some people think all the society does is dish out goodies to people, but it does much more, including getting involved with immigrants, naturalisation and so on and I have dealings with it in that regard. I and others appreciate the important work done by the society in our communities. People would be much worse off if the society did not exist.
People often ask whether there are worse or different levels of poverty in different areas. That is a good question. Some people say they are not aware of poverty in their area because they do not see it and others will say they were in Africa and that is where one sees real poverty. People do not have a proper understanding of what exactly poverty is. I expect that poverty will affect even more people next year and the following year. A number of people I know with small businesses are now going out of business and do not have enough money to pay creditors, never mind anybody else. These people will have no income now because, unfortunately, the self-employed do not get welfare payments, except at the discretion of the community welfare officer. That will be a serious problem down the line. There are people like that in our communities. They are in need, but are too embarrassed to avail of the services of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul.
People do not understand the difficulties faced by social welfare recipients. This issue was raised yesterday by Senator McFadden in the Seanad. People say to us they do not know what people are on about when they say social welfare payments are not adequate because they know families where the income from social welfare is higher than the income of those people who are working in the same house. Another point people make is that social welfare recipients get sufficient moneys, but do not manage their finances properly because they spend money on the wrong things and go to the pub every night. I do not agree with these views, but I want to give a flavour of the ideas people have with regard to those on social welfare, particularly when we are talking about poverty and people who are less well off.
It is important that we educate people on what is happening in communities so they have some understanding of the situation and do not just have a blanket view and believe that stories of poverty are pie in the sky or that the Society of St. Vincent de Paul just dishes out bags of coal to people who do not need them. The issue of the education of the public with regard to the services provided and the need for them must be tackled.
Senator Butler made a point about the increase in the budget for the Department of Social and Family Affairs from €15 billion to €19 billion. It is true there has been a significant increase, but people still say welfare benefits are inadequate. I was dealing with a person born in Ireland who had been living in England and then came back to live here. She got a house and her pension was transferred. She was amazed to discover that her pension here was almost one third higher than it had been in Britain. Perhaps the delegates would comment on these few points.
I cannot understand why gas and electricity are so expensive when the price of oil is going down. I raised this issue with the Minister yesterday, but got no response. People raise this issue with me constantly. These costs are a significant issue, particularly for the elderly. I have heard that some people are now cutting down on food out of fear that they will not have sufficient funds for heating. I will not take up any more time. I congratulate the society which is doing great work. It will certainly have any support I can give. If the society outlines what it wants us to do for it, we will bring that to the table and do our utmost to achieve it.
Thank you very much.
The Government did that.
The Deputy is interrupting again. Does she ever stop?
It is just unbelievable, the rubbish that side is coming out with.
The facts are not unbelievable. What would be unbelievable would be how Fine Gael and the Labour Party, if they were in power, would be able to deliver on borrowings of €2 billion less than what we propose to borrow. That was what Deputy Bruton proposed in his policy before the budget. That is €2 billion less in current expenditure to provide for increases in social welfare, education and health. That is what is unbelievable.
That is based on savings that could be made.
I do not question Deputy Catherine Byrne's commitment to poverty, that is acknowledged, but we on the Fianna Fáil backbenches will not accept attacks on our deeply felt and ingrained commitment to the poor of our constituencies. The champagne socialists in the Labour Party may laugh all they like, but we have a deep commitment to our constituents and to the poor in our constituency, otherwise we would not be elected.
Did Fianna Fáil show that commitment in the budget?
We showed it in the budget. If Fine Gael had been in power, there would be €2 billion less spent next year. The Deputy cannot say one thing in here and have Deputy Bruton saying something else on the budget.
Fine Gael is not saying something different at all.
We are borrowing the money because we want to give increases in welfare. That had to be said in response. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul is here today. It does fantastic work in my parish and has a holiday home for older people there. It does fantastic work by giving older people free and reduced-price holidays.
What is the state of membership of the society? Are more people coming forward or is there a need for more members? This issue was raised by one of the society's officers in County Meath as he foresaw a problem. I will give whatever help I can in my local area to the society. I have family members involved. The work is generally confidential at the coalface. The collections are public but people are helped confidentially. We are very grateful for that work and we hear about it in our constituencies. I thank the society for its challenging assessment of the budget as it is important to hear it and not just the shrill politics from the Opposition.
I also wish to pay tribute to the Society of St. Vincent de Paul for its work. The society has done tremendous work in County Clare to help people on the margins and I pay tribute to everyone associated such as the field workers who do amazing work. The current financial difficulties have meant 106,000 extra people in the dole queues this year compared to last year. In my constituency of County Clare, 2,500 extra people were in the dole queue this November compared to last November. The demand for the services of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul will dramatically increase. The society is appealing for extra volunteers and I join in that appeal.
One of the most vicious cuts in the budget was the removal of the free books scheme. I refer as an example to St. Flannan's College in Ennis, of which I am a past pupil. A total of €18,500 was given to that school last year but this was in the better times. It is frightening to think that people on the margins, the poor families, will be hit. It will be down to societies such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, to give those people that dig-out and to help them through. The Government decision is very regrettable. There is still time for a re-think on its part. I commend the society for its work.
I wish to make a brief comment. The Vice Chairman will know I am not a mud-slinger so I will not sling mud. I wish to comment on what has been said about how people manage their budgets. It is very difficult to manage something one does not have and it requires skill. I refer to an advertisement currently on television asking people to donate money for the Third World. This money is not to bring out food but rather to fund people to go out and educate the people on how to manage and till their land and grow crops. This is the sort of programme that is needed here because it is to do with education. People need to be educated on how to manage what they have. The people who need to be educated are the people in the low-income bracket. If the Government keeps insisting on taking money away from education we will not get any further.
Most of this is about money and the budget. If we are to make any serious inroads there has to be the will and the co-operation to do it. In response to my colleagues opposite, the Cabinet sub-committee on social inclusion met in February and did not meet at any stage prior to the budget, not once. We knew the budget was going to be tough and difficult and this is when the sub-committee should have been meeting regularly to see how best to handle this situation and to ensure the poor would not be worst affected. There is a money side to this but it also needs a political will to deal with it.
I call Senator Mullen and I apologise for overlooking him.
I apologise to our guests from the Society of St. Vincent de Paul that I was called away for a while this morning. I was here for the society's presentation to the committee. I was very taken by what Professor Monaghan said about helping people to move to a better place. A number of years ago, I did a very small brief stint of voluntary work in Argentina, not under the auspices of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, and I have vivid memories of meeting families in situations of dire poverty close to the project with which we were working. Despite their living in a fairly fertile part of the world, they just did not have the coping skills necessary to make the best of a bad situation. I say that because I agree — not necessarily with the party political wrangling about it — with everything that has been said about the importance of education. It strikes me that when we talk about education in the context of disadvantage, it is not just about helping people acquire skills for a changing job market but that it can be about something much more basic. I know the Society of St. Vincent de Paul is deeply aware of this in terms of helping people to make the best of their situation because very often people in situations of disadvantage lack the coping skills which the rest of us take for granted as being very basic to the human experience, for example, in the area of nutrition.
We would all wish to be associated with the tributes to the Society of St. Vincent de Paul as everyone in Ireland has a special place in their hearts for the society which has massive credibility as a result of its work and its long tradition. I was very fortunate to be present in Trinity College last week at a talk about the society's founder, Frederic Ozanam. There was much talk on that occasion about voluntarism. I am very sorry I missed the replies on the subject of voluntarism. A few years ago, everyone was talking about how we were cash rich but time poor. We are now in danger of being poor on both fronts where we do not have the resources to reach. We are a generation very absorbed in very noble activities to make the best of a situation for our families the downside of which is a decline in voluntary spirit. The knock-on effect is the fragmentation of social bonds and a degree of anarchy emerging. This can be linked to the absence of good people in communities.
Given the society's credibility and long tradition, is it experiencing the volunteer crisis to the same extent as other organisations or is it cushioned from the effects in that people often think first of the society when they think of volunteering their time?
The delegation has a major challenge. I thank my colleagues for their contributions. This has been a robust discussion but a very good one. Not to state the obvious but it has been a privilege for the committee to have the delegation here and it is important for us to listen to the delegation. I always give credit to the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. Like other colleagues I was a member of the society and I worked in Drimnagh, which is in Deputy Catherine Byrne's constituency. I have a great deal of contact with the society in Tallaght. No mention was made of the society's shops. Deputy Cyprian Brady referred to the headquarters of the society. I looked through the window of the premises in Tallaght this morning just to prepare myself for this meeting. I hope that all of us as a community will be generous this weekend for the society's annual collection. I wish the society well.
We know there are challenging issues. I come from a generation of old Dublin where I remember the different challenges which faced the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. I was reared in Dublin of the 1950s and 1960s. Now I hear from the society and from others the different perspectives with regard to health and education. I suspect the society is finding different challenges as we all know from our work. Unfortunately, we will probably be required to conclude this meeting in less than ten minutes. I, therefore, ask Professor Monaghan to do his best to sum up. If issues remain to be dealt with, perhaps he might correspond directly with the committee and on other occasions we might have an opportunity to evaluate what he has said.
Professor John Monaghan
It is important that we make this comment. We appreciate the increases in the budget in social welfare, health and education. Clearly, they were not enough, but we appreciate that it happened. Matters would have been considerably worse had it not happened. I will hit some of the high points.
Deputy Shortall asked about the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice, minimum budget standards and how we might influence people. Mr. McCafferty is a representative on social partnership. This ties in with Deputy Enright's comments about groups and Departments working together, the social inclusion committee. Mr. McCafferty tries to raise these flags. One of the issues we have — it is very popular — is that social welfare benefits tend to be mathematical formulae. They are based on a percentage of another number with no attention paid to whether it is appropriate. It is simple inasmuch as it is very easy to calculate a percentage, but it takes absolutely no account of whether it is appropriate. Some of our colleagues in the voluntary sector like the idea of percentages, but, frankly, we do not think it is appropriate. It should be based on what one needs, not as a fraction of another number.
On funding, copies of the annual report have been circulated. If members turn to pages 20 and 21, they will see that donations and legacies amount to the greater proportion. Private funding at church gates and from our own activities contributes the greater proportion of our moneys. In fairness, the Government gives us approximately €1.4 million in general funding which we can spend on issues that are important to us. Page 22 also refers to holiday homes, housing, hostels, youth clubs, resource centres and the seamen's shelter. In the event that we become involved in capital projects, it will provide conduit funding. We will spend the money and it will give it back.
The Chairman mentioned our shops, of which we have approximately 130. We employ people on CE schemes, etc. We pay their wages and the Government gives us the money back. Therefore, there is conduit funding of approximately €10 million, but we are spending approximately €26 million in that area. There is a transfer of considerable funding.
How much funding is provided by the State as a percentage of the society's budget?
Professor John Monaghan
It would probably be approximately one quarter if capital funding is considered. However, the percentage for discretionary funding would be 10% or less.
Mr. John Mark McCafferty
The vast majority of the Government funding goes towards housing. It is money that comes in and goes out. It is used for social housing and hostels. It is not as though there is a massive tranche of money going directly towards welfare coming from State coffers. There is a block of money, but in the scheme of things it is relatively small. That is what provides us with a level of independence.
Professor John Monaghan
We raise income from our own sources. As members will see from the annual report, we raised approximately €5.5 million from our own activities to fund them.
Many members asked about the people calling to us. I agree they are changing. The people who were always in difficulty and struggling for a number of years are still struggling. Deputy Brady made a point about self-employed persons. Increasingly, we are seeing people who had small businesses and are losing them. They may have been associated with the construction industry, including tilers, alarm fitters and landscape gardeners. Because they did not pay stamp, they are entitled to very little. They are struggling and coming to us in even greater numbers.
The living alone allowance was important for a number of members. Thankfully, older people have had the benefit of increased pensions and subventions. One is right in saying we look after older people well. However, we are not so good at reducing their sense of isolation and fear. They are concerned about who will look after them when they are sick and who will bury them when they die. Many older people refuse to turn on the heat because they are afraid. We need to work on this critical issue.
We will be doing work on mortgages and issues people have with banks. We have an extremely good relationship with Departments. We have found our dealings with officials in them to be very good. They are very hard working individuals who are of fantastic help to us when looking for information and they are willing to listen. We greatly appreciate their support. Perhaps it is because I am an engineer, but I cannot understand why Departments cannot be joined together in thinking with a greater degree of fluency and effectiveness. I find this mind-boggling. Public and civil servants often get a lot of stick. Without question our dealings with them have been very worthwhile. We really appreciate this.
Regarding mortgages and the banks, we favour a moratorium on all financial institutions evening talking about repossessing people's homes in the next two years. That should be off limits. They need to engage with people in difficulty to allow them to pay a small amount. The position is different compared with the 1980s. I remember working then. The Vice Chairman spoke about Drimnagh. I grew up in Drimnagh and know Inchicore. I remember what happened at the time in my conference in Leixlip where I now work. When I was treasurer, I was able to work with my colleagues to allow people hold on to their homes in the 1980s. It was possible to do deals with banks and building societies and bullyrag them into making deals with us. That is very difficult now because of the level of debt. Misery was high in the 1980s but debt was low. Now both are high and we need to find a mechanism to deal with them. One of the things we need to do is ensure the financial organisations effectively do their duty. They are being guaranteed by taxpayers' money to keep them solvent. It makes no sense to chase those same taxpayers to take their homes. They need to pull back from this.
It has been a pleasure to make our presentation to the committee and I hope members found it informative. I would like to be able to tell them that by the time we come back next year the problems will have been solved. Sadly, that will not be the case. We spent €46 million in 2007 and will spend more than €50 million in 2008. We will be close to a figure of €60 million in 2009 and the problems will increase dramatically. Sadly, measures of at-risk and consistent poverty will increase. We take no pleasure in saying this because we will need to work with it.
I believe there was agreement to allow a fair amount of time for colleagues to make their contributions. I am sorry there is another meeting. I thank Professor Monaghan and his colleagues for attending. As this is our last meeting before Christmas, I wish everybody a happy Christmas and a peaceful new year. We would all like to be associated with what was said about the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, particularly in the week that is in it. I know the society is placing considerable emphasis on the need for a successful collection over the weekend. I was in Springfield this morning and noticed a note in my own church. I hope the collection goes well.
Professor John Monaghan
As George Hook said: "Give."
On behalf of members and the Chairman, Deputy Healy-Rae, I wish Professor Monaghan and his colleagues well. I thank them for coming and I am sure we will have other opportunities to exchange views.
The joint committee adjourned at 11.50 a.m. until 11 a.m. on Wednesday, 21 January 2009.