It is not correct to say that the destitute element of the population are being asked to contribute anything towards the balancing of the Budget. Persons who are destitute are not interested in this section, and are not affected by the section. The rates of assistance which are payable to such persons, in accordance with their circumstances, are set out in the schedule to the principal Act, and these rates are not being changed. Any person who is unemployed, in the sense in which we usually interpret that word—that is any person who is ordinarily dependent for his livelihood upon the wages he earns, and who, through no fault of his own, is unable to obtain his livelihood, or to get an opportunity of work, will not be one ½d. the worse for this section. The purpose of the amendment is to remedy, to some extent, an anomaly which resulted from the principal Act.
As the law stands at present, a person who has property calculated in accordance with the methods laid down under the principal Act, equal in value to 2/- a week is, when unemployed, better off than the person who has no property at all. The alteration of that position, not entirely, but to some extent, while undoubtedly it makes possible a saving to the Exchequer, also makes possible the utilisation of that saving for the benefit of the section of the people who require assistance more urgently than those persons who possess property.
This Bill contains a number of sections. Under every other section of the Bill except Section 11 increased charges will arise. The scheme of assistance is improved so as to operate more generously on behalf of the unemployed, and those who through no reason of their own are not in a position to earn their livelihood. These improvements, and others which may be enacted in the future, would not be possible unless the total cost of the entire scheme could be kept as low as possible. We are helping to keep down that total cost by the elimination of unnecessary provisions of this kind. These provisions are unnecessary because the amount of assistance, which the Oireachtas decided to be made available for unemployed persons, is set out in the schedule of the principal Act, and is available and will continue to be available for such persons. It is untrue to say that the unemployed persons are being asked to contribute £150,000. Yesterday I impressed upon the Senator that it was not possible to take one section of this Bill and to calculate the financial effects of it while ignoring all other sections. The Bill, as a whole, is going to effect certain changes in the finance of the scheme. But whatever saving may be effected, under this head, the changes under other heads are going to involve increased expenditure; and the State is not going to secure £150,000 as the result of this measure.
It is rather peculiar that we should have a member of the Fine Gael Party that sought by other methods, even by the methods of obstruction, to prevent any money being voted for the unemployed, now endeavouring to increase the amount. It is another indication, of many we have already had, of the inconsistency of the action of members of that Party. The unemployed assistance scheme is new; it came into operation for the first time last year. It involves a charge of one kind or another upon public funds—the Central Fund, the funds of local authorities or the Unemployment Insurance Fund, amounting approximately to £1,300,000. It is a generous provision to make in addition to the other measures adopted for the relief of hardships arising from unemployment. I might point out that it was provided last year for the first time, and it ill becomes a member of the Party that held office for ten years, and made no such provision for the relief of the destitute, now to appear in the role of the advocate of more and more expenditure for that purpose.
Section 11 of this Bill removes an anomaly in the principal Act. Logically, we could wipe out entirely the provision for uncalculated means. We are not doing that, because there is still some necessity for allowing what has been described as a margin for error in the calculation of means. It is not that the system of calculation is unsound, but there are difficulties in determining the weekly value derived from a holding of land, from the ownership of certain farm stock or other property of that kind. With the best will in the world, or the best system of calculation in the world, there will be certain errors in calculation and a certain amount of discrepancy between the determinations of one officer engaged on that work and another officer, and in order to ensure that undue hardship will not arise from such causes this margin is allowed; but the margin need not be as high as in the principal Act.
If we had originally made a margin of 1/- nobody would have questioned it. While the principal Act was before the Oireachtas nobody proposed to increase or decrease the margin set out there. It was put in because we felt a wide margin was required during the first year of the operation of the Act. Having regard to the experience we have gained and the efficacy of the machinery now available, following the appointment of a number of investigation officers at the beginning of the year to exercise a close supervision over the administration of the Act, and particularly having regard to the other provisions of the Bill, the change now proposed is in every way desirable, but it inflicts no hardship on the class of people whom it was primarily desired to aid by the enactment of the unemployment assistance scheme.
Sections 11 to 21, inclusive, and the Title agreed to. Bill reported without amendment.
