Section 36 provides further formal legislative cover for the arrangements made in amending the functions of that National Social Services Board. They are doing excellent work and the documents they present are very good. They have a reputation for producing good documents but the recent documents are excellent.
SECTION 36.
Question proposed: "That section 36 stand part of the Bill."
I am pleased the National Social Services Board is now the responsibility of the Department of Social Welfare. Section 36 provides for amendment of the functions bestowed on the board when originally established under the aegis of the Department of Health in 1984. Responsibility for the board transferred to my Department in 1995 and it is appropriate that its function should be reviewed.
The revised functions reflect more accurately the important role the National Social Services Board has in promoting and supporting independent information, advice and advocacy services thus ensuring that all citizens have access to accurate, comprehensive and clear information on the full range of social services. The revised functions reflect the activities undertaken by the board in recent years, such as its role in providing impartial social policy feedback on issues of concern to social service users. It also reflects its role in providing information, training and development services for the independent social services sector.
Since responsibility for the NSSB moved from the Department of Health to my Department in 1995, we have been closely involved with the new board and the management of the NSSB in developing a strategic plan covering the next two years. The NSSB strategy for 1996-8, which was presented to me before Christmas by the board and which has my full support, has been formulated against the background of the wide ranging commitments to the development of quality public services in the context of the Government's strategic management initiative. It commits the NSSB to co-operating, supporting or directing the resourcing of all non-Government organisations involved in the provision of information, advice and advocacy services. It is now working on preparing an operational programme to see how this strategy can best be translated into effective action.
Functions A and B outlined in the Bill are already provided for under the former functions of the NSSB as one composite function. Function C is a new function which reflects the current work of the board regarding researching, surveying and provision of feedback on social policy issues with a view to highlighting issues of concern and, therefore, being in a position to contribute to the planning and delivery of social services. This important feature of the work of the board should be written into its functions. Function D is an expansion of a former function. In addition to the primary function of providing greater accessibility, co-ordination and public awareness of social services it also includes information, advice and advocacy services delivered for those purposes in both the statutory and voluntary sectors. Function E is a new wording reflecting a core function of the board regarding developing independent information, advice and advocacy services to ensure that all citizens have access to such services. The principal means of furthering this function is through a network of citizen information centres. Function F is a newly worded function which reflects the boards existing activities in support of the development of voluntary social services and their commitment, as articulated in their strategy, to continue to provide appropriate support. Function G is an amendment of an existing function to explicitly include financial resources among the supports which may be provided in appropriate circumstances. In effect, this function reflects the current position. Function H is identical to a former function except that "persons" has been substituted for "bodies" on the advice of the parliamentary draftsman. Function I is a new function permitting the board to develop services to address identified needs whenever the Minister so requests. For clarity, the opportunity has also been taken in this section to specify the Minister for Social Welfare rather than the Minister for Health as in the original legislation. Regulations made in 1995 on the transfer of responsibility already provided for this. The opportunity has also been taken to revoke a number of former functions which are no longer relevant in the context of the transfer to my Department.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 37 and 38 agreed to.
SCHEDULE A.
Question proposed: "That Schedule A be a Schedule to the Bill."
A problem came to my attention during the day about which I am concerned. The Minister has made generous provision by doubling the rate of inflation for social welfare increases. This is welcome, but those on contributory old age pension who have an occupational pension receive no increase. The changes benefit private pension funds rather than pensioners. I met a delegation today to discuss this issue. Even though the Government has enhanced the position of pensioners, contributory old age pensioners whose pension is abated against an occupational pension gain nothing. It puts a few million pounds into private pension funds. Surely the Minister did not intend to do this. Will the Minister consider an amendment to the Bill to ensure that the additional increase above inflation will not be abated.
The question of abatement and the absence of any law on what is permissible to be abated from social welfare payments from private pensions should be addressed. I will write to the Minister about this. Millions of pounds are going to pension funds rather than pensions.
I do not know how much is involved, whether it is millions or tens of millions. It is a condition of the occupational fund rather than a condition of social welfare. It is the pension fund of which a person is a member, that claws back an element of the occupational fund relative to the increase in social welfare pension. Perhaps the Deputy might write to me with the details of the specific cases he has in mind and we can then raise them with the pension board to see if the matter can be addressed. I do not know whether it can or not.
We have had many hours of discussion on the subject matter of Schedule A.
I understand that, but Schedule A, Part 1, makes specific provision for the new rates of contributory old age pension which will not benefit many contributory pensioners. It will cost the State money, perhaps millions of pounds. Will the Minister consider an amendment on Report Stage to prevent this happening?
I cannot say I will do that because the abatement is a condition of the pension fund. It is not within the power of the Minister for Social Welfare to interfere with the private arrangements people make with their pension funds. We can ask the pension board to look at the issue to see if there is an anomaly. However, by and large, people who are in insured employment and who pay into pension funds do so on the basis that the occupational fund is related in various ways to the fact that they will be in receipt of a contributory old age pension. There is an interaction in our system between the two which is primarily a matter for the private arrangements between the person who pays into a fund and the conditions they accept in joining that fund. I will ask the Pensions Board to look at that and see whether there is an issue which needs to be addressed.
We cannot justify spending millions of pounds on pension funds while leaving pensioners no better off. It is clear that the Minister's intention and that of the Government was to ensure that all pensioners would receive a small increase at a greater rate than inflation. If this Bill goes through unamended, we will enrich pension funds but not pensioners. That is a mistake.
I have no knowledge of the particular pension fund arrangement the Chairman is speaking of. If he wishes to write to me with regard to the specific cases he has in mind, I will raise them with the Pensions Board. In relation to increasing social welfare pensions for contributory pensioners, I, as Minister, cannot interfere with the private arrangements that exist between pensioners and the pension fund into which they have paid. The Pensions Board may well make a recommendation that we need to alter the occupational pensions legislation in some way but I cannot pre-empt that. I cannot give you an opinion on it because I simply do not know. However, I am prepared to ask the Pensions Board to examine the issue.
I cannot believe that the Government is prepared to pour money into pension funds and not into pensions.
We do not know yet whether we are pouring money into them at all. I reiterate that occupational pension fund contributions are predicated on the fact that people will receive an occupational pension.
I understand that and Deputy De Rossa has been a very thoughtful and effective Minister for Social Welfare. His doubling of the rate of inflation this year was a wise move to ensure that everybody benefits from the economic growth of our country. However, if this Bill goes through unamended many people who have contributed to an occupational and social welfare pension throughout their lives, will end up no better off. Their money, up to 100 per cent of it in some cases, has been clawed back by the fund.
I am not disputing that. Neither am I saying that I will do nothing about the situation. However, I cannot give a commitment that I will deal with it on Report Stage because I do not know enough about it.
I am simply asking the Minister to look at the matter.
I will do that.
Question put and agreed to.
Schedules B to H, inclusive, agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Report of Select Committee.
I propose the following draft report:
"The Select Committee has considered the Social Welfare Bill, 1997. The Bill is reported to the Dáil, with amendment."
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Report agreed to.
Ordered to report to the Dáil accordingly.
I thank the Minister and Deputy Woods for their co-operation.
The next meeting of the Committee will take place on Wednesday, 19 March at 6.30 p.m. to consider the Equal Status Bill, 1997.
The Select Committee adjourned at 8.15 p.m.