Select Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands debate -
Wednesday, 22 Nov 2023

Vote 37 - Social Protection (Supplementary)

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

No apologies have been received apart from those from an Cathaoirleach, who is currently doing a Topical Issue in the Dáil Chamber and will join us shortly. Members are required to participate in a meeting remotely from within the Leinster House complex only. I remind all those in attendance to make sure their mobile phones are switched off or on silent mode. I welcome the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, and the Minister of State, Deputy O'Brien.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person or entity outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The committee will now consider the Supplementary Estimate for Vote 37 with the Minister for Social Protection. I welcome the Minister, the Minister of State, and their officials to the meeting. I invite the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, to make her opening statement.

Minister for Rural and Community Development. (Deputy Heather Humphreys)

I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach and the committee members for the invitation to meet with them today and for their co-operation in ensuring we can present the 2023 Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Social Protection. I am seeking a Supplementary Estimate of €678 million for 2023, and the purpose of this is to address a shortfall in funding for my Department which is required because of additional expenditure on Vote 37 in 2023. The additional expenditure is as a result of the various lump-sum payments we provided in spring and the further package of lump-sum payments which will be paid out over the coming weeks to assist people with the cost of living.

I am deeply conscious of the cost-of-living challenges many people are facing right now. While the reductions of between 10% to 12% in retail prices for residential electricity and gas prices announced by many suppliers in recent weeks is a step in the right direction, there is still much further to go. It is incumbent on utility providers to mirror continuing falls in wholesale prices with the rates they charge their customers. The consequences of high utility prices are known to us all, and they have the knock-on effect in the cost of every household’s weekly shop. The CSO, in its latest release this month, notes that inflation moderated from 6.4% to 5.1% between September and October. While this moderation in inflation is welcome, it is still too high, and we all know that higher prices impact people in their pockets.

This Government wants to help people and that is why we acted decisively, earlier in the year, to provide a spring package which contained more than €402 million in additional social protection supports, including a €200 cost-of-living payment to long-term social welfare recipients, including those receiving the working family payment; a €100 child benefit additional lump-sum payment per child; a €100 once-off increase in the back-to-school clothing and footwear allowance; and the continued roll-out of the hot school meals programme. After the summer, as part of our preparations for the budget, we examined the situation afresh, and with continuing cost-of-living pressures, we again provided additional targeted payments for people. These additional payments, made through November and December, will put money into the pockets of older people, working families, carers and people with disabilities. The wide range of lump-sum payments will help to ease the burden on our most vulnerable over the winter months as an integral part of the comprehensive budget package to provide assistance to households in dealing with the cost of living.

In framing the budget, our aim was to ensure the support being given would be delivered in a timely manner, would benefit households throughout the State, and would be progressive in nature by targeting supports towards those on lower incomes in particular. I believe the overall package of supports represents a robust response to the substantial bills and expenses that households are currently facing, and this view is supported by independent ESRI analysis. In 2023, these supports are estimated to cost almost €1.3 billion, of which €832 million is for Vote-funded schemes. The cost-of-living supports that are paid to people in receipt of payments from voted schemes is met entirely by the Exchequer. As members will be aware, there is a current year surplus in the Social Insurance Fund. This means that the cost-of-living supports paid to those on social insurance schemes have been funded from the SIF without recourse to funds from the Exchequer. As the cost of the various lump-sum supports were not included in the original Estimates for the Department, and unless equivalent savings on other schemes meet the entire cost, a Supplementary Estimate is required to ensure these essential supports can be paid.

In the briefing material provided to the committee, we have separately included the additional expense of the cost-of-living supports, including the Christmas bonus, to be paid for each scheme, showing the effect of these supports on the requirement for a Supplementary Estimate. This table also provides the outturn position on the various schemes prior to the payment of the cost-of-living supports, which eases comparison between the original Estimate and the Supplementary Estimate.

I hope the committee finds this approach useful.

The balance of the Supplementary Estimate is required to meet a net overspend on the schemes and services delivered by my Department. In February of this year, a Revised Estimate of €23.9 billion was considered by the committee for projected 2023 social protection spending. This was based on Government decisions that had been made at the time. I have provided the committee with full details of all schemes, where the projected end-of-year Vote expenditure deviates from that projected in February 2023. I will go through the key issues behind that in a little more detail now.

On cost-of-living impacts, Government has provided a very significant response to support social protection recipients in the face of the cost-of-living pressures which manifested during 2023. Additional payments totalling almost €1.3 billion specifically focused on mitigating cost-of-living pressures have and will continue to be made this year. For example, earlier this year, as part of the spring cost-of-living package, my Department made the following payments: a €200 cost-of-living payment to long-term social welfare recipients, including those receiving the working family payment; a €100 child benefit additional lump sum payment per child; a €100 one-off increase in the back-to-school clothing and footwear allowance; and the continued roll out of the school meals programme. Following the cost-of-living package announced as part of budget 2024, my Department will pay the following additional payments between now and the end of the year: a €400 disability and carers support grant to be paid this month; living alone and fuel allowance lump sums to be paid in November; more than 46,000 working families to get a €400 lump sum payment next month and a €100 per child lump-sum payment for those receiving an increase for a qualified child; a double child benefit payment for 1.2 million children in December; and, of course, the Christmas double payment for more than 1.3 million people.

In the Revised Estimates for 2022, Government provided a non-core fund of €480 million to provide critical social protection supports to refugees fleeing the war in Ukraine who have sought shelter in Ireland under the protection of the EU’s temporary protection directive. As part of the Supplementary Estimate, I will be seeking an additional €25 million to support those fleeing the war in Ukraine, inclusive of cost-of-living supports. I have provided the committee with full details of all schemes, where the projected end of year Vote expenditure deviates from that projected in February 2023 due to the impact of the expenditure on payments for people fleeing the war.

On a positive note, the position of the Social Insurance Fund in 2023 is again very healthy. As a result of our exceptionally strong labour market performance this year, the Social Insurance Fund's PRSI income to the end of 2023 is projected at almost €15.8 billion. This is €650 million, or 4% more than was estimated in February. Fund expenditure is now projected to be just over €12.3 billion, which is €421 million or 4% more than had been projected. This means that no SIF subvention is required from the Exchequer in 2023, and the Social Insurance Fund will carry over an accumulated surplus currently estimated at €5.6 billion into 2024, a fact that is hugely welcome but vital given the future financial pressures we face in terms of our changing demographics.

Taking account of the additional cost-of-living measures the Government announced on budget day and the continued supports required to assist those under the EU’s temporary protection directive, it is now projected that overall social protection spending in 2023 will be €25.04 billion. This is a difference of €1.14 billion over the February 2023 Revised Estimate. Not all of this €1.14 billion is being funded through the Supplementary Estimate. There is €650 million in additional PRSI income over that previously estimated. This will more than cover the additional estimated expenditure on social insurance schemes. Taking account of this, the total Supplementary Estimate required to meet the shortfall on Vote schemes is €678 million.

This €678 million comprises an additional €715 million for schemes and services funded from Vote 37 and an additional €12 million on administration. Combined, this amounts to €727 million, of which €49 million is offset by additional appropriations-in-aid receipts. The need for this Supplementary Estimate is driven by additional expenditure of €832 million on cost-of living payments on Vote schemes. Excluding these once off measures, however, we estimate underlying savings of €154 million on a range of schemes funded from Vote 37, mainly due to a stronger labour market and lower live register figures. The net amount sought as part of this Supplementary Estimate is, therefore, as I have said, €678 million.

As we approach the end of yet another very busy year, I take this opportunity to acknowledge the hard work of the staff of the Department of Social Protection. Since 2020, the staff have gone above and beyond to ensure people were supported, first through the worst of the pandemic, then with the cost-of-living crisis, and then those arriving from Ukraine. This support is delivered with courtesy and helpfulness and quickly. As we have seen with last year’s autumn bonuses and are seeing again this year, the Department delivers repeatedly. Just this week we see bonus payments delivered for 46,000 working families, a fuel allowance lump sum paid to 410,000 households, and a further lump sum paid to people with disabilities.

I recognise the extraordinary efforts of the Department’s policy, IT and operational teams to ensure that, as we sit here today, these payments are made to thousands of people this week. This is in addition to all the normal work of the Department as it supports its customers day in and day out. I visited the IT centre about a year and a half ago. It is amazing what goes on there. The centre is the machine which drives all those payments into people's bank or post office accounts. I acknowledge the huge amount of work the team does. Sometimes we can take it for granted that all of this will happen on time and on schedule and the money will just automatically appear in the bank and post office accounts. That is not the case. It takes a huge amount of work by a lot of people. What the staff of the Department of Social Protection have done in recent years in the face of a pandemic, a war and a cost-of-living crisis is the definition of what public service is all about. I take the opportunity to record my thanks to the staff of the Department of Social Protection, in the local Intreo offices and HQ offices around the country. We all deal with them through our constituency offices, and while, no more than ourselves, they cannot solve every problem, they always do their best and I recognise their efforts.

I thank the Chair for allowing me the opportunity and I am happy to take any questions from the committee on the Supplementary Estimate.

Deputy Denis Naughten took the Chair.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank the Minister. I apologise for my late arrival. I was in the Chamber. I call the Leas-Chathaoirleach, Deputy Ó Cathasaigh.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

I thank the Minster and Minister of State for their attendance. I echo the Minister's final comments about the work of the Department of Social Protection. Since I have been elected, we have gone from global pandemic to war in Europe and a massive inflationary cycle. It has been an incredibly busy time for the Department. The staff have been extremely diligent and flexible in responding to the many competing demands put on the public purse.

I usually apply a fairly blunt instrument to how I approach the Estimates. I scan through it and I look for where there is the biggest percentage variation and ask the question why, so that is pretty much how I will approach the questions here. Are we still contracting private services in terms of employment supports such as JobPath at a time when we have historic high rates of employment in the economy? Is it not an opportunity to row back from that position of using private employment services and move back towards the public ones?

Working down through the Estimates, among the ones that jumped out at me, as it were, humanitarian aid increased by 1,451%, which is quite an increase. What did that relate to? I just have it as a bare line.

The massive repayment in terms of the Covid-19 employment wage subsidy scheme is about 2,500%. Why have we found ourselves in a position that so much of that money is being repaid? That is referred to as AZZ.

Disability activation and employment supports have decreased by 95%. I understand we are in a fairly full labour market and most people who want a job can find one, so I understand that rationale. However, we also know, and this would have been reiterated to us when Department officials presented the Green Paper on new proposals for disability allowance, that we have one of the lowest rates of employment in Europe for people with a disability. Why is that figure is falling away to next to nothing at a time when I would say we have an opportunity to identify and help people?

I have asked the question about the temporary wage subsidy scheme, TWSS, and the EWSS. I wanted to ask about the hot school meals programme. It is something that I am very much behind and something I know the Minister is very much behind. Is the Department modelling in terms of the anti-poverty impact there? I feel it in my bones that it is a great intervention in terms of anti-poverty, but I would like to be able to back that intuition up with some hard figures on whether the Department is doing that kind of work.

In terms of the climate action plan, and I am sorry that I am throwing quite a few things at the Minister here, the Department is the lead for a lot of actions, including around the just transition. What kind of employment supports are directly being provided in areas like the midlands, where fossil fuel production is being phased out? Is the Department keeping track of statistics or measurements in terms of driving forward those parts of the just transition that it is specifically tasked with? That will do in terms of specific questions. I have a couple of broader ones, but that will be in the waffly section, a Chathaoirleach.

An Cathaoirleach

I think you are doing well this morning, Deputy.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

The Deputy asked a good few questions there. If he has to ask them a second time, I will come back in in case I have missed some of them. He asked, first of all, about the contract employment services. Those contracts are in place. We have a reduced level. We have our Intreo partners and the long-term jobseekers. They look after about 40,000 in all. We need that flexibility because you never know when people will be made redundant. We want to be able to ramp up the supports if necessary to help people get back to work. That is what it is all about. It is about supporting, re-skilling and upskilling them. Unfortunately, we heard about a few different job losses recently. That is when we want to kick in very quickly to help people take the necessary steps to get back into alternative employment. The service is there and it is always running in case it is needed. That is an important thing that we have to do. Thankfully, the figures are very low at the minute, but it is important that when it is needed, we can ramp it up quickly.

The Deputy mentioned people with disabilities. Ireland is behind the EU average for employment rates for people with disabilities. I have worked to enhance the supports we have in my Department, whether it is the employability programme, the reasonable accommodation fund, the workability or the wage subsidy scheme for people with disabilities. We do need to do more work with people and make them aware of these supports. We have had a number of campaigns. I will continue to highlight to employers that there is a fund available for workplace adaptation and encourage more people with disabilities to come to look for employment. The labour market is tight and I think it is a great opportunity for employers to take people with disabilities into their workplace. We will continue to work on that. We want to help people who want to work. We are not forcing anybody to do anything, by the way. It is about helping people. I will leave it at that.

The amounts appear large for the recoveries on EWSS and TWSS. Expenditure on these schemes was in the billions. We recover that through Revenue. We have been in contact with Revenue about the projected recoveries in future years. The Deputy can appreciate that massive money was paid out during the pandemic on all of these supports. There is data coming in and if people were overpaid, we are obviously looking for the money back.

The Deputy also mentioned the hot school meals programme. I love the hot school meals; I think it is a great programme. I might as well tell the members that I was visiting a primary school recently and there they were heating up the dinners. I asked the children in sixth class if they like the hot school meals, and every hand went up. It is my ambition that there will be a hot school meal in primary school for any child born this year by the time they are going to school. We are moving the programme on and ramping it up as quickly as we can. It is a great leveller, because the children all sit down and get the chance to get a hot meal. The effect on their educational attainment, following that staple meal in the middle of the day, is transformative. There is no doubt about it. In terms of whether we can collate the data and feed it into anti-poverty measures, the only problem with it is that poverty is measured on income. It is not measured on the ancillary supports that we can give people. It has a qualitative impact. I think it should be included, to be honest, because it makes a huge difference. It makes a huge difference to the parents who are trying to put lunches together that are never eaten or are returned. At the same time, for those who do not have a proper diet, it is massive. I am very committed to the hot school meals programme and I want to keep ramping it up as quickly as we can.

Is there anything else I have to cover?

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

The humanitarian assistance scheme.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

Sorry, I missed that. The scheme was approved by Government in November 2009 and a fund of €10 million was available. There is about €7 million spent. Unfortunately, we have had a good few flooding events. The scheme was activated to support households affected by the different storms. It was initially activated for Cork, then it was extended to Louth and Galway. As the Deputy is aware, I have increased the income limits up to €50,000 for a single person, €90,000 for a couple and €15,000 for every qualifying child. The good thing about it is that if you are over the limit, it does not mean you get nothing. For every €1,000 that you over the limit, you have to contribute 1% to the cost yourself. That is for homes that have no insurance. Initially, there is one stage. If you are left destitute and out of your house, you can get a small support of up to €1,500 to cover incidentals. That is not means-tested. We help everybody because we do not want to see people in that awful place. For the replacement of white goods, carpets and all of that, there is a second stage. For structural damage, it takes a bit longer. There are three different phases in the payments.

I was in Carlingford a few weeks ago, where a lot of houses had been damaged. My officials were with me that day. I was glad to see that they were very good and called to every house. They did the same in Cork. They called out to houses to see how they could help people. There was an elderly lady who was quite distressed, and they were able to write a cheque for her there and then to give her a bit of support. Her two daughters were abroad and living far away, and she was going to stay with a niece. She was in a very difficult place. I have to say that I was delighted with my departmental officials. They were wonderful. They help people and are very good at that.

An Cathaoirleach

Deputy Ó Cuív would know all about the humanitarian assistance scheme. I think he was involved in establishing it. Originally, it was run through the Irish Red Cross and would have to be re-established each time there was a flooding incident. We took the decision, in the last Government, that we would have a standing fund that could be dipped into straight away. I think the point to get out to people is that if they have an incident where their home is flooded tomorrow morning, they can access funding straight away, without a means test, from their local community welfare officer who has access to that fund. Supplementary to that, it is based on whether you have insurance, income and so forth. However, there is initial help for every single individual should they find themselves in a flooding situation. They should make contact, through the emergency number, with the community welfare officer straight away.

Does Deputy Ó Laoghaire have a question?

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

Not yet, but I will.

An Cathaoirleach

We will go to Deputy Ó Cuív, then Deputy Ó Laoghaire.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

First, I would like to join the others in thanking the staff and the Minister. There are a number of issues that I would like to raise with her. The overspends are easily explained. If we had not had these one-off packages or they had been included in the original Estimate, there would have been an overall saving.

Am I correct that the Minister had an overall saving?

Deputy Heather Humphreys

Yes, that is correct.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

Taking everything into consideration, on devoted money, the Minister came in within budget. The other things were conscious decisions of the Government to give out more money. That is a different issue. That is a sign of good budgeting. They are massive figures. I see small overruns and then I look at the figure and it is €2 billion or whatever for pensions and there is a small overrun. The Department should be complimented on that.

I then looked at the underspend. There is a large underspend, thankfully, on jobseeker's allowance, Tús and community employment, CE, schemes. I am a bit disappointed. I hope that now, as we go into next year, that the Minister will tell the Department of public expenditure that her Department is making savings - it is on a roll - and that she will look at how many people can be facilitated who are on jobseeker's allowance, which means they have to be available for and actively seeking work, but cannot do anything until they get a full-time commercial job. The idea of CE schemes, including Tús, is that it is preferable for people who are on jobseeker's allowance - they do not have a job - to engage with some kind of activity or work or, in the case of CE schemes, training. It has been proven time and again that it is good for people's personal well-being. The Minister will find evidence of that in her Department. Mental well-being is linked to having a purpose in life and getting out. People get more money and keep a connection with the workforce and the discipline of work. It means they have an employer who can give them a reference and so on. When employers look at CVs, the ones that pose the biggest problem or worry employers the most, is where people were unemployed for more than a year and did not get employment or engage with anything. They ask what people did with their time and whether they worked in voluntary organisations. Has any thought been given to trying to once again persuade the Department of public expenditure to loosen the terms of people remaining on these schemes until they get commercial employment? I will not rehash the debate I have had time and again that some people are unlikely to get full-time employment but are much better off on a scheme than being forced into idleness. It seems that now is the obvious time, when there is no pressure on jobseeker's allowance.

I will look at the three budgets together. The underspend on jobseeker's allowance is €70 million. The underspend on community employment programmes is €26 million and on Tús it is €15 million. It is a considerable amount of money when they are added up. It is well over €100 million. We would get the cost back - the difference between the cost of someone being on a CE scheme and straight cash - of people being allowed to stay in the schemes. There are social benefits and the monetary benefits would not in any way eat up the savings. People who are on jobseeker's allowance should benefit from the saving.

I looked at fuel allowance. I might not be reading it correctly, but it seems that if we take out the one-off payments, it came in under budget. It seems that even though the means-test thresholds were raised quite considerably, it still came in under budget. Not as many people availed of it as expected. The figure I have for fuel allowance is €437 million, minus €25 million for the variance, including cost-of-living measures. It is easily understood. It is a guessing game when we start using means tests. Is that not right? The figures were conservative when the changes were made, so there is room for a little more generosity. The Minister is aware of my view on means testing. A suggestion has been made at this committee that instead of the rule being that the figure for a single person over 70 is €500 and a person who hits €501 gets nothing, there should be a half-rate or some kind of tapering off, rather than people losing the whole thing overnight. Older people and others who receive this payment really appreciate it. I noticed there is a small saving on free travel. That indicates that the recent announcement the Minister made about people who are excluded from driving for medical reasons will be easily funded. That is positive.

Normally, farm assist payments go down as the unemployment rate goes down, because the vast majority of farmers are part-time farmers who work when work is available. It is strange at first view that farm assist payments have not gone down. There are no savings. I think I know the reason. I have raised this issue many times. It relates to anyone with a dependent child or adult. Under the change of rules, those who joined the rural social scheme, RSS, after 2016 only get €22 or €25 per week - it is a small amount of money - for 19.5 hours work. I think people with dependants are shying away from the scheme. They ask why they should do 19.5 hours work as there is no benefit. People on the rural social scheme work hard and do productive labour. People who were on the scheme previously got the full payment and anyone who is on the scheme who joined before 2016 - some people have been on the scheme for many years and have benefited hugely socially, economically and in every way - gets the full payment. Means were ignored as long as they were under the threshold of means. Everyone who is farming should have a small profit. I hope they have. Could that be looked at again? The figures speak for themselves. It is terrible to think of people going on the farm assist payment and not making the fantastic contribution that any of us who have had experience of RSS workers know they make. They are exceptionally skilled because they are all farmers and know what they are at and they make exceptional contributions to rural communities.

The figures for humanitarian aid are not big in the greater scheme of social welfare. That needs to be in place into the future. It is a good scheme and my experience of the people who deal with it is that they are considerate of people in difficult circumstances. That is hugely helpful.

My final question relates to a big ticket item. Will the Minister tell the committee how much people with temporary protection from Ukraine, TPUs, cost in a year? How much did they cost in the past year? More important, what efforts are being made to facilitate people who come from Ukraine - no one is arguing with that; they have made good contributions to a lot of our communities, schools and so on and have integrated well - to acquire English and engage in the workforce? Do we have any idea how many of them are transitioning from dependence on social welfare into the reverse, that is making a contribution to the social insurance fund by working?

Anecdotally, I have heard that in my own area there are a reasonably good number because the buses are full every day with people going to work. Has the Minister seen a levelling off of the number? I understand the number in the country is not going up rapidly at the moment, although I could be wrong. Is the Minister seeing a drop in the number of people claiming because more and more people are engaging in the workforce? Can we facilitate more engagement through good transport services and so on, particularly in rural areas, where many are living at the moment?

Deputy Heather Humphreys

The Minister of State, Deputy O'Brien, will deal with the question on CE, Tús and RSS, and I will take the rest.

Minister of State at the Department of Social Protection (Deputy Joe O'Brien)

With regard to CE, Tús and RSS, but CE and Tús in particular, the job market is in a good place and that means the people who previously were not getting employment and might have looked at CE are looking at employment. That is good, and it is the way we want it to be, but it puts pressure on organisations that are dependent on CE places. At the moment, we have 18,750 people in CE places, which leaves us with 2,382 vacancies. I feel this gives us an opportunity. I agree that when we have the unemployment rate pushed down, it exposes what we need to do for those people who have struggled long-term to find employment. It opens up opportunities to get people out of the rut they have been in for a while, and CE is in a good place to do that. We have been looking at ways of adapting it in order to get to those people who previously would not have thought of it before. Qualified adults are now eligible and we are getting people on those payments into CE as well. We are also looking at those on disability allowance, although we have to do that sensitively because it is an option for some but simply not an option for others. More Ukrainians are also coming onto CE.

We need to push down into the live register and see who we can help. If there are ways in which we are not supporting people, we need to adapt and do that. I believe CE can do that. We have adapted it in a number of ways over the last two years and we are open to doing that again. We need to do wider promotional work on community employment. Many of us in the niche community sector understand and appreciate what community employment can do, but there is a broader piece of work that I have been pushing internally in the Department and we need to get it out there, at a wider level, with regard to the value of CE and what it can do for people. It is extraordinary and we have all seen the cases. I visit projects monthly and there is always someone whose life has been turned around by getting into CE. We need to get that awareness of the power of CE out there a lot more.

With regard to Tús, we are trying a couple of different things. We have looked at a small area, for example, and we are literally contacting everyone in that small area who is eligible for Tús to see what the feedback is and whether we can replicate that more widely.

The Deputy will be aware that the rural social scheme is under review at the moment and farm assist is the basis for that. We have been pushing farm assist as a way of reinvigorating the rural social scheme, and we have been asking key stakeholders on the ground to tell people about farm assist. I do not know if that is having an impact as we do not have direct evidence of it, but maybe the figures indicate that is the way it is going. Certainly, with the RSS review coming to its closing stages, we need to keep everything on the board in terms of how to keep life in the scheme going forward because it does amazing work. We want to keep small farmers on the land and it is a key way of doing that. Those are some initial responses.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

I will answer the question on the TPU first. The original cost was €480 million this year and we need an extra €25 million. Some 16,500 people are working.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

How many in total?

Deputy Heather Humphreys

There are 16,500 people working. If the Deputy is asking for the total number who came in, I can tell him that about 99,000 came in, but they move. It involves all ages, and that includes children and pensioners. I have a breakdown from October which could be useful. There are 27,658 on jobseeker’s payments, 5,281 on the State pension non-contributory, 2,250 on the one-parent family payment and 1,033 on disability allowance.

We are engaging with about 30,000 people in terms of job activation measures. There are three problems. First, many are highly qualified people but they need to learn English. We expanded the CE scheme to allow them into it because we felt it was a good way for them to integrate into the community but also to learn the English language. Second, they sometimes change accommodation, which means they have to give up their job and it can be problematic. Third, single parents have childcare commitments and it restricts what they can do. Again, we are working with them. I feel that many of them have a lot to contribute to our society so we need to continue to see if we can make it easier for them to go back to work. We also want to make sure that if they can take up a job here, they will do so. We are doing that piece of work.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

The Minister's officials might confirm whether I have read this right. To take those on one-parent family payment and jobseeker’s allowance, the number is about 30,000.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

Yes, 30,000. That is right.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

And 16,000 are working. That means the ratio is about 2:1 and 33% are working. It is important that we stress that this is the reality and that many are engaging quickly with the workforce and making a contribution. It is bad enough trying to get labour at the moment but if we took those 16,000 out, it would be a huge loss to our society.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

Those 16,000 are paying PRSI. They are working people. From my experience, and I am sure the Deputy’s is the same, most of them want to work. If we can help them, we will. Language is a barrier for some of them but we are trying to overcome that with the classes that are being rolled out.

I will move on to the fuel allowance. I expanded the fuel allowance last year, as the Deputy knows. When trying to estimate how many were going to take it up, we thought there would be more. We are currently advertising it to make sure everybody is taking it up. I take the Deputy’s point about the humanitarian scheme, which we discussed earlier. We have a sliding scale for that whereby if people go over the limit, they get a bit less for every percentage point they go over it by. I think that is something we should consider, to be honest. There are many older people out there and the Deputy and I know that they like to have the few bob saved in case they need it. They are probably scrimping a bit and turn off the heat sooner than they need to because they just do not want to spend their savings. It is just something that happens as people get older. It is a good idea and perhaps we should look at it in the context of the next budget with regard to how we might slide the scale.

The new group are the over-70s. They do not have to be on a social welfare payment once the joint income is €1,000 or less per week, which is very generous. That is where the savings came in. As I said, we are advertising again. I am happy to look at that because the Deputy makes a good point in this regard.

The humanitarian aid scheme is a good one. The income limits were a fair bit lower so I have brought them up. It was at €30,000 for a single person and I brought that up to €50,000; it was €70,000 for a couple and I brought that up to €90,000; and I increased it from €10,000 to €15,000 for every dependent child. A good few people are able to avail of it. It is for people who do not have insurance, that is, those who were not able to get insurance as opposed to those who did not take out insurance.

It is working well. That scheme needs to stay there because our climate is changing and we find that, unfortunately, there are more incidents like the ones we have seen in Cork, Galway and County Louth and we need to be able to support people. It is an awful thing to walk through a house and see the damage. I do not have to tell anyone here because we have all seen it.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

It is amazing that once they have the money, people make it back fairly fast.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

They do.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

I want to raise one issue that has arisen, certainly with businesses, but I am sure it will arise with households too.

Instead of saying there will be no insurance, companies have put very large excesses in place. In other words, the person pays the first €10,000 or whatever. In that event, would consideration be given to the humanitarian aid on the amount that would not be covered because of the large excess? Does the Minister understand my point? It is certainly happening with businesses, and I assume what is happening with businesses is happening with private houses. Businesses are told to pay the first €40,000 or €50,000 and after than they will be helped. Instead, the situation would be that the person who only had €50,000 and no insurance would get the humanitarian aid. I do not know if the same is happening in households with an excess being put in, but in that case the amount below the excess should be eligible for consideration for the payment.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

We do it on a case-by-case basis, and we have consideration for those with large excesses. They get support for the simple reason that they have insurance, but they have a huge excess because of flooding in the area. The community welfare officer takes that into consideration.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

I echo the comments on the staff of the Department in the offices around the country as well as here in Dublin. I appreciate all the assistance my office receives from them. To start on a positive note, I mention the school meals. This is something I very much believe in and have argued for over a long period. It is very positive to see it happening.

There are a few bits and pieces. The humanitarian scheme again is very well-administered. There are one or two - I do not know whether to call them anomalies - difficulties for people seeking to claim in circumstances where people have no insurance, which is obviously very common in areas prone to flooding. The restrictions that exist in the form of the contribution an applicant must make themselves can make it very difficult for people to rebuild and restore their houses to the prior condition. I am aware people can still get the humanitarian allowance, but the contribution they must make themselves is more substantial. I might send on details of a case I came across recently of somebody in the Naval Service whose home was damaged. They qualified for less than they expected because the bank statements they submitted reflected a time in which they were deployed. They are not currently deployed and are not expecting to be anytime soon, so their real income is much less than would have been the case if a longer look-back had been applied.

Pay-related benefit for jobseekers was provided for in the budget. It is difficult to get my head around exactly what is going to transpire because it is subject to final design. I am wondering what calculation the €5 million provided for December 2024 reflects. We have the straw man and the sense of the €450 cap and the six months and the Minister has given some commentary on it in recent days as well, but I want to get a sense of what precisely the €5 million provided for is based on and whether it gives us an insight into what exactly is going to transpire next December. There will probably further consultations on it. I probably have two more questions, but I will let the Minister respond to that much first.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

I thank the Deputy. On the humanitarian scheme, a person's contribution depends on the means they have. The Deputy has a specific case that is similar to somebody having a huge amount of overtime. This Naval Service member is no longer deployed, so they do not have that income. If the Deputy sends details of that case on to me, I will be happy to look at it. In any of these things, it is done on a case-by-case basis. If we see a real need, we will try to be as flexible as we can. In fairness to the community welfare officers, they have been very good at that.

I got agreement at Cabinet yesterday to proceed with the pay-related benefit. I have to draw up the heads of Bill and publish them. I hope to get that done before the end of the year and bring the legislation through the Oireachtas early next year. The €5 million we have is to introduce the benefit in December 2024. It is going to take a while by the time we get the legislation through and we move it on. The plan is to introduce it at the end of next year and it will be fully up and running in January 2025. That means anybody new who is laid off from the day on which we enact it will get the higher rate of payment. Unfortunately, for those on existing payments, we cannot start transitioning them over. What we plan to do is for the first three months a person is made redundant they will get €450 or up to a maximum of 60% of their salary. For the next three months they are off they will get €375 up to a maximum of 55% and for the last three months they get €300 up to a maximum of 50%. It means when someone is made redundant we are able to cushion that sudden income drop.

This is something I feel very strongly about, because I worked in a credit union and when the downturn came many people who had worked all their lives, and this benefit is for people who have long-term contributions and worked all their lives, were suddenly sitting in front of me having realised they were only going to get a small amount. It was under €200 at the time and mind you me, there are a lot of things that flash in front of your eyes when you think you cannot pay your bills. This benefit is being introduced for the simple reason that we can cushion that blow for the first three months, reduce that for the next three and again for the last three. In fairness to the Deputy, he recommended at the committee that we keep it open for nine months rather than the six months we looked at in the straw man. We have staged it accordingly. We put it out for consultation and good ideas came back. As I have said, I never had a monopoly on good ideas and if we get them we will implement them as best we can. That is the reason there is a €5 million in the Vote. It will be much bigger next year.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

Of course.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

It is to get it started and up and running.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

The Minister has more or less answered my question, but I just want it to be crystal clear. This is something I support and agree with. There was previously the straw man and there have been changes since, but is it the Department's position now that the payment will be the €450 cap-----

Deputy Heather Humphreys

Yes.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

-----or 60%-----

Deputy Heather Humphreys

Yes.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

-----and up to nine months on a staged basis?

Deputy Heather Humphreys

It reduces every three months, yes. I will be bringing that legislation through and we can talk about it then, but that is what I have got agreement for.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

Yes, but the €5 million is premised on those calculations.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

On that basis, yes.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

I appreciate that. It is useful.

I am conscious of what the Minister announced about the PRSI roadmap related to this. An awful lot of people would have been hoping for the restoration of the right to retire at 65 years as part of the roadmap. There is a payment, but it is less than the pension payment. Many people were hoping for this. Certainly, it was a major issue over the past couple of years. Many people who are on their feet all day working hard and who have 40-plus years of work done would expect to be in a position to retire at 65. People will be disappointed about that. It remains our position that people should have the right to retire at 65. Obviously, there are people who can work longer, which is welcome, but there are many who work in hard, physical jobs. They are very often the people least financially able to retire but physically they are in the most difficult position. I wanted to put that on record again. The Minister may respond if she wishes, but it is not so much a question as a comment.

There is a final point I wish to flag as I look at some of the lines in relation to invalidity, disability and partial capacity benefits. We sometimes come across cases of people who have been ill and subsequent to that illness, once they come off illness benefit, are probably in a position to do a bit of work. Because they have not previously been on invalidity benefit, partial capacity is not open to them and they do not qualify for any payments because their doctor believes that they might be capable of some minor element of work. They do not qualify for a disability benefit and they do not qualify for an invalidity allowance, but because they have not been on an invalidity benefit they do not qualify for the partial capacity benefit. That is something of an anomaly that we need to consider. It is not very frequent but we have come across cases like that. Perhaps the Minister will respond to those two pieces.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

On the PRSI question, obviously the economy is performing extremely well. What we have done is what I said I would do, which is to keep the pension age at 66 and set out gradual PRSI increases over the next five years. The first one is kicking in at 0.1% from 1 October. That will cover the pay-related benefit and keep the pension age at 66. We will do it at small amounts and gradually. Now is the time to do it when everything is in good shape. As the Social Insurance Fund is in good shape at the minute, small amounts are better now than at times when something has to have a fast reaction and needs a big increase. For the average earner it will work out at about 90 cent a week. A person will be able to retire at the age of 66. A pension at 66 is worth about €300,000 in a pot for the average person. Then we are also bringing in the PRB and it is a comfort to know that if one is made redundant one has that bit of help. I actually think it is not bad value at 90 cent per week for the average earner as an increased contribution. This provision will be made in a separate Bill.

My officials will explore the design of a scheme that would modify the current benefit payment for 65-year-olds. The Deputy will be aware that I brought this in a couple years ago whereby a person did not have to be actively seeking work and he or she got the benefit for the 12 months. We we will look at that to see what we can do for people who have a long social insurance history of 40 years or more. I absolutely agree that there are cases where somebody has been doing hard manual work for 40-odd years, their back is broken and it is tough getting up to have to go to work. I accept that and we will look at it but I wanted to move on and get this other piece started and get it implemented first. We will look at that, however, and there is a commitment to do that.

The partial capacity benefit is open to illness benefit recipients over six months as well as invalidity pensions. If the Deputy gives me the specific details of the case I will look at it again. Is that all right? I am not all over the detail to be honest.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

I will send any cases. It is primarily that most people who are on the partial capacity will have come off from invalidity benefit. It is possible to get it off the illness benefit but it is not very common. The cases possibly would have related to periods when people were off sick for a month or two and are gradually returning to work.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

I am happy to have a look at it.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

If the Minister is willing to look at the benefits for those aged 65 and if she agrees to look at situations where people have been working on their feet I do not see why there is not a right to retire at the age of 65 and a right to have a State pension at 65.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

The State pension age is now at 66 and that is the retirement date. I am happy to look at it but in solving one problem sometimes one could create a whole load more. I take the Deputy's point. I think of the cleaner and the hoover coming after. The person's back is broken and they are bent over. It is about how can we help those people. In the social welfare Bill I am bringing in, there is provision for those who can work and will have the option to work on longer. There are people who are fit and healthy at 66 and are dying to keep going. It is not right that they should have to retire either. We have both sides of it.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

I thank the Minister.

An Cathaoirleach

On some logistical issues, the Minister has talked about referring a further Bill to the committee for pre-legislative scrutiny. We will be delighted to consider it when that happens. I want to note that if this is referred over the Christmas recess, we will not have the full eight weeks to consider it. We had a number of problems over the summer recess when Bills were referred to us for pre-legislative scrutiny and we had very truncated scrutiny as a result of that. I ask the Minister to keep in mind that if Bills are referred over the recess, it does not leave us with that flexibility.

I have one question regarding the Supplementary Estimate in front of us. Could we have clarification on the €12 million on administration? I am confused about the way it is laid out. Is the €12 million just coming from the Social Insurance Fund or is there a separate €12 million on administration under both Vote 37 and under the Social Insurance Fund? It seems to be unclear. If there are two figures of €12 million, it seems that the administration across the payment in the schemes outside the Social Insurance Fund is at 2% or at a much lower rate than within the Social Insurance Fund at 5%, which would be a contradiction in terms. It should be easier to pay out payments through the Social Insurance Fund, which is for non-means-tested payments, than as means-tested payments. Perhaps the Minister will clarify that first and then I will have another point.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

It is Vote 37 and is a separate administration. It is only one €12 million.

An Cathaoirleach

It is €12 million that is being accrued against the Social Insurance Fund. Why is there the additional administration in the Social Insurance Fund and not across the rest of the Department? The way this is being presented gives the impression that the additional €12 million is to facilitate the additional payments on the run-in to Christmas. If there is that additional cost in the Social Insurance Fund, why is there not an additional cost outside of it? The Minister may not have that detail today but perhaps she could come back to the committee with the note on it. We do not want to see the Social Insurance Fund being seen as a soft touch in relation to administration and 5% seems to be a very high level. The Minister may not have that level of detail today but I would appreciate it if she could come back to the committee to flesh that out in detail.

There is one other issue I want to bring to the Minister's attention, which is the participation rates of one-parent families. I am aware that the Department is looking at this specifically and that there is a pilot in the north east of the country in relation to this at the moment. We have sought a detailed briefing from the Department on that commendable initiative. The Western Development Commission and the Department of Rural and Community Development were before the committee to discuss digital hubs. Thankfully, as broadband is being rolled out, there is less demand for digital hubs to access high-speed broadband. Hopefully that service will become obsolete in the not too distant future. The Minister's Department is looking at how we can redevelop those digital hubs for other purposes. One of the suggestions I put to them is that across the economy, not just domestically but globally, there is a huge shortage of staff in the whole area of cybersecurity. That type of work is flexible.

It can be done remotely and at different times of the day. It can be serviced in different markets, not just the domestic market in Europe and Ireland but also in North America and the Middle East. It would be ideally suited to women, and it is mainly women who are in receipt of one-parent family payments. It could bring additional high-value income into those households. The digital hubs could be used to provide those recipients with the skills training to take up some of this employment.

Microsoft has been running a similar programme in Norway with migrant women. I think there is an opportunity for the Minister wearing her hat as the Minister for Social Protection and her hat as the Minister for Community and Rural Development, along with the Minister, Deputy Harris, to join up the dots, use the digital hubs and target an underemployed element within our workforce, giving them the opportunity to get into high-value employment rather than just low-value, minimum-wage employment. It is not just the income benefit for that particular household; this has long-term social impacts within that household, and the research will show that. There is an opportunity here to join up the dots with regard to that. I ask the Minister to take it away and consider it. The committee and I will come back to her further on it as well.

I echo the comments of the Minister and colleagues here. On behalf of the Oireachtas, I acknowledge the work done by the Minister’s Department officials, right from the Intreo offices through the whole Department and up to Secretary General level. We have always said it. If other Government Departments could manage their engagement with the public and Members of the Oireachtas in the manner that the Department of Social Protection does, it would be far better for the public service as a whole.

Finally, I acknowledge in the Public Gallery the presence of two transition year students, Rachel Cunniffe from Dundalk and Cillian O’Donovan from Dublin. They are with us in the Oireachtas this week, seeing what happens here first hand and looking at the whole Estimates process. They are both very welcome.

With that, go raibh maith agaibh go léir. We will now suspend for five minutes before the committee considers the Supplementary Estimate with the Minister for Rural and Community Development.

Sitting suspended at 10.42 a.m. and resumed at 10.48 a.m.