Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 13 February 2008
109 Deputy Bernard Allen asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his views on the removal of the rule that prevents recipients of lone parent supports from cohabiting with their partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5035/08]
View answer110 Deputy Dinny McGinley asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his views on the proposals to replace the lone parent’s allowance with a parental allowance; the timeframe of when same will happen; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5034/08]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 109 and 110 together.
The Government discussion paper, Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents, put forward proposals for the introduction of a new social assistance payment for lone parents and other low income families with young children. It also proposed a range of additional services, including the expanded availability and range of education and training opportunities, the extension of the national employment action plan, focused provision of child care and improved information services.
Lone parents are not members of a homogenous group. They are of differing ages, education and employment backgrounds, have experienced different routes to becoming a lone parent and hence have differing needs. Many of these needs are common to all parents on a low income. Under the terms of the one-parent family payment a person must be parenting alone, therefore those who cohabit or marry no longer fit the contingency of lone parenthood and are not entitled to claim the payment. This results in a disincentive to one-parent family payment recipients to form or declare long-term relationships. The consequences for the child or children involved should also be considered.
Under the proposals, the one-parent family payment would be abolished and the contingency of lone parenthood would no longer exist. Instead, a new payment would be made to all parents on low income, living alone or with a partner, with young children. Cohabitation would, therefore, no longer be an impediment to payment. As I have recently reported to the House, the development of any new scheme to support low income parents can only be introduced when the necessary co-ordinated supports and services are put in place on the ground by other Departments and agencies.
As I stated, the non-income recommendations contained in the discussion paper are being tested in two areas, namely, Coolock and Kilkenny. These tests are focused on identifying and resolving any practical and administrative issues that may arise in advance of the scheme being introduced. They are scheduled to run until at least the end of February, with a report then being made to the Cabinet committee on social inclusion. The tests will allow for operational and logistical co-ordination between the relevant Departments and agencies to be considered and facilitate the development of the policy and operational details of the new scheme and accompanying supports.
Although the exact terms of the new payment have not been finalised, the key to any new payment is to ensure the necessary financial and other supports are in place to assist families towards improved employment prospects and disincentives to work are kept to a minimum. While there is no definite date for the nationwide roll-out of the new payment and related supports, following the evaluation of the tests, it is my intention to move forward with the proposals. As I have stated on a number of occasions, I aim to resolve these issues this year.
The Minister stated he hopes to introduce the new payment by the end of the year. His predecessor made the same commitment in 2006. Why has the original commitment not been met?
The Minister will agree that the cohabitation rule is anti-family and deprives children of the right to have both parents present in the home. Is his timescale for removing the cohabitation rule this year a definite and firm commitment? Will all the changes regarding one-parent families be introduced together or incrementally? To return to a question the Minister failed to answer, will the new system be mandatory or voluntary?
New measures have not yet been introduced due to the substantial engagement taking place with groups representing lone parents or working in this general area. One does not always secure agreement on a way forward. We have engaged in substantial discussions with all the relevant groups to move forward. One of the recommendations arising from this engagement was that the Department would establish a pilot scheme to determine how to address issues that arise. We have acted on this recommendation and when the scheme concludes this month we will need to start taking decisions.
I want to remove the cohabitation rule because it is wrong. When one deals with substantial policy matters it affects many other areas of the social welfare code and these, too, must then be resolved. While the issue is clear when considered in isolation, it becomes much more complex when one considers the knock-on effects in other areas. Notwithstanding this, I intend to remove the cohabitation rule.
I would like the new system to be voluntary. Some of the issues to be assessed once the pilot scheme has concluded are how many people engaged in the scheme voluntarily, how many of those invited to participate in it failed to do so and what has been the response of participants. I understand those involved in the scheme have responded positively. It is important to overcome the fear of the system some people may have and concerns about prejudice. It may well be that there are prejudices on both sides.
The Minister's officials laughed when I made that point yesterday.
As the Deputy stated, there probably are prejudices.
On the payment issue, on which progress has not yet been made, is the Minister committed to introducing a parental allowance which would, as proposed, be payable irrespective of whether there are one or two parents in a family or whether the parent or parents are working? If he is so committed, what is the timescale for introducing such a payment?
That issue is central to what I am trying to do and I would like to achieve this objective before budget 2009. We do not know the identity of a large cohort of disqualified adults, so to speak, or what means they have at their disposal. We want to ensure everyone avails of their rights to the available supports. That is a significant challenge ahead.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
