Vol. 173 No. 2
I move:—
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £177,000 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1959, for payments to the Social Insurance Fund (No. 14 of 1950 and No. 11 of 1952).
This Estimate is concerned with the Exchequer contribution to the Social Insurance Fund. As Deputies are aware, the Exchequer, under Section 39 of the Social Welfare Act, 1952, makes good, through sub-head A of the Social Insurance Vote, the amount by which the expenditure of the fund exceeds its income in any year.
The amount of this deficit for 1958-59 was originally estimated at £4,213,000. It is now estimated at £4,390,000 and the Exchequer must, therefore, provide the extra £177,000 to balance the expenditure and income of the fund for 1958-59.
The additional sum of £177,000 required is attributable, as to £102,000, to an estimated short-fall in the income of the fund in the current year from employment contributions payable by insured persons and their employers. The original Estimate for this income was £5,886,000. It is now estimated that the income will be £5,784,000, a variation of less than 2 per cent. The actual income from contributions in the first six months of the previous financial year. In recent months, however, this tendency has been reversed and income is now running somewhat above the 1957-58 level.
A sum of £44,000 is required because the amount drawn from the Exchequer during the year ended 31st March, 1958, was that much less than the deficit, approximately £4,531,000, which emerged when the actual figures of expenditure and income became available after the close of that year.
The balance of the Supplementary Estimate—£31,000—is the net deficit resulting from a number of small variations, up and down, in other items of expenditure and income of the Social Insurance Fund. The sum includes provision for heavier expenditure on disability benefit arising from the present influenza epidemic. No provision was made in the original Estimate for epidemic illness.
This, according to the Parliamentary Secretary's speech, may seem a harmless sort of Supplementary Estimate, despite the fact that the sum asked for is £177,000. The introduction of this Supplementary Estimate demonstrates the trend in employment or, if you like, unemployment. It seems to me that the forecasts of the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary, and the anticipation of the Government and their promises with regard to unemployment, have not materialised. The Minister for Finance, I am sure, approved of this Supplementary Estimate two, three or four weeks ago. It seems strange that he should, a little over a week ago, announce that there was a big reduction in unemployment in the country. The indication contained in this Supplementary Estimate is that there is no material improvement in the unemployment situation.
The Parliamentary Secretary introduced the main Estimate for this year. He was slightly optimistic with regard to unemployment. As reported at column 106 of the Official Report of 13th May, 1958, he said:—
"The State subvention to the Social Insurance Fund of £4,213,000 for 1958-59 is £274,000 lower than the corresponding provision for 1957-58. This is mainly due to an anticipated decrease of £190,000 in benefit expenditure and to an anticipated increase of £100,000 in contribution income. The main variations giving raise to the net decrease of £190,000 in benefit expenditure are reductions of £150,000 and £117,000 in unemployment benefit and disability benefit respectively, offset by an increase of £69,000 in the provision for widows' and orphans' contributory pensions."
The Parliamentary Secretary went on to say—
"Both the reduction in the provision for unemployment benefit and the increase in the provision for contribution income are based on the expectation of an improved employment situation in 1958-1959."
In view of the fact that it is necessary for the Parliamentary Secretary to come here and ask for a sum very similar to that by which he cut the Estimate last year, surely at this stage he should say to the House: "What we anticipated in respect of employment has not materialised." Over and above all that, the Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister for Social Welfare should be honest enough to come in here and say: "We did not carry out the promises we made with regard to a reduction in unemployment."
It seems to me that many of the Fianna Fáil speakers have no regard whatever for figures, for figures of unemployment and figures of expenditure on unemployment benefit and unemployment assistance. That is evidenced by the fact that Deputy Haughey appeared in the House yesterday and, in reply to certain allegations by a member of the Fine Gael Party, blandly told us that the people in the City of Dublin—and I expect this is a slight exaggeration— are 50 times better off than they were two years ago. How can Deputy Haughey, or any spokesman of the Government, or the Minister for Finance, who says unemployment has been substantially reduced, reconcile their views, as expressed here and in the public Press, with the fact that at present we still have—I have not got the figure for this week—approximately 84,000 people unemployed, and a substantial number of those in receipt of unemployment benefit?
Coupled with that, we have emigration, which the Taoiseach says is not easy to estimate, and some tens of thousands of people have emigrated since 1st April, 1958. That too, has relieved the Exchequer and the Social Insurance Fund to the extent of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of pounds. Therefore, it is dishonest for any spokesman of the Government to try to tell this House, and the people at public meetings, and through their three national newspapers, that unemployment is on the decrease. The fact is that it is not. Of course, if intending emigrants who contemplate going to Britain to look for work were to read the Sunday Press every Sunday and read about the dozens of mythical factories that have been established, or are to be established they would never think of leaving this country.
Apart from the dishonesty of speakers of the Fianna Fáil Party, it is dishonest of the Irish Press, controlled by the Government Party, to try to fool the people into the belief that there is work here, or that there are to be a substantial number of factories established to give much needed employment. The fact that the Parliamentary Secretary has introduced this Estimate is an admission by the Government that they have made no improvement as far as the employment situation is concerned.
It is an admission by the Government that the promises which they made prior to the last election, and the promises they made on assuming office, have not materialised. There is nothing but talk of factories and promises of factories. The people have been subjected to plans and promises of plans, but the plain fact is that there are still 83,000 or 84,000 people unemployed and it does not seem that, within the near future, that figure will be curtailed to any substantial degree. As a matter of fact, the Parliamentary Secretary and members of this House know that as far as employment is concerned in road making, in bog development, in drainage and in house building, it is diminishing, and diminishing rapidly, and that has been mainly brought about by the actions of the Government.
I do not know what the situation would have been if there had not been emigration. Nobody will allege that I condone emigration, but if the 40,000 or 50,000 people who are alleged to have emigrated in 1958 were here and had been paid either out of the Social Assistance Fund, or the Social Insurance Fund, the Supplementary Estimate which the Parliamentary Secretary would have to bring in here would be of considerable dimensions.
I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to tell us also what effect there has been on the Social Insurance Fund by the raising of the ceiling for insurable employment from £600 to £800 per year in respect of certain workers deemed not to be engaged in manual work. That, too, mark you, must be added to this figure of £177,000 because that is an income that was not anticipated when the Parliamentary Secretary introduced the Estimate in 1958 or, if it was anticipated, it was never mentioned when the Estimate was being introduced. The Social Insurance Fund, therefore, has been relieved to the extent of, I suppose, £30,000 or £40,000 by reason of the raising of the ceiling for insurable employment in respect of non-manual workers from £600 to £800 per year.
As I said, this Estimate seems to be a repudiation of the allegation that unemployment has been reduced and it is certainly a repudiation, and a strong repudiation, of the allegation by the Minister for Finance, a little over a week ago, that unemployment had been substantially reduced during the régime of the Fianna Fáil Government.
Deputy Corish has pointed out the saving to the Exchequer by the number of emigrants who leave the country. I want to draw the attention of the House to another method which the Parliamentary Secretary, or the Minister, has for saving the Exchequer, that is, the reinvestigation of the means of applicants for unemployment assistance.
I am afraid the question of unemployment assistance must be ruled out of order as it has no relation to the Estimate.
I quite appreciate that, but this is an Estimate under Section 39 of the Social Welfare Act, 1952——
——and it also deals with unemployment assistance.
The money being sought by the Parliamentary Secretary relates to unemployment benefit.
I do not wish to argue, and certainly will not argue with the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, but there is an additional sum now required. I am trying to relate that sum to other moneys which the Department have saved. I think it is relevant in that respect. I respectfully say that, with the amount already saved, this money should not now be necessary.
I am afraid it relates to the Social Insurance Fund. I am sorry I cannot allow any debate on unemployment assistance. It will arise on the main Estimate.
That may be so. I should like to draw the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary to the fact that there is considerable delay in paying those applicants the unemployment assistance and unemployment benefit to which they are entitled. Since 1st January, I have written to the Department of Social Welfare on 24 occasions for 24 different applicants for unemployment assistance and unemployment benefit. Their applications have been held up for some considerable time and no money has been paid to them.
Some time ago, the Parliamentary Secretary made a statement that 50 per cent. of the applicants for unemployment assistance were receiving the amounts they were receiving under false pretences. That may be the cause of the delay now in paying out.
Let us not enter into a discussion of unemployment assistance.
The Parliamentary Secretary said it.
I did not say 50 per cent.
Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary would say the percentage he did use?
I did not use any percentage.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary give us the words he used?
I cannot at the moment.
We will root it out for the Parliamentary Secretary. I would appeal to him not to victimise these unfortunate people by holding up the amounts due to them. Pay out the money due to them. I would make particular reference to the money due under the reciprocal arrangement entered into by Deputy Norton, when Minister, with the British Government. Prior to 1950, contributions paid by Irish workers in Great Britain were absolutely useless to them for the purpose of drawing unemployment benefit. As a result of that very fine agreement by Deputy Norton with Britain, now they may draw certain benefits in this country for contributions they paid while working across the water. These people contributed towards the fund and they should be entitled to the benefit of it. There should be no delay in paying it, but there is a dragging of feet, with the result that in some cases the applicants have actually gone back to Britain without the money being paid.
I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to speed up investigations and pay out whatever money is due to applicants. I beg of him to stop this reinvestigation of means. We all know that the cost of living has gone up and the means of the individual should now come down instead of being increased. I would ask him to give us some reason, if not now, then on the principal Estimate, why this reinvestigation of means is carried out. It is like the poor law valuations. The Government are afraid to introduce a Bill here at this time, but they have inspectors around the country increasing poor law valuations all over the place.
Of all the Departments, I am sure the House fully expected that this would be the last Department which would come in here with a Supplementary Estimate. The reason for it is that last year the Parliamentary Secretary intimated that the Government was so full of confidence in relation to the future that they could present a reduced Estimate. Now he comes in to-day and eats humble pie. The anticipation of the Government has not been realised. This money is not intended to improve the lot of any recipient because of the increase in the cost of living, but it is intended to cater for people whom the Government thought would not really make a demand on the fund.
This is an indictment of the Government's failure to improve the employment situation. The Parliamentary Secretary pointed out that £102,000 of the £177,000 Supplementary Estimate is occasioned by a short-fall in contributions. There is tangible evidence that the Minister for Finance, when he was speaking a week or two ago, was completely erroneous when he claimed there was a dramatic improvement in the unemployment situation. Here is the positive evidence that far from there being the anticipated improvement, the existing situation requires that the Government should supplement the fund by the sum of £177,000.
Many reasons can be put forward for the Government's failure to bring about an employment situation in the country where the fund would not have to meet this charge upon it. It is true that following on the round of wage increases, which again was sparked off by the Government's financial policy in withdrawing the food subsidies, a number of industrial companies, unable, because of price competition in the goods they were distributing, to recoup themselves by increasing the prices of the goods they were producing, succeeded in recouping themselves by actually reducing their staffs. They laid off four, five and six here and there, and in some cases even a dozen. In consequence people who were in what they thought was sure employment found that they had to queue up to draw social insurance.
The Parliamentary Secretary intimated also that he expects a heavier withdrawal, due to the incidence of 'flu. This, he expects, will only account for a very small part of the Supplementary Estimate. I may say to him that this is one of the occasions which will assist in bringing the Government to a realisation of the difficulties that exist in the country. The Government are not helping the situation when in the newspapers owned by the Taoiseach, particularly the Sunday Press, the most extraordinary hopes are held out to the people of the good that will flow from governmental action. We saw recently that 300 people were to be employed in the town of Bandon in Deputy MacCarthy's constituency in a jewellery factory. That has been exploded for all time.
I never saw it.
I shall provide the Deputy with the cutting.
It does not seem to arise on this Estimate. The Social Welfare Act is the only thing that falls for discussion.
The Supplementary Estimate is occasioned by a short-fall in the contributions and by the fact that the view expressed by the Parliamentary Secretary introducing the Estimate last year has not been realised. The Government expressed the opinion that the situation would be such in the 12 months now under review in this Supplementary Estimate that there would not be any need for a charge on it comparable with that of the previous year We find that far from these hopes being realised, there is this considerable short-fall in what the Government anticipated would accrue to the fund.
