I appreciate that there are difficulties for the Government in view of the industrial dispute in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs in relation to the payment of pensions generally and the general conduct of their affairs. However, I was appalled to learn of the situation prevailing in regard to pensioners, especially those about whom there appears to have been no arrangement made for ensuring that they would receive some sort of income or make them aware that they could collect the pensions, if that was the agreed arrangement. This is obviously a very sensitive area and one does not wish in any way to provoke further industrial tension here. One of the major characteristics of the Government is their contempt since they came into office for the working class and particularly the poorer people. During the last few weeks we have seen people queuing for social welfare benefits reminiscent of the former soup queues.
Adjournment Debate: Payment of State Pensions.
We are not dealing with social welfare benefits here. We are dealing with State pensions. That is the question the Deputy asked and he will have to stick strictly to it. That is the rule in relation to questions on the Adjournment. He must stick strictly to what he has raised.
I am dealing with the attitude shown by the Government——
The Deputy cannot deal with any attitude. He can deal with State pensions and their payment and nothing else.
I will say my piece and I do not care what you say about it.
The Deputy will not say his piece if it is not relevant.
If the Chair will allow me he might discover it is.
Up to now it is not.
The Government have shown contempt for the people and this is exemplified by their attitude to State pensioners. Last Friday was the last day, as far as I am aware, for receipt of those pensions by the people in such categories. They did not receive a penny or the courtesy of a line of any kind telling them they could collect their money. There was not even an advertisement in the newspapers about this matter. That attitude permeates the economic and social policies of the Government since they took up office. The people have put up with enough of that. Many State pensioners have to exist on a pension which would not buy one a pair of shoes nowadays. How does the Minister think those people have lived over the last five weeks? What excuse is there for the constant inactivity in relation to the payment of this essential money?
I am the first to acknowledge the attempt made by the Minister for Social Welfare in relation to the social welfare category but I am not aware of any similar move in relation to State pensioners, who are a very distressed category. The pensions of those people, unlike the pensions of which present-day State employees will enjoy in due course, are a pittance. It should be one of the priorities of the Government to increase those pensions having regard to the service they have given to the State. I have had a number of queries from ordinary, decent people who have given years of service to the State about what is happening. I endeavoured privately to ascertain what the situation is but so far I have not got any information.
I know of people in severe distress. It would have been a help to have said that while nobody wishes to cut across the situation with regard to industrial negotiations or to be accused of any action which would prolong a strike, nevertheless I understand that pensions are payable across the counter to people who can come and get them. If that is the situation I suggest it is only those in the know who are aware of this. It is a little difficult for anybody on this side of the House to obtain figures in relation to the number of State pensioners in this category. I am assured that approximately 150,000 are in this category. Many of those people are not within easy reach of the offices to which they would have to travel to pick up their pensions if that is the arrangement. Despite a fairly persistent review of the newspapers in recent weeks I have seen no advertisements in relation to payment of those pensions. If there have been such advertisements they have not been of sufficient size to make them effective. People have a right to know where they can get their State pensions.
We are not talking here about some return on investment which could wait a while. We are talking about the only means which many of those people have to get them food. It is now five weeks since they got a penny from the Government. It is not good enough for the Government to keep their heads down and pretend that this problem is not there. I am sorry if I am more heated than I normally am but this is a very serious issue.
I would like the Minister to spell out clearly what arrangements he has made for the payment of those pensions. If he wishes to include other pensions and other payments due to people I will not object. I would like him to tell us if advertisements have been placed in the newspapers in relation to the payment of those State pensions. If there have been such advertisements would he embark on another advertising campaign and advertise in a way that those people will know they have an option. What about the people who cannot travel to offices in the city? A man visited me today who had to get a taxi to get into the city which probably cost 10 per cent of the pension he receives. What about the people who are bedridden? What about the people who cannot read newspapers? What about the people who are too far away from the offices in the city and cannot get their few pounds?
The manner in which a Minister deals with the weaker section of the community is a mark of his calibre. If we are to judge the performance of the Government so far on that they are abysmal. I make no apologies for saying that. I ask the Minister to put every possible pressure on his colleagues to end this disastrous dispute and to try to ensure that there will be economic stability. I ask him to give some guarantee that those people will get their few pounds every month so that they will know that tomorrow's meal, small as it might be, will be on the table.
I believe that depriving people of their pensions could be a matter of law. I am not suggesting anybody should take that course of action but it is very serious that people should be put into a situation where they are unable to ascertain their rights in this matter. If they ring a Government Department they will not get an answer because nobody is answering the telephone. They cannot post letters to ascertain what the situation is. Nobody is saying out loud whether or not they can come and collect their pensions. The impression given by the hard-working officials who are genuinely trying to meet those people's needs is that the less said about this matter the better. If the Government have to govern by stealth they should consider getting out of the job.
Over 100,000 children in the country depend on social welfare payments. Thousands of people are very concerned at the moment about where tomorrow's meal will come from, never mind clothing and heating. All the Government's actions have indicated an obsession with people at the top end of the scale and no regard for people at the lower end of the scale. We get every kind of evasion possible when it comes to the people who need attention. I believe we would very quickly have action if those people marched through the streets tomorrow as we had with certain other categories. Those people will not march because that is not their tradition. If the Minister and his colleagues carry on the way they have been, the country will be on the streets. The working class will be on the streets, the people who have been deprived by this and previous Governments during the years. As one of their spokesmen and one of their elected representatives, I am sick and tired of it.
I demand a new deal for these people, not just in this area but in all the other areas.
I support Deputy Keating on this major problem. I speak particularly for people in the rural areas. Not more than an hour ago I had an anguished phone call from one of my constituents in Cork, a pensioner whose husband had served the State. The sole income of this widow is the pension from the Department. Her queries were very much in line with the kind of question put to me in recent weeks by many people, both within and outside my constituency.
So far as these people are concerned, the problem is that they are solely depending on their Department pension. They have not received it and have no information on how to collect it. I am asked quite often by these people if they go to the expense of travelling to Dublin and calling to the Paymaster General's Office will they be able to get their pension. The cost alone of transport to Dublin is quite considerable for somebody living in Cork. At this stage, will the Minister tell us if they can collect their pension by travelling to Dublin? Many of these widows are at the end of their tether and they may have to borrow the rail fare to Dublin. Surely there must be some better way of looking after these people than putting them to that expense? In regard to people from the south, would it not be possible to arrange that cheques be made available at centres in Cork, Limerick and Waterford so that, with the minimum of expense, people could collect them? I am making that suggestion in the event of the Minister not being able to make arrangements to have them delivered to the beneficiaries concerned.
The other question that arises is whether authorisation could be given to somebody to collect the cheques for these people. They may not be able to travel to Dublin and, even if arrangements were made to have the cheques available at local centres, they might not be able to collect them because of bad health.
I am not treating this question in any political way. I come from a rural area and there is a genuine problem there. People are suffering as a result of this strike. People are in need, and I am thinking in particular of widows of State employees. These people are totally bewildered about what to do. They do not know how to face the Easter holiday. There must be a responsibility on the Government to look after this section. I know that there are others who are affected also by the strike, those in receipt of disability benefits and children's allowances. There is a duty on the Minister to ensure that the benefits, meagre as they may be, reach the people.
Quite genuinely I tell the Minister it is the Government's job to ensure that payments reach the beneficiaries. We must bear in mind the difficulties of people living in such circumstances. I come from a rural area and I must ask the Minister to consider the difficulties of people who live in such areas, more than 100 miles from Dublin. Even if they can get transport to Dublin they will have to spend a day making the journey to and from the city.
The answer must be to have some kind of arrangement where the cheques could be made available locally. The first priority is to get the benefits to the people, if that can be done. They should be made available at local centres so that much travelling will not be involved for the people concerned. Above all, they should be told the position. They should not have to contact their public representatives in a state of bewilderment and confusion wondering where the next bob is going to come from.
I want to impress on the Minister the fact that there are genuine problems affecting the people in our community. The Government must show their concern for them. I appeal to the Minister to take all necessary steps to ensure that this real problem is alleviated as soon as possible.
It is extremely regrettable that State pensioners should suffer in the dispute in the postal service. It is frequently our experience in cases of this kind that the weakest suffer the most. However, I do not think it is particularly helpful to the situation to have the kind of statements we have heard from Deputy Keating, as distinct from Deputy O'Keeffe.
Deputy Keating said that so far as he was aware—and he went on as though it were a fact—no effort has been made to deal with the situation. I want to tell the Deputy that considerable efforts were made and one result has been that 100 per cent of the pensions due in February were distributed. If the Deputy does not appreciate that, the Retired Civil Servants' Association do appreciate it. I have in front of me a letter from the honorary secretary of that association, dated 3 March, expressing the appreciation of the association for the efforts that were made which ensured that result. So far as the March pensions are concerned, almost 60 per cent of them have been issued.
Were they collected?
Some were collected. Certain arrangements were made in regard to Garda pensions which were distributed through Garda stations. Similarly in the case of Defence, they have been distributed through Army barracks and other arrangements have operated in different areas. Of course it means that 40 per cent of people have not got their pensions for March. It is quite untrue to say, as Deputy Keating said, that no effort has been made to deal with this very difficult situation.
He started off by saying that the situation is extremely delicate and that he did not wish to exacerbate it. It is extremely delicate and I do not think that what Deputy Keating has said will do anything other than exacerbate the position. The question of publicity was raised by Deputy Keating. There have not been advertisements: the experience in another dispute some time ago indicated that without advertisements virtually all the pensions affected by the dispute were collected. As I have said, the situation is delicate and I do not wish to exacerbate it.
How are people to know?
If Deputy Keating does not know, I will tell him that what he suggested would be far from helpful to pensioners. If he does not know that and if he makes inquiries he will find out why. Every effort open to us has been made to ensure that these pensions were distributed. Deputy O'Keeffe asked if people could collect their pensions. The answer is yes. He asked if the pensions could be collected on their behalf. If authorisations are given by the people concerned, with the pension numbers, every effort will be made to ensure that the warrants will be issued to the people collecting them on behalf of the pensioners.
The Minister said I made a suggestion that would be unhelpful. I do not remember what suggestion that was.
Advertising.
It worked in regard to social welfare.
A different problem.
How are people to know? I know several people who do not know.
I can appreciate there would be some who would not have known, but all pensioners' associations were informed and they made efforts to notify their members. Of course there are people who could not be contacted in this way, but one must recognise the reality of the situation. I want to tell the Deputy that the course he has advocated would be far from helpful to pensioners.
It might get the dispute over more rapidly.
I dispute the wild allegations made by Deputy Keating on the attitude of the Government in this or in any other matter relating to the poorer sections of the community. It may be outside the scope of this debate and I do not want to pursue it unduly, but it is not unreasonable to point out that he did not make any statement of fact to support his allegations.
I did not because it would have been outside the scope of the debate.
The evidence available is quite to the contrary. If Deputy Keating was talking, as he seemed to be, about the poorer sections of the community, he was talking, to some extent at least, about people in receipt of social welfare benefits, and he should know—in case he does not I will tell him—that the record of this Government compared with that of his party and the Labour Party in office shows that in real terms we looked after those people three times better than they did together.
Tell us about the food subsidies.
Since we came into office in 1977, and during our period before the Coalition, we did that. That is a fact, though Deputy Keating does not appear to like it. He should not make these assertions without having regard to the facts. Deputy Keating was able to make these assertions without interruption. I have a much more limited time and would the Deputy mind listening for a change? He has not helped pensioners by what he did here today.
Maybe they know where to go to get their pensions.
Deputy Keating got his chance, and would he listen for a minute? He did not help them by what he did today. It is worth while to observe that Deputy Keating got up, made his statement, alleged without any basis in fact that no effort had been made to solve this problem——
The Minister said that 40 per cent of pensioners did not get their pensions.
One hundred per cent were dealt with last month and to date 60 per cent have been dealt with in respect of the March payments. Furthermore, it is notable that Deputy Keating did not put forward a suggestion, except one which is so unhelpful that it could deprive all State pensioners of their pensions if it is not properly handled. The implication of what the Deputy said is that this matter should be dealt with by the Government simply by giving way to any claims made that can be backed up by ability to screw the poorer sections of the community. That is an easy way out. Did Deputy Keating get up to make the statements he made about the people he alleges he is concerned about without saying anything to those who are causing the deprivation?
You are the Government.
To the best of my knowledge he did not say anything of that nature. He came in here and arrogantly said that he represents the people who are concerned. Whom does he think I am representing? Whom does he think other Deputies are representing?
You have lost touch.
We were elected to this House by far more people than those over there.
You are in Government.
At the start of this debate I did my very best to keep Deputy Keating strictly on the question. I did not succeed, he would not let me succeed, he resisted and he deserves what he is getting now.
You put the heat into it. I can take anything that man over there can throw at me.
The Deputy should show it by keeping quiet for a few minutes.
If the Minister would fix the dispute there would not be a problem.
Listen and take your medicine.
Would the Minister deal with the question I asked about getting cheques to centres closer to the people?
I have indicated that in some cases it has been possible to do that, but there are others where it is not possible without creating a situation where nobody would get cheques. Therefore, we have tried to make some other arrangements which I have tried to outline without exacerbating the position further. I cannot say any more without running a risk which I feel should not have been run by the manner in which this matter has been raised. I have had to deal with it, but I do not think it has been helpful. We have done the best we can and are continuing our efforts. I have already indicated some of the things that can be done; but it is unfortunate, to say the least, that we had this arrogant approach by Deputy Keating based on nothing but wild allegations, unfounded on fact——
That is not true.
I have already pointed out the degree in which the Deputy has departed from the truth, but if Deputy Keating were sincerely concerned about these people in the first instance he would have tried to find out what was going on, he would have done that privately, and he would have inquired whether it would have been helpful to these people to have the matter raised.
I did so.
The Deputy did not try to find that out.
I rang the Department twice, privately, but I did not get a call back.
Did the Deputy ask anybody if it would have been helpful?
I asked privately.
He knows damn well he did not and he has not helped anybody. The only thing we can hope for is that the efforts already made, which have been as successful as I have indicated, can be continued. I hope the damage that has been caused already will not worsen.
Government by nods and winks.
There may be an end to the dispute soon, but in the meantime Deputy Keating does not impress me, and I doubt if he impresses many people when he gets up here to profess concern for these people but does not face up to the cause of the problem or address his remarks to those who by their direct action are responsible for any hardship created.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 25 April 1979.