Róisín Shortall
Ceist:35 Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Social Protection the way he plans to reform the social welfare system to provide greater social security for the self-employed [43859/10]
Other Questions
Social Welfare Code
Self-employed people pay PRSI class S contributions which provide cover for long-term benefits such as State contributory pensions and contributory widows pension. Unfortunately, this is the same answer I gave before.
If the Minister does not want to read it we can go directly to questions.
Does Deputy Shortall want me to read it again?
I heard it the first time.
I will read part of the answer. It is recognised that the current downturn in the economy is having a significant impact on many self-employed persons and the consequent reduction in their income and activity levels would be reflected in any assessment of their means from self-employment for jobseeker's allowance purposes. If a self-employed person's situation changes after he or she has made an initial claim for jobseeker's allowance, he or she can apply to have his or her means assessment reviewed in the light of his or her changed circumstances. There are no plans to extend cover for short-term benefits to this group of insured workers. Any such measure would have significant financial implications and would have to be considered within a budgetary context. Consideration would also have to be given to an appropriate increase in the rate of the PRSI class S contribution.
This is another area about which I asked the Minister to outline his plans for reform. He recognises, as does everybody else, that there is a significant problem and yet is doing nothing about reforming the system. There is a dispute about figures. The Minister should have figures to give us a better picture of the situation. The bottom line is that self-employed people get a very poor deal from the welfare system. I am sure the Minister is aware, as are the rest of us, of many situations where people had no choice but to be self-employed over recent years because that has been the tendency in the employment market.
Does the Minister accept that there are several different categories of people who had no choice but to be self-employed because of the abuse of the system which he was prepared to stand by over recent years? People such as lorry drivers, for example, were classed as self-employed. People who were small contractors, such as plasterers and carpenters, who previously worked for someone were forced to become self-employed.
Like all of us, I am sure the Minister is aware that a great number of people only discovered they were not entitled to any assistance when they found themselves unemployed. Such people are not entitled to anything if a partner has any kind of income. Does the Minister have any plans to reform the welfare system for people who find themselves unemployed, having been self-employed?
As I pointed out, in actuarial terms self-employed people, because they only pay 3% PRSI compared to 14.75%, come out much better in the long term because the most expensive benefit which everybody is paying for are pensions, be they State, contributory or widows pensions. Therefore, if the system was reformed to give short term benefits there would be a number of practical difficulties and one would have to significantly increase the level of self-employed contributions to the approximate level of the employed contributions which is 14.75%. One could not have a situation where one person was getting a lot of benefits, having contributed 14.75%, and another was getting an equal set of benefits, having contributed 3%.
That is the dilemma in this case. I accept there are challenges in this situation, as I said in my answer to the question asked by Deputy Timmins. One very successful solution we found to the problem of self-employed people in receipt of farm assist was through the rural social scheme which gave one something akin to what a stamp would give one but it was done in such a way that the person was given time which reduced the possibility of abuse of the system. I assure the Deputy that I am working in that direction and I hope to make progress in the near future.
Beyond looking at something, we would like to see some action. I hope the Minister will introduce these reforms in next month's budget. Is he prepared to give consideration to introducing a voluntary arrangement whereby self-employed people can pay the full stamp in order to give them the cover that is necessary in the event of them losing their employment?
There are two issues. The Deputy rightly referred to money. The contribution would have to be 14.75%. The other problem is that, for example, people in employment can receive payments such as short term illness benefit after three days even though they are not at work. One is not allowed to receive the payment if one is attending one's place of work.
If one is laid off work, one can immediately sign on for unemployment benefit. It would be very difficult to monitor that in a self-employed situation and it would impose huge practical difficulties. As I said in the reply, in most European countries, there are differences between self-employed and employed on that basis.
I have a simple question to which I know the answer but I would like the Minister to put it on the record. Deputy Shortall referred to unemployed people who were self-employed. There was a bit of confusion, in particular when the recession began, that these people could not apply for the jobseeker's allowance. Will the Minister confirm that once they provide evidence of all their means, they will be entitled to jobseeker's allowance? A number of people who were self-employed went to social welfare offices only to be told that because they were self-employed, they could not apply for jobseeker's allowance. Will the Minister put on the record the position in regard to self-employed people applying for jobseeker's allowance?
It is a very good question and was the first one on which I asked for absolute clarity when I came into the Department. I have answered numerous parliamentary questions on this but I am delighted to have an opportunity once again to clarify it. A person whose income drops beneath the threshold of the family circumstances — for a single person over 25 years of age, that would be €196 — is immediately entitled to jobseeker's allowance.
As a matter of form, the Department often asks for the previous year's accounts but that is only as a guide. If a person had a contract to deliver bread, was self-employed and owned the van and the contract finished and a replacement contract was not put in place, the fact he or she had made a lot of money in the previous year would mean nothing because as long as he or she could satisfy the officials that he or she had no current income nor likely prospect of income in the immediate future, he or she could immediately get jobseeker's allowance.
Time and again, we have reinforced this message and I am delighted to be able to do so again on the record. We have also ensured that the officials in the Department are absolutely clear on the guidelines in this regard. There is a safety net.
Departmental Schemes
Emmet Stagg
Ceist:36 Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Social Protection the way his work for the dole scheme will work and if the scheme will be compulsory [43860/10]
Activation and support for those who are unemployed is a key priority for Government. Earlier this year, the Taoiseach announced a number of changes to improve the delivery of employment, training and community services to the public by bringing together related responsibilities in these areas. These changes included the restructuring of departmental responsibilities with the objective of providing a streamlined response to the income support and job search needs of people who are unemployed.
In this context, my Department is devising proposals for the development of new initiatives which will offer social employment opportunities. This new initiative will be an important element in the development and delivery of employment and community services and will aim to provide quality work opportunities to the unemployed and beneficial outcomes to the community. A key feature of the new scheme will be to provide a new activation route that will support unemployed people in remaining job-ready for re-entry to employment as the economic environment improves.
Referrals under these new initiatives will operate in tandem with the improved processes being developed under the national employment action plan.
Last August the Minister announced 10,000 new scheme places but three months later not a single additional scheme place has been provided. We heard much talk from the Minister throughout the year about various initiatives to help people access employment but, unfortunately, we have seen very little action. When does the Minister intend to establish this promised scheme? How does he propose to pay for it? Can he give us an assurance that the scheme will be voluntary?
Work on the scheme is well advanced and I hope to be able to make an announcement on it in the near future. I did not make an announcement on a scheme but I did an interview in which I indicated that I believed a scheme such as this should be developed. I also indicated in the interview that it should provide 5,000 to 10,000 places initially. As I said, I am working on it and we will announce the details in due course.
The Minister has had quite a bit of mileage out of this in recent months, that is, announcing various initiatives, including this one. Let us see some action. Can he put some meat on the bones of this? How many places does he intend to provide? We know that if one opens up new places on a voluntary basis, they will be hugely oversubscribed. That is the reality. The majority of people on jobseeker's benefit or allowance want to do something worthwhile. If the Minister provides the places, people will fill them without any difficulty. When does he intend to set up this new scheme? How many places does he intend to provide on the scheme and how does he propose to pay for it?
It will be paid for out of Exchequer funds provided to my Department.
Not this year. Is that what the Minister is saying?
Work is well advanced on the scheme. An announcement will be made on the detail of the scheme in due course.
The Deputy asked a parallel question about schemes being voluntary and so on. I remind her that it is my intention to commence sections 18 to 20, inclusive, of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2010 on 1 January 2011. The national employment action plan must have sanctions for people who say they are available for and are actively seeking work but who do not avail of appropriate courses or training and refuse to participate in programmes.
On a point of order, nobody is arguing with the Minister about that. We are asking him about this promised scheme. He is supposed to provide 10,000 places.
That is not a point of order.
When will the Minister provide those places and will they be voluntary?
The Minister may not have announced the scheme but he leaked it to the media. I do not know what the difference is and the media might explain it to us. The media ran with it over the summer and I was inundated with requests to find out Fine Gael's view on it. Deputy Shortall had the same problem. When will we see people taking part in this scheme? Will it be compulsory because, as I said previously, it would be wrong to take an accountant or an architect off the live register and have him or her sweep the streets. That would not be acceptable as a way to remove people from social welfare. Will the Minister confirm that will not happen?
This will be operated through the national employment action plan. As I pointed out to Deputy Shortall, it is intended to introduce sanctions provided for in law on 1 January 2011 to give teeth to the national employment action plan. When the scheme is introduced — I have explained this in detail previously — the names of those willing to participate and co-operate with the national employment action plan will be put on a register for employment on the scheme. Obviously, those who do not participate in the national employment action plan, which is an integral part of our approach, will be subject to sanctions. That is the way it should be.
Like the other speakers, I understood the Minister was to introduce a scheme with 10,000 places. It is very disappointing that has not happened because it is the way forward.
The real reason I want to speak is to put the record straight in that many of those who were self-employed still have great difficulty getting social welfare.
We have had two questions on that already.
I know that but I wanted to put it on the record that everything is not sorted out. It is important for those who are in a bad way that the facts are set out.
I would be concerned if the Deputy believed my Department was not applying the guidelines in regard to self-employed people. The Deputy should give me specific incidents so I can prove that is not happening. From my own work, I know that sometimes people do not give adequate information to my Department to make these decisions. I would be more than willing to listen if the Deputy could give me specific incidents where people who have an entitlement to jobseeker's allowance are not getting it. He knows I would be very concerned if that happened.
Job Creation
Tom Hayes
Ceist:37 Deputy Tom Hayes asked the Minister for Social Protection the total number of job facilitators; the average waiting times to access support from a job facilitator; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43787/10]
The Department's facilitators work with social welfare recipients of working age to promote economic participation and enhance social inclusion. Recipients include people in receipt of jobseekers payments, people parenting alone, people in receipt of disability payments and people providing care. Facilitators work with these social welfare recipients to identify appropriate training or development programmes which will enhance the skills that the individual has and ultimately improve employment chances as well as help them to continue to develop personally. They develop individual progression plans with the customer.
Facilitators operate within the Department's regional structure and are located throughout the country covering defined geographical areas. They work closely with FÁS and other agencies at a local level to identify and target appropriate education, training and development programmes for social welfare recipients of working age. The facilitator service is available to social welfare customers at all local offices. Facilitators hold open clinics and meet with people who have been referred either by the social welfare local office, by other agencies or by local development groups.
Appointments to see a facilitator can be made by contacting the social welfare local office or the facilitator directly. In addition to this, cases are also selected centrally and referred to facilitators by the employment support section. The service was enhanced under the national development plan social and economic participation programme, which provided for the provision of 70 job facilitators. There are currently 67 facilitators serving which constitutes 65.4 full time equivalent posts.
In the current economic climate the demand for the facilitator service is elevated. Facilitators generally have scheduled days when they are available in different locations across our network of offices and people wishing to meet with a facilitator would be advised to call on one of those days, as a centralised appointment system is not maintained. Accordingly, waiting times for individual facilitators are not maintained, although facilitators make every effort to contact all interested customers as quickly as possible.
The Minister confirmed today that almost 440,000 people are unemployed.
No, I dealt with that earlier.
We will not get into it again unless the Minister wants to. There are 67 people in place to deal with people who are unemployed, meaning each facilitator must deal with almost 7,000 people. That is unacceptable. Will the Minister provide more staff under the Croke Park agreement by moving people to this area? People are unemployed and we must get them back into the workplace. How will extra staff be used to deal with the issue, as it is unacceptable for each facilitator to have to deal with almost 7,000 unemployed people?
The Deputy knows that the employment services part of FÁS is being moved to the Department, so all the resources involved in placing people through FÁS will also now be part of a seamless service to be provided between facilitators and FÁS staff. They will not do exactly the same work but all the personnel will work together coherently. We could say that this is the Croke Park agreement working as we are bringing the FÁS services to the Department, meaning we will have the joint resources of what was FÁS in my Department in this regard. When that happens, without adding extra cost burdens to the State there will be a much more efficient service.
Will it be a one-stop shop?
Does the Minister accept that the transfer of FÁS staff to his Department provides an opportunity to set up a proper one-stop shop system for unemployed people? This seems to be the weakest link currently, as unemployed people cannot get basic information about available training schemes. Specifically, it seems there is nobody within the Department in a position to advise unemployed people about the implications if they move from welfare to work with regard to welfare payments, in-work supports, tax, PRSI and so on. Will the Minister give an assurance that this will be made a priority and this kind of specific advice will be available to unemployed people, most of whom want to move from welfare to work?
The purpose of bringing the employment service of FÁS to the Department is to provide a comprehensive service to unemployed people so they can be made aware of all the opportunities out there on a one-stop shop basis. I welcome the Deputy's support for this approach, which is fundamental to the changes made by the Taoiseach when he set up the Department of Social Protection. We have moved rapidly and we are bringing in a second Social Welfare Bill. We are quickly moving to the type of services that the Deputy wishes we could provide. She should rest assured that there is nothing between us on this issue.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.