Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 11 Nov 2014

Vol. 857 No. 3

Social Welfare Bill 2014: Second Stage (Resumed)

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Deputy David Stanton

It was only a short number of years ago that a bailout was imposed on this country. We had to accept this bailout in order to pay the bills relating to social welfare, education, policing and everything else. There are all kinds of debates about why the bailout was necessary but, as a nation, we were forced to accept it. A few short years later, we were informed that we should cut another €2 billion from the economy in 2015. There were people who were in favour of and opposed to this suggestion. The Government decided not to cut €2 billion and instead it put money back into the economy. Again, there are arguments for and against this action. If one listened to some, however, one would believe that we are again taking money out of the economy rather than putting it back in. Much of this money relates to the social welfare budget. Child benefit is going to be increased by €5 per month per child and the living alone allowance will also be increased by a modest amount. These are small increases but they must be viewed in the context of the position in which we previously found ourselves. At the time, we were the laughing stock of the world and we could not borrow money anywhere. We had to be given money in the form of a bailout. Three years later, we now find ourselves in a situation whereby we can increase social welfare payments. The amounts involved will be small but they are a start and I wish people would acknowledge that. As already stated, a few years ago Ireland was a laughing stock and perhaps those in government could have made different choices. However, we found ourselves in a particular position.

As has been the case with much of what the Government has been doing, many of the measures contained in the budget and in the Bill before the House are designed to try to get people back into employment. We need to move away from the dependency-entitlement culture which has been built up over decades in this country. We must help people to help themselves, to stand on their own two feet and to go out to work each morning. That is why the back-to-work family dividend is particularly welcome. It is a very good measure that will support people in returning to work. I am delighted that the allocation in respect of the JobsPlus scheme is being increased from €3,000 to €6,000 and that €12 million is being invested in JobPath activation services to help people who have been out of work for more than 12 months. JobsPlus provides a payment of €7,500 to employers to hire people who have been unemployed for 12 months or more and €10,000 to hire those who have been unemployed for 18 months or more. This is another good measure. However, I am aware of cases in respect of which a greater level of flexibility might be shown.

I was my party's spokesperson on social welfare for quite a number of years and I am aware that there are always anomalies in the system. Such anomalies often only have an impact on a very small number of people. However, I am of the view that we should try to identify and remove them. I wish to provide an example. One of my constituents was on jobseeker's allowance for two and a half years when his wife passed away. He previously worked in a construction-related retail position and was transferred by the Department of Social Protection - with his agreement - to widower's pension because this would lead to him being financially better off. It was the correct thing to do. The man wanted to return to employment and a local business indicated a willingness to take him on but only if he could get onto the JobsPlus scheme. He pursued the matter and discovered that he was not eligible for this scheme because widower's pension is not a qualifying payment. Will the Minister of State consider making it a qualifying payment? It could be done at the stroke of a pen. There would only be a tiny number of people involved and if they qualified for the scheme, it would be of enormous assistance to them. I have been in contact with the Department on numerous occasions about this matter and have been informed that there is no way it can be done. However, I take this opportunity to ask the Minister of State to make the change that is required. It would be a small change which would only have an impact on a handful of people and would not cost a great deal of money. I am of the view that this change should be made. The man in question has not been able to get onto JobsPlus and he remains unemployed.

These are the types of anomalies at which Deputies should be looking in terms of discovering how they might be removed from the system or how small changes that can make a difference might be introduced. Another such anomaly is that relating to Student Universal Support Ireland, SUSI, eligibility and jobseeker's payments. Again, a little flexibility should be shown in this area, particularly in the context of the eligibility of the dependants of those in receipt of jobseeker's allowance for SUSI grants at the special rate. I am aware of the case of a person whose mother is in receipt of jobseeker's allowance. The girl's mother is married to a jobseeker's allowance claimant but he never adopted the girl so he is not her legal guardian. At the time of application, she was over 18 and was not in a position to be adopted. As a result of the fact that her mother was not in receipt of one of long-term social welfare payments listed under the terms relating to the student grant scheme, the girl in question was only entitled to the maintenance grant at standard rate as opposed to at the special rate. I accept that this anomaly relates to the area of education and SUSI but I am of the view that the Minister of State should discuss it with the relevant officials in the Department of Education and Skills. The student should be receiving the maintenance grant at the special rate in order that she might remain in third level education. As a result of the anomaly in question, however, she does not qualify. Perhaps the Minister of State will ensure that the necessary changes are made in order that individuals such as this girl will qualify for payment.

In the context of the rental accommodation scheme, the housing assistance payment, HAP, is directly payable to landlords. I have come across a number of cases, however, where those in receipt of rent allowance did not pass it on to their landlords. The HAP will change the position in this regard. In addition, those in receipt of it will be able to work, which is a major advantage. I ask that those in receipt of rent supplement be transferred to the HAP over time. Some new applicants are discovering that supplement is not available to them because they do not meet the criteria and that HAP is not available to them either. There is a lacuna in this regard to which consideration must be given.

As stated earlier, the main thing we should be doing is trying to encourage people to return to work. The cost of child care is an issue which often arises and it is one on which we must begin to focus. I am aware that in the past matters arose in the context of lone parents and in terms of how we might ensure that people's children will be cared for when they return to work, education or training. We should engage in a detailed examination of the position in this regard.

I welcome the important increase in the living alone allowance, which will take effect from the beginning of January 2015. I also welcome the payment of 25% of the Christmas bonus. I accept that the full amount will not be paid but what is on offer is much better than I expected. This time last year I did not think we would be in a position to pay any form of Christmas bonus this December. However, things have changed and we are in a position to pay something. I expect that next year the amount paid will increase and that we will be able to roll back many of the cuts that have been introduced, particularly as more people return to work and pay tax and as fewer draw down social welfare payments. I reiterate the need to encourage people to stand on their own two feet, earn a living and enjoy the dignity of being able to go out to work. There is nothing worse than being obliged to stay home all day looking at the four walls and having nothing to do or nowhere to go.

I am sure that, like me, colleagues have come across the Men's Sheds movement, whereby males - many of whom retired from work early - meet their peers in workshops and engage in all sorts of activities, including crafts, arts, etc. The enjoy companionship and camaraderie, which, very often, is all people want. There is no better way to experience either than by going out to work. We must do everything to ensure that people can obtain employment. The JobsPlus, JobPath and Tús schemes, which are similar to the community employment schemes that obtained in the past, are proving successful in getting people active and out to work and in restoring their dignity. I accept that some of these schemes are only stopgap measures but at least they are getting people of out their homes in order that they might obtain training, a small income and enjoy the camaraderie of their colleagues. If nothing else, it is better than staying home and looking at the four walls.

As I said at the outset, a number of years ago Ireland was in a bailout. This year the budget deficit will be €8 billion. We will be borrowing that amount to keep the country going rather than to pay the costs relating to the bailout or whatever. It is an awful lot of money. The plan is to gradually reduce the deficit to a manageable level in the coming years in order that we might get citizens back to work. Some young people who emigrated in recent years are beginning to return home. Like many others, I have been affected by emigration. I have two sons who are currently abroad and my dearest wish is that they will return to Ireland and obtain employment here.

I commend the Bill to the House.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I call Deputy Finian McGrath, who is sharing time with Deputies Healy and Mattie McGrath. How much time does Deputy Finian McGrath propose to use?

Deputy Finian McGrath

How much time is available to us?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputies have 20 minutes.

Deputy Finian McGrath

I will use six or seven minutes and my colleagues can share the remainder.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Social Welfare Bill 2014.

I also welcome the positive aspects of the legislation. This is an important debate as we are dealing directly with people's lives, incomes and ability to survive. We must look carefully to the future and ensure all promised pensions are secure. It is important that we do not let down or ignore any legislative protection for deferred pension scheme members, particularly senior deferred members of the Irish airlines superannuation, IAS, scheme. I totally support the IAS scheme pensioners. I will not stand by and let what is happening happen. It is a grave injustice against the deferred IAS scheme pensioners. I urge the Government to think again and row back on the grave injustice. All the pensioners want is parity of treatment.

I will give examples of real cases because we are talking about social welfare and pensions. These issues highlight the grave injustice that has been perpetrated on the IAS scheme pensioners. A constituent of mine wrote to me today and stated:

We are well aware you are under pressure with the issue of the Irish Water Board but this is not my concern. My concern is far more critical and will have far longer and more savage repercussions for as long as I live. This will be a bigger headache for you than the Water Board if you do not act to introduce [and support an] amendment.

Incidentally, I support it. My correspondence also states:

I worked for 36.5 years with Aer Rianta/DAA, leaving in April 2010 with a proposed pension deferred of €35,640 due on 1st Oct 2016. I was led to believe that my pension would be UN-coordinated (Page 4 of my DAA Letter of Offer 2010) with my State OAP under the scheme rules. Which means I could have expected [in the region of] €35,640+€11,487=€47,127.

[However,] DAA 2010 letter of offer proposed that at NRD €35,640+€11,487=€47,127.

Effect of coordination, €35.640-€11,487=€24,153.

Restructured pension will now reduce to €19,419.

Coordination will apply from NRD normal retiring date of 1st Oct 2016 despite the State OAP not applying until 25th July 2017.

10 months on an income of €19,419 a huge drop from what I signed up for in 2010. I'm sure the Dept who looked over and approved all financial dealings of DAA were aware of the offer being made.

Please also note that a) on my death, my spouse will be expected to live on 50% of my proposed savagely reduced pension and b) while civil servants and active employees of Aer Lingus and the DAA will be entitled to jobseekers' benefit until they reach State pension age at 66, 67 or 68, my pension will have the State pension proportion deducted from the date I will receive my first IASS payment.

The correspondence urges me to vote in favour of the amendment and right a glaring wrong. The constituent refers to his family:

Will you have me and my family in your thoughts next January when the Aer Lingus share price takes off and shareholders not even resident in this country make a fortune at the expense of the Deferred Members? Will you be one of the Members of this Oireachtas who stood by and let this happen?

I raise this tonight because I fully support the IAS scheme pensioners. There are many living across my constituency of Dublin North-Central and across the north side. I plead with the Government to have some common sense and end this grave injustice.

The Bill proposes a number of changes to a range of social welfare payments and requirements, including changes to the habitual residence condition and the family income supplement. It seeks to transpose certain provisions of Directive 2010/41/EU and also proposes amendments to the Pensions Act 1990 in respect of notifying members of a defined benefit pension scheme whereby scheme benefits are being restructured under section 50 of the 1990 Act. That is essentially what the legislation is about. I mentioned pensions because they are referred to in the Bill. It reminds me of another constituent who wrote to me yesterday. He stated:

When I left Aer Lingus after 44 years of service, it was on the basis that my pension would be €44,682 PA. I was informed by the Trustees that this figure has been revised down to €26,411. As I'm classed as a Deferred Pensioner I nave no representation at all to challenge this savage cut. This reduction is over 40%.

This is a grave injustice. This gentleman pleads with me to support him. It is important that I highlight this in this important debate. We are talking about social welfare and the welfare of our constituents, including pensioners.

Having already asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport and Minister for Social Protection, I now ask the Minister of State, whom I know listens to sensible proposals and understands a grave injustice when it is made known to him, to do his best to resolve the issue arising from the proposed cut of 60% to the pension entitlements of deferred members by the trustees of the IAS scheme by amending the Pensions Act 2009 in order to regroup deferred pensioners with pensioners in payment, as was the case up to 2009, through provisions of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Act 2013. Will the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport sign the ministerial order and enforce the requirement in the 2014 legislation?

I welcome this opportunity and urge the Minister of State to listen to the IAS scheme pensioners. They deserve justice and are entitled not to have their rate cut by 60%. They deserve to be looked after in the future.

Deputy Seamus Healy

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. I wish to focus on what the austerity policies of the Government, including the Labour Party, have done to families and children. I include the austerity policies of a Labour Party Minister and Tánaiste. We know that families, including children, have fallen further and faster into poverty in Ireland than in any other developed country. That is despite commitments and promises made by the Labour Party in its 2011 manifesto and its famous Tesco advertisement during the course of the election campaign. I shall remind the House and public what the Labour Party said in that manifesto about children, families and older people. Under the heading “TIME FOR CHANGE”, it states:

Ireland should be the best place in the world to grow up, and to grow old. It is a scandal that, despite a decade of prosperity, vulnerable children have been allowed to die for want of proper care; and that the privileging of profit in healthcare has put older people at risk of abuse by unscrupulous businesses. The Labour Party believes that it is time to put aside the ‘me first’ philosophy of Fianna Fáil, and to work together to build an Ireland that is a safe place for children ...

Under the heading “BREAKING THE CYCLE OF CHILD POVERTY”, it states:

Child poverty in Ireland has remained stubbornly high ... Labour will adopt a radical new area-based approach to tackling child poverty ... [This] involves all of the existing state services, such as public health nurses, schools, childcare professionals, and social workers coordinating their efforts, with expert Irish and international support, to tackle every aspect of child poverty within Ireland’s most disadvantaged communities.

These were the promises made.

We all remember the famous, or perhaps infamous, so-called Tesco advertisement that warned the public not to vote for Fine Gael, stating "LOOK WHAT FINE GAEL HAVE IN STORE FOR YOU!" There are six items in the advertisement. One of the main ones is a €252 child benefit cut, and it goes on to state, "FINE GAEL: EVERY LITTLE HURTS!" Of course, what happened was that the Labour Party reneged on those promises and the austerity policies espoused by the Labour Party, the very same policies that were put in place by Fianna Fáil and the Greens, have hugely disadvantaged and ravaged young people, children and families. Indeed, Labour Party budgets alone have taken up to €1,500 from families in child benefit.

Despite the so-called Tesco advertisement that warned not to vote for Fine Gael because it would reduce child benefit, the Labour Party went even further and reduced child benefit by up to €1,500 per family. There were cuts in the back-to-school allowance, maternity benefit and fuel allowance. Indeed, the recent 2015 budget widened the rich-poor gap by €499 a year. The result of all that has been that families have been decimated and a recent report by UNICEF tells the story only too well. According to UNICEF, Irish families with children have lost the equivalent of ten years of income progress and families with children have fallen further and faster into poverty than in any other developed country in the world. The child poverty rate, as measured by EUROSTAT, rose from 18% to 28.6%, an increase of 10.6 percentage points. This corresponds to a net increase of more than 130,000 poor children in Ireland. That is what the Labour Party has done for children in Ireland. The party has put 130,000 additional children in this country into poverty by the austerity policies that it has espoused over the course of recent years.

The UNICEF report goes on to state that Ireland ranks 37th out of 41 OECD countries, when UNICEF measures relative changes in child poverty. It states the recession and the policies have hit the 15-24 age group particularly hard. It adds that 18 OECD countries recorded a reduction in child poverty during the same period, including Chile and Poland, which saw a reduction of 7.9%. UNICEF states:

Countries should place the well-being of children at the top of their priorities during economic recessions ... Children living in poverty are more likely to become impoverished adults and have poor children, creating and sustaining intergenerational cycles of poverty.

The report goes on to state that it need not be that way. It states that for each country, the extent and character of the impact of the crisis on children depends on the strength of the social safety net and, most important, the policy responses of governments. This Government, this Minister and this Labour Party could have done it differently. They could have ensured that Irish children and families were protected. They promised that, they made that commitment in the course of the previous general election but, of course, they reneged on those promises and commitments. I say, "Shame on the Labour Party."

Deputy Mattie McGrath

I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on the Bill and I thank the Technical Group for that opportunity.

One must welcome the individual efforts, however meagre, made in the budget by the Minister. I welcome the increase in child benefit, although it is from €130 to 135 a month, in the living alone allowance and the partial restoration of the Christmas bonus. Those measures are welcome but there are many other areas across the Social Welfare Bill where little or no effort has been made to look after the less well-off, the elderly, widows, carers, and a tranche of individuals and low-income families. Many in such families are unemployed, while others are working in low-income jobs and getting support from the family income supplement. With the never-ending stream of increases in the cost of living that have taken place, both through the Government's direct action and indirectly by forcing up the cost of commodities, every issue bears down on a family.

I have stated in the House on many occasions that it must pay a person to go out to work. We will never end the jobless situation, even though we had considerable work here, without making it viable for a man or woman to do a fair day's work for a fair day's pay, and we must try to get the unemployed out of the poverty trap. While reports have been mentioned, we do not need any of them. We use clinics and walk down towns.

Some of the legislation that has been introduced in recent years has made it more difficult and expensive to create employment, and there must be a radical root-and-branch review of the social welfare legislation, many other areas of legislation and proposed legislation. As an employer, I understand the delicacies and pressures in providing employment for small and medium-sized business trying to compete. The multinationals, while they are welcome to come here, may get grants but the small employer is not looked after. There are many areas in the Social Welfare Bill where that could have been addressed, and for the past seven years while I have been a Member, it has not been addressed. It becomes more cumbersome, difficult and expensive, and there is less of an incentive for employers to take on the unemployed to bring down the numbers on the dole queue. As I stated, there must be an incentive for a person to go to work. It cannot be the position that one is better off at home, which is not healthy or good. One must allow those who want to go to work to do so.

On the jobseeker's allowance, the cut introduced last year for young people is too penal. In the case of the vast majority of young people, it is not true what the then Tánaiste, Deputy Gilmore, stated at the time about them watching flat screen television. The vast majority of young people who go through education are educated and interested in finding gainful and meaningful employment but cannot do so. On the 70,000 jobs we heard of during the local elections, those jobs were in Australia or Canada.

There must be a situation where the unemployed feel empowered and allowed to work. JobBridge was mentioned on several occasions. While JobBridge is being abused, speaking from the point of view of the community, it has been very successful in communities with which I am familiar where community initiatives and community groups got the unemployed on internships and JobBridge. However, it is being abused where one sees unscrupulous employers using it to hire the unemployed as petrol pump attendants and for other jobs of which we all have plenty of evidence. That needs to be worked on as well.

As I stated at the outset of the monster that is Uisce Éireann being conceived, born and delivered, it is still a nasty baby, kicking and squealing and throwing toys out of the pram. The Government provided water allowances in the budget. They are taking away from a positive budget in ways, and going towards paying for fat cats in jobs in a super quango that was set up. It is interfering with the social welfare system to try to devise ways to pay back some of the moneys to be paid to the company when the basic problem is that the price of the water per cubic litre to be paid to this monstrosity, or as I called it, wild beast that has to be tamed, is too expensive because it must pay for consultants and big business.

The Social Welfare Bill is being used to try to deal with the monstrosity that has been created, instead of dealing meaningfully with pending employment legislation to make it more attractive for employers to create more work and to be the creators of wealth by getting people to work. People are always happier when they are working. Most people I know want to have a job, play their part and pay their taxes, but also to be able to provide for a family and to educate them. It is a pity to see the Government stuttering and stammering. The Taoiseach said today that the water will flow, but at what price, and what pressure will be put on the social welfare system? Such money should be earmarked to be spent elsewhere in the system to support families, not to try to sweeten the pill that is Irish Water. The pill is bitter and will leave a toxic taste forever.

Deputy Seán Kenny

I wish to share time with Deputies Michael Conaghan and Brendan Ryan.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputy Kenny has five minutes.

Deputy Seán Kenny

The Social Welfare Bill 2014 gives effect to a number of significant social protection measures and improvements. First, there is an increase in the monthly rate of child benefit, which I welcome. Ireland as a nation is now coming out of the serious economic crisis it faced in recent years. While things are still tough the Government is able to give back some of what has been lost. Part of that is the restoration of child benefit, bringing the current rate from €130 to €135 per month, with effect from 1 January 2015. In the case of twins, the monthly rate of child benefit will increase from €195 per child to €202.50 per child. In the case of three children or more, the monthly rate of child benefit will increase from €260 per child to €270 per child per month with effect from 1 January 2015.

In addition to the measures on the monthly rate of child benefit provided in the Bill, budget 2015 also announced the introduction of a new back to work family dividend to provide an additional incentive for families to move from welfare to work. The details of the measure are being developed and the required legislation is expected to be introduced by the end of March in order that the back to work family dividend can commence in April 2015.

Further measures are provided for in the budget. One of them is the increase in the living alone allowance, effective from January 2015 and the payment of a Christmas bonus of 25% to certain social welfare recipients in early December 2014. That can be introduced by way of regulation by the Minister for Social Protection in advance of the dates.

Other social protection measures announced in budget 2015 relate to non-statutory schemes and do not require any legislative amendments. They are the new water subsidy of €100 per annum for all recipients of the household benefits package and recipients of the fuel allowance who do not already receive the household benefits package and the doubling of the number of employees supported by JobsPlus from 3,000 to 6,000.

Additional funding of €12 million is also provided in 2015 for the introduction of a new employment service known as JobPath, and additional annual funding of €2 million for the school meals programme.

Another element of social protection provisions in 2015 is the introduction of an amendment to the Bill which will retain the weekly earnings disregard for working lone parents who are in receipt of one-parent family payment at its current level of €90. Under the one-parent family payment scheme the first €90 of a person’s weekly gross income is disregarded. That means a person can earn up to €90 per week and qualify for a full one-parent family payment. The amount was intended to fall to €75 per week next year and to €60 per week in 2016 but that will not happen because the country is doing much better economically and such cuts are no longer needed. That is a further example that we are, thankfully, coming to the end of austerity. Some 28,000 working lone parents who currently get a one-parent family payment from the Department of Social Protection will benefit from the measure in 2015 at a cost of €8 million per annum.

Budget 2015 has also recognised the role older people have played in the recovery of the economy. Christmas can be a time of financial strain for many families and budget 2015 has secured a Christmas bonus payment of 25% for all people on long-term social welfare payments, including pensioners. The payment will benefit more than 1.16 million people.

Under budget 2015, the living alone allowance will increase by €1.30 per week, bringing the rate from €7.70 to €9 per week. That is the first increase in the payment since 1996 and will benefit more than 170,000 people. That, again, is an indication that we are moving out of the era of austerity.

I welcome in particular the 0.6% pension levy which was introduced to help fund the jobs initiative. It played an important role in the positive jobs trend, with 72,000 new jobs created since the peak of the crisis in 2012. The 0.6% pension levy will end in 2014 and the additional 0.15% pension levy will expire at the end of 2015.

The economy is doing better but we are still not out of the woods. There is a definite and tangible improvement in the finances of the State and it is only right that the upturn is reflected in how people are supported by the provision of social protection. That means we are stopping the planned cuts previously envisaged and increasing payments where possible. It also means restoring some of the cuts previously made. That is a process which will continue. I commend the Bill to the House.

Deputy Michael Conaghan

I just require a couple of minutes. I wish to draw attention to a few of the social protection initiatives in the recent budget. At the outset I refer to some of the broad, general principles underpinning the provisions. The principles in summary are as follows: first, to assist unemployed families to return to work; second, to help all families with the cost of raising children and; third, to give explicit recognition to the additional pressures on pensioners and people with disabilities who live alone.

Those are some of the principles underlying the measures. Now, I wish to give a little detail on a few of the main provisions. Under the heading of assisting people to return to work, there will be a new back to work family dividend for lone parents and the long-term unemployed. That will be of the order of €30 per child per week. A total of €12 million has been allocated to the measure for 2015. Second, the doubling of JobsPlus places from 3,000 to 6,000 will greatly incentivise employers to take on long-term unemployed people. The Minister has also devoted €12 million to the measure for 2015. Third is the provision of a further €12 million for the new employment support programme, JobPath, as my colleague, Deputy Seán Kenny, has just mentioned.

I wish to refer briefly to measures to support families with children. Child benefit will be increased by €5 per month to bring the support up to €135 per month for each child. Additional funding for school meals is included in this category of support. I pay tribute to all those who volunteer to distribute school meals within schools, who do the work diligently and without any payment.

Turning to the budget supports for older people and people with disabilities, the living alone allowance will be increased to €9 per week, an investment of €12 million per annum. A total of 177,500 pensioners and people with disabilities will benefit from the programme of support. It is worth noting that this is the first increase in this category of provision since 1996.

Finally, I wish to refer to the return of the Christmas bonus. It is a very special payment. The first instalment of the return to the full Christmas bonus was made by the Minister in this year’s budget. A payment of 25% of the Christmas bonus will be made this year.

I commend the two Ministers, in particular, the Minister of State, Deputy Kevin Humphreys, who is carrying out his new job with great diligence and energy. I commend the Minister, Deputy Burton and the Minister of State, Deputy Humphreys, for their attention to the contributions of Members from all sides of the House. They have done their best to deliver the available funding.

Deputy Brendan Ryan

I have been a public representative since 2007, at the time when Ireland's economic growth was beginning to slow down. Recession hit in 2008, leading to the spectacular banking collapse which brought about the tragic introduction of the troika into our sovereign affairs. Throughout this entire period it has been those people in receipt of a social welfare payment, those who struggle to get by from week to week, who have been hit very hard. The first three budgets introduced by this Government were brought in under the strictures of the EU-IMF troika. Spending cuts in big spending Departments such as the Department of Social Protection, could not be avoided. People who only argued about individual measures were dishonestly ignoring that reality.

As a member of the joint committee on social protection and from Labour Party parliamentary party meetings I am aware that the Minister, Deputy Joan Burton, fought tooth and nail to protect, in so far as she could, the recipients of social welfare payments from the worst of the budget adjustments during this period. Labour protected weekly welfare payments, payments that had been slashed under Fianna Fáil. We protected the State pension, the carer's allowance and free travel. We protected a range of payments. Not everything could be protected, unfortunately, and reductions were made at this time. Any cut in social welfare has an impact. By definition those in receipt of social welfare payments are not wealthy people. Those of us in the Labour Party are keenly aware that these people are the ones most in need of support and help. This is why we have fought so hard in the first few years of this Government to ensure that social welfare recipients were not seen as low-hanging fruit for the troika.

In the multi-annual budget plan for Ireland, signed by Fianna Fáil when it brought the troika to town, budget 2015 was supposed to see a further €2 billion withdrawn from the economy. There is no doubt but if this has been the case, the Department of Social Protection budget would have been in line for further reductions. However, this Government is working to get the country back on the road to economic recovery and we are succeeding. That recovery is taking hold this year and as such, we have been able to deliver a budget which for the first time since the dark winter of 2008 contains no cuts. Instead of a €2 billion overall budget reduction, we have been able in a modest way to begin to increase some social protection payments. Child benefit has been increased, the Christmas bonus is being reintroduced and the living alone allowance is being increased to €9 per week. This will benefit 177,500 older people. I am especially pleased to see a return of €5 per month in child benefit payments, with a commitment to another €5 return in next year's budget. It is no secret that the €10 cut in child benefit payments in budget 2012 was most difficult for the Labour Party in particular. It tested the resolve of many of our Deputies. At the time a number of us thought long and hard about our positions. In the end, the majority chose to remain and fight within the Government and to ensure that once we did emerge from the troika we would be there to make sure these payments were restored. This budget was the first opportunity we had to give something back and I am glad that with Labour in Government we are giving back to those most in need.

The re-introduction of a Christmas bonus payment in the form of a 25% payment is also welcome. I have always viewed the Christmas bonus as an important stimulus payment for local economies. The re-introduction of this payment constitutes a €63.5 million investment in local economies which will help local businesses sustain and create jobs. That is what this Government is about, creating jobs and bringing this country back to economic health.

In her time in office, the Minister, Deputy Burton, has shifted the focus of the Department of Social Protection from a passive, hand-out Department, into a more proactive, hand-up Department. New schemes like JobBridge and Gateway, while not perfect and not without their faults, have provided a pathway back to work for many in long-term unemployment. Community employment schemes continue to be protected and encouraged by this Government.

Like others, I await with interest the final decision regarding water services supports. In the initial proposals, €66 million has been apportioned for these supports through the household benefits package and for pensioners and people with disabilities. We all want certainty regarding Irish Water, its charges and its reliefs.

This is a positive budget, a budget which no commentator or opposition politician thought we could deliver six months ago. Many hoped we would fail, including some who have spoken about ten minutes before me. These same commentators and opposition politicians expected second bailouts, even greater economic collapse and increased unemployment. This Government has ensured we did not need a second bailout, and with this budget we proved that we did not need an onerous €2 billion adjustment.

I welcome this budget and the provisions contained in this Bill which see payments increased for vulnerable people. I look forward to continued economic growth next year and hopefully we are now in a position to continue to reverse some of the hardships visited on our citizens over the past few years.

Deputy Billy Timmins

How much speaking time have I?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are adjourning at 10 p.m., meaning 15 minutes tonight.

Deputy Billy Timmins

Is Deputy Durkan waiting to speak?

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan

The Deputy can relax.

Deputy Billy Timmins

I do not wish to deny Deputy Durkan.

I will table an amendment to the Social Welfare Bill on Report Stage, in view of the fact we will be unable to table it on Committee Stage. The amendment will propose the removal of the requirement to include the PPS number on the water registration form to be returned to Irish Water. This measure was sneaked in during discussion of the Pensions (Amendment) Bill by the Minister for Social Protection without any debate-----

Minister of State at the Department of Social Protection (Deputy Kevin Humphreys)

It was dealt with in the environment committee.

Deputy Billy Timmins

If the Minister of State will bear with me I will deal with that presently. I congratulate the Minister of State on his appointment. The measure was included in the Pensions (Amendment) Bill with very little debate. There is an obligation on the Government to explain the reason for the inclusion of the PPS number. I can take or leave the concept of the inclusion of the PPS number. The Minister of State is correct. All the members of the committee agreed in the June 2012 water provision report that the PPS number would be used as a means of supplying data to Irish Water. No member expressed opposition to it.

It is important for the Government to explain the background to this decision. I am not opposed to the concept of its inclusion but I wish to afford the Government an opportunity to deal with the issue head-on because some people, in particular, Sinn Féin Members, have flip-flopped on the issue.

With regard to welfare fraud, respective Ministers have always stated that they have bottomed out on what can be recovered from welfare fraud. Welfare fraud is often associated with a person double-claiming a social welfare benefit such as unemployment benefit but a large proportion of welfare fraud is unintentional. There is deliberate welfare fraud and there is unintentional fraud, which I hazard is probably the lesser of two evils. I refer to the older person who is a pensioner who may come into property or cash assets. It is not always the case that a person knows he or she is doing wrong and this is evidenced by the fact that many people never claim certain tax reliefs to which they are entitled, such as for waste collection charges. When the Department is dealing with such elderly people I ask that they deal with them in a sensitive manner. I have four or five cases in which people have been caught for fairly substantial sums. I can understand the Department's position but I can see how this situation came about in that it was an unintentional consequence of developments over a ten or 15 year period. If a departmental inspector writes to such people to say they owe €50,00 or €80,000 and demands payment I ask if the inspector would visit the person and explain what is going to be done and help them to work out a mechanism for repayment.

I ask if possible that those figures be published so that we can see the breakdown of welfare fraud in that many instances could involve inadvertent receipt of an old-age pension or a carer's allowance. It would help to clarify that fraud is not always a case of someone skiving all the time. I have come across a case whereby someone who was receiving carer's allowance appears to have been defrauding the individual for whom they were caring.

Someone being looked after is generally elderly or vulnerable, but people who receive carer's allowance are not vetted unless they are employed by an organisation or agency. Those in receipt of carer's allowance on an individual basis are not Garda vetted. I will not elaborate on Garda vetting; if one is Garda vetted once it should do for everything, whether it be a GAA club, carer's allowance or a ping-pong organisation. Those in receipt of carer's allowance on an individual basis should be vetted, irrespective of whether they are caring for family members.

When speaking on welfare issues, people like to race to the concept of populism. Many social protection measures are a requirement. I saw that if rent supplement was higher in one health board region than in another, the rents there were also higher. It is very important that those who are vulnerable and in need of rent supplement receive it, but a higher rent supplement should not drive up rents. We must get the balance right. In establishing who is entitled to rent supplement, it is important to have a standardised concept of housing need as opposed to housing desire and to differentiate between the two. Many local authorities do not do so.

One will always argue welfare benefits are not substantial enough, but I believe in the concept of taxing all welfare benefits at a basic rate, in which case in the first instance the benefits should be increased by the amount of taxation. I am not stating the actual amount of money people receive should be reduced, but to tax it and increase it accordingly so people can buy into society and have a role to play. There would be no cost to the Exchequer, but people would feel they are paying back something and making a contribution to society. This is important because there is nothing worse than being told one has never paid a penny tax in one's life. Many welfare benefits are earned and we should examine this concept. I emphasise I am not stating benefits should be reduced, but that they should be taxed and increased accordingly. When it comes to welfare issues, most Members of the House are pragmatic, reasonable and compassionate people and philosophically there is no great political divide.

There is a letter in today's Irish Independent from Donna Hartnett from Cork. She is a hard-working woman who wrote about getting out of bed in the morning at 6.30 a.m. and sending her children to school, the hard life she has and how she will not pay certain charges. A total of €19.4 billion out of a total of €50 billion, which is almost 40%, will be spent in 2015. One of the main faults with welfare in this country was shown where the Minister spoke about sharing the fruits of the recovery and giving the greatest proportion of the gains to those on low and middle incomes. Social protection should be about assisting people and not dividing the cake, sharing the fruits of recovery or giving the greatest proportion of the gains. It should be about assisting people so they can participate fully in life. Funding should be provided, but it should all be aimed at building up people's self-esteem and integrating them so they play a full role in society. It should not be a case of siphoning them off with a certain amount of financial benefit. The Minister stated having a job is the single best protection against poverty and I agree with this.

The best way to ensure people get jobs is through certain policy mechanisms, one of which is housing. Our record in this country on social housing has been deplorable. We are all familiar with local authority housing estates and I cry for people because of the conditions in which they must live due to the design of these housing estates, particularly two up two down apartments for elderly people or young couples. It is crazy. There is no space to play. I plead with the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government not to rush out and build 2,000 or 3,000 social houses, but to ensure he gets it right before anything is put in place. It should not be a matter of producing the numbers. Early intervention in education is also very important. We can all go into primary schools in our constituencies and identify the children who will have difficulties. Putting resources into early intervention in education will not be a guarantee of outcome but surely it could guarantee equality of opportunity and we should strive to do so.

I welcome the back to work dividend. Child benefit increased by €5 and I am a beneficiary of it myself. The living alone allowance increased by €1.30. The time has come to tax children's allowance, perhaps with a cut-off point, because it is not equitable. I am aware people state it is the one payment that goes to a mother or a father. The living alone allowance has been increased by €1.30 to €9 a week for pensioners and people with disabilities. I wonder whether there is a more desirable spending mechanism. It may be very difficult to calculate. Everybody speaks about the increase in child benefit and the Christmas bonus of 25%. Are we responding to soundbites? Are we thinking about the next general election, when people might say the Labour Party got rid of the Christmas bonus-----

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

Fianna Fáil did. It was the last lot.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan

It was that lot over there.

Deputy Billy Timmins

I should have known with Deputy Durkan at the wheel it would not have happened.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan

I am keeping an eye.

Deputy Billy Timmins

People state they returned the Christmas bonus and that others took it away or took a euro from old age pensioners. I am concerned that often we introduce policy measures to counteract slogans rather than deal with issues.

I totally disagree with the €100 supplement for water allowance for people on home care packages and the free fuel allowance not because I believe they should pay the full whack, but because the entire mechanism of Irish Water should have been based on an educational programme, grants for harvesting rainwater and a breakdown of potable water and grey water used. An allowance of potable water should have been provided to meet the requirements of an individual. The emphasis should have been on the allowance rather than a grant or tax reduction. An argument may be made this would give rise to on balance sheet payments or a subsidy to Irish water, but everyone should have free water for their drinking and living needs and where potable water is used for greywater needs there should be a charge. A mechanism or grant scheme should have been in place to assist people harvest greywater.

I believe it is more important to teach someone how to fish than to give him or her a fish. I also believe that those who are vulnerable should be looked after, but we must remember someone must create the wealth to provide the budget of €19.4 billion. In recent days I heard someone state the Government made a choice to develop Newlands Cross rather than build social housing. How will we create wealth if we do not invest in infrastructural projects? How will we get the money to pay for education and social protection unless we invest? It is not a case of one or the other; one must try to do both and get a balance between them.

I am a great believer in workfare instead of welfare. In recent years the Government has moved towards this and put a toe in the water, but now it has become concerned because this may not be populist. What I mean by workfare is that an unemployed architect would work in the local authority where he or she might be needed. It is about giving people self-esteem. It is not about getting people out to sweep the roads or wash signs. It can be about people assisting in hospitals or teachers working as classroom assistants. I am sure the majority of people would rather do this for their basic payment. We can speak about JobsPlus and JobBridge as a move in this direction, but we need to be more definite. Those who are vulnerable and need to go on long-term benefit, sickness allowance or invalidity pensions should receive them, but after a certain period of time on unemployment assistance or benefit one should move to workfare instead of welfare.

Debate adjourned.