JOINT COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AND FAMILY AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 8 Feb 2005

Child Poverty: Presentation.

Acting Chairman (Deputy D. Wallace)

I am pleased to welcome Ms Maria Corbett, acting chief executive, Children's Rights Alliance; Mr. Daithí Downey, policy officer, Focus Ireland; Mr. Dónall Geoghegan, assistant youth director, National Youth Council of Ireland; Mr. John Mark McCafferty, national social policy officer, Society of St. Vincent de Paul in Ireland; Ms Naomi Feely, policy officer, OPEN — One Parent Exchange & Network — and Ms Terry Battles, Pavee Point, who are here to make a presentation on child poverty in Ireland on behalf of the umbrella group known as End Child Poverty Coalition. It is very satisfying to receive a presentation from such a representative group.

Members are reminded of the parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members who wish to make a declaration on any matter being discussed may do so now or at the beginning of their contributions. They are also reminded that if there is any possibility of a conflict of interest arising, they should make a declaration of interest, either now or at the start of their contributions.

I draw witnesses' attention to the fact that while members of the joint committee have absolute privilege, this same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. While it is generally accepted that they have qualified privilege, the committee is not in a position to guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses appearing before it. I invite Ms Corbett to make her contribution.

Ms Maria Corbett

I begin by expressing our appreciation for the opportunity to make a presentation to the joint committee today. I appreciate that this meeting was organised at short notice.

I am with the Children's Rights Alliance. Like my colleagues, I am a member of the steering committee of the End Child Poverty Coalition, a partnership of seven non-governmental organisations working co-operatively to effect public policy change with the aim of ending child poverty in Ireland. The seven coalition partners are: Barnardos, Children's Rights Alliance, National Youth Council of Ireland, Society of St. Vincent de Paul, Focus Ireland, OPEN and Pavee Point. The members of the coalition have been working together for several years, since 1999 prior to which it was known as the Open Your Eyes to Child Poverty Initiative.

The main focus of our work is the achievement of the Government's target to end child poverty. This target is embraced by the national anti-poverty strategy, the national action plan against poverty and social exclusion and the national children's strategy. We are delighted to have the opportunity to speak to the committee and outline our concerns at the level of progress in meeting the targets laid down in the various strategies. We particularly want to discuss the provisions of budget 2005.

Mr. Dónall Geoghegan

I thank the joint committee for inviting us. The organisations represented responded in various ways to the recent budget. We have put on the table our positions on the analysis of what happened in it. As Ms Corbett stated, as a coalition, we were not happy with the progress being made to meet the targets in the NAPS, national anti-poverty strategy. There is a long way to go and we feel an opportunity has been lost in budget 2005.

We welcome some of the positive moves made, particularly the increases in the adult rates of social welfare payments and the moves to remove those on the minimum wage from the tax net. These will have a beneficial effect for children living in poverty. However, in our budget submission we put forward the view that the Government should hold to its commitment to increase child benefit but that did not happen. The commitment has been broken twice in recent years. We were told the commitment to increases in child benefit would be met by 2003. However, that was put off for the year 2004-05 and in the budgetary announcements its fulfilment was put off for yet another year. It was a lost opportunity to deal with child poverty.

Child benefit, in itself, will not be enough to eradicate child income poverty. In our input to the budget we suggested child dependent allowances — CDAs — should be increased as they had not been increased since 1994. We know the background, in terms of the poverty trap, etc., but felt there was an immediate need to increase them because of the way children and families living in poverty were targeted. The families concerned are headed by lone parents and particularly at risk. CDAs provide tremendous support for them. In the longer term the system of child income support is inadequate. There must be a balanced approach, between the universal approach adopted in the case of child benefit where the family of every child receives the payment and, on the other, targeted supports which have lost currency in recent years.

We are enthusiastic about the study to be undertaken by the National Economic and Social Council, NESC, of a second tier payment and were pleased to hear the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Brennan, speak about the possibility of introducing such a payment which would be targeted at children living in poverty. That study is under way and there will be some form of report by next July. I look forward to reading it. It will set the scene for the 2006 budget in terms of a targeted second tier payment for the support of children.

Mr. John Mark McCafferty

On behalf of the coalition, I welcome the opportunity to make this presentation to Members of the Oireachtas. I will speak about a number of headings, including education, medical card coverage and income supports for asylum seeking families. Some of the considerations are income related while others are services related. Therefore, some come within the remit of Department of Social and Family Affairs while others come within a wider services remit but are nonetheless important to the issue being discussed.

The coalition is disappointed at the failure in budget 2005 to increase the back to school clothing and footwear allowance. As there are ongoing annual increases in the cost of school clothing, not to mention the other costs associated with education, this in a sense represents a reduction in the value of the payment by the Department of Social and Family Affairs. To put the matter in perspective, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul spends in excess of €2.5 million every year in assisting families to access education, either through clothing or other supports. This enables them to make full use of the education system. As a coalition, we feel this was a missed opportunity.

We had advocated an increase in funding for the National Educational Welfare Board. While we note there was a increase in funding to a figure of €1.3 million, we also acknowledge that the board had sought a sum of €6.1 million. We believe the board is crucial to the retention of children in school and that the gaps in provision are as a result of a lack of funding. The concern of all organisations is that this will continue.

The third point in terms of education is that the school completion programme received only a 3% increase. That programme is aimed at tackling educational disadvantage. We had advocated that funding of approximately €5 million be granted to it. However, only one-ninth or one-tenth of that figure was actually bestowed upon the scheme. Dónall Geoghegan referred to the child income support considerations set within Sustaining Progress, the social partnership agreement, and specifically within the special initiatives. Likewise, a special initiative exists for tackling educational disadvantage. We had hoped, as a result of that focus, that more emphasis would be placed on investing in that area.

On child health, the coalition had hoped for a substantial increase in the provision of the GMS system and medical cards. We note the increase of 30,000 this year in the number of those eligible for full medical cards and the introduction of GP-only medical cards for 200,000 others. It has been the experience of all organisations that, by and large, low income families and others who interact with the GP system require prescriptions which cost a considerable amount of money. Therefore, the GP-only medical card is but a partial solution. We have concerns in that regard. Many organisations engage in assisting households in gaining access to GP and other health related costs. It is from the standpoint of our being providers as well as advocates that we are disappointed.

My next point relates to the issue of income support which I understand is administered through the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. However, given it is an income adequacy consideration, we note the lack of increase year on year to the direct provision payments for adults and children and for asylum seeking families. If the sum of €19.10 per week for adults and €9.60 per week for children was the type of pocket money minimally acceptable in the late 1990s then that amount must pose a risk of poverty in the mid-2000s for those in receipt of direct provision.

My final point relates to the impact of the habitual residency condition. We have examples of where child benefit is paid in respect of some children within a family and not for others because children born in or having entered the country since May under the habitual residency condition are not eligible for child benefit. In our analysis, that is unfair. We are disappointed there was no policy change in that regard in the 2005 budget. My colleague, Mr. Dáithi Downey, will address the issue of housing and homelessness.

Mr. Dáithi Downey

I thank the committee for the invitation to attend today. I work with Focus Ireland, a homeless service provider and social landlord in the cities of Dublin, Limerick and Waterford. I would like to reiterate that bad housing wrecks people's lives and their life opportunities. We do not necessarily argue that homelessness is an inevitable outcome of poverty but when in poverty one's ability to secure access to affordable, quality housing in a location of one's choice with access to schools and so on for one's children, it is a significant barrier to one's participation in Irish society.

Our primary concern is the need to address the growing social housing need and growing manifestation of poverty. We are directing the committee's attention to the opportunities that now arise to address the output balance in some of our housing construction output and to shore up the commitment to capital investment and social housing. We welcome the belief by Government and other commentators that the percentage rate of output for social housing required to meet future need is inadequate and needs boosting. We welcome the recognition by Government, in its social housing and affordable plans, of the five year multi-annual funding and capital envelopes for same.

While we have made great strides in tackling the most immediate and obvious forms of homelessness such as street homelessness and so on and while emergency and temporary accommodation has been increased, our failure to provide an appropriate output of social housing means that the move from temporary status accommodation is not happening. We are concerned that the inevitable outcome, without appropriate delivery at local community level of a spectrum of quality affordable accommodation, will be that people will revert to emergency temporary accommodation. That means people living in a bed and breakfast establishments or hostels. With that come the associated developmental impacts on children of not having enough space to play, to eat or for recreation. These problems are to the fore in the experience of many of the families to whom we offer services. My message today is that bad housing wrecks lives.

Deputy Penrose took the Chair.

Ms Naomi Feely

I represent OPEN, the One Parent Exchange & Network, which represents lone parent groups in Ireland. The anti-poverty commission thanks the committee for giving us the opportunity to present our response to budget 2005. The coalition is currently undertaking research which gives a voice to children living in poverty and this research highlights the realities for these children. It is hoped it will be published by summer 2005.

While some of the matters highlighted are the responsibility of the Department of Social and Family Affairs, others come within the remit of the Departments of Health and Children and Education and Science. We emphasise the need for a co-ordinated approach to the eradication of child poverty so that it comes not just from the Department of Social and Family Affairs but from the Departments of Health and Children and Education and Science and other Government agencies.

We thank the committee for inviting us here today and for listening to our presentation.

Chairman

I apologise for my late attendance and thank the group for its presentation.

Deputy Stanton

I welcome the representations from the various organisations and thank them for the work they are doing. It is important we are informed by independent organisations working on the ground to meet people's needs on a day to day basis.

I am interested in the idea of developing family income supplement and CDAs into second-tier payments and how that might work. We have discussed this matter in the Dáil with the Minister. Has this idea been thought through by the coalition? Does it have any proposals on how it might work? I am interested in learning more about that issue.

One of the criticisms often made in this area — the coalition might correct me if I am wrong — is that people are unaware of family income supplement and the back to school scheme. Perhaps one of the organisations could inform the committee what percentage of people are unaware of them. Does the coalition regularly come across people who are unaware of such payments? Is there a need to inform people about them and, if so, what is the best way of doing that? We have debated the issue at Question Time and on Committee Stage of the Social Welfare Bill. The Minister admits people may be unaware of all the social welfare supports, which is an issue that must be tackled as it is appalling that people are not drawing down these payments.

Will the delegates paint a pen picture and describe what it means to be living in consistent poverty versus relative income poverty and back it up with the figures? Will they tell the committee — it will be reported in the media — how many children are living in consistent poverty in Celtic tiger Ireland Mark II? We have seen recent European research on the issue. I recognise that without the excellent work of the organisations in this field, many people would be in dire straits.

One of the issues relating to asylum seekers that has been drawn to my attention is the length of time a number of families have lived in centres around the country with hardly any contact with the outside world. People have told me that the assimilation of these asylum seekers into wider society may be a problem because their children will have not seen their parents work for a number of years and have seen no interaction with society. I visited some of these centres which seem to be soulless places. What should happen?

I agree with the delegates that dramatic improvements are necessary on the income criteria for medical cards. All public representatives meet people at their clinics for whom the cost of going to the doctor and filling the prescription for medication is enormous. People on low incomes, yet not low enough to qualify for a medical card, are caught in a trap.

Mr. Downey has stated bad housing wrecks people's lives. It is obvious that we must improve social housing and the infrastructure that supports people's lives. While there is an explosion of housing, little or no community supports are incorporated in the developments. I am not sure that appropriate supports are part of the planning process for social housing. Will the delegates comment on this?

Chairman

Does Mr. Geoghegan wish to take the hot seat?

Mr. Geoghegan

I will open and others may come in after me. First, I will respond to questions on FIS, family income supplement, and CDA, child dependant allowance, rates and the possibility of a second tier payment. There are problems with the systems for income support. Members will be well versed in the problems, for example, that certain allowances act as a disincentive to work. We have no view as to which model for a second tier payment should be followed.

An interesting study for the End Child Poverty Coalition was conducted about two years ago by Mr. John Sweeney who at the time was with St. Patrick's College, Drumcondra. The study — we have copies for members — Ending Child Poverty in Rich Countries: What Works?, looks at the income support arrangements in other countries and compares the advantages and disadvantages of different models. Certainly, the message from the study was very strong, that one needed a balanced approach and that one would not eradicate income poverty by a universal approach to child benefit, unless it was raised to such an astronomical level that the State could not cope with the bill.

One needs to target those most at risk of poverty. I know there are various ideas on what a second tier payment might be; one is a refundable tax credit. I am no expert but know there is a strong lobby for that route.

Deputy Stanton raised the question of awareness of various allowances and asked for our suggestions on making people aware of them. It is generally recognised that the take-up of allowances is a great deal less than the potential — the Department of Social and Family Affairs issued a report on the issue. One can use the usual methodologies for raising awareness such as radio and newspaper advertising. A locally based programme to build a higher profile for the allowances has much merit. I know that some work was done by a welfare organisation which increased the take-up of allowances such as FIS substantially. This will leave the State with a bigger bill. The people in question need the money but do not know enough about how the system works to be able to avail of it.

Mr. McCafferty might deal with some of the questions on consistent and relative income poverty and asylum seekers.

Ms Corbett

Before we leave the issue of FIS and CDA rates, perhaps we should go back to basics and think about the key principles for a second tier payment. The first key principle is that it should be work neutral in order that, whether people work, the payment would be neutral. Second, it should be non-stigmatising. Third, whatever payment is put in place should provide an adequate income for an adequate standard of living for children. That should be the key motivating factor behind the new payment.

One of the interesting findings of the Sweeney report — we have experienced this in recent years because we have reached almost full employment — is that there will always be families where the parents will not be working, either through illness, disability or being involved in child rearing responsibilities. As a society, we must ensure we provide for these children to ensure they are not disadvantaged by the circumstances of their parents.

Mr. McCafferty

Of all the payments and allowances, the take-up of FIS is the lowest. The reason for this is that people do not know it is available. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul advocated in its pre-budget submission for a dedicated fund in the Department of Social and Family Affairs to raise awareness. As Mr. Geoghegan suggested, a quick blast of advertisements in the local newspapers or through the media would let households know they can avail of this payment.

Part of the problem may be that people believe taking up the payment is a little technical and that they will not understand it. To maximise the take-up, one must outline in plain language the eligibility criteria for family income supplement. As Mr. Geoghegan said, as a coalition, we are not advocating a specific second tier payment.

There are a number of items on the agenda. The National Economic and Social Council study will this year deal with the issue of child income support, specifically the issue of second payments. There are a number of interventions at the Government's disposal. For example, CDAs and family income supplement could be merged, another look could be taken at the refundable tax credits option and CDA payments could be re-examined. The argument has been made that because they have been frozen for 11 years CDAs do not warrant the same treatment as in 1994 when it was held they acted as a disincentive to work. We are asking that the committee look at the various options, although we are not being prescriptive in that regard.

In our experience, the back to school clothing and footwear allowance has a better uptake rate than family income supplement. I am not sure if is 100% but it is certainly much healthier than in the case of family income supplement. The debate in that regard centres on eligibility and whether it is adequate in terms of the age categories and so on.

I will now address the points regarding consistency and relevance. To the best of our knowledge, only the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom in the European Union use the consistent poverty indicator when considering the issue of poverty. We have little with which to compare the consistent poverty rate. This indicator informs us of a significant level of hardship. Statistics from the recently launched EU study indicate there is a significantly high level of consistent poverty. It cannot be compared, however, to the previous ESRI study. The rate of consistent poverty is not down to 0% or 2%. In general terms, it is approximately 10% or 11%, a significant figure given the robust methodology used and not something to be dismissed.

The measure used across the European Union is relative income poverty — the extent to which one can participate in society, have a normal meaningful life and is able to provide for one's children in terms of health, education, access to services and other items which most of us take for granted. The figures in that regard have been consistently high and are increasing based on recent data.

The Society of the St. Vincent de Paul is well placed to provide an indication of what exactly is going on. Much of what is happening is linked to the issue of medical cards and to families headed by a person in employment but on low pay and unable to enjoy the tax cuts introduced under social partnership agreements which higher income earners enjoy. Such persons are often not eligible for the medical card or rent supplement if in the private rented sector and are being hit in a number of ways because so many services have a price tag attached. I do not suggest the system is adequate for a person fully dependent on the social welfare system but it does provide certain safety nets for people in employment on a particular level of income. As outlined, such persons are often vulnerable. The system includes those struggling within the social welfare system to make ends meet, of whom in our experience there is a significant number, and those households headed by a person in employment but on low pay and struggling for the reasons outlined.

The issue of asylum seekers was raised. We have a number of sister organisations assisting refugees and asylum seekers. In this regard, the issue of integration is important. There is a space in policy, within social partnership, for a special initiative on migration and interculturalism, part of which assumes an effort or attempt at integration. The direct payment of small amounts of money to families does not assist in integration as it does not allow for travel, trips to hospital and other contingencies. That has been the experience of some of the centres affiliated to our organisations.

Deputy S. Ryan

I compliment the coalition on its presentation. Pre-budget submissions are particularly helpful to the Opposition. I note the coalition feels let down by the budget and the Social Welfare Bill.

Will the delegation outline why it believes the Government is not concentrating on social housing? While the coalition has clearly stated the Government is making progress in the provision of such housing, why, in its opinion, is it not concentrating on this sector? Is there a stigma attached to social housing and, if so, how can it be dealt with?

There are many other representative organisations working at the coalface on a daily basis trying to tackle poverty issues. As stated, families with three or more children, the children of lone parents and Travellers are particularly at risk of experiencing poverty for the reasons outlined. In the context of the difficulties experienced by the organisations in trying to deal with problems on a day-to-day basis — the delegation may not be able to answer this question — how helpful is it to them for journalists like Kevin Myers to make the following statement:

". . . our system of benefits to unmarried mothers is creating a long term time-bomb and even as things stand we are bribing the unmotivated, the confused, the backward, the lazy into making the worst career decisions of their young lives . . ."?

He goes on to say:

"But is it true? And how many girls — and we're largely talking about teenagers here — consciously embark upon a career of mothering bastards because it seems a good way of getting money and accommodation from the State?"

What impact does that type of statement from a journalist have on the organisations in dealing with the issue on a day-to-day basis? We know there are problems and that many young girls are having children early in their lives. Do such comments help in the current climate?

Mr. Downey

I will not begin with a comment on the unhelpful remarks of Mr. Myers but respond to the initial query from Deputy Stanton and then Deputy Ryan.

Since 1995 we have been experiencing a unique asset price boom in housing which has continued for so long that double digit price inflation is almost a normative. Our fiscal treatment of housing as an asset is being used as a real wealth generator. The indirect effects of this wealth from housing have been felt across the economy as people refinance and draw down equity for various forms of conspicuous consumption. Using property as an asset for wealth creation has tended to push away the opportunity for other interventions in housing provision which would lead to a more balanced and sustainable housing market and also offer ringfenced protection to those who cannot access private property through owner occupation.

Changes have occurred in the housing market in terms of quality, standards, design and location. We are all aware of the issues arising from urban sprawl such as congestion, impacts on the quality of life and so on as people seek more affordable housing. When one compares social housing with comparatively priced private housing in certain locations, one finds that the standards of construction in social housing in terms of thermal and sound installation and the overall design standard are much higher.

There are great examples of social housing in Dublin. For example, in Bridgeford Street one will be struck by the sheer elegance, style and design quality of what is being built to replace the somewhat disastrous 1970's deck access housing. What is needed is a conversation on the value for money of houses on the open market compared with what can be built for that price. People must ask serious questions about the nature and quality of the accommodation they wish to purchase.

A more important issue is the influence the housing market has on the ability of all social housing providers to generate future social housing provision. For example, its impact on the price of development land is very significant. This is a real problem for housing associations and social housing providers to overcome.

Another factor is that we do not have a diverse tenure system capable of responding to a problem that may emerge in the future if interest rates move upwards by a significant factor. The impact of a one or two percentage increase on a person repaying a mortgage of €1,200 each month which is not unusual for a first-time buyer would be very significant. It would amount almost to a doubling of the repayments because at present interest rates stand at about 3%. This may give rise to arrears and if the person concerned defaults, he or she may become homeless through repossession which is akin to what happened in 1992, if members remember back to that period.

The European Central Bank in Frankfurt has noted that house prices in Ireland are unsustainable. We have had a number of warnings. The Central Bank is worried that an interest rate equilibrium of 6% which it projects as the long-term equilibrium for the Eurozone will result in repossessions during a period of negative equity.

I have gone the long way around explaining that we have a housing crisis for low income families and groups experiencing homelessness. If the housing market suffers a hiccup because of rising interest rates, we will have an even greater housing crisis because of our inability to grow output. We are not expending a sufficient proportion of capital to build a stock of well designed quality houses.

Housing must form part of an integrated development process whereby it comes with local services, including schools; crèche, educational and leisure facilities; good street lighting and furniture. These are the bits and pieces that tend to be absent from the speculatively built edge of town estates in which many must reside because that is all they can afford. The people concerned also have a housing issue related to those who want to build social housing because they are all looking for the same thing, a built environment of quality, with quality housing that is sustainable and affordable in a location where people want to live.

As to Mr. Myers' comments, my view is that they are unhelpful, disappointing and betray an ignorance of some of the basic facts of the argument.

Ms Feely

I reread Mr. Myers' opinion article. In recent weeks lone parents have been attacked in the media on countless occasions. It is not helpful that a very vulnerable group in society is attacked when the authors may not be aware of the actual statistics. The most appropriate response may be to illustrate them to the author. Of the 60,000 births last year, about 5% were to mothers under 20 years of age. Of the 80,000 recipients of one parent family payment, 2.3% are teenagers. In his article Mr. Myers states: "We have 80,000 MoBs . . ." but he does not seem to realise that 15% of lone parents are actually lone fathers. He seems obsessed with the idea of lone teenage mothers when it is quite clear from the statistics that only a minority of lone mothers are teenagers. The greater proportion, between 30% and 40%, are in the 20-30 year old age cohort.

It is damaging for society that a journalist and a leading academic in the field of science and technology are making their opinions on unmarried mothers known in the media. Opinions must be backed up by facts. The facts are that only 2.3% of one parent family payment recipients are teenagers and that 60% of lone parents have one child. We need to make the facts known through the media exploding the myths highlighted by Mr. Kevin Myers and Dr. Ed Walsh, formerly of the University of Limerick. It is important that opinions are based on the facts. If 90% of lone parents were teenagers, there would be a greater justification for Mr. Myers' opinion. His comments are damaging. Lone parents are three and a half times more likely to be living in poverty than anybody else in society. His comments were tactless to attack such a vulnerable group.

Deputy Connolly

I welcome the End Child Poverty Coalition, comprising seven voluntary organisations, and compliment it of its presentation which represents a co-ordinated view of the issues. As the voluntary organisations concerned have formed an umbrella group and are trying to achieve the same objective in relation to poverty, are people coming up with similar solutions and is energy being wasted?

When referring to Mr. Myers' opinion column, Ms Feely mentioned that he should back up his opinion with facts but sometimes facts get in the way of a good story and what we have is a very good one. When some people see single mothers, they think it was a planned pregnancy with a view to obtaining State support. That perception is feeding into the opinion column and I would like to see the facts outlined by Ms Feely getting as much media coverage as this story has got.

Poverty has proven a big problem with approximately 66,000 children living in what could be deemed to be below a level of comfort. I am sure within that there are different levels of comfort. One could presume that if one throws money at these problems they will go away.

I would like to hear the organisations' view on what would be the situation if services were provided ahead of money. Money paid to parents may not always filter down to a child or alleviate his or her suffering. What is the organisations' view on the provision of medical cards to all children in second-level education and the provision of a hot meal to every child at school? If children got a hot meal at school they would be more attentive and better able to study. I would also like to hear the organisations' views on dental benefits. Some people in the middle income bracket cannot afford to bring their children to the dentist. While many dental problems are often identified when a child is in primary education, he or she is no longer entitled to benefit when they reach second level education. Perhaps the coalition could comment on the benefits derived from the provision of dental benefit.

The issue of housing for some 50,000 children was referred to earlier. It was also mentioned that the problem worsened during the period 1991 to 2000. It is acknowledged that some 73,000 units will be required in 2005. How soon will that problem be tackled? Another way of addressing the issue of poverty is through education. We must try to encourage children from low income families to remain in education. Mention was made of the back to school clothing and footwear allowance. Have any of the organisations detected a level of embarrassment among families to avail of such allowances?

Another issue of concern is the provision of child care facilities which would assist lone parents in having their children taken care of while they go to work. How do the organisations propose to deal with the issues mentioned?

Ms Corbett

I would like to bring to the attention of committee members a report compiled by the Children's Rights Alliance. While a copy of the report is not circulated with the material supplied, I can forward one to the committee. The report provides an over-view of statistics and may answer some of the questions raised in that regard.

The number of children living in consistent poverty, as measured by the Living in Ireland 2001 study, was 66,000. That study relates to children of families with an income below 70% of the national mean income and those experiencing deprivation indicators. For example, one indicator relates to the number of children who had gone without a substantial meal for one day in the previous two weeks. That statistic may answer the question regarding whether we would be supportive of breakfast clubs providing children with substantial food. The provision of substantial food is an important factor in a child's life. Another deprivation indicator relates to those who lived without heating in the previous two years. Heating is a fundamental necessity and we can all relate to what it must be like to grow up in a damp household. I will make a copy of the report available to the committee.

In the context of the Kevin Myers article referred to earlier and to other discussions on children it is important to reiterate that the anti-poverty coalition when working with children is working for them in terms of their needs, supports and rights to adequate health, services and to access to education. Regardless of society's views on parents or particular communities it is incumbent upon us to work for the rights of all children. The Children's Rights Alliance is working to promote the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to which Ireland signed up in 1992. One of the key fundamentals of that convention is the right to non-discrimination. It is important to reiterate that point.

Mention was made earlier of children of asylum seekers and migrant families who have entered Ireland since May 2003. Those children are no longer eligible for child benefit. The universal payment of child benefit no longer applies. The idea of cherishing all children regardless of whom are their parents no longer exists. We are deeply disappointed at the loss of that universal support for children. The circumstances of families in receipt of direct provision need to be investigated. As stated earlier they receive €19.10 per adult per week and €9.60 per child per week. These people were once entitled to child benefit. Its withdrawal has resulted in the loss of cash income to those families of between 40% and 70%. They have no legitimate way of making up that income as they are not permitted to work in the State. We have deep concerns about such families and believe that issue needs to be reconsidered.

The question was also asked as to whether services or income should be provided to families. The evidence from the John Sweeney report commissioned to study child income support in other developed countries illustrates a need for balance. Although there is a need for increased and adequate income support, there is a need also for investment in services such as health and education.

Mr. Geoghegan

Income and services are issues with which we grapple on a daily basis. We are anxious there is an understanding based on balance. We all have a stake in what welfare recipients spend their money on but, when providing money by way of State supports for others such as mortgage interest relief, SSIAs and so on, we do not ask where that money goes. Nobody has ever asked me on what I spend my mortgage interest relief. I have not yet been asked by any company conducting a survey on what I will spend my SSIA money.

We are hugely aware of where welfare recipients spend their money. Our interest in such issues are legitimate. We want to know that children supposed to benefit from CDAs, family income supplement or child benefit are accruing that benefit. However, it is important, while taking that general interest, we do not disrespect the family unit by suggesting services is an alternative to the provision of cash. Many households need cash in order to purchase services and goods.

The recent NESC report on housing proposed the construction of 73,000 extra social housing units by 2012. I understand the report is currently being considered by Government. The delivery of those units will make an enormous difference to many people such as those of whom Mr. Downey spoke earlier and in particular to the homeless. Meeting that target could make a huge impact in terms of the queues for social housing which have grown astronomically during the past two years.

The educational disadvantage committee is currently examining the various systems dealing with educational disadvantage. There has been enormous growth in such schemes down through the years. Finally, a long hard look is being taken at what is working, what is not, what needs to be built on and how various schemes can work better together. I understand the report is to be published in the next few months. The emphasis of the report is on trying to solve the problem of educational disadvantage and this would be of interest to the committee.

Education is a route out of poverty. Some people are better able than others to avail of that route. Those who are most disadvantaged have consistently had the least opportunities available to them to progress and develop themselves in education. Education policy in Ireland has a long way to go to bring about a fully inclusive education system.

Deputy D. Wallace

I also welcome the members of the delegation and thank them for their presentations. The members of this committee are here to listen to the delegations that regularly come before us making a case for those most in need. For that reason it is very important that the dialogue continues.

Of all the voluntary organisations that comprise the End Child Poverty Coalition, it is the Society of St. Vincent de Paul that stands out because from my youngest days I can recall members of the society and the Sick Poor Society calling to my home in Cork to assist and support our large family in time of sickness. How we support and assist people is an issue very close to my heart. Many Members of the Oireachtas have the same approach to those most in need in the community. In a time of economic boom, one would expect that everybody would benefit, but unfortunately some are left behind as the rising tide does not lift all boats. There are people in need in the community and we must remain vigilant.

While we have made progress this is not always acknowledged. I am speaking from both sides of the fence in terms of where we are coming from, where we are and where we are going. A Deputy made the point that not everybody is aware of his or her entitlements. In this regard we have highlighted the low take-up of family income supplement, FIS, in the presence of the Minister. The Department of Social and Family Affairs has made significant progress in raising awareness and informing people of their entitlements, but many thousands who are entitled to FIS appear not to avail of it. People may be shy about applying for it, people on low incomes may not want to want to apply for it. It is important that family income supplement is highlighted by non-governmental organisations as well as by this committee.

I pay tribute to the members of the delegation for the work they are doing in the community. I hope that by combining our efforts, we will make a contribution to the lives of those most in need. One never knows the impact of one actions on the individual and I say that from personal experience.

Deputy Boyle

I apologise that I was not present during the presentation but I caught some of it on the monitor while waiting for a question to the Taoiseach in the Dáil on the involvement of community and voluntary organisations in social partnership, which did not come up.

I would be interested in the comments of the delegation on how the recent EU SILC report was received because I think it was treated in a blasé fashion by those who have an onus to act upon information when it is made available. The main reaction was a questioning of its methodology and not of the central fact that 23% of Irish children are or run the risk of living in poverty. It is shocking in its own right but for a country that takes great pride in its current economic status, to fail to have official bodies react appropriately to it is even more damning.

On the question of freezing child dependent allowance, CDAs and access to family income supplement, FIS, Deputy Dan Wallace has outlined some of the reasons that people do not apply for it. The fact that one must apply for it together with the bureaucracy involved is one of the main reasons that people do not take it up. If we have information on what people are earning in the workforce and know they are not liable for tax, but may be entitled to an additional payment, could the State agencies not take the appropriate action and address the issue by direct payment, either by way of refundable tax credits or negative income tax, as it is often referred to?

The remarks of Dr. Ed Walsh have been commented on by Mr. Kevin Myers and others. It was interesting that Dr. Walsh was making his comments in the context of a lecture series in University College Cork and apparently participants in this lecture series were asked to impart their last words of wisdom if this was to be their last lecture. If this was the wisdom of Dr. Walsh, we would have already heard enough.

The idea that tax relief incentives need to exist for those whose business is doing business, and that grant payments, individual relief for mortgages and SSIAs are an incentive for people to work harder, yet for those who depend on cash cushions, the incentive is to have cash taken from them is a double standard with which we have lived for far too long. It is organisations such as the End Child Poverty Coalition who must deal with the responsibility of that. I wish the coalition were more challenging in challenging that prevailing political wisdom that is far from wise.

Senator Terry

I thank the delegates for making the presentations and giving the members of the committee an opportunity to ask questions. Let me preface my remarks by joining with others in condemning the recent remarks of Dr. Ed Walsh and Mr. Kevin Myers, which do nothing to help the cause of children or parents who are struggling to make ends meet. Women are always at the butt of these comments, as was evident in the past week or so. We must remember that every child that is born has a father, and sometimes people like to forget about that. The mother is left holding the baby and she is the public image but there is always a father somewhere in the background. While the vast majority of fathers are very good and want to be involved in their children's upbringing, some will shed their responsibilities very easily. Do the delegates have statistics on the number of fathers of children born to a lone mother who are not paying maintenance towards the upbringing of his child or children? It would be of benefit to the child if every organisation involved with children could work towards getting fathers more involved in the child's upbringing, so that we do not have the mother on her own struggling to bring up the children.

I would be interested to know if anybody has information on the issue of maintenance. Yesterday, I read an interesting report which was produced by Camille Loftus. She undertook a study on lone parents and her findings were frightening. Dr. Walsh should read that report which found that lone parents who work part-time are worse off than lone parents who stay at home or work full-time. Having paid all essential bills and not allowing for any luxuries, such as alcohol, cigarettes or a night out, such a woman would be in debt at the end of the week. In addition, she would lose her medical card and the back-to-school clothing and footwear allowance. How can we incentivise people to continue working if they lose out on these benefits?

Lone parents are not just single mothers with children, they can be single fathers with children. This is due to marriage breakdown, domestic violence and all the other issues that create single-parent families. It is not just about a mother being alone with a child, it can also involve single fathers following the breakdown of marriage.

I wish to highlight some educational points in which I have an interest. Does the delegation agree — I suspect it would — that the Government has let children down by not providing sufficient pre-school educational facilities? We should compare that funding with the figure provided for adult education, which I welcome. I do not have the relevant figures here but the comparison is interesting if one considers the millions of euro provided for adult education as against what is provided for pre-school education. Adult education is primarily taken up by people who have missed out along the way. It is a welcome fact that they should return to education at any time but if a similar figure was invested in pre-school education we would not need the same large figure for adult education in 20 years' time. We must not allow children to slip through the education net at an early stage, which is happening. Our prisons are full of people who dropped out of school early. Studies have shown that the majority of prisoners in Mountjoy Prison, for instance, dropped out of school at an early age. Therefore, the investment should be made in pre-school and primary education. Does the delegation agree with that?

It is appalling that there are still nine counties that do not have education welfare officers. I have met many teachers and I am aware from them that there are many difficult students in primary schools but why are they difficult? They are difficult because they are living in poverty and there are problems at home. They go to school in the morning hungry and their homework has not been done because of domestic difficulties. There is no system to enable teachers to help such children and keep them in school. The rate of absenteeism for such children is very high. It is appalling to think that nine counties are currently without education welfare officers.

I wish to put a point to Ms Terry Battles of Pavee Point. Does she have statistics that would outline how many Traveller children are currently in school, at all levels? We have some figures that Deputy Stanton obtained in reply to a parliamentary question concerning the number of Traveller children who have reached junior and leaving certificate level. In the academic year 2003-04, there were 60 such children in sixth year but I am not sure whether they completed their leaving certification examinations. Some 340 Traveller children were due to sit the junior certificate examination in 2004 but how many of those completed the examinations? It would be interesting to know how many Traveller children are in full-time education.

Chairman

As we have two more speakers, I will allow the delegation to reflect and deal with all the questions after, in case there is an overlap.

Senator K. Walsh

I will not delay the committee for long. I will not repeat what everyone else has said because I agree with it — in particular what Deputy Boyle said about the 23% rate of child poverty, which is frightening. Anything that can alleviate child poverty is welcome. The delegation comprises a marvellous group of people and I congratulate them on the information with which they have provided us. I wish them well.

I also agree with Senator Terry's remarks concerning the shortage of education welfare officers. There are not enough welfare officers in place and anything that can alleviate this serious problem, particularly for Traveller children, would be welcome.

As regards the awful remarks that were published today, they are too cruel to read. Therefore, I will not comment on them.

Deputy Callanan

I welcome the delegation and compliment its members on their great work. Many areas have been referred to, including the child dependant allowance, back-to-school clothing and footwear allowance, medical cards, housing and child benefit. Which of these matters would have the greatest impact on alleviating child poverty for those who are most in need?

Mr. McCafferty

I will cover a couple of the points that have been raised. Deputy Connolly referred to the notion of group working and whether there was duplication in the past. There are some groupings where there can be duplication and there may be a waste of time and resources. However, in my professional experience, this coalition is a key example of where groups are adding value to each other's efforts. There are natural leaders in certain policy areas so we share that load, as well as our experience and knowledge, from a policy viewpoint before dividing those tasks accordingly. It has added value to the work of the society and in that respect I would commend it.

There has been a low emphasis on social housing and a high emphasis on affordable housing. As was outlined in the NESC study, we hope that over the next five years — or, at least, until 2012 — we will see substantial increases in the output of social housing.

As regards the provision of medical cards for all children, the coalition is advocating that, in the first instance, medical cards should be allocated on an income-related basis in order that children of poor families will benefit. Ultimately, all children should benefit but the primary focus is on children in low-income families.

To respond to Deputy Wallace, I acknowledge that progress has been made. There has been significant progress in living standards, in very general terms, over the past ten years. One example of where progress has been made, certainly up until about 2001, is child benefit. It was substantially increased up to that point. We have come to a bit of a stumbling block but it would be churlish for us not to acknowledge that the income of many households has increased substantially. We note that. I suppose we focus, in the limited amount of time available, on the matters requiring improvement.

In terms of education, our policy focus, and this is the experience also within the special initiative for tackling educational disadvantage within social partnership, is that the community and voluntary organisations are advocating a much greater emphasis on the early years. If one makes that investment and puts that emphasis on intent, policy and budget, then a number of years down the line one need not place great emphasis on adult education because the impact has been felt right at very beginning.

Over the next three years the Society of St. Vincent de Paul will embark on a massive investment in education for children of low income families in the communities it assists. We will spend €14 million as part of our three year plan 2005-07. The society believes as does the coalition that this should be the main emphasis when we look at educational disadvantage in the early years, both pre-school as well as primary school and secondary school.

The child care issue was raised twice and Ms Feely may touch on it. It was raised initially in terms of a labour market device, that child care would free up parents to access the labour market, which was valid. It was brought up the second time as a means to develop the child. When we speak of child care we are talking about early child development, education and care. It is folly to focus primarily on the labour market implications of child care because one is talking about the development of a child, both cognitively and socially, from a very early age, and about trying to intervene as well as the other labour market implications of having a widespread and accessible child care service.

Mr. Geoghegan

As Deputy Wallace suggested and as Mr. McCafferty also alluded to, progress has been made. One development is the huge growth in the number in employment, from about one million in the late 1980s to in the region of 1.7 million or 1.8 million now. That has made a huge difference in lifting many children and young people out of poverty.

There are two problems with continuing on such a route. First, there is near full employment in Ireland at present. The model of employment being the route out of poverty is limited. It will still benefit some but many will be still left behind who will not be able to work — people with disabilities, for example, or in families where there is disability, etc.

Another aspect of that is that there are families of working poor in Ireland. That is why there are schemes like FIS. Such people cannot survive. They cannot bring up their families and meet the expectations of society within the income restraints.

We all would say a father who absconds should pay maintenance. However, my reading of this issue is not just that the lone parent's payment — it was the single mother's payment in years gone by — was devised because it would be extremely difficult to administer a maintenance type of scheme, but so that the lone parent, usually the mother, would not feel beholden to the father for continued income support. Often where a relationship breaks down it is better for the father to be at some arms' length. That does not solve the problem in terms of the overall issue of the father's place in the family, continued involvement, etc. It is a complicated issue that cannot be dealt with in a few minutes but in terms of maintenance, I understand those countries that have gone down the route of trying to push for greater maintenance have found it difficult to put together a scheme that works and respects the rights of all the parties involved. That is why the State's intervention is crucial.

With regard to the greatest impact, from everything that has been said, if we were to put forward something as having the greatest impact, maybe the people around this table would put forward different things, which approach would not be any good to the committee. In the short term an adequate income is crucial for children living in poverty in order that they can find their way in the world. In the longer term, returning to an issue which arose earlier, ensuring good access to quality education and particular schemes targeted at those who need them most would pay huge benefits, not taking from their housing needs, etc.

Ms Terry Battles

To respond to Deputy Terry's queries on education and the high level of educational disadvantage among Travellers living in Ireland, the 2001 statistics show a very young Traveller population living in Ireland, that 63% of Travellers are under the age of 25 and 42% are under the age of 15.

On the education front, figures for Travellers mentioned 63.2% of Traveller children under the age of 15 had completed their education at 14. The comparable figure in the general population is 15.4%. Primary school is the highest level of educational attainment for 54.8% of Travellers. Working with those Department of Education and Science figures for 2003, the Deputy mentioned that there were only 62 Traveller children in sixth year in the Republic of Ireland. This reflects the significant educational disadvantage and the experience of racism and discrimination within the school system, both direct and institutional. We would argue also that there is a clear need for an intercultural curriculum that would incorporate Traveller culture, ethnicity and identity within the educational curriculum, and for the appropriate supports to be put in place for that to be achieved. We will work with the national Traveller education strategy to achieve these ends. There is more information on this in our shadow report to the third commission, a copy of which I submitted to the committee secretariat.

Ms Feely

Senator Terry raised a good point about the Camille Loftus report, One Size Fits All? Last year three important reports were undertaken for lone parents, two by OPEN and one by another organisation, the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice, with which Mr. McCafferty would be familiar because the Society of St. Vincent de Paul is a partner.

An overall finding of the first of these, the qualitative report by OPEN, indicated that lone parents want to go out to work but there are so many barriers preventing them getting back into work such as affordable and accessible child care.

The Camille Loftus report found that lone parents in part-time employment were in the best position because the child care costs were not as high as those where the mother returned to full-time work. The lone parent did not retain the back to school footwear and clothing allowance but was eased into the system. The Vincentian Partnership report on budget standards established a standard of living, costed it and compared it against social welfare and minimum wage payments. A lone parent with two children in receipt of social welfare benefits was in debt to the sum of €23.62 taking into account only ordinary living expenses and not alcohol, cigarettes, savings, debt repayments or maintenance orders. She had a very basic standard of living. It was considered that her best option as a lone parent was to take up part time employment, since when she took up full time employment she was in greater debt. There has been much comment about lone parents' dependance on social welfare but lone parents are unable return to full employment due to a lack of access to affordable child care.

The question was asked if any of the organisations were involved in encouraging fathers to pay maintenance and so on. We support lone parents and lone parent groups in Ireland. We represent them through the anti-poverty coalition and at local level. We are not directly involved in getting fathers to pay maintenance and so on. We act as a support mechanism for lone parents and lone parent groups throughout the country.

On the barriers for lone parents trying to obtain part time work, there is a valid argument widely supported by a number of organisations. The National Women's Council has undertaken numerous researches on the lack of income provisions for people involved in caring duties within the home. We need to put in place adequate supports for those involved in caring duties within the home.

Chairman

Thank you. I wrote an article last September on lone parents. It was published in The Irish Times. Some of the recent commentary by people one would expect to get the facts right were ill-founded. Many of the statistics quoted did not meet the realities I encountered as a public representative. Having perused much of the very valuable research on this issue I discovered there are many barriers to lone parents being in the workforce. Many lone parents living in deep poverty are trying to work their way out of it. Barriers such as the restriction on the back to education allowance, the acute cost of child care and the failure to increase the income threshold contribute to their plight.

People who write negative articles should try to live on the sum paid to lone parents. Unfortunately, perception becomes reality in the minds of some people. It is only when one deals with a situation on the ground that one learns the truth. A lone parent known to me was precluded from eligibility for the back to education allowance because she would have only been in education for 11 of the 15 months required. This was a person who could have gone on to third level education to obtain a degree. Society would be best served by trying to assist such people.

One wonders if those involved in that type of commentary are in favour of abolishing all social welfare assistance. That is a major cause for concern and worry and is symptomatic of a right-wing drift in Ireland. I would not like that view to become prevalent.

I thank the coalition for attending today. But for the fact that we must attend the Dáil for Leaders' Questions we could be here for another two hours. The meeting has been a valuable one. I thank the coalition for its contributions and openness. I also thank my colleagues who have remained. This has been one our best attended meetings for a presentation. Given the high level of interest, the coalition may be sure we will call on it to attend again in the not too distant future to give its views on the problems it encounters. It has been useful to have the various organisations attend in a unified way. My colleague made the point that it is a worthwhile way of making a presentation. Thank you.

The joint committee went into private session at 4.30 p.m. and adjourned at 4.40 p.m. sine die.