Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 11 Dec 2014

Vol. 236 No. 6

Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Bill 2014: Second Stage

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

First, I apologise on behalf of the Tánaiste. She had hoped to be here today herself to take Second Stage but, fortunately for me, she had to travel to Stormont, and I got the opportunity to come in to the Seanad.

This is a short social welfare Bill by normal standards but nonetheless it marks a positive shift in our economic and social recovery. This recovery can now clearly be seen. According to the European Commission, Ireland will be the fastest-growing economy in the EU this year, with our growth rate expected to be 4.6% compared to an EU average of just 1.3%. The latest CSO quarterly national household data shows that there was an annual increase in employment of 1.4% or 26,800 in the year to the third quarter of 2014, bringing total employment on a seasonally-adjusted basis to nearly 2 million people. Overall, almost 125,000 people have left the live register so far this year to take up employment. Importantly, the vast majority of people returning to work are returning to full-time employment. In budget 2015, the Government delivered a package that will reduce taxes for middle and low-income workers and provide welfare increases in a number of key areas, such as child benefit and the living alone allowance. By any standards, that is a remarkable turnaround given the economic crisis this Government inherited upon taking office.

The main social protection measures contained in this Bill and in budget 2015 are an increase of €5 a month per child in child benefit from January 2015; the introduction of a new back to work family dividend scheme to help people back to work; an increase in the living alone allowance to €9 a week from January 2015; the payment of a Christmas bonus of 25% to all long-term welfare recipients in early December; the retention of the weekly earnings disregard for recipients of one-parent family payment at its current level of €90; and a doubling of JobsPlus places from 3,000 to 6,000 and increased funding for JobPath.

I am conscious that, in the six years since the banking collapse, some very difficult social welfare changes have had to be made. The Government has been able to prioritise the protection of basic social welfare rates and maintain a social welfare safety net that is among the most effective in the EU at reducing poverty. We are now realising the benefits of the sacrifices that have been made by the Irish people, as we emerge from the unprecedented economic crisis that has impacted so significantly on our country. Budget 2015 now reinforces the improvements in the economy by sharing the gains of our recovery in an equitable and sustainable manner. Together with more measured announcements in the budget, the measures being provided in this Bill will begin the process of restoring living standards for families, for older people and for low and middle-income workers. I am very pleased that it has been possible, for the first time since forming this Government, to have been able to provide for modest increases in social welfare payments, and they are modest increases.

The Government's statement of priorities published earlier in the year promised a new deal on living standards for low and middle-income families. In line with this commitment and in recognition of the sacrifices that have been made and the difficulties still facing many families, the Bill provides for a €5 increase in the rate of child benefit as announced in budget 2015. This will bring the monthly rate of child benefit from €130 to €135 per child, with effect from 1 January 2015. This increase represents an annual increase of €60 for each child, bringing the overall annual investment through the child benefit system to €1,620 for each child. This measure will benefit more than 1.1 million children in 612,800 families. The Government has also committed to increase the monthly rate of child benefit by a further €5 in 2016, provided that the circumstances allow and the economy continues to perform. Child benefit has been critical in supporting families through difficult times and this increase will help families to build a better financial future and boost the recovery. Child benefit helps to prevent poverty, along with other child income supports paid to welfare recipients and low-paid working families. Altogether, the Government will provide a combined weekly payment of €63 for vulnerable children. These and other social transfers greatly reduce the at-risk-of-poverty rate for children from 45% to 19%. Child benefit is one of the few universal payments in the welfare system in that regard and its universality has an important role to play in maintaining the welfare system. That every child receives child benefit, regardless of their employment status, also ensures that this payment does not act as a disincentive to work.

Last week the live register figures, which show a year-on-year reduction of 10%, are a clear demonstration of the jobs-led recovery overseen by the Government. There were 10% fewer people on the live register last month as compared with November 2013, and that 10% reduction over a year is a substantial improvement. Unemployment now stands at 10.7%, down from a crisis figure of 15%. The number of long-term unemployed has also seen a fall of 7.4% in the last year. This is still far too high. However, the pace of the reduction in unemployment is now accelerating and I am confident that we will get unemployment below 10% within the next year. Employment creation remains a central focus of Government policy. In particular, we want to ensure that people who lost their jobs during the crisis can now benefit from the strong economic recovery under way.

A vital part of Government's strategy is the need for additional activation measures in the interim while the economy recovers. This is the rationale behind the Government's activation strategy, Pathways to Work. In order to support the implementation of Pathways to Work, €1.6 billion is being made available in 2015 to provide approximately 300,000 work and training places. An additional €12 million has been allocated for the JobPath initiative which will match the long-term unemployed with appropriate training and employment opportunities. That is one of the most significant aspects, because the people who became unemployed at the very start of this recession are the ones who now need to be trained so they can access employment. In other recessions, we have seen people being left behind because they were unfortunate enough to get detached from the workforce and were not close to the market. The training positions that are being made available and the extra resources that are being put in are quite significant.

We are also doubling the number of positions on JobsPlus to 6,000, with a focus on young unemployed people, at a cost of €13.5 million in a full year. Under the JobsPlus scheme, monthly cash grants are paid to employers to help with wage costs when recruiting long-term unemployed jobseekers. One of the interesting statistic relating to JobsPlus is that over 60% of those recruited last year had been unemployed for longer than two years. The initiative is focused and is clearly getting people who had been quite removed from the workforce back into employment. This is why I am so pleased to see the doubling of the number of positions to 6,000. Hopefully, demand will grow and we will see many of our long-term unemployed back in the workforce. This must be one of our main priorities.

In addition, a new incentive, the back to work family dividend, is being introduced, which will help jobseekers with families return to work. This dividend will provide an incentive of up to €1,550 per child in the first year of employment or self-employment and half that amount in the second year. The scheme will apply to families returning to work from the beginning of 2015 and will cost €22 million in 2015 and €46 million in a full year. It also offers people a great opportunity to start their own business. I believe many of those who have been long-term unemployed will avail of this incentive dividend to get back into employment. The necessary administrative and technical details of the dividend are currently being developed, but will not be finalised in time for inclusion in this Bill. Instead, the required legislative amendments will be provided for in a further social welfare Bill which will be introduced early in the new year, with a view to enactment by the end of March 2015. While the dividend will come into operation in early April 2015, payment of the dividend will be backdated to the beginning of January in the case of families taking up employment from that date. There is no bar, therefore, to returning to work in the new year. People should realise the dividend will be backdated to January and paid in a lump sum.

The 2015 social welfare Bill will also provide for a number of other changes to the social welfare code arising from policy, administrative, operational and control matters. The back to work family dividend, when taken together with the employer incentives under JobsPlus and the activation measures under the JobPath scheme, will ensure that people who have remained on the live register for a prolonged period can also benefit from the recovery in the labour market. Senators are aware of people in their communities who became unemployed back in 2008 and 2009. We now have quite a package in place to help these, between the back to work family dividend, JobsPlus and universal children's allowance payments. Disincentives to returning to work are being removed. The HAP scheme being rolled out across the country will replace the rent allowance and help remove unemployed people from the poverty trap. A range of initiatives and assistance is now in place to help the long-term unemployed back into the workforce and I believe this will be successful in coming years.

It is essential that the ongoing task of economic repair is accompanied by an equal focus on social recovery. Following a number of budgets which required a major consolidation of the public finances, including social protection expenditure, budget 2015 provides that all social welfare payments and supports will be maintained during 2015. This means that there will be no reductions in payment levels and no changes in qualifying criteria. However, the improved economic circumstances have allowed us to go beyond this by providing for the first increases in weekly social welfare payments since 2008.

The living alone allowance, which is payable to some 180,000 pensioners and people with disabilities, is being increased from €7.70 to €9 a week from the beginning of January 2015. While this is only a small change, it is significant because the payment has not changed since 1996. This payment recognises that people living alone have additional expenditure. It costs as much to heat a room for one as it does for two. This is acknowledged through this increase. We need to monitor the effect of this payment. People living alone face additional expenditure and a higher cost of living. This extra payment acknowledges this for the first time since 1996.

We have also been in a position to partially restore the Christmas bonus this year. A bonus of 25% was paid last week to all long-term welfare recipients, including pensioners, lone parents, jobseekers, carers and people with disabilities. Both of these measures are being provided for by way of regulations which have been made by the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection. While these increases are modest in regard to those provided for in the recent past, they are also prudent. We will not return to the recklessness of the past. Instead we are using the economic dividend from the recovery to invest in sustainable growth in families and communities and in vital public services. All Members will acknowledge that the Christmas bonus will go back into the economy and help sustain it. The moneys paid out this week will be spent over Christmas and is, therefore, an important boost to the economy.

I am delighted to say that budget 2012 provided for a phased reduction between 2012 and 2016 in the weekly amount of earnings that can be disregarded for the purposes of the one-parent family payment scheme, with the disregard due to fall from €90 to €75 next year and to €60 in 2016. I am pleased that it has been possible to provide for the retention of the weekly earnings disregard for recipients of one-parent family payment at its present level of €90 a week. This measure will benefit some 28,000 working recipients of one-parent family payments during 2015, at a cost of €8 million. In addition, the back to work family dividend will be a significant financial assistance to lone parents looking to return to work.

Given the scale of the economic downturn and the unparalleled levels of unemployment, supporting the protection and creation of jobs has been a major priority for the Government. A key element of this is supporting people to move from welfare into employment. One of my main priorities as Minister of State with responsibility for activation measures is to continue with the transformation of the Department of Social Protection from being a passive benefits provider to one that is actively engaged in assisting jobseekers to return to work, including engagement with employers to them and employees get what they need. The number of people at work has increased by 84,000 since 2012.

We talk about reform and change. The reform that has taken place in our employment offices is only paying a return now. Our new Intreo centres, which have been developed by our public and civil servants have changed how these offices interact. They offer a service now. The first step taken into an Intreo centre is a first step back towards employment. I pay tribute to the public and civil servants who have retrained, changed and are working actively to help jobseekers to return to employment. They are also working with employers to match them with the talents of jobseekers. The Government's primary strategy to reduce long-term unemployment has been, through policies, to create the environment for a strong economic recovery. Economic growth will underpin jobs growth and this strategy is working.

This Bill also enables the Minister for Finance to drawn down moneys from the Central Fund to discharge liabilities which may accrue to the State in the event of the wind up of a defined benefit pension scheme in particular circumstances. These circumstances arise where: both the employer and the scheme are insolvent, which is often referred to as a double insolvency; the date of the wind up of the scheme was on or after 25 January 2007 and before 25 December 2013; and the resources in the scheme are not sufficient to fund a minimum level of benefits.

The issue of a potential liability on the State arises following two rulings of the European Court of Justice. The first ruling, which was delivered on 25 January 2007, relates to a UK case - Carol Marilyn Robins and Others v. the UK Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. The second ruling, which was delivered on 25 April 2013, relates to an Irish case - Hogan and others v. the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Ireland and the Attorney General.

The measure being provided for in the Bill will allow for payment from the Central Fund to be made by the Minister for Finance in circumstances where the State may need to address liabilities that could arise between the date of the Robins judgment which was delivered on 25 January 2007 and the date of enactment of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Act 2013, namely, 25 December 2013.

As I know Senators will be aware, Government approval has been given for a mediator set of recommendations to settle the long-running Waterford Crystal pensions case. Under this settlement, the former workers of Waterford Crystal will receive significant pensions and a tax free lump sum by way of compensation for the delay and stress involved in bringing Irish and European court cases to resolve the matter. In addition to the measures contained in the Bill, a number of administrative measures are being put in place and will be finalised early in the new year, with a view to having lump sums paid as early as possible in 2015 and pension payments starting by the middle of the year. The settlement will include all 1,774 deferred members of the Waterford Crystal staff and factory pension schemes and encompass the families of some members who have, unfortunately, died since the company went into receivership. These arrangements are subject to the workers balloting on and accepting the proposals. I hope the measures will bring security and peace of mind for pensioners in the certain knowledge that their pension entitlements are now secure.

I will now address the specific measures contained in the Bill. Section 1 provides for the definition of common terms which are used for the purposes of the Bill. The "Principal Act" means the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 and the "Act of 2012" means the Social Welfare Act 2012.

Section 2 provides for a €5 increase in the monthly rate of child benefit, bringing the current rate up from €130 to €135 with effect from 1 January 2015. The section also provides that in the case of twins, the monthly rate of child benefit will increase from €195 to €202.50 per child, while in the case of multiple births of three or more children, the monthly rate of child benefit will increase from €260 to €270 per child, with effect from 1 January 2015.

Section 3 provides for the retention of the weekly earnings disregard for recipients of one parent family payment at its current level of €90.

Section 4 provides for the drawdown of moneys from the Central Fund by the Minister for Finance for making payments to approved persons to discharge the liabilities of an eligible pension scheme. An eligible pension scheme is one where the scheme was wound up between 25 January 2007 and 25 December 2013; the employer is insolvent; and the resources of the scheme are insufficient to discharge certain defined liabilities.

Section 5 provides for the Short Title and construction of the Bill and collective citations.

Despite the need to stabilise the public finances in recent years, the social welfare system continues to have a key role to play in society. We have made substantial progress in repairing the enormous damage done to the economy. We must now ensure we provide assistance for people who have become unemployed through no fault of their own. This is the first budget to put money back into people's pockets. I recognise nevertheless that many difficulties remain. I commend the Bill to the House.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Kevin Humphreys.

The Fianna Fáil Party supports the Bill which provides for a 50% correction in the €10 cut in child benefit introduced in 2012. We also support the legislative provisions which finally settle the long-running Waterford Crystal pensions dispute. I regret, however, that the Bill does not disguise the fact that the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection has serious questions to answer about the manner in which cuts have been implemented. The budget 2015 announcements restore only a small fraction of the reductions introduced since 2012.

On 12 October 2012 the Minister stated, "We are committed to maintaining the basic, core social welfare rates." Notwithstanding her promise, she subsequently cut child benefit, reduced the period of entitlement to jobseeker's benefit from nine months to six, dramatically cut jobseeker's allowance for everyone under 25 years to €100 per week, impoverished pensioners by filleting the household benefits package and abolishing the telephone allowance, cut the back to school allowance for clothing and footwear and reduced the respite care grant for carers by 25%. This is not a legacy of which the Tánaiste can be proud. I say this with regret, rather than as outright criticism.

According to Social Justice Ireland, 16% of adults living in poverty are employed. These are the working poor and I suggest a significant number of them took part in yesterday's demonstration, not necessarily to protest about Irish Water but to oppose the Government's austerity programme to which they have been subjected in recent years. It is rather interesting that the Tánaiste's decision to abolish the weekly €100 PRSI allowance has resulted in an anomaly, whereby lower paid workers will take home less pay when they earn more.

The Minister of State will be aware that Ireland is obliged under European law to pay child benefit to the children of non-Irish nationals living here. While this is a reciprocal obligation across all European Union member states, Irish rates of child benefit are high in comparison with those in other countries. The welcome increase of €5 per month will increase Ireland's standing in the relevant international index. I ask a question about the financial impact of this obligation on the Department. I understand that, as of 8 December last, the obligation applies to 4,793 customers and 7,668 children and that the amount paid out from 1 January to 30 November 2013 was €10,856,950. This is a significant amount of money, as the Minister of State will no doubt agree. I have no difficulty with the principle of paying child benefit to children of non-Irish nationals in this country. Irish citizens resident in other EU countries benefit from the same provision, although not to the same degree. Are moves under way in the European Union to change the position in this regard?

Sentiment is shifting on the package of social welfare benefits being paid to transient populations across EU member states. As the Minister of State will be aware, I raised on the Adjournment the recent Dano case in Germany, which provides further evidence that change is taking place. Change is not always in the best interests of the vulnerable and less well off and I do not advocate changes that will affect the vulnerable. Nevertheless, the current position raises questions. It is fine that non-Irish nationals resident here whose children are living in their home country receive child benefit. The disparity between the rate of child benefit paid in this country and the rates paid in the countries from which non-national recipients come is significant. The Irish child benefit rate is almost as high as the weekly wage in some of the countries in question. I raise this issue because money is still tight in the Department and the Minister is clearly considering a range of options to save money. Is the Government changing its position on this issue? I suggest sentiment is changing on the issue, although this may simply reflect the language used by the United Kingdom Independence Party, UKIP, as we receive most of our news from the United Kingdom, rather than Germany, France and so forth. I am curious about this matter.

I commend the Department on continuing to focus on minimising social welfare fraud and abuse. Work in this area generated control savings of €632 million in 2013. During the lifetime of the previous initiative which started in 2011 and concluded in 2013, more than €1.9 billion was achieved in control savings, a considerable sum in the context of an overall budget of almost €20.5 billion.

The figure for the Department is almost €2 billion. I understand from listening to the Minister recently that one of the reasons there has been a slight loosening of the purse-strings in some other Departments is because of the savings in the Department of Social Protection budget as a result of increased employment as well as other fraud control measures. It is within that overall package that I raise the issue in the context of this legislation. I realise it does not impact directly on the Bill but it is akin to it and perhaps the Minister of State has some views on the matter. I appreciate that I am throwing the Minister of State a curveball today but he may have some views. Perhaps he will agree that the topic is at least worth reassessing and considering.

Perhaps the Minister of State will also provide the House with an overview of the European perspective on the issue of the totality of social welfare benefits. The Minister of State knows better than me that the social protection budget is one of the highest in the entirety of Government expenditure which, I gather, is of the order of €55 billion this year. Therefore, a budget of €20 billion from that total is considerable. That is why I am making the point. I am mindful that the Department is constantly looking at ways to minimise loss or waste. I ought to choose my words carefully. I am not suggesting that the payment of child benefit to people living in other EU countries is a waste but I am simply asking whether in the current economic climate it is worthy of reassessment and whether this view is growing within the European Union.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Humphreys, to the House. Before discussing the positive measures in the proposed legislation, I imagine the Minister of State, along with all of us, welcomes the news of the discussions involving the former staff members of Waterford Crystal which have been successfully concluded. Amendments to relevant legislation were passed as part of discussion on the matter in the Lower House. There is no need for me to go over that issue again, save to say that it is to be welcomed.

It is a welcome change to be discussing a social welfare Bill that is increasing the level of supports the State provides to people. The people have stood with us, sometimes with gritted teeth, during all the harsh but necessary measures that the Government has had to introduce during the past four years. At every turn the Opposition has behaved as if no cuts in any services were warranted and every taxation measure was an outrage. It is easy to be in opposition in such circumstances. I did not envy the Minister or her Cabinet colleagues the job of making the books balance especially when we were locked out of the international financial markets. I commend the Minister on staying the course and helping to turn our country's finances around. I have no doubt that the actions of the Minister and her colleagues as well as the wider Fine Gael and Labour Party membership will be seen in future as having saved our country from utter chaos. I do not say as much lightly.

Our economic recovery is gathering pace. Our unemployment rate which is currently at 10.7% is below the European average and falling. The Exchequer returns are impressive. Our growth rate is the highest in Europe. Given that the State was three months from running out of cash when this Government came to power that is a remarkable achievement. However, it is important to note that many people have not yet experienced these benefits. To that end the major provisions of this year's social welfare Bill are welcome. We are starting to give back to people what was taken from them by the financial mismanagement of the previous Administration. Allowing families to retain the full qualified child increase of €29.80 per week per child for 12 months after a return to work and to retain 50% of the payment in the second year is a positive development.

I commend the Minister on committing an additional €2 million to the school meals scheme. A presentation by the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice of examples of social welfare-dependent households and their food spend suggests that a one-parent family with children aged ten and 15 years would spend an average of €123.24 on food or 38.1% of the income. In the circumstances such an increase in the school meals system is welcome and should help levels of food poverty.

The reduction in the children's allowance payment in previous years was a tough call and I am pleased that the Minister has partially reversed that decision in this year's budget as well as making a commitment to restore it if the public finances allow. This year's increase of €5 per child will affect almost 613,000 families throughout the country. Additionally, the increase to €9 per week in the living alone allowance is a positive step and will assist in a small way those experiencing isolation. Given the part of the country where I am from I urge the Minister of keep this under review. Much of our recovery is bypassing rural Ireland. The partial restoration of the Christmas social welfare bonus with a commitment to further increases over time is also a welcome development not only for those in receipt of it but also, as the Minister of State said, for the economy. This is because the extra payment will be spent in local shops and supermarkets throughout the country. Much of the recovery to date is macro rather than micro and we need to bring everyone along the way to recovery rather than leaving anyone behind, as happened during the so-called Celtic tiger. This part of our recovery should be about rebuilding a society rather than simply rebuilding an economy. This budget is the start of that process and I know the Minister shares my view in this regard.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I offer my best wishes to the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach with their important work in the North. The Minister of State outlined in his speech several positive changes that have come about since the Minister has taken charge of the Department of Social Protection to help families, get people back to work as well as welfare increases, especially the supports for employment and activation. I acknowledge these significant measures. They are the result not of piecemeal changes but because of a fundamental reform vision that is at work.

I welcome the modest raise - the Minister of State used the same term - in child benefit and the projected plan to raise this further in 2016. This is a recognition of the rise in cost of living and the cost of raising children in Ireland. While the increases are welcome I know the Minister of State will be aware, as will the Tánaiste, that it does not begin to meet the costs associated with raising a child, especially in light of the remarkably high child care costs in Ireland, which average at approximately €800 to €1,000 per month. This is a modest increase brought about in the context of no other significant measures, for example, tax relief in child care or investment in early years education and care. It is important to see the increase in the context of the lack of investment and other aspects of ensuring that all children receive the best possible start. Other Senators have mentioned that the measure should be set in the context of cuts to this payment during the past five years. The cuts since 2009 amount to €400 million. Given inflation, increased property taxes and eventual water charges the measure outlined by the Bill, worth approximately €70 million, could have been more generous. Indeed other child investment measures could have been adopted.

Having said that, the universal child benefit payment is the only payment that recognises the cost and value of care of our children in our society. It is incremental but it is only incremental by beginning to balance the gender income gap that widened during the austerity years. I imagine the Minister of State is familiar with the ESRI report which highlighted that women in couples experience a loss of approximately 14% in income levels as against 9% for men in couples. The cut in child benefit, which is usually received by the mother, was recognised as a key driver of this difference combined with the cuts in public services. The income disadvantage follows women through their work life and into their pension years and the gender income gap remains between men and women in pension age. It is concerning that many older women in Ireland are living in poverty. For this reason I am disappointed that there has been no progress in regard to the homemaker's scheme in the budget since the changes to the number of contributions needed to receive a full pension rose from 260 to 520 in 2012. This policy has disproportionately affected women. For historical and current reasons, women continue to have fewer contributions than men.

When the changes were made, there were promises that this policy would be balanced by changes to the homemaker's scheme, but they have not been implemented. I refer to the homemaker's disregard and the homemaker's credit advocated by the National Women's Council of Ireland. The council makes a strong recommendation for the introduction of a homemaker's credit and states the scheme for the homemaker's disregard should apply from 1974, rather than 1994, as it stands. This would be of benefit to many women now reaching pension age. I support these recommendations and it is important that we address these issues now to ensure inequality is not embedded in the pensions system. Perhaps it is more accurate to say inequality is embedded in the pensions system and must be rooted out.

These issues emphasise the importance of gender-proofing and inequality-proofing public policy. It is very positive that the Tánaiste is engaged in a social impact assessment of policies, as many civil society groups recognise and acknowledge. We need to encourage this approach across other Departments and I do not doubt that the Tánaiste says this at the Cabinet table. We must ensure stronger gender-proofing and inequality-proofing measures in the budget process, but the partial roll-back on child benefit reductions does not make up for the lack of affordable and accessible child care services. As the Minister of State knows well, the cost of child care is one of the most prohibitive barriers when it comes to the participation of women in employment, which is the most effective path out of poverty. Talk of early years education and care should relate not only to jobs but also to quality of care. We must speak about the importance of providing all children with the right of equal access to educational opportunities.

Early years education is expensive, although providers try to keep costs as low as possible, especially in the non-profit sector, and, because of this, many children are denied access to such education. This causes disadvantage and can affect children up to secondary level. Many parents feel compelled to enrol children in schools earlier than necessary for financial reasons - an additional year in early years education costs approximately €12,000. The current system is not in the best interests of children and as it does not promote equality, it must be addressed.

Child poverty is a major issue in Ireland and particularly affects children in one parent families who suffered owing to austerity budgets. I am happy that cuts to the lone parent income disregard which were to take effect in January 2015 and 2016 have been frozen, as this is a significant achievement. I compliment the Tánaiste and her Department on this decision and hope the unfair cuts that affect 28,000 of the poorest households and children will be reversed fully.

The back-to-work family dividend expected in another social welfare Bill will be welcomed because these are not piecemeal changes but part of a wider vision. We must examine the situation of families when the benefit period expires, as many women availing of the scheme may still be on very low incomes after the first one and a half years in employment. I draw on the work of the National Women's Council of Ireland in calling for an extension of the qualified child payment which is paid to families in receipt of certain social welfare benefits, low income families that receive family income supplement. This could provide the support and incentive that families need to remain in employment.

I would like to see the habitual residency condition removed from child benefit, as advocated by FLAC and others, because child benefit should be a universal payment to all children living in Ireland. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which was ratified by Ireland provides that state parties must respect and ensure the rights of children, including the right to benefit from social security without discrimination. I strongly believe children living in Ireland should not be treated differently because of their parents' status or lack thereof.

I thank the Minister of State for taking this debate in the absence of the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, who is in Belfast to engage in very important talks in which I wish her well.

For the first time since I was elected to Seanad Éireann I see a social welfare Bill that gives something back to people, rather than merely adjusting qualifying criteria. This is a welcome development and an indication that Ireland's economic and social recovery is showing positive signs. It also shows that the Department's drive and policies to get people back to work are having positive effects. The Department is investing over €1 billion a year in employment supports and this must be welcomed, as the more people we get back into permanent, sustainable employment the better it will be for the economy. The knock-on effect is that fewer people will need social welfare payments.

Budget 2015 has a number of positive social welfare elements, some of which will be introduced through new legislation and some through amendments to existing legislation. I very much welcome the increase in child benefit; it is a modest increase, but if it had been a cut of €5, it would have been portrayed as a huge amount. Any increase is welcome. The Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, committed in the Seanad to not cutting child benefit any further until safe and affordable child care provisions were in place. In fairness to her, she has honoured this commitment and gone further by increasing child benefit.

It concerns me that there has been a very poor uptake of the after-school child care programme. In the budget for 2014 the Tánaiste allocated €14 million to provide 6,000 after-school child care programme places. Will the Minister of State update us on how this programme is proceeding? It is hard to believe the uptake has been poor when parents are crying out for after-school child care services.

I have a proposal for the Minister of State and hope he will pass it on to the Tánaiste in order that she can put it to the Cabinet. This morning on the Order of Business my colleague, Senator Jillian van Turnhout, raised the issue of Childline and said its night service was to cease owing to a lack of funding. I ask the Minister of State to ask the Tánaiste to use the money not spent on the 6,000 after-school child care places on a once-off payment to ensure Childline's night service continues. What better way to spend this money than on a service for children? Please discuss this proposal with the Tánaiste and, if she agrees, she might take it to the Cabinet for approval.

I particularly welcome the amendment relating to the one parent family payment and the halting of the proposed reduction in the disregard of income. I know of many parents who are on their own, working part time to facilitate school hours and have a mortgage to provide accommodation for their families. They are balancing mortgage repayments based on the one parent family payment, income from employment and family income supplement. They work hard to earn an income and provide a stable home for their children. The halting of the reduction is a positive move and I am glad that the Government finances made it possible. I am also glad that there has been a commitment to stop a further planned reduction next year.

It is great to see the restoration of 25% of the Christmas bonus, as it gives a little back to those dependent on social welfare payments. Many used to look forward to the Christmas bonus to buy a little extra at Christmas time.

There has been an increase in the living alone allowance for the first time since 1996. This is the first increase in 19 years, despite the fact that many of those years were good ones, with plenty of money in the country. I am delighted that the Government has seen fit to increase the allowance because those living alone have the same expenses as anyone else - they must heat their house and pay bills as one would if one shared a house with two or three others. The increase is small, but it is a move in the right direction.

In conjunction with labour activation measures, the retention of the qualified child payment, the back-to-work dividend, is a very positive move. It is beneficial to parents who felt they would be only marginally better off in going back to work. I am delighted that the Tánaiste has confirmed to me that this will not be taken into account when assessing eligibility for family income supplement. The back-to-work dividend will apply at rates of 100% for the first year and 50% for the second year. A person should never be better off unemployed than in employment.

This will be a great help to families and in assisting people to get back to work. I was concerned when the Minister of State said legislation would not be introduced until April to give effect to this provision, but he counteracted this by saying the legislation would be backdated to 1 January 2015. I hope we will have the legislation enacted as quickly as possible in the new year.

I know that labour activation measures are the responsibility of the Minister of State who has clearly outlined in detail all of the schemes available to help to get people back to work or education. Since his appointment, he has hit the ground running, visiting numerous counties, meeting staff in different offices with responsibility for labour activation schemes such as Intreo offices, local employment service offices, the Employ Ability centres, the partnerships and Tús. I know that he is taking a hands-on approach because I accompanied him on some of his visits and know exactly how he is working and what he is doing.

There are many incentives available to help people to get back to work, but I would like to highlight a service that is under the radar. Many are not aware of the support provided by the nationwide EmployAbility Service. Just because a person has a disability or an illness does not mean that he or she cannot work. It is important that people realise this. The nationwide Employ Ability service provides an employment support service for people with a health condition, an injury, an illness or a disability, as well as a recruitment advice service for the business community. The local Employ Ability service will provide an employer with employment assistance and access to a pool of potential employees with varying levels of skills, abilities and training; will provide ongoing support for both employer and employee throughout the period of employment; will provide a professional job matching service to help to ensure successful recruitment; and will provide advice and information on additional employment supports. Many people are not aware of this service which is one that goes under the radar. It is important to highlight it in order that people with a disability know that they can work and have a life.

Senator Paschal Mooney has raised the issue of child benefit being paid to parents whose children do not live in Ireland. I have raised this issue with the Minister several times. I have also raised it at the Joint Committee on Education and Social Protection. I cannot understand why the child benefit payment made to parents whose children live abroad cannot be made at the benefit rate applicable in the country in which the children reside. If a parent works in Ireland and he or she sends the money to his or her country of origin, surely the payment should be made at the rate that applies where the family lives, not the rate in Ireland.

I am constantly raising the issue of a homemaker's credit, as Senator Katherine Zappone has just done. I am speaking for people who were affected by the marriage bar and had to resign their jobs. The homemaker's credit scheme was introduced in 1994 for women who stayed at home. What is the difference between women who were homemakers before 1994 and those who took on this role after that year? Now that we have a little funding, these women, some of whom were forced to give up work to look after children and raise a family, are no different from those who are doing this today and in receipt of the homemaker's credit. I ask the Minister of State to took at this issue again, as most of the women in question are coming up to pension age and will only be eligible for a reduced pension.

The Acting Chairman is indicating that I should finish.

I have given the Senator a good deal of leeway.

The Minister of State is most welcome. It was good to hear the good news that the Government had to give, particularly on the unemployment figures. The rate of unemployment has come down from 15.1% in early 2012 to 10.7%, which is particularly good when compared to the recent unemployment figure in Spain of 24.4%.

Senator Paschal Mooney raised the issue of the rate of child benefit that should be applied to families whose children do not live here. It has been very well worded. The Minister of State said: "Child benefit helps to prevent poverty, along with other child income supports paid to welfare recipients and low paid working families." I do not agree with the decision reached by the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection in ruling out a means test for child benefit, even though this has been called for in several reports. It is a waste of money to give the benefit to high earners and the Minister of State is right to refer to low paid working families. It is a clear example of something that would not happen in the private sector when something could be done about an issue. Last year it was reported that Ireland had eight billionaires and 20,000 millionaires. I am not sure how true these figures are, but only three families handed back their children's allowance payments. According to a report in the Sunday Independent, "If a parent does not wish to claim their child benefit payment, they can notify the Department of Social Protection in writing to that effect and their claim will be stopped in accordance with their wishes". That seems to be a very old-fashioned system which obviously is not working. Will the Minister create a website to enable people to give back their payments more easily? Surely in the era of computerisation and PPS numbers, this could be done easily. Such a system could save the State money if the Government was not willing to means test the payment. Will the Minister of State comment on this idea, as it would be a very sensible move?

I recognise that the Government has reduced child benefit rates for successive children, but I wonder if the number of children in a family for whom child benefit is received should be capped? In Switzerland the payment of child benefit depends on the region in which one lives, but it is usually around €150 per child per month. However, in most regions the payment of child benefit is stopped after the second child. I understand there is a similar system in place in the United States. I know that this will not sound popular in a country that traditionally has had large families. We have 16 grandchildren, but I do not think my wife and I have more than five children. I understand that with the increase in child benefit under the Bill, a person with eight children will now receive €1,080 per month as opposed to the previous payment of €1,040. In Switzerland a parent with eight children would still receive a total of €300. I feel guilty in saying this, but I wonder if the payment should be capped and only made in respect of a certain number of children? I do not know and I am sure this would not have been acceptable in the past.

I also wonder if the total amount paid to a single parent household should be capped to ensure those who rely on welfare payments do not earn more than the average working family. That is something the Government in the United Kingdom has considered. Does the Minister of State agree with this sentiment or does the Government believe there should be no cap?

I know that the Bill introduces the back-to-work family dividend to provide an additional incentive for families to move from welfare to work. That is a very worthy initiative which will mean that persons will be able to retain some of their child benefit payment in order to make it more attractive for them to take a job. The new support will also be available to single parents and many unemployed parents who were previously self-employed or working in the construction sector. That is also a very good initiative.

I take the opportunity to ask the Minister of State about the incentives to encourage people to start their own business. This has a very big part to play in getting people off social welfare payments. The short-term enterprise allowance and the back-to-work enterprise allowance give support to unemployed persons who want to start their own business. Will the Minister of State outline how many have availed of this and similar schemes? Also, will he state the number of new businesses that have been set up and how many have lasted for more than one year? It would be interesting to get feedback on these novel ideas.

One of the massive barriers in getting back to work, particularly for women, is the cost of child care, which is among the highest in Europe. We have heard this issue referred to so often. I suggest the benefit be linked with subsidising the cost of child care instead of being a cash payment. There are other examples which are worth noting. In Denmark families pay up to 25% of the cost of day care services, with those on low incomes or single parents paying nothing or up to 25% of the cost. There are also discounts for siblings and the government makes up the difference.

I think that at the very least, we could consider a tax credit for child care. This would encourage people, particularly women, back to work, may even get highly experienced older women back into work as childminders and could have the effect of reducing the amount of people on the dole.

Would the Minister consider the example of the UK where parents can claim up to £100 per week to cover child care? I think the fees are very good points to start from as I believe the cost of child care is forcing many parents to stay at home. Why would one work if one had to pay for travel, child care, etc., when one could earn a similar amount and stay at home with one's child? The latter is a much more rational choice and by subsidising child care, we would make a job a much more attractive proposition.

I also welcome the additional money allocated to JobPath which the Minister of State mentioned. This programme is targeted towards the long-term unemployed, that is, people who have been out of work for over 12 months. Could we also look at people who have been unemployed for over ten years? Do we have figures on them? This is a group to which the Government needs to give targeted assistance. It is also worth noting that the UK has introduced a scheme specifically for people who have been out of work for over two years. It is called the Help to Work scheme. The rules in the UK state that jobseekers who have been out of work for over two years will only receive their benefits if they either show up at a job centre every day or commit to six months of voluntary work. It means that jobseekers who lack experience or skills will be expected to take part in community projects such as tending parks or face losing their handouts under the new Help to Work scheme. Those who fail to comply with the rules, which also offer signing up to a training scheme as a third option, will have their jobseeker's allowance docked for four weeks for a first offence and 13 weeks for the second. The idea behind unpaid community work is that it will help the long-term unemployed to learn the discipline of observing office hours and becoming part of a team. While these measures seem harsh, the UK government says that the rules are needed to help the long-term unemployed. I think the lesson from this example is that we should treat those long-term unemployed very differently from those who are out of work for several years and that perhaps more incentives are needed for the latter group of people. In particular, the Government should probably identify those people who are out of work for more ten years as they need more specific assistance to get them off social welfare and back into the workplace. I have been involved for a little while with the Springboard scheme. This scheme takes graduates with a high level of skills which are not being used at the moment and helps them to acquire different skills. I think a similar kind of thinking could take place in this case. I welcome the Minister and I welcome the Bill as, in general, it is going in the right direction. Let us make sure we keep our eye on it and enthuse those decision makers to make sure that this continues.

The Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Bill 2014 gives legislative effect to one of the social protection measures announced in the Budget Statement of 14 October 2014 which are due to take effect from 1 January 2015, for example, the increase in the monthly rate of child benefit. This Bill also provides for the retention of the weekly earnings disregard for recipients of one parent family payment at its current level of €90 and the draw down of moneys from the Central Fund by the Minister for Finance for making payments to approved persons in order to discharge the liabilities of an eligible pension scheme. Section 1 provides for the definition of common terms that are used for the purposes of the Bill. The term "Principal Act" means the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 and the term "Act of 2012" means the Social Welfare Act 2012.

As the Minister of State said in his statement, section 2 provides for a €5 increase in the monthly rate of child benefit bringing the current rate from €130 to €135 with effect from 1 January 2015. This section also provides that in the case of twins, the monthly rate of child benefit will increase from €195 per child to €202.50 per child, while in the case of multiple births of three or more children, the monthly rate of child benefit will increase from €260 per child to €270 per child with effect from 1 January 2015. I am not too sure how often that will happen but it is nice to provide for it.

Section 4 enables the Minister for Finance to draw down moneys from the Central Fund to discharge liabilities which may accrue to the State in the event of the wind up of a defined benefit pension scheme in particular circumstances. These circumstances arise where both the employer and the scheme are insolvent, which is often referred to as a double insolvency; the date of the wind up of the scheme was on or after 25 January 2007, which is the date on which a ruling was given by the European Court of Justice in the UK case of Carol Marilyn Robins and Others v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, and before 25 December 2013, which is the date on which the changes provided for in the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Act 2013 were enacted; and the resources in the scheme are not sufficient to fund a minimum level of benefits. Section 5 provides for the short title and construction of the Bill and for collective citations.

The increase in the monthly rate of child benefit, which has already been referred to by the Minister of State and previous colleagues and which is provided for in section 2 of the Bill, will cost €72 million in 2015. The retention of the weekly earnings disregard applying to recipients of one parent family payment, as provided for in section 3 of the Bill, will cost €8 million in 2015.

Budget 2015 provided for a number of social protection measures, some of which relate to statutory schemes and which need to be implemented by way of legislative amendment, while other measures relate to non-statutory schemes and do not require any legislative change. Of the various social protection measures announced in budget 2015, four of these measures relate to statutory social welfare payments and will need to be implemented by way of legislative amendment. Two of these measures - the increase in the living alone allowance which is effective from the beginning of January 2015 and the payment of a Christmas bonus, which has already been referred to by the Minister of State and other colleagues - must be addressed. Two of these measures can be legislated for by way of regulation and the necessary Regulations have been made by the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection. The other two legislative measures require amendments to the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005.

In addition to the increase in the monthly rate of child benefit being provided for in this 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, which is most welcome. I understand that the necessary administrative and technical details of this dividend are currently being developed but will not be finalised in time for inclusion in this Bill. The required legislative amendments for this dividend will be provided for in a further social welfare Bill to be introduced early in 2015 with a view to its enactment by the end of March 2015. While the dividend will come into operation in early April 2015, it is worth noting that payment of the dividend will be back-dated to the beginning of January in the case of families taking up employment after that date. The other social protection measures which were announced in budget 2015 relate to non-statutory schemes and do not require any legislative amendments.

I will conclude with the question of social welfare tourism. How extensive is it? Have we curtailed what was at one stage a significant issue for us? Have we eliminated it? Are there any savings we have made? Does it still happen? Coming from a Border county, I would ask myself whether there was anybody coming to the South via Belfast.

I am not saying they are not entitled to claim, but when people can leave it for a month or two, I am not sure they need it. The same goes for those who fly in from far-off places to claim it.

I welcome the Bill and wish the Minister of State every success.

As always, the Minister of State is very welcome.

I welcome the Bill, in particular the increase in child benefit, the introduction of the back-to-work family dividend, the increase in the living alone allowance and the Christmas bonus and, in particular, the retention of the earnings disregard for one parent families and the doubling of JobsPlus payments.

I add to the appeal of Senator Marie Moloney that, if there are savings in the case of after-school clubs, perhaps Childline, as the service for children that provides support for them, might benefit. The difficulty is that there are no Government standards for after-school clubs or how the funding is to be paid. There is a lack of consistency and quality around the country because the Government is not stating what regulations it wants to see applied to after-school clubs. These clubs are very important and we should have them in place, but the Government has to give a direction, or else we will have to wait several years, as happened in the child care system - for a crisis to happen and then do something about it.

I very much welcome that clarity has been provided in the case of Waterford Crystal. I cannot imagine what it must have been like for individual workers. It is great to be part of something so positive and the timing is very important.

The difficulty for me is that when we were making cuts, some of which I supported with a heavy heart, as I do not like to make any cut, we were given a narrative about the importance of services. We were quoted the first report of the advisory group on tax and social welfare on child and family income support which stated: "The Group recognises that child income support payments cannot be viewed in isolation from other State supports for children such as education, health services and childcare". We were encouraged not to always look at CAF transfers but instead to invest in services because that was where we would achieve the quality outcome. For example, the OECD's 2014 report shows that Ireland is now the most expensive country in the OECD and one of the two most expensive countries in the world for child care, yet we have the lowest rates of investment in Europe in child care services. The report states a family with two children spend 40% of their average wage on child care costs, whereas the average in the OECD is 12%. No wonder we are high in the ranking.

A number of Senators, including Senator Paschal Mooney, raised the issue of child care payments if people moved to another country. The difficulty is that in other countries the benefits are availed of through services. Whether it is through health, education or child care services, the investments are made in order that citizens can get the benefit. I certainly concur with Senator Katherine Zappone on the habitual residence condition. For me, every child in the country is, first and foremost, a child and the idea that we put an artificial bar in place and say we have this habitual residence condition is unacceptable and needs to be addressed. In the recent UNICEF report Ireland was in the bottom five of 41 developed countries with respect to the impact of the economic crisis on child well-being. While we can welcome the increase, we have evidence that children in Ireland fared worse than those in other OECD countries. The vast majority of OECD developed countries were impacted on by the global financial crisis but many of them managed to actually decrease their rate of child poverty in their responses to the crisis, whereas we managed to increase it. In fact, I agree with the UNICEF Ireland director, Mr. Peter Power, who said:

Countries should place the well-being of children at the top of their priorities during economic recessions. Not only is this a moral obligation, but it is in the long term self-interest of societies. Children living in poverty are more likely to become impoverished adults and have poor children, creating and sustaining intergenerational cycles of poverty.

The report found that the rate of child poverty had risen by over 10% between 2008 and 2012. While that does not cover the period of the Government, we know that there were further cuts made during its time in office; therefore, we can speculate that the position has not improved. This is very grave and we should be taking note of it.

We need to look at how we invest. When I heard about the €5 increase in child benefit, a part of me was happy and I accept that it will make a difference for some families, especially those on low incomes. However, is it where we want to get to? That is my difficulty. During the crisis we were lectured in the House about the importance of investing in services, particularly child care services. The Tánaiste told us that we needed safe, affordable and accessible child care services in place, similar to those found in Scandinavian countries. The Minister of State can see I am not happy about this. While we had previously heard that the issue of a second preschool year would be looked at in 2016, in response to a recent parliamentary question, the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy James Reilly, told us it would be introduced in 2020 at the earliest. Everybody is in agreement on its importance, particularly for special needs children, for whom I have made an appeal in the Seanad. As we know about the importance of a second preschool year, why are we not looking to make this investment?

The Department of Social Protection has signed up to the whole-of-government policy, Better Outcomes, Brighter Futures, a policy for children and young people from birth to 24 years. Its second key goal is achieving their full potential in learning and development, yet it has not been demonstrated to me that we are going to do what we said during the crisis when we took the tough decisions. As I said, I supported the Minister in making those decisions, but I was lectured that it was all about services. However, I do not see the money going into the provision of services and we are still cutting our investment in them.

It is not very often that I support a Social Welfare Bill, as we certainly were not given that opportunity in the past few years. However, I am supporting the Bill, not because I think it is fantastic or that the Government has done anything of significance for those on social welfare payments, but because it does provide for some increases for people whom we obviously need to support.

Before I go into the specifics of the Bill, we need to have a bigger and wider debate about poverty and inequality and their relationship not only with the social welfare system but also low pay. Many people in work cannot, for example, have a good quality of life and cannot afford to pay basic bills. The concept of a living or a social wage is gaining traction in Europe. The Government has a commission on low pay which is going to report back on the issue, while I have taken on the responsibility for the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation of developing an all-party report on the concept of a social wage and low pay and its relationship with public services. That is the other element in that many people are living in poverty because they do not have access to a home, housing, health care or education services in the manner they would want to have or should have and all of these issues are interrelated. We need to fundamentally reform the social welfare system. Obviously, finding a job is the best way to lift a person out of poverty, or at least it is one of the mechanisms for doing so. It is welcome that more people are in work and that the unemployment figures have come down. However, in recent weeks the OECD's report showed that Ireland had the second highest number on low pay among OECD countries. It is an indictment of everyone in the political system that so many people in the State are on low pay and cannot afford to pay basic bills. This means that we have to transform the system and look at the relationship between social welfare, work, low pay and access to public services.

Obviously, I do not need to remind the Minister of State that what is contained in the Bill is very modest. It does not make up for many of the cuts imposed not only in the past few years by the Government but also by the previous Fianna Fáil-Green Party Government and even the Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Governments before it.

While the €5 increase in child benefit is welcome, it must be put in context. I will not rehash all of the pre-election promises made by Labour and Fine Gael as it would start a political row that I do not intend to have. However, I must point out that the Government has cut child benefit over the last number of years. While we are giving back €5 per child, it must be considered in the context of cuts which ranged from €10 to €47 per month per child. We must also look at the €100 cut to the annual back-to-school clothing and footwear allowance for poor families, the cut to maternity benefit of €32 per week and the cut in the lone parent income disregard from €146.30 to €90. As a consequence of the last cut, a lone working mother is down to €28 per week. During the intervening years, the cost of living has been rising, which has eroded the value of the total child benefit payment further. That is the context in which many struggling Irish families will assess the value of the measures contained in the Bill. They must be looked at in the context of all the other cuts that have been put in place. These are not just cuts in social welfare but pay cuts and cuts in public services, all of which impact on poverty and inequality.

I appreciate that the Government took over a dire economic situation where the country was bankrupt and on its knees. No one is underestimating the ability of the Government and the State to deal with the very real problems we had, but many, including me, would argue that there was a fairer way. What one would want coming out of a government cycle is fewer people in poverty and less inequality. Almost all of the reports we have seen, including the OECD reports and ESRI reports - with the exception of the last one, which gave some positive welcome to the budget in terms of its progressiveness, although that was countered by NERI and other groups - show that many people still live in poverty. There is still deep inequality and it will only be solved if we start to fundamentally change how we do things. That must happen through not being afraid to tax wealth - not being afraid to tax those who earn more and use the money and resources we have to ensure that those who are working have decent pay, that those who are not working have a decent standard of living, and, most importantly that we invest in public services. I say that as we are going into an election in respect of which we can already see auction politics, with tax cuts being promised everywhere. What about investment in public services and making sure we have enough teachers in schools and nurses and doctors in our hospitals to provide people with access to health care? Carers and those with disabilities should be provided with the resources they need. That is the type of debate I would like to see as we move into an election, not solely one on tax cuts, which is my fear.

I welcome the provisions on the ability of the State to compensate the former Waterford Crystal workers. I warmly welcome those, having done a great deal of work behind the scenes on the issue myself. I hosted a number of briefings in Leinster House which Government representatives attended. We worked constructively together and I commend the Minister for moving on an issue on which the previous Government did not move. While it was down to the workers who took the court case, it is a very good day for all of us when the deal which will hopefully be voted on by the workers has been provided for by the Government.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. He has hit the ground running and is doing a good job. I welcome the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Bill which is the first positive indication that the ship of state is being refloated and the country is being turned around. We saw an indication of that in the Finance Bill also, where from 1 January people will get some tax back and an increase in their take-home pay.

The improvements in the Bill are modest, but I welcome the fact that €72 million in additional funding is being made available for child benefit. While the increase is €5 per month, it is an indication that the Government takes the issue of child and family poverty seriously. I take on board many of the issues raised by Senators Zappone and van Turnhout on child poverty and the need for the Government to do more to address it. I support strongly a second pre-school year for kids, as there is a real opportunity there to lay a solid foundation and provide a good educational start. I encourage the Minister of State to fight hard to have resources made available to introduce a second pre-school year next year if at all possible. We would all be happy to come up with suggestions as to where funds could be found or savings made to facilitate that.

I welcome the reinstatement of 25% of the Christmas bonus. We would have liked to see a greater restoration but it is a good start. I have a query, however. A constituent approached me last Friday in Ballinasloe who asked why, notwithstanding the fact that he had been on disability allowance for about ten years, he had not qualified for the Christmas bonus. Did he give me incorrect information, or is there a particular issue? He assured me he has been in receipt of disability allowance for ten years but was not entitled to the bonus.

I support much of what Senator Feargal Quinn said on incentives and encouragement to return to work. The only way to address poverty is to facilitate everyone who wishes to work to find gainful employment. I welcome very much the significant level of job creation we have seen but would love us to be in a situation where as many citizens as possible could be offered meaningful and gainful employment. I wonder often why there are families where no one has worked for two or three generations and whose members never appear to be asked to participate in a community employment or FÁS scheme. How does that continue to be the case? There is an issue there that we need to address. I welcome very much the back to work family dividend, which is providing up to €1,550 per child in the first year of employment or self-employment. It is a real incentive. I am glad the self-employed are being considered in this regard. Many self-employed people lost their jobs through no fault of their own at the end of the boom and are beginning to pick themselves up and create employment, including, in some situations, employment for another person also.

This morning, I was at a very enjoyable function where Mr. Magnus McFarlane-Barrow was honoured. He is the founder of Mary's Meals, which provides a meal at school for approximately 1 million people in developing countries across the world. I welcome the increase in the school meals fund by €2 million in the budget. Unfortunately, many children in our own country come to school without having eaten a meal. In many cases, the only real food they get in the course of the day is what they get at school. There are issues there and in many cases it is not because there are inadequate resources going into the house but rather because of poor parenting. We need to look at that issue also and perhaps apply funding to addressing it.

The general thrust of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Bill is welcome. It is a good start and we all welcome the fact that things are improving within the country. We still have a long way to go and are still borrowing a great deal of money to meet our day-to-day commitments. I congratulate the Minister of State on his appointment and wish him well during the remainder of the term of office of the Government.

You have as long as you like, once it is good news.

I thank Senators for their contributions. I always find it a pleasure to come to the Seanad for the constructive debate undertaken here. I find it useful and informative.

Several people, including Senator Moloney, remarked on my comment that the increase in child benefit of €5 was modest and rightly so. If there had been a decrease it would have been a massive decrease. I recognise that putting €5 back into a mother's pocket or a family's pocket is modest. It is really an acknowledgement that things have started to turn. I, along with all members of the Government, would have preferred for it to be more. That is why we gave a clear indication that if the economic recovery continues as it has to date, there will be an additional €5 in next year's budget announcement. The idea is to put down a marker to people to show things are turning. We want to ensure what is best for the citizen. The word "citizen" is always important and it is not used often enough. The citizens of the country will start to see the benefit and not only in child support benefits.

Senator van Turnhout commented on services. The important thing is the provision of services. It is critical. Several Senators commented on the provision of a second year of preschool. That is important, especially in areas where there is deprivation. The benefits to young people, children and families are important.

I will try to address as many points as I can without keeping Senators in sleeping bags for the night. I will go as quickly as I can. Reference was made to transfer of benefits, in particular the children's allowance. There are international agreements. Senator Mooney was quite right to point out that Irish people also benefit from these transfers. The overall figure given was €11 million, but there are swings and roundabouts in this regard. What is happening in this area in a constructive manner? There is a reflective forum to discuss matters of concern to member states. The issue of the export of child benefits has been placed on the agenda for the forum to discuss in the near future. The matter is being examined. Deputy Mooney raised the matter previously when I was in the House. I hope the Senator will see that notice has been taken and that action and discussions have begun to take place.

Reference was made to poverty and inequality. An ESRI report has shown that because the Government has been able to maintain core benefits, income inequality has been reduced in the State. This is very much about people who have lost out. Higher incomes have come down a little. The fact that we have been able to maintain core social welfare benefits has been most beneficial to people. This is often remarked elsewhere in Europe. Countries like Portugal, Spain and Greece have been unable to do that. It is something that the Irish Government has been able to do through the sacrifice of its people.

The Tánaiste has been very proactive in respect of welfare fraud. I am unsure whether people noticed last week but reference was made to 20 gardaí being transferred to the investigation unit. While fraud is significant, given the overall budget for social protection it is rather small. The figures include overpayments as well. We have a duty to the citizen and the taxpayer to ensure money is spent correctly and that there are no people defrauding the system. After all, at issue is taxpayers' money. Senators rightly acknowledged the work that the Tánaiste has undertaken in this area in recent years. We have seen a significant reduction in this regard.

Senators Zappone referred to vision and reform. Certainly there has been reform. Like Senator Zappone, I believe reform never comes quick enough. It is nearly always too slow for people who are on the political wing of Government. We are always keen for it to take place faster. There are so many problems and there is so little money at the moment. Certainly, we would have been far happier if the economy had turned around a little quicker and we would have been able to invest in services, especially for our young people.

I believe that investment in young people is the way to go. Let us consider the list of priorities. My priority is always young people, older people and pensioners because as the upturn takes place, they may not be here to benefit. This is why the Tánaiste was so keen to increase the children's allowance in this budget and to acknowledge that older people and pensioners have taken quite a knock during this recession. This is why the reinstatement of 25% of the Christmas bonus has been so important.

Reference was made to access to early years education. Senator Zappone is doing fantastic work in An Cosán. In my constituency the area-based childhood, ABC, programme has been working under Professor Bleach. This is a good intervention. We need to consider the expansion of such programmes and make them more accessible to other people, especially in disadvantaged areas. If these schemes are to be rolled out we need to consider areas of disadvantage to be prioritised. Certainly I agree with Senator Zappone in that regard.

Senator Marie Moloney referred to child care places. There has been an increase. I understand 234 have taken up places.

The figure is over 6,000.

I will get Senator Moloney more precise figures. Senator Moloney made a good point about the EmployAbility Service. I launched the EmployAbility Service when the staff involved moved to the new offices in Galway. People should consider the difference the service has made. A number of services are run throughout the country to help people with disability to get into relevant jobs that they like and enjoy, rather than shoving a round hole into a square box. Fantastic work is under way in this area. Since becoming Minister of State for activation I have been promoting the EmployAbility Service throughout the country and I hope to visit many more and assist them.

Senator Quinn asked directly about the back-to-work enterprise allowance. There have been 10,897 recipients of the allowance. This is about getting people who have been unemployed back to set up their own businesses. It has been working well. Senator Quinn will probably be looking at proceedings in his office. The Intreo offices are assisting people who have been long-term unemployed into employment and the figures are showing this. The group engagements are working well. Group engagement services are given to people on the live register who wish to set up their own businesses.

Unfortunately, I would at some stage enjoy having a longer debate about stopping the children's allowance after the second child. I have it to say that Senator Quinn dodged a bullet. I disagree with that and I would like to go through the areas and why I would disagree with him. Senator Quinn is not here. I know he had to go to an important meeting. It is not that he is not doing other work.

Child care was raised by Senator Quinn as well and I accept that it is a problem. Work is being carried out by the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Reilly, in this area. The issue came up recently at a Cabinet sub-committee. The Taoiseach has taken quite an interest in this area.

Senator Quinn should note that several services are tackling people who have been quite a distance from the employment market. These include Gateway and Tús. They are actively helping people who are long-term unemployed to get back into work.

I thank Senator Brennan for his remarks and support. He raised the issue of social welfare fraud. There is a special investigation unit with 91 offices and 290 inspectors. Therefore, the Department of Social Protection does not take fraud lightly. It is actively working on the issue.

Senator Cullinane referred to low pay. I would be very interested in a wider debate on this. The Tánaiste has appointed the Minister of State, Deputy Gerald Nash, to address this issue. He set up a commission and the discussion is ongoing. Certainly, we are delivering in this regard. I very much welcome the commission and look forward to its recommendations.

Under-employment is very much an issue. I refer to people on 20 and 30-hour contracts. I believe the Minister of State, Deputy Nash, will deal with this. Senator Cullinane said he would not refer to broken promises. The Government made one very clear promise, namely, that it would get the country back on its feet. The unemployment rate is now dropping and the number of people employed is growing. Certainly, the commitment in this regard has been honoured. Senator Cullinane said he would like to see more people employed in schools. In the latest budget, 1,700 additional resource places were provided for in the education system. During the worst years of the recession, we built classrooms rather than prefabs. There is much to be said for that.

Reference was made to an individual of the disability allowance who was not paid the Christmas bonus. One will probably find he was on illness benefit. If he applies for the disability allowance, he may be entitled to it. We can take this up afterwards if the Senator wants to provide to me the details.

The increase of €2 million for the school meal programme is very welcome.

I brushed over the relevant issues very quickly but we will have a longer engagement on them next week on Committee and Report Stages. Senators are very much looking forward to that, as am I. The interaction will be as constructive as I always find it. I hope to be taking Committee and Report Stages if the Tánaiste cannot do so. I look forward to engaging with the Senators next week and thank them very much.

Will the Minister of State pass on my proposal on Childline to the Minister to determine whether any funding is available for a once-off payment? It is a very important issue.

I will, indeed. The Senator's reputation precedes her. She will probably beat me to the Minister with that. I will probably be the second person to raise it with her, straight after the good Senator. I thank her very much.

Question put and agreed to.

When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 16 December 2014.

When is it proposed to sit again?

At 2.30 p.m. on Monday.

Barr
Roinn