Mr. John Mark McCafferty:

I thank the Chair. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul is present today in coalition with a number of other organisations, namely, the Make Room coalition, which comprises Focus Ireland, Threshold and ourselves. We also are in coalition with Barnardos and Focus Ireland from a child poverty perspective. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul is making this presentation on behalf of the families we assist, primarily, as well as the volunteer members of the society, our donors and supporters. From that viewpoint, the cumulative impact of austerity measures to date on those families and individuals has been devastating. We oppose further reductions in social expenditure as the people we assist and those who are struggling throughout Ireland have suffered enough. It obviously is the responsibility of the State to lead and make the choices that will tackle Ireland's budget deficit in a fair and equitable way. Alternatives to cutting social expenditure to meet the budget deficit targets have been proposed by various commentators, a number of whom spoke to the joint committee earlier this morning.

The Government can choose, we believe, to close the gap between Ireland's revenue and expenditure while protecting vulnerable persons and the services on which they rely.

Further cuts to the budgets of Departments which impact negatively on the services needed by individuals, families and communities are unacceptable to us. We are asking the Government that resources are found and the best approaches adopted to protect the social services and those supports, and we are looking at alternative options. We are advocating that growth be stimulated by utilising a portion of cash reserves to deliver vital and strategic social infrastructure, improve efficiencies in the provision of public services and generate revenue from resources, including business, corporations and those with higher incomes and assets that can afford to make a greater contribution to Ireland's recovery.

More specifically, we are advocating for a living income, both in and out of work, reduced child poverty and better energy affordability. We are seeking a living income in and out of work through the protection of social welfare rates for those of working age - that is set out in the programme for Government - and to urge that the eligibility for payments and associated secondary benefits not be eroded any further.

As employment is critical to tackling poverty, family income supplement, FIS, is crucial and needs to be retained, with the assessment continuing to be based on net income. In addition, the withdrawal rate, the payment rate and the qualifying thresholds must all be maintained. FIS provides great income support for families who are working and a higher level for those who are working than those who are not.

We are also interested, like Barnados, in focusing on reduced child poverty and increased well-being. We see the key to that being child income support payments that are reformed in a way that protects the incomes of families who are struggling and makes family income or a better alternative available to families on low wages. Also, we are looking for early childhood care and education to be protected and extended.

Another area is better energy affordability. We spend a great deal of money and time trying to tackle the energy debts of families and we are looking for enhanced retro-fitting programmes and financial inclusive services. That is of relevance to the committee.