Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank both organisations for their compelling and succinct presentations. I have a few questions for Mr. McCafferty regarding social welfare. It is chilling to reflect on the fact that the expenditure the Society of St. Vincent de Paul has had to incur to make up for the shortfall in State support increased by over 56% between 2008 and 2011. That is a shocking figure, particularly at a time when the society is finding it more difficult to get donations because of the recession. Mr. McCafferty will be aware that the budget for community welfare payments for once-off items of expenditure for poor families has been slashed. It has been reduced over the past two years by 40% in actual terms, which is worse than real terms. There were reports in the media during the year that community welfare officers who accepted the validity of certain cases raised with them were referring people to the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, among other charitable organisations. Is that true?

Second, with regard to the changes in entitlement to fuel allowance, he will also be aware that there is a specific commitment in the programme for Government to combat fuel poverty. However, what has happened in respect of fuel poverty in the past two years is that there has been a massive increase in energy prices, a carbon tax has been imposed, there has been a reduction in the period for which fuel allowance is paid from 32 weeks to 26 weeks and, in the last budget, the free electricity allowance, which played a big part in combating fuel poverty, has been reduced by over 60% in terms of how much it can benefit a client. Has Mr. McCafferty noticed the impact of this in his dealings with people? Has it generated more demand for the society's support?

I note the comment that there has been an intensification of poverty. The internationally accepted poverty line for a single adult living alone is €204 per week. The rate of jobseeker's allowance is €188 per week, so those recipients are living under the poverty line. They are officially at risk of poverty. They are trying to exist from week to week. The poverty rate for children living in families below the poverty line is one in five.

That is about double the OECD average. The percentage of children living in consistent poverty has increased, dramatically, to 9.5%.

I thank the delegates for exploding the myth that everything will be okay if we do not change core rates. People have been devastated by changes to the eligibility criteria and I know individuals who have been taken out of the social welfare system because of changes to eligibility rates. It is not of much use to them to hear that core rates have not changed because they are no longer eligible for any rate. These points have been gone through in detail. We are told that we should not reduce the core rate of jobseeker's benefit but the period for which it is paid. We are told we should not reduce the core rate of carer's allowance but to reduce the respite care grant. The grant is available to everyone in receipt of carer's allowance and there is effectively a reduction of €7 per week in what a person receives. We are told we are not reducing the core rates, but we have now got rid of the back-to-school clothing and footwear allowance for children up to the age of four years. The rates for other ages have been slashed and eligibility has been tightened.

It is stated on page 4 of the delegates' submission relating to lone parents that "Reductions in the earnings disregard and changes in eligibility for the one parent family payment mean that lone parents in employment [the only way most of them are surviving is through part-time employment] have seen and will continue to see significant falls in their incomes".