Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The JST review is a value for money review which will be an extensive piece of work and will examine the JST payment and how it has been working since its inception in 2013. The review will provide a detailed analysis of the activation of JST payment recipients. On completion of the review, officials will available to discuss its findings with the Oireachtas joint committee. Given that the majority of JST payment recipients were previously in receipt of the one-parent family payment, OFP, the review will provide my Department with an analysis of former OFP recipients. It is a very discrete piece of work dealing with those who were in receipt of OFP and changed to JST.

The jobseeker's report is being done externally by NUI Maynooth. Although I do not know when the final draft will be delivered, I will find out and let the committee know later in the afternoon. Youth unemployment is falling very rapidly, and faster than unemployment among older adults. That has to count for something. There are specific measures regarding young people who are homeless, such as reducing their rent contributions, which I have included in the budget in response to requests from the homeless charities. While some have said the reduction in jobseeker's allowance for young jobseekers has contributed to the rise in homelessness, I have yet to see any evidence-based paper or analysis that supports this opinion. While people are entitled to their opinions, it is not a fact.

I do not think my Department commissioned the Millar report, although we funded it through the Irish Research Council. It was to be a report on activation, what works and how we can get lone parents into employment. Unfortunately, it was not that. It turned into something different. It was an interview-based analysis of the changes made over the years. Unfortunately, it was not very useful to us. We can do a formal response to it. However, it did not give us what we wanted, what we asked for or what it said in its title, namely, Lone Parents and Activation, What Works and Why. I had hoped what would come out of it would have been a study of, for example, ten different countries and a list of ten actions that succeed in activating lone parents and ten actions that do not. It did not do this. It fell down very badly on what it was supposed to give us. It is disappointing. However, the Millar report does show the need for us to commission a report into the impact of the changes and the reforms of lone parent payments during recent years. It must examine several issues, including the impact on incomes, employment and welfare dependency. Most of us in the House, maybe not all of us, believe reducing welfare dependency is a good thing. Some academics question this view and believe people are better off on welfare than in certain types of employment.

I do not believe that. For reasons of confidence, mental health, self-respect and how they are considered in society, people are always better off working than on welfare, even if they might be a little better off on welfare. I appreciate that some politicians do not agree with that view. Many academics certainly do not hold that view, although they never seem to identify where the funds should come from to pay for a contrary view. With the Deputies' agreement, and if they are willing to withdraw these amendments, I propose to commission such a report and have it carried out by an external body. I am not sure whether we must tender it but I would have thought a body such as the ESRI or similar would be the kind of body that could carry out the report and consider the matter in the round, namely, the impact on employment, incomes and welfare dependency.