John Lahart (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for staying back. I sympathise with the views of the INOU on supporting the return to work. I do not think we are generous enough about that. I concur with Ms O'Brien about the back-to-work enterprise allowance running out after two years. I have experience of that in my constituency. Individuals need a bit of time if they take that route. They may have the genesis of a business idea which ends up not working. They have a need to make money at the same time to support themselves. They will often deviate from the agreed path just to support themselves for a period. That meets with reprimands and negative feedback, which I often find patronising. It is often said it can take three years for a business. I ask Ms O'Brien to develop that theme. I agree with her on it.

I am on the board of a social enterprise in my constituency. It started life with the name "Get Tallaght Working" and now has a different name. It is vital for people. I would like to hear some views about social enterprise, which is very underdeveloped in Ireland compared with our European counterparts.

The INOU also made the point about information dissemination. We had a meeting today in the Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party rooms with representatives of the hospitality business. The temporary business energy support scheme was a very welcome stopgap initiative for businesses in dire straits because of suffocating energy bills. Something like €28 million out of an allocated budget of €1.2 billion has been drawn down because bureaucratically it is very challenging. In addition, businesses using bulk gas or kerosene do not qualify. I understand this may be because way back in the day someone abused the system. I do not want to malign Revenue, which does a great job. However, because Revenue decided these do not qualify, it rules out any business not connected to piped gas. It is another illustration of a remedy being set up that does not work and is just too complex. The issues are not just with the social protection but across the board.

Ms O'Brien is right in what she said about the pandemic unemployment payment. I was always amazed that it was processed so miraculously quickly. I disagree with her on one point. I take her point that 600,000 were in receipt of it and, when it was lifted, only 20,000 moved on to jobseeker's payment. However, I saw the other side of it, particularly with younger people, who went to work during the pandemic and found they were earning just marginally more than their peers who decided they would get €350 a week for doing nothing. We need to strike a balance there. They might have felt they were doing their bit of national duty during a time of emergency. That balance needs to be struck. It is just an observation on what Ms O'Brien said.

I have family members in the United States. I hope we will never get to the point where we see people over 65 packing bags at checkouts and other such tasks in supermarkets. I do not believe we have got that far yet. However, I suspect that for the man who delivers pizza to me, that is his second job. In the previous Dáil I was Dublin spokesperson for my party. While I do not want to give an indication of the precise geographical location, this happened in Dublin. Someone told me about a young garda delivering pizzas in their spare time. I get that it is happening on one level of the scale.

I return to the point on information dissemination. I am also a member of the Joint Committee on Health. The approach the Scottish have to their health system is to wrap their arms around the public, as it were, and see themselves as caring for them. Here, institutionally, the health system has kept people at arm's length. By and large the State, since its foundation, has kept health and education at arm's length. What attitudinal change can we make to how we treat people who rely from time to time on social protection?

Someone demurred - I think it may have been Ms O'Brien - when one of my colleagues asked if all the witnesses agreed with the universal payment. I would like to hear the views of whoever demurred on why they would not favour the universal payment. Those are my questions and comments.