Paul Donnelly (Dublin West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank our guests for the presentation. The previous question is very important. It does not seem as though the figures add up. I would like to see them to examine how the Department’s statement stacks up to the suggestion it will cost 50% more, given an awful lot more people who have been admitted will be exiting well before six months. Another part I am always conscious of is that every time something like this is proposed, there seems to be a reduction in the timeline. Previously, the period was 12 months, it was then reduced to nine months, and now it has been reduced to six months but with a few quid more. I am always wary of situations such as this where people who are on the margins or are struggling are faced with what was previously a full 12 months being reduced over a period to six months. I certainly would not like to see that happen. It would be a retrograde step in the provision of protection for people who are in a difficult, vulnerable and stressful position. I am concerned about it.

There was a reference to the proposal for a ceiling but we have not talked about the other, lower end. Where would be the floor in respect of the payments that would come where people fall below a certain level of income? We would certainly look at the minimum essential standard of living to protect people from poverty. Workers who lose their job will get 60% of their previous income. How was that figure arrived at? Why not 70% or 80%? Is it an international standard?

Mr. Hession discussed illness benefit. Will he elaborate on that? Sinn Féin has published a submission as part of it, so I look forward to that being considered.