Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On rent supplement, the Minister told me the Department had given its officers extra powers of inquiry to ascertain who is being paid the rent, the person designated, the proper recipient. In Limerick, this does not seem to have made the slightest difference. The experience on the ground in Limerick is that social welfare officers are run off their feet and the last thing they want to hear about is rent allowance.

Regardless of whom the rent is paid to, there could be a problem about whether it is paid to the tenant or to the landlord, that is the wrong target, the target should be those taxpayers who fund the system who are being driven out of their minds by antisocial behaviour in many cases. They should have the right to know who the landlord is who is allowing this antisocial behaviour and collecting a social welfare cheque at the end of each week. Will the landlords, the recipients of this taxpayer largesse, be identified on a public list?

The Minister mentioned the Croke Park agreement and the 1,700 CWOs who have been transferred. This has been in gestation for a long time; the process had started before the Croke Park agreement was even dreamed of. The agreement provides for transfer from other Departments that are less overworked than the Department of Social Protection. How many have been transferred as a result of that provision? Talking to officials on the ground in the Clare-Limerick-Tipperary area, the experience is that they are still far too busy and could do with a lot of extra staff.

I asked the Minister how many people had been designated to investigate the 985,000 cases of fraud. The Minister mentioned €84 million had been spent on Tús, and I congratulate her on that, and €65 million on JobBridge. That underlines earlier concerns expressed by Deputy Ó Snodaigh and me about the cost of extending the youth guarantee scheme. It will be phenomenally expensive if we are to get anywhere near what we have been led to expect.

On the lack of incentive to go to work, I would be interested in hearing the reply to the question on the overall cap. As far as the general situation is concerned, there is an interesting section in the briefing document from the Department where it is estimated if someone is more than 70% as well off staying at home, that is what he tends to do. The Department has some interesting and helpful figures there, finding that in a recent analysis of the minimum wage, 90% of social welfare payments have a replacement rate that is less than 70% the minimum wage and 10% of claimants have a replacement of between 70% and 80% of the minimum wage, indicating that the social welfare system is not a powerful disincentive to those who want to go to work.

I am not trying to be politically contentious but the internationally recognised standard for the poverty line is 60% of the average industrial wage. In this country, there are 750,000 people living below that line, with 250,000 of those being children. The Minister will find the vast majority of those are found in the ranks of social welfare recipients. That is why I am anxious rates be protected as far as possible.