Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The witnesses are very welcome. I have some questions for Ms Loftus. Will she give us a financial example of the way family income supplement, FIS, will be reduced according to the Mangan report? She said that would put a family into poverty. She stated also that she believes in keeping FIS until a better in-work benefit is introduced. What has she in mind?

Surely, work should pay and Ms Loftus should elaborate on what are the better cut-off points.

To follow up on Deputy Ó Snodaigh's comments on the proposal from the Minister, Deputy Quinn, I agree it is wise to put money into services for children and that this can benefit parents in a way that an additional €20 or €30 per child also might. However, given the number of families which need child income supplement at present, I do not wish to see cuts to every family's child income supplement just to provide a second year of preschool for some children. I am pleased to put this point on the record. This next question is also directed towards Ms Orla O'Connor and the National Women's Council of Ireland. Have the witnesses done their sums in this regard? For example, were child income benefit to be cut for just those families which would benefit from the second year of preschool while leaving all other families alone, how much would that provide? That would be fair and equitable. How much of a service could be provided by simply reducing the payment for those children who would actually benefit from the preschool education?

I will turn to Ms O'Connor, as I am uncertain of what exactly she meant in one of her recommendations. It states, "The entrance level at which families become eligible for the second tier payment needs to be significantly higher than the €25,000 suggested". Ms O'Connor should state precisely what she means in this regard. The next question also is addressed to both Ms Loftus and Ms O'Connor. There is a chance that the more welfare supports we have, the less attractive we will make the quest for work. In their view, where is the cut-off point at which one proofs against poverty and simultaneously makes work attractive? I would be grateful were they to provide some financial examples in this regard.