Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I strongly support the recommendations in the Mangan report, which was raised by Deputy O'Dea, Deputy Butler and others. Deputy Butler in particular has on a number of occasions at the committee strongly supported the extension of invalidity and permanent disability benefits to the self-employed. I have seen some organisations representing the self-employed criticising the proposal - Deputy Butler knows who I mean - and I think they are tremendously short-sighted. Where a medium-sized to larger firm is doing very well, it is relatively easy for the proprietors to pay for and invest in private pension benefits and schemes, which are very attractive from a tax point of view, as well as paying very hefty premiums for income maintenance in the event of illness. That is generally way beyond the capacity of self-employed people operating on a small scale. The social welfare system offers extraordinary value for money to self-employed people. They pay 4% contributions, which is a very low rate of contribution. For somebody in employment, the rate between them and the employer is 14.75%, so there is a very big gap. I certainly think that as the economy recovers and as people come to retirement age and as retirement age looms, and it is only then, unfortunately, when they tend to become exercised about the issue, it will make even more sense, but it has to be on a funded basis.

Ita Mangan, chairperson of the advisory group on tax and social welfare, has been asked in the committee and in other public venues about mandatory or voluntary contributions. She and others with a great deal of experience in social welfare have said that there cannot in practice be a voluntary social welfare insurance scheme because what is being done from an insurance point of view is that a significantly large population is being covered in the hope that the number of claimants is a relatively small proportion of that population. It has to be self-financing over a period of time. The more we have a social welfare system where the financial resources flowing into it are adequate to meet the demands on and expectations of that system, the more sustainable the system will be. That has always been a goal of mine. It is a debate that continues.

I am delighted to hear that Deputy Daly has been having a conversation with the Minister for Finance. In the context of the extraordinary pressures that have been on the economy in recent years, I can understand that it is difficult to enter into fresh commitments. The time is approaching when we can move forward and I am happy that a lot of work has been done in the Department. This work has major IT implications and we have staff specifically looking at those. As with all new systems in large-scale welfare or health areas, getting the IT simple and easy for people to use and ensuring it is absolutely reliable is the cornerstone. The Department's senior staff, including the deputy secretary, have been involved - I think it is called the business management system - and I have learned to respect them, because the long-term planning of every element is critical. I remember in earlier years, along with Deputy O'Dea and with Deputy Ó Snodaigh, taking a decision in respect of the Longford office and the carers' payments and so on that were coming from there. I advised moving to much better quality IT platforms and I remember advising Deputies at the time that it would result in some delays. In fact, the outcomes have been well worth it. However, the same applies with moving over to a supplementary pension savings system. It has to be very well organised and I am pleased that the deputy secretary, Anne Vaughan, who is present, has been very involved in guiding the business preparation for that.

In relation to carers, Senator Naughton asked about the potential-----