Seán Haughey (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)

I congratulate the Minister on the work he is doing in the Department of Social and Family Affairs and on this Bill and the Social Welfare Bill enacted before Christmas. The Minister confounded his critics in the media on his appointment and has clearly demonstrated that he adheres to a caring social philosophy. He has demonstrated himself to be a reforming Minister in the Department. I look forward to many more innovations from his Department in the years ahead.

In budget 2005 the Minister reversed many of the measures introduced in budget 2004. I welcome the reversals relating to the rent allowance, diet and crèche supplements etc. As economic growth has increased again, the Minister has recognised that these cuts were unnecessary. I welcome the fact that he has looked at the measures in an imaginative way, introduced reform and, in some cases, reversed them.

I appeal to the Minister to simplify the social welfare system which is enormously complex. As a public representative, I admit I am still not familiar with all the provisions of the Social Welfare Acts. From time to time, I must research an issue for a constituent and the more I go into it, the more I realise how complex the system is. I advise the Minister to simplify and consolidate the system as he proceeds. No doubt he will consider this proposal favourably.

This Bill provides for increases in child benefit from 1 April, with a €10 per month increase for the first and second child, giving up to €141.60 per month for each child. It also makes provision for a €12 per month increase for the third child and subsequent children, giving up to €177.30 per month. I welcome these increases. Since 1997, the Government has identified child benefit as a way of dealing with the issues of child care and child poverty. The commitment is clearly there in this budget and in previous budgets. I welcome the Government's approach to child care and the selection of child benefit as the major plank in dealing with this major issue.

I also welcome the improvements in the annual respite care grant scheme that will come into effect from June. Carers, in particular, have sought to have the means test for the carer's allowance abolished. Deep down, everybody knows we do not have the resources to do that, at least in one fell swoop. Beefing up the respite care grant is another step in the right direction of making help available to people not in receipt of carer's benefit or carer's allowance. I am not familiar with the regulations regarding qualification for this extended grant scheme but I hope they will be simple and easily understood by all concerned. Many more people will be able to avail of this grant scheme, which is to be welcomed. It is a step in the right direction towards the ultimate ideal of doing away with the means test for the carer's allowance.

The Bill makes provision for an increase from €12,697.38 to €20,000 in the amount of capital disregard for the purposes of the means tested social welfare schemes, other than the supplementary welfare allowance. This provision will come into effect in April 2005 for the purpose of the carer's allowance, and in June 2005 for other relevant means tested schemes. The disregards relating to the carer's allowance should be looked at every year, which I know the Government has done. It too is a step in the direction of the abolition of the means test. It is an ideal that may never be reached but we must always strive towards it. I am glad the disregards have been looked at in this Bill.

I am a board member of the Northside Partnership set up to tackle long-term unemployment on the north side of Dublin. A number of similar projects, which operate under the aegis of ADM, exist throughout the country. Last year it produced a document entitled, Policy Issues Inhibiting the Client Base of the Northside Partnership. The report is based around a series of case studies that illustrate the policy and administrative blockages that inhibit people from making the often difficult transition from welfare dependency to gainful employment. I recommend the document to the Minister and his officials. It is a practical document that deals with actual case studies and outlines the stupidity of certain provisions that inhibit various groups from getting back to work.

The Northside Partnership deals in particular with the following categories of people; the long-term unemployed, women returning to work, lone parents, young people at risk of unemployment, people with low levels of education or skills, ex-drug misusers, ex-offenders, Travellers, people with disabilities, homeless people and refugees.

I will refer to one or two of the number of suggestions that were made in the document. It was suggested that disabled people should be guaranteed retention of their medical cards when they return to employment. It was also suggested that places on Youthreach programmes should be increased to meet demand and that age restrictions be changed to facilitate access to students aged 12 to 16 years who have left mainstream schools and are without a training allowance. Another suggestion was that non-EU school leavers who are residents would be provided with the same access to third level education as their EU counterparts. The classification of students as EC/non-EU should be uniform across the third level sector and adjusted over time according to their number of years' residence. It was also proposed that one year of unemployment should be the standard definition for labour market programmes but flexibility should be provided to give officials the ability to case conference. The document contains several other suggestions to which I hope the Minister's officials will give serious consideration.

I welcome the Minister's comments on single-parent families. Again, it was a breath of fresh air. He says he wishes to facilitate the entry of lone parents into the education system or the workplace and that the system, where possible, should facilitate two parents in child rearing. The Minister is a brave man to look into this issue but it needs to be addressed. We must aim for a system that guarantees equality across the board in the social welfare system for all claimants. If that involves going down the individualisation route then we need to start on that process. It is a complex issue. The Minister will touch on many vested interests as he proceeds. I welcome his comments and look forward to reforms in that area.

The group, One Family, which represents single parents, published a position paper yesterday, which clearly stated that official figures contradicted recent claims that it was financially rewarding to become a single parent. All of us on the ground know that.

It is a very good social welfare Bill and I wish it a speedy passage through the House.

See this speech in context