John Ellis (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail)

The Bill gives us an annual opportunity to review the social welfare system. That the Bill also deals with pensions is important to many people.

We are all aware that the social welfare spend has increased by 60% in the past four years and I believe it has doubled since 1997. When we look at the increase and at the number of people in receipt of social welfare vis-À-vis the numbers in the early 1990s, we see the enormous ground gained. The rate of unemployment has dropped from 10% to 4.3%, although in my opinion and that of many others the rate is much less than the official figure because many of those counted as unemployed are unable to take up full-time employment and cannot hold down full-time jobs. We are as near as possible to full employment.

We also see that over the past decade there has been a major increase in social welfare payments and industrial. The latter have risen by 71% while the former have increased by between 87% and 95%, which is important. Some of the best schemes, certainly for the people I represent, have been the farm assist programme and the carer's benefit because they have been of enormous assistance in many cases, especially in rural Ireland.

When we talk of unemployment we must also look to the future. We must accept that we will have more non-nationals working in this country if we are to maintain the growth we have had. The projections show that we will need between 30,000 and 40,000 non-nationals annually added to the workforce along with our own people entering the workforce to maintain the economy at its current rate.

Child benefit is very important. That payment goes directly to mothers and it is money they can spend wisely to the benefit of their children. It now accounts for 66% of child income support. Only ten years ago, it amounted to less than €30. That is very important. The increases that we will see in child benefit are to be welcomed, and the Minister should be complimented on the way he has dealt with this matter in the budget.

We all welcome the changes proposed regarding the number of contributions required to receive disability benefit, but I still feel that there are several anomalies that may need to be examined regarding the entire disability sector and benefit recipients. In many cases, people are finding that because of minor technicalities they are debarred from receiving a payment. That is not in the best interest of people forced, in many circumstances through no fault of their own, to apply for disability benefit.

The increase in the carer's allowance of €14 per week is definitely welcome, as is the change regarding means. The carer's allowance has enabled many people to remain in their family homes and be looked after by relatives or friends. In doing so, it makes an enormous contribution to the quality of life they can expect. The savings made through not having those people in residential care in beds costing anything up to €1,500 per week have meant that they can be looked after by their families for a fraction of the cost and in an environment in which they wish to remain.

If we consider the number of full-time carers, we see an enormous increase. I have no doubt that, as time passes, we will see a further increase. The rise in the respite grant from €835 to €1,000 is to be welcomed, and the 33 full-time carers will very much appreciate that. I am inclined to agree with Deputy Ring on one matter, namely, that the numbers are greater than we appreciate. Many people are still ignorant of the fact that they may qualify, even for a reduced carer's allowance, and a national campaign to explain to people their entitlement as carers might be beneficial, both to them and to the economy, with a long-term financial saving to the State.

The assessment of capital for non-contributory schemes must be reviewed. I welcome the Minister's decision to increase the amount from €12,690 to €20,000. It will allow those with SIAS and so on to use them without being crucified and suffering a loss of means. However, at the moment the assessments made, mainly against capital means, are totally out of line with the return on that capital. We are all aware that the limit regarding receiving even a reduced pension is €76,000. That would return only approximately €13,000 per annum, which is the equivalent of €25 per week. However, those people are being debarred from non-contributory entitlements.

In many cases, part of that money may have been acquired over years or retained as the nest egg that Deputy Ring talked about being set aside for a rainy day. All capital should be assessed on market value. If a challenge were mounted in the courts regarding the assessment value of capital by social welfare, the Department would lose and find itself in a very awkward situation. One can only assess means against the actual value of something. I ask the Minister to review that and put a realistic value on capital for those in receipt of non-contributory pensions.

We must also examine the entire pensions system. I do not speak of the State pensions system. This Bill examines pensions operated by the various insurance companies, banks and so on. The solvency and liquidity of some schemes must be examined. Some of the funds are deficient, and there is currently a row in the ESB, which has a deficit in its pension fund. There is a problem for people in many such funds that the returns have recently been much lower than expected. The result is that some who had looked forward to very reasonable pension rates now find that they may not receive those when they reach the prescribed age. Those cases must be looked at.

However, there is also a need for the Department of Social and Family Affairs or some other Department to consider introducing a new type of pension, namely, one to which people could contribute an annual percentage of their income for a private pension other than through PRSI. That could be done. I compliment the NTMA on its return last year in comparison with private funds. The cost of maintaining some of those private funds and the charges levied on participants are not acceptable, either to me or to those who participate in them. Perhaps the Minister will look at that when he has time.

I welcome the Bill, which does a great deal and implements the changes made in the budget. However, there is a timely warning to everyone here that pensions must be reviewed and that we must examine other means of maintaining our current high standard of social welfare payments for those dependent on them while ensuring that there is no abuse.

See this speech in context