Cecilia Keaveney (Donegal North East, Fianna Fail)

I am delighted to speak on this Bill. While the Opposition has a role to play regarding issues that are still not addressed, I must take the opportunity to welcome the fact that this Bill is here for the purpose of implementing the €874 million social welfare package that was announced in the last budget. When the current Minister's predecessor, Deputy Coughlan, came in with a package of €630 million, people were bowled over by the size of the increase at that time. We now have got a 40% increase of €244 million which brings the total spend up to €12.25 billion. When we speak of numbers in this fashion, it becomes a kind of tragedy as we cannot take on-board such an amount of money. If we spoke about thousands or ten of thousands of euro, then it might mean more. However, €12.25 billion is a huge amount of money to spend. The fact that it is being spent on social welfare means the priority of the Government is to try to get the money to those who need it most. Of all Departments, the Department of Social and Family Affairs deals specifically with those who are in difficulty, be it the unemployed, the elderly, the very young or the disabled.

I would love to have a position where most social welfare payments for the unemployed were not needed in my constituency. I would particularly like to have a situation where we did not need unemployment assistance. I always speak of the concept of joined-up government and I want to take the opportunity of congratulating FÁS and the different schemes that are running to deal with the unemployment issue in the textile industry. I want to encourage the Minister to talk to the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment about Donegal and its needs so that the spending level on employment assistance can be reduced and people can be assisted instead in finding new employment. I recognise that a task force met with more than half the Cabinet last week. I trust it will move on to something that will be seen to be useful for the constituency I represent.

The doubling of spending since 1997 speaks for itself. It is important to recognise the very positive actions being taken when we consider the sums being spent. In this context, I acknowledge the work of the CWO which, especially in my local area, reacts to the individual rather than to a rule in a book. This is in keeping with the policy the Minister outlined in his speech and it is something which must continue. There is no issue in Donegal. If a person approaches the CWO with a genuine concern, he or she receives a fair hearing.

The issue of the exchange rate between the euro, sterling and dollar is difficult to explain to people who do not come from areas in which one frequently uses more than one currency. Exchange rate fluctuations make it appear on paper that people are gaining and losing in terms of the cash they have. However, if a person in a Border area receives a cheque in sterling, he or she may spend it in a shop in the North. To him or her, spending £20 in a shop in the North is the same as spending €20 in a shop in Donegal. Therefore, while the Department considers sterling to be more valuable, the individual does not because if he or she does not exchange it for euro, he or she will not see the cash difference. The exchange rate is one of the most significant issues raised with me. Much the same is true of education grants. If a person receives a grant in Belfast, how well he or she does depends on the exchange rate on the day.

I welcome the increases in child benefit as the payment accounts for 66% of child income support provision. In 1994, it constituted less than 30%. Child care is even more topical following the recent controversial article by Kevin Myers in The Irish Times. The Minister alluded to lone parents who support children while trying to get back to education. While it is important to help people to move into the workforce, there is another side to the equation involving the people already in employment who spend significant sums on child care. I am not sure child benefit payment is used to pay for child care in crèches. There should be a tax relief for child care, which is a matter for the Minister for Finance.

I would like to think in the context of debate over the last week that people in employment will be considered as well as those trying to access employment. We want to move away from a system which makes it disadvantageous to work. People in employment are still considering that if they did not work they would obtain medical cards and a range of supports. No matter how often we explain that certain supports are not that exciting, the problem is that the Government has made some of them very worthwhile. We are almost the victims of our own success in this area.

I will not detail the level of children's allowance payment, but it is significantly greater than the 25p per week rate in the days I first came to the House.

A provision of €35 million has been made to enhance supports for carers. The introduction by a previous Minister in the Department, Deputy Dermot Ahern, of the respite grant was significant and its extension is very important. There are many other elements in the legislation which I do not think I will have time to address. Changes in the bereavement grant are important as is the decision to make orphan's payment directly to persons over 18 who do not reside with guardians. It is also important to encourage people to think about their pensions. While none of us thinks he or she will get old, it is necessary to point out that only 43% of women in the State have pensions. People in their 20s are failing to make any pension provision.

There is a social dimension to the current state of the contract the Department of Social and Family Affairs has with post offices. I raised the issue a number of years ago when it came up, but the matter seemed to settle. There is a current threat that the contract will be revoked despite the fact the EU decision will have no real influence on whether social welfare payments can be made through the local post office network. The local post office in Carrowmena has been in the hands of the same family for 100 years. They are very proud of it and it is very much part of the fabric of the tiny village of Cloghan. We cannot sit and do nothing for five years while people die off according to the age profile involved. If they die off, it will be in the context of haphazard post office provision.

The Minister must talk to the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources to ensure we have a vibrant post office service into the future. As people are paid by transaction, if there are few transactions, they will not receive adequate incomes. Many seem to live on practically nothing. It is important to guarantee a minimum wage to the operators of post offices which do not seem to be viable. We must decide whether a social service is involved and maximise the number of jobs that can be done through a post office. The Government did that in the past and was been able to direct payments to be made.

It has been contended that 20 cent or 30 cent is saved per transaction by putting payments through banks, but the recipient pays 30 cent at an automated teller machine to take money out. It is a question of robbing Peter to pay Paul. I make a plea to reverse the decision.

The Minister should also talk to the Minister for Transport about the rural transport scheme and continue to consider all-Ireland transport networks.

As Deputy Perry said, gross and net salaries are very different and impact on how far one's payments go and on the numbers eligible for medical cards.

See this speech in context