Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

I am surprised this question was not taken with the previous one. Why does it take the release of a report of this type for the Minister and his Department to react? Why were the deficiencies in the system, which the report identifies, not recognised earlier? Why is there no response to the obvious inadequacies in payments lone parents receive before they are exposed by representative bodies such as OPEN? At the launch of this report the consumer director of IFSRA, Ms Mary O'Dea, said it was obvious the title of the report, Do the Poor Pay More?, was a rhetorical question. She observed it is evident that the poor pay more and that the situation of lone parents in particular must be examined in this regard.

The Minister said he met the IBF and intends to meet the Irish League of Credit Unions. What does he intend to do about the greatest problem in this area? The legal moneylenders are the most significant problem in terms of indebtedness. The Government had opportunities to deal with this problem when the two Bills relating to IFSRA came before this House since 2002. The Minister for Finance was told the Consumer Credit Act 1995 must be amended and that the existing rules in regard to moneylending were causing untold hardship. The Government's failure to respond is a contributory factor to the misery many experience as a consequence of indebtedness.

The Minister has been far too slow in counteracting the inconsistencies and contradictions in regard to payments and differentials within his Department. Another question I tabled today highlights the situation of a lone parent on a community employment scheme who would find herself €45 euro better off a week if she worked part-time in the private sector. However, her job does not exist in the private sector because it is social services-based. Another constituent of mine, a male lone parent who is participating in the job initiative scheme, finds his secondary benefits eroded so severely because of the recent rise on payment for this scheme that he is now worse off by €80 a week, or €4,000 per year. These cases arise as a consequence of rules the Department implements, which could be changed merely with the movement of a pen. However, no action is taken in this area.

The Government had advance notice of the content of this report. I had not been a Member of this House for long when the Free Legal Advice Centres produced a similar report, An End Based on Means, which highlighted the failures of Government policy on moneylending and in regard to those living in poverty. Some two and a half years later, there is still inaction. The Minister must address this issue with his Cabinet colleagues who have joint responsibility for this area. We should not have to return to this issue at Question Time in the future.

See this speech in context