Willie Penrose (Westmeath, Labour)

I thank the Minister for his detailed and comprehensive reply. However, no matter how one tries to portray the system, people are still no better off. Is this not one of the poverty traps? We are trying to create an environment in which increases are not clawed back. If one is in receipt of rent supplement, is there not a euro-for-euro clawback? Has the Minister checked this with community welfare officers? I heard from a number of sources that there is such a clawback.

To widen the debate, does the Minister intend to focus on poverty traps in the forthcoming budget, such that earnings disregards will be increased substantially to ensure those who would normally be entitled to secondary benefits, such as the back to school clothing and footwear allowance, will not be denied them?

Does the Minister not feel it is disgraceful that the carer's allowance is included as income in the assessment of needs pertaining to the back to school clothing and footwear allowance? Every other allowance made available by the Department is disregarded. Will the Minister admit the carer's allowance is the one payment that should be disregarded in respect of applicants for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance? Do the criteria as they stand not convey to people on the very margins that they are always caught and can never gain no matter what they do? Will the Minister increase earnings disregards so secondary benefits can be made available to those whom we all want to see obtaining them?

See this speech in context