Dan Neville (Limerick West, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. The objective of any social welfare Bill is to ensure that people on lower incomes will have a reasonable standard of living and will not have to live in poverty. I would like to deal specifically with child poverty because, while we might be recognised internationally as trying to maintain a reasonable standard of living for those on social welfare and those living in poverty, there is gap in regard to child poverty.

I am sure the Minister is fully aware of the excellent report by the End Child Poverty Coalition which was published last year. Despite a buoyant economy and increased wealth, child poverty remains unacceptably high in Ireland. Many find it difficult to believe that poverty exists for children at a time when this country is perceived to have great financial wealth. Government statistics indicate that one in seven children live in consistent poverty and almost one in four children live in relative poverty.

Poverty among children manifests itself across a range of areas that go beyond income. The longer a child is poor, the greater the impact on the life chances of the child and the subsequent deprivation in later life. Growing up in poverty affects the natural development of a child, including his or her social, educational and personal development. Many children who live in poverty drop out of education at an early age. Speakers already pointed out that the route out of poverty is through educational opportunity and being in a position to use the opportunity presented by the education system.

Child poverty has been repeatedly described as a denial of the basic rights of a child to an adequate standard of living. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is often referred to in this Chamber. It refers to the right of all children not to live in poverty. The convention provides that every child has the right to an adequate standard of living, adequate income and accommodation, education and health care and the necessary supports and services. All children have a right to the material and other resources necessary to allow them to experience a childhood free of poverty and deprivation and to reach their full potential as adults.

Ireland ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1992, thereby committing itself to implementing the convention's provisions to the maximum extent of its available resources. Repeatedly, in respect of various issues, we have raised the failure of the State and the Government to ensure the commitments under this convention are honoured. Our economic resources have grown enormously in the past decade. Ireland is now in a far better position to implement those commitments in full.

The Government has separately committed to reduce the numbers of children living in consistent poverty to less than 2%. Moreover, a commitment was given in the national anti-poverty strategy to end child poverty completely by 2007. Will the Minister outline how the Government plans to achieve this target? The realisation of this commitment necessitates the implementation of appropriate policy measures. Given that the Government's goal date is 2007, this is the last opportunity to allocate the necessary resources to honour its commitment. I am glad the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, is in the House. If he has an opportunity to contribute, he might deal with the attainability of the targets in the national anti-poverty strategy.

The elimination of child poverty should be moved to the top of the agenda of political and economic objectives and it should remain there. Like any other national objective, it requires sustained and comprehensive action, supported by the allocation of significant resources. Achieving the goal of ending child poverty by 2007 is a challenge that can be met, but only if the effort is a matter of national and political priority for the Government.

The most recent statistics on the incidence of child poverty in Ireland, from 2003, indicate 14.6% of children live in consistent poverty. This means some 148,000 children were identified as living in houses with incomes of less than 60% of the national median income and experiencing enforced deprivation in respect of one or more of eight basic deprivation indicators. These indicators are: no substantial meal for at least one day in the past two weeks; no heating at some stage in the previous year; debt problems arising from ordinary living expenses; inability to afford two pairs of strong shoes, inability to afford a roast dinner once a week; no meal with meat, chicken or fish, or the vegetarian equivalent, every second day; inability to afford new clothes; and inability to afford a water-proof coat.

In 2003, approximately 23.9% of all children were at risk of poverty. This represents 242,000 children, almost one in four. This is the official EU definition of income poverty, which in Ireland is referred to as relative income poverty. According to the EU's evaluation, therefore, almost one quarter of Irish children is at risk of poverty. In addition, research indicates that the depth of relative income child poverty has increased, with a greater percentage of children now living in households with incomes of less than 40% of average disposable income.

The statistics I have quoted are taken from the EU survey on income and living conditions, EU-SILC, published by the Central Statistics Office in 2005. The EU-SILC replaces the living in Ireland survey which was conducted by the Economic and Social Research Institute between 1994 and 2001. Within the EU, Ireland performs poorly in terms of comparative child poverty rankings. In 1999, the average EU-15 child poverty rate was 19% but the corresponding figure for Ireland was 21%. By contrast, Denmark and Finland, for example, had levels of 6% and7%, respectively.

For lone parents, the EU-15 average income poverty rate was 38%, compared with the figure of 44% for Irish lone parents. The EU-15 average poverty rate for families with three or more children was 25% and Ireland was again above average with a rating of 27%. We are consistently above average in terms of the EU test of child poverty. Ireland has one of the highest rates of poverty among developed countries, ranking third highest in the United Nations human rights development index for 2005, which measures the extent of poverty in 18 OECD countries.

Children in Ireland are twice as likely to be poor as adults. Once in poverty, Irish children usually remain in poverty well into adult life. The groups of children particularly at risk of experiencing poverty and social exclusion are those who live in welfare dependent or low income households, live in lone parent households, live in families of four or more children, have disabilities, are from the Traveller community; are from asylum seeking families, are from migrant and refugee families; leave school early or leave the justice system or health board care. Two particularly vulnerable groups are children living in lone parent households and in asylum seeking families.

Th EU-SILC survey identified 14.6% of children as living in consistent poverty. However, the percentage of children in poverty varies depending on their household composition. One parent households have the highest consistent poverty rate at 32.6% and are three and half times more likely to live in consistent poverty. A specific difficulty arises in regard to life opportunities and support for children in one parent households. Children in lone parent families also face a disproportionate risk of being in relative poverty. Households with one adult with children face a 42.3% at risk of poverty rate compared to around 15% of households with two adults and one to three children. The children of single parent households are three times more likely to live in poverty than a family with two or three children.

Lone parent families reported the highest deprivation levels for each of the indicators I mentioned. Some 33% said they could not afford to buy new clothes, 31% experienced debt problems arising from ordinary living expenses and 24% said they had to go without heating at some stage in the past 12 months due to a lack of money.

Recent studies highlight the level of poverty and indebtedness experienced by lone parent families. Some 70% of Money Advice and Budgeting Service clients are in receipt of social welfare and, of those, nearly one third are in receipt of the one-parent family payment. This is a major issue related to the one-parent family payment which often is not highlighted. Society often perceives one parent families as almost living off the State. I have often heard people referring to such families as sponging off the State. That perception is totally at odds with the real position in terms of the life opportunities and poverty levels experienced by the children of those families. That is also the experience of the parents in those families but we are specifically dealing with statistics developed to show the level of poverty experienced by children of one parent families. Support to increase income for lone parents is vital. As matters stand, most lone parents cannot afford to work while remaining on the one-parent family payment and due to low educational attainment will not get work which pays enough for them not to be in receipt of the payment.

The Minister has stated on numerous occasions that the Government views employment as the key route out of poverty, a view with which I agree. However, one third of children in relative income poverty in 2001 were living in households headed by a person in employment. While parental employment has to date successfully lifted many children out of poverty, there are limitations to this approach. Some parents cannot work or are only able to obtain low waged employment which does not yield sufficient income to adequately support their families.

Research clearly shows that Government intervention to combat child poverty can make a major difference. Societies which do most to look after people will, over time, improve the capacity of people to look after themselves. The countries with the lowest child poverty rates in the OECD are those which allocate the highest proportions of GNP to social expenditure. Ireland currently lags behind the OECD average in its expenditure on key services such as education, housing and health care. For example, in regard to expenditure on early childhood education and care, Ireland invests less than 0.2% compared to the OECD average of 0.4% — only half the level of investment of the OECD average.

The Combat Poverty Agency concludes in its 2005 report, Ending Child Poverty, that:

—Ireland invests relatively little in subsidised services for families with children

—Ireland's comparative ranking on child support plummets after services are factored in, and

—Housing costs are disproportionately burdensome for families with children. . .

The agency calls for improved services for families with children in the area of early childhood education and development, health care, housing and family services.

Concerns that cash transfers to households on behalf of children may create work disincentives for parents and-or be siphoned off by adult members for their own use are not substantiated by research. This was discussed earlier in the debate. Income support measures which protect people from poverty appear to empower people to get back into the workforce rather than create a disincentive to their doing so. The real position does not gel with the often accepted view that if cash incentives are given to people in receipt of lower incomes, they hive it off their children; rather the opposite is the case, it incentivises them to improve their position.

I urge the Government to prioritise the introduction of a new mechanism to support the most vulnerable children. As an interim measure, supporting children through the child dependant allowance must become a key focus. I pay tribute to the End Child Poverty Coalition for its excellent report, Child poverty in Ireland 2005: An Overview, which was available last year.

See this speech in context