Paul McGrath (Westmeath, Fine Gael)

It must be difficult for the poor Minister, Deputy Brennan, to come in here and have all this kudos heaped upon him. I could remind the Minister that a few years ago the esteemed Ceann Comhairle and former Deputy, Seán Treacy, was a bit surprised when he was stepping down and glowing tributes were paid to him from all sides of the House because the kind of bouquets thrown at him previously would not have been similar. When the speeches came to an end, he drew himself up to full height in his Chair and stated that, on listening to everybody in the House, he thought he must have passed away and had to kick himself to be assured he was still alive and able to hear what was been said. I am sure the Minister, Deputy Brennan, is wondering what has happened.

I compliment the Minister on introducing the single rate of child dependant allowance because many others acknowledged there was a gross injustice to some children who were discriminated against simply because of the category of social welfare payment their parents were receiving.

I will perhaps embarrass the Minister further. It is not the first time I have seen Deputy Brennan do something that was against the run of play. In the short time he was Minister for Education, Deputy Brennan sorted out an extremely difficult problem in my constituency with a contentious issue on which others had turned their back. It is not new that he would take steps like that and I applaud him.

That said, we on this side of the House welcome generally the measures in the Social Welfare Bill. We have a job to do as well. We must point out where we are going, where the next steps should be taken and what are the next areas to be addressed and examined. It is in that context that I will put a few points to the Minister. I am, of course, confident that Deputy Brennan will not be able to deal with these problems because he will have moved to this side of the House, but perhaps Deputy Penrose, Deputy Stanton or somebody else will be the Minister capable of implementing the reforms of which I will speak.

The first such reform, which is along the same lines as that of the child dependant allowance, relates to child benefit. There is a gross inequity in child benefit. The rate is €180 for the first and second child, and there is a much higher rate for subsequent children. That is not fair. Why should one discriminate against the third child? The ridiculous situation arises where when the first child getting a particular rate, the Department does not know what rate to give the twins who follow and, therefore, divides it between them so that they get a rate half-way between the rates applicable for a second child and a third child. The same level of payment for child benefit should apply across the board. There should not be different rates for first, second and third children.

It is important that the Minister managed to introduce a second tier of payments, to which he and others made reference. We need this second tier of payments whereby people on lower incomes will qualify for a higher rate of child benefit. It is important to go down that road and take a step towards working in that direction. I hope whoever is Minister on the next occasion — it will not be me — will start down that road.

The second issue I ask the Minister, or whoever will be the incumbent after the election, to examine is the terrible and grossly wrong discrepancy between long-term and short-term payments and the consequences flowing from being on one rather than the other. For example, a person on a long-term payment is entitled to the Christmas bonus whereas a person on the short-term payment is not. Unemployment benefit is a stamps-related payment. It is an insurance scheme into which one pays. When a person needs to draw unemployment benefit, he or she is entitled to draw down the stamps. A person who draws down his or her stamps does not get the Christmas bonus. By comparison, a person on unemployment assistance, who perhaps does not have the same level of stamps, whose stamps are old or who does not have the same contributions, gets the Christmas bonus. That is not fair.

To project that further to the children of those on unemployment assistance or unemployment benefit who attend third level, where a child attends third level a parent on the long-term payment will get the dependant allowance but a parent on the short-term payment will not. That is not fair. The Minister is discriminating against those who have contributed to the social welfare fund and who are in their time of need.

A further disadvantage arises in the case of the higher education grant top-up for those on low incomes. If one is in receipt of unemployment benefit, which is stamp-related, and one's child is in higher education, one is not entitled to the top-up payment. However, if one is in receipt of unemployment assistance, which is not stamp-related, and one's child is in higher education, one is entitled to the top-up payment.

See this speech in context