Willie Penrose (Westmeath, Labour)

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, before section 1, to insert the following new section:

1.—The Minister shall as soon as may be after the passing of this Act prepare and lay before both Houses of the Oireachtas a report on the implications of abolishing the means test for carer's allowance.

As the Minister is well aware, I have always unashamedly articulated the plight and championed the cause of carers, of which there are 150,000 working in their own homes and contributing to the mission statements and long-held objectives of the Department of Social and Family Affairs, the Department of Health and Children and the Health Service Executive to keep the people for whom they care within their own environment, where they feel happiest in the company of their own families, neighbourhood and community. It is a laudable objective for the achievement of which we must put in place the appropriate structural changes at policy level.

In this context people work 24 hours a day, seven days a week and 52 weeks a year and it would be churlish, not to say nakedly political, not to acknowledge what the Minister has done. He has taken significant elements of the Houses of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs report of November 2003 on the position of full-time carers, which made 15 recommendations. He has extended the period of carer's benefit from 15 months to two years and, for the first time in the latest budget, abolished the outdated rule that a person could not receive two social welfare benefits. The fact that a person on a widow's or widower's pension can now also receive 50% of the carer's allowance is a welcome and progressive step and acknowledges the reality of life for many people.

I remember articulating this issue previously with the story of an elderly widow who had looked after a child with Down's syndrome for 25 or 30 years and who was only entitled to a widow's pension. Despite carer's allowance being tailor-made for her, not only in terms of an income support but as an acknowledgement of her role in ensuring her young son remained with her, she was not entitled to it, so the measure is extremely important in that context.

The amendment I have tabled proposes that the Minister consider the cost of abolishing the means test. As I said last night, our social welfare system is heavily dependent on means-testing. Some of the many means tests are very complex and not as transparent as they should be. Many are a labyrinth of rules and regulations. They are very time-consuming and costly and officials who carry out the work would probably admit they would be better trying to achieve policy objectives elsewhere. The abolition of the means test would reduce net costs by allowing officials to be deployed on other work and by saving on travel costs incurred during the course of an assessment.

The crudest cost-benefit analysis would show abolition to be a positive option from every possible perspective. The National Economic and Social Forum has indicated the amount saved to society by family home carers who work without complaint and who only desire help at critical times, a need the Minister has met by extending the respite care grant and increasing it to €300. The Minister does not strangle a good scheme with the cords of bureaucracy and that is important. There are many schemes and most have worthy objectives but, from the outset, they become strangled and emasculated by a labyrinth of bureaucracy, killing the value of a scheme before it begins.

The Minister has loosened the cords from the respite care grant and it is important that, as its availability is widened and its eligibility thresholds lowered, it is advertised so the people who need it most are made aware of it. The Minister always says he tries to act in a targeted and focused way. I accept that his argument cannot be discounted at the stroke of a pen but requires evaluation. In the context of care worth €2 billion, a great saving to the State, another €150 million, following the abolition of the means test, for people spending a minimum number of hours caring for someone would be money well spent. Where otherwise would we get the nursing homes?

I strongly support massive investment in the public infrastructure to provide State-run nursing homes. I would double the funding for beds for St. Mary's Hospital in Mullingar, which I mentioned earlier and which has very good staff, attendants and doctors and provides a lovely environment in which to live. The number of beds we would have to provide through private nursing homes and State-run institutions would be colossal.

The Minister might say the universality principle is a long way from Labour Party ideals but this is fundamental Labour Party thinking. Domiciliary care, primary education and the over-70s medical card are not strangled by income-related conditions. The abolition of means testing is a very important concept and we are four square behind it. I am very proud it was a kernel of the recommendations of the all-party Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs.

As chairperson, it was good to achieve an all-party consensus. When the matter is explained to the public, they will agree with us on what the recommendation means to them. I acknowledge what the Minister has done in respect of carers in that he is one of the first Ministers to take the matter on board and make significant changes, but this change would have a long-term positive effect and be cherished.

I attended the briefing given by Mr. Enda Egan of the Carers Association in Buswell's Hotel and listened to a lady from Waterford. In a non-political way, the association made the same points as the Minister. I will give him credit for that because, when people do something well, they are entitled to acknowledgement. The woman said that she has had enough of the situation and that if she is €10 over the threshold, she will not get the payment. For her, the abolition of the means test was key to the issue. I took solace from her case, which she made in a cogent manner, but some people question the situation.

The Labour Party believes that this is matter is so important that it will be part of our electoral platform and will not be reneged upon. This worthwhile issue is dear to me. Given that cost benefit analyses did not cast some recent expenditure in the same positive light as this €145 million expenditure, it is time to take the quantum leap of abolishing means testing.

See this speech in context