Willie Penrose (Westmeath, Labour)

I support the thrust of Deputy Stanton's amendment. This is one of the few amendments that do not have an adverse financial impact. If it can be construed by the Minister and his officials as having such an adverse impact, he is really saying that if the Department can save money by a strict imposition of a deadline, then that is a good day's work. Things should not work like that, because the Minister and his officials are not getting paid on productivity. If a pot of money is being provided for this, why not extend the date? Deputy Stanton is absolutely right. Many people are not aware of their rights. That was the case with the FIS, which has been in existence for an age. People are even more aware of it because they are in employment.

We spoke about the carers. If someone is in low income employment and is receiving the carer's allowance for a child within the house, that allowance is calculated as income for the purposes of evaluating that person's right to the back to school clothing and footwear allowance. It seems that some regulation ensured that the carer's allowance would be included as part of the income calculation. The Minister has some very competent legal people beside him to find that regulation. He should root it out and boot it out. Nonetheless, I acknowledge the increases the Minister has provided for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance, which are very worthwhile. It is funny that as children get older, the costs of keeping them seem to get more expensive. I feel that I had more money in 1990 than I have in 2006. Sending children to school costs more and I want to acknowledge that.

Anybody receiving the carer's allowance is not a millionaire and must have an income limit to qualify for it. Why should that allowance be calculated as part of the income calculation? It can be used to exclude people from eligibility for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance. Deputy Stanton's point is well made. There is no cost to anybody. The Minister should expand the deadline according to the Deputy's exhortation. It might contribute to diminishing the level of poverty. We all talk about the number of hot meals, changes of clothing, pairs of shoes and so on as the measurement of the fight against poverty. This is very important for those who suffer significant cost impositions when their children go back to school. Every change that will help in removing impediments to this scheme's availability for the people who deserve it, should be made. That is why I am very supportive of Deputy Stanton's amendment. I ask the Minister to examine the other one to which I have made reference as well.

See this speech in context