Willie Penrose (Westmeath, Labour)

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 5, between lines 12 and 13, to insert the following:

"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.".

I will not delay on this because I have harrowed this ground often. The Minister, the public and the 150,000 carers involved in looking after people in their homes know where the Labour Party stands and that its stance is unambiguous and unequivocal. We believe in the people who provide care 24 hours a day, seven days a week and 52 weeks a year. We acknowledge the work the Minister has done and the fact that the respite care grant has been increased. The Minister has taken on board some of the key recommendations of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs, including the half-payment now, which broke the barrier or obstacle in the Department whereby a person could not get a second social welfare payment. This provision was strongly advocated by the committee, which did not depend on consultants or flashy photograph opportunities to achieve its objectives.

The committee's hard work was done in the bunker and was not covered by the media which lacks interest in the issue. We were interested as we believe our job is to articulate and advocate the needs of this group. We did that well. The Labour Party believes that abolition of the means test is the next step and over the lifetime of any government in which it will participate it will insist on this as a fundamental policy. Our leader made that one of his five priorities at our party conference. As far as we are concerned we have a contract with the Irish people to abolish the means test for carers who provide a few hours excellent work every day and save the State at least €2 billion a year. It is not a total loss because a means test is administratively expensive, bureaucratic and discretionary. What may be assessed as means for one person may not be means in the eyes of another.

This provision would obviate the need for a means test. We hold this principle dear. On a cost benefit analysis it would be positive. The State wants to get value for money although this Government is not good at that. These people do not have contracts and do not receive holiday pay. That is why we insist on this as a small recognition of their work. Carers have clamoured for and asked us to fight for this on their behalf. It is the way forward.

The Minister may not be in a position to accept the amendment because it involves €140 million but we put it down to ensure it remains at the top of the political agenda where the Labour Party has placed it from the start. As spokesman on social policy I am proud of the party's stand on this.

Some people do not believe that the principle should apply universally but those who are well off will not apply for carer's allowance. They have the financial resources and back-up to disregard the payment. It is probably only buttons to them. For others it is important because it enables them to purchase additional respite care which gives them a few hours off. Often the health of the carer can become worse than that of the person cared for. They get worn down providing the necessary loving and tender care within their homes. All the studies in this area show that one is better off in one's home environment. This provision would help to ensure that people will be able to keep their loved ones at home. It is a worthy objective which the State should achieve because carers save it a great deal of money.

See this speech in context