Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Social Welfare Bill. I agree with the points made by Deputy Flynn. I had intended to address some of those issues also, especially the need to treat all adults as individuals. I object to the use of the term "qualified adult", even though it may be an improvement on some of the terms used in the past. This issue needs to be addressed given that there is still a difficulty with people receiving the payment in their own right without having the approval, as it were, of their spouses. I support Deputy Flynn on this matter.

The increase in payment for a qualified adult is welcome and it is not too bad for those aged over 66, but it is still a small increase for people aged under 66. We need to treat all adults as separate individuals. One adult in a household should have equal rights with the other adult in a household and should not be treated as a lesser mortal in that context.

I spoke this morning on local radio, as many of us do at various times. I referred to family income supplement and the need for people to apply for it. Members on all sides of the House stated the FIS is still not being taken up by many people who are entitled to receive it. The payment is substantial and it is worth having, especially in a low income household. We have to disseminate this information in whatever way we can. I appreciate that as public representatives we try to do this in our own way, as we are all very conscious of it. When I spoke on the radio this morning I suspected I was probably not speaking to the people who were entitled to FIS because they were out at work. We need to disseminate this information in workplaces. As others have stated, people entitled to FIS are not generally dealing with the Department in any other way and for that reason probably do not think about the Department of Social and Family Affairs as a place where they might get support. I suggest that FIS needs to be advertised more widely in work places, and particularly in places such as corner shops, factories and where people tend to be on the minimum wage or work only the 19 hours one needs to qualify for FIS, where people's incomes are not necessarily large. The Department must continue making the effort to get the message out because many of those who see a reference to the Department assume it does not apply to them if they are at work. I am strongly of the view that it is important to get that message out because we need to provide an incentive to people who would be only a little better off by going out to work and the FIS should make a big difference to them.

While it does not relate to the Department, when it comes to medical cards and other health benefits we need to ensure that people in that income category are not losing out. All of the increased health charges and the raising of the threshold for the drugs repayment scheme, which were announced not here in the Chamber or in the budget but at a separate press conference by the Minister for Health and Children, hit those low-income families who tend to be the ones who find it difficult to make ends meet. They do not qualify for other kinds of supports such as back to school allowance and clothing and footwear allowances, unless they qualify directly for FIS. We need to remove those disincentives wherever possible.

That brings me to rent allowance which has been touched on by a number of Members. There is a disincentive for people to go out to work because they would lose their rent allowance if they did so. Such areas need to be addressed in a more holistic, cross-departmental way than heretofore. Often lone parents, in particular, find that if they lose their rent allowance it is really not worth their while going to work.

I have just come from the briefing on the community child care subvention scheme, which also is not the responsibility of this Department, from the various child care committees around the country who argue strongly that the changes proposed will hit people who are at work and on low incomes. The scheme taking over from the equal opportunities childcare programme, which was designed to encourage women to go to work, will be focused much more on people on social welfare and may provide a disincentive to people using community child care crèches to remain in or go out to work.

I am arguing that the Ministers who deal with these Departments, which all deal with this same category of person, should tailor all of their schemes to ensure the maximum support and opportunity for those who want to go out to earn a few bob, contribute to the economy and at the same time support their families and who do not want to find themselves out of pocket by doing so.

Generally, the social welfare increases amounted to €12 per week, and €14 per week in some cases. These are fairly small increases if one is coping with the increased costs of food and fuel in particular. The telephone calls I have been receiving from people tell me that the cost of foodstuffs which make up the basic weekly household bill are constantly increasing and this increase will not make a significant difference to their household income. I am particularly concerned because every year in January I get telephone calls from people living in local authority houses stating their pension just increased by whatever sum — it will be €12 this year — and the council is taking it back by increasing the rent. It is the same argument I made about the previous issue. It is a matter of Departments working together to treat these people as individuals rather than merely ticking one box in one Department and another box in another. If one gets an increase in pension and two weeks later the rent rises, the increase is not of much use. Something needs to be done about local authorities increasing rent on the basis of increases in social welfare.

See this speech in context