Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)

I listened to all the contributions and I did not speak earlier because I would agree with everything that has been said. There is nothing surer than that research must be done on this area. As soon as the Minister leaves this House, given the figures that will be generated in the next few months on the mortgage assistance which her Department must give, there is nothing surer than that she will need to commission a report. That report will be about the level of activity in the service, how it is delivered, how much help people need, why they need that help, what is the proposed length of time for which they will need that help and the different types of mortgages that will be in play.

The Minister makes the argument that it is not right to ask for a report within the social welfare Bill, and I accept that. I am sure that it would be sufficient if everyone could agree that a report will be done, but it must be done urgently. It is not merely about the gathering of statistics because one could bring any community welfare officer in here and he or she would tell the Minister the facts and figures on what they have encountered over the past few months.

It is not good enough that at a time when ever more people are falling back and relying on the State, to which they contributed handsomely over the past number of years through tax and social insurance contributions, this restriction comes in. The Minister cannot do that. People must feel that when they need help the State will be there to pick up the pieces for them. That is the purpose of the social insurance fund. The type of research and report needed must be done as a matter of urgency because we are not certain exactly what type of help will be required; it will be different across individual cases.

There is one issue which has not been raised, and I am reluctant to raise it. In the past number of years some break-ups resulted in the family home being sold and the profit divided between the two parties involved, irrespective of whether they were married. Neither party has had enough money to buy a home of his or her own and yet is precluded from going back on the State's housing list because he or she has funds under the means-tested element of the scheme. That is something that needs to be included in the reporting system. Where does that leave people? It is the most peculiar system I have ever come across. The system does not encourage thrift or savings. No matter how little one has in the bank, one cannot benefit from State aid because it will be means-tested against one's claim. That is something that needs to be put into the report as well.

That report could and should be done in a matter of weeks. The Minister would be foolish to say "No". She and I know that in a matter of weeks she will be looking for this anyway.

See this speech in context