Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)

The Government decision not to provide for a double payment to social welfare recipients this Christmas is, in the Labour Party's opinion, mean-spirited and unnecessary. The traditional bonus payment has been paid since 1980. Not everyone on welfare receives it, just those who are most heavily dependent, namely, those on pensions or long-term welfare payments. People affected include those receiving blind pension, carers payments, disability payments, farm assist, guardians payments, invalidity pension, jobseeker's allowance, one-parent family payment, pre-retirement allowance, deserted wife payments, prisoner's wife allowance, State pension and widow's and widower's pension Claimants stand to lose up to €240.30 each or approximately 2% of their income. In the case of most married couples, the combined loss will be well over €400.

Since more than 1 million people are affected by this move, everyone knows someone who is affected. Everyone recognises the seriousness of the economic situation in which we find ourselves and that the Government's back is to the wall, but it is when backs are to the wall that one sees the true priorities of Government and what it is really made of. For goodness' sake, if as a country we could afford a Christmas bonus in 1980, how on Earth can we not afford one in 2009?

The Minister for Social and Family Affairs has stated that the choice was to cut the Christmas bonus or to cut welfare rates generally, but this was not the choice. The Government had other revenue raising options available to it, but ignored them. Evidently, the Government would rather hit pensioners and the poor than phase out what amounts to a €700 million tax relief subsidy for landlords of commercial and residential properties. Evidently, it is fine in an emergency to suspend payments to long-term welfare recipients, yet leave untouched the hundreds of millions of euro in tax relief for the pensions of rich company directors. Evidently, people on low fixed incomes can afford to take a hit next Christmas while the 6,000 tax exiles remain untouched by tax reform. There were many other options, such as seeking reductions in the rent paid out by State bodies and Departments, capping public sector pay or the famous text tax, but none was taken.

In practical terms, suspending the Christmas bonus will mean that older people and poorer people will struggle to heat their homes this Christmas because, in many cases, the bonus is used to pay for a refill of the oil tank, to stock up on coal or briquettes or to pay off the larger gas bills at that time of year. For some, scrapping the bonus will mean there is less available for presents for the family or money for the little things that matter a lot, like sending Christmas cards to family and friends or taking grandchildren somewhere special, like to a pantomime or to the cinema.

I hope the Minister will take in my next point. For the economy generally, it will mean even less money being spent in our shops this year at Christmas because no one saves the Christmas bonus.

See this speech in context