Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

In the short few minutes remaining I wish to state that I am appalled that we have reached this juncture, coming as it does after the so-called Celtic tiger about which we boasted in this country. Inside and outside this House, nationally and internationally, we have heard the mantra in recent years that we were the richest country in the world, the most powerful people in the world and people expected a great deal of us. We would have expected a lot more from the Government in office than a punishment beating for the recipients of social welfare. Bearing in mind that the Christmas bonus payment is for long-term social welfare recipients only, one should note that the number of people likely to be affected by the proposal is much greater than has been indicated to the House. The pain and punishment likely to be inflicted on those who are vulnerable is considerable. They are dependent on a payment and have budgeted for the year on the basis of receiving it but had no knowledge of what was coming down the tracks.

Worst of all, the proposal is tempered by the threat by the Government that there is worse to come and that tough decisions must be made. The theory is that if one experiences enough pain, it will solve the problem. I have bad news for the Minister in this regard. She knows the proposal in question is doing nothing for the economy, the recipients of social welfare or those who recently applied for social welfare payments. The payment cut has only one objective; it is to compensate for the recalcitrance in recent years of those who did not do the job they were given to do or did not run the economy properly. Like the Sheriff of Nottingham, the Government is now roaming the land punishing people at will for having the misfortune of having voted for it.

The saddest point of all is that, unfortunately, people who are vulnerable, dependent on the State and watching the postman to ensure events occur when expected are now being told by the Government that the cut to the bonus was better than making a cut across the board. They are told it is a punishment to be meted out to them and that the medicine is good for them. They are told they will enjoy it later on because the sun may shine at some stage in the future, at which time the Government may be able to hand them back some of the money.

This is a sad time and I do not know if the Minister is really au fait with what is happening. The real reason for the cuts is that the budget was short changed. There was an insufficient Estimate to meet the requirements of the Department of Social and Family Affairs at the beginning of the year. The €223 million the Minister will save will probably help to pay for the rent of the storage space for the e-voting technology. It will go towards rent that, in some cases, will have to be paid for the next 20 years unless the machines are melted down or sold to another republic.

Sadly, as I have mentioned before in the House, the application of the habitual residency clause at present is appalling. If a founding member of the main Government party were alive in this country today, having returned in the past two years, he would not qualify for a social welfare payment. This is a sad reflection on our society. The provision was made for one purpose, to which of course the Government will not admit.

Consider the position of many people who were self-employed and self-sufficient but who now find themselves unemployed and dependent on social welfare. It is humiliating and sad enough to have to line up and apply for social welfare and supplementary welfare but it is really awful when those doing so are led to believe they qualify for nothing. This is not true. They are entitled to a payment, be it a sickness allowance payment or unemployment assistance. These are means-tested payments to which they are entitled and there should be no obstacles to their receiving them provided they meet the requirements.

See this speech in context