Dáil debates

Wednesday, 16 June 2010

Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2010: Second Stage (Resumed).

 

7:00 pm

Photo of Catherine ByrneCatherine Byrne (Dublin South Central, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill, which will result in significant changes in social welfare payments this year as the Government tries to tackle social welfare costs, which currently stand at €20 billion per annum.

In the past, social welfare was associated with the poor and disadvantaged. Now, in more difficult times, social welfare recipients come from all walks of life, including people who find themselves unexpectedly out of work or struggling to pay bills. For this reason, with Government revenue dwindling by the day, we need to allocate social welfare payments to genuine cases involving the greatest need.

Budget 2010 introduced a raft of cuts to social welfare payments, including an excessive reduction in the dole payment and cuts to child benefit, disability benefit, illness benefit and treatment benefit. These cuts had a knock-on effect on thousands of people who were already struggling to survive and now face further changes to the jobseeker's payment, supplementary welfare payments and the one parent family payment.

Essentially, the Bill restricts access to three payments and makes qualification for payments more difficult. While I understand the need to reduce Government expenditure following the reckless waste of billions of euro in recent years, some of the changes proposed in the Bill do not make sense.

On the proposal to cut social welfare support for young people, I do not agree that reducing jobseeker's payments for people under 25 years who do not take up an offer of training or suitable employment will result in real savings. On the contrary, it will make life more difficult for young people. Where is suitable employment to be found? As we all know, there are 437,000 people on the live register, 85,000 of whom are under the age of 25 years. Many of these young people are highly skilled and have third level qualifications or trades. The vast majority of them want to work and earn a living and do not want to rely on the State. If they are lucky , they receive €100, or a little more depending on their age, from social welfare and struggle to pay their bills and make ends meet.

I agree that we must support and encourage young people who wish to return to education to upskill and hopefully find employment. However, forcing young people into training which is not entirely suitable merely to tick a box is not the answer. We need jobs to back up the many new training places available but such opportunities are in short supply.

The proposal to reduce unemployment benefit by between €25 and €35 for young jobseekers who do not take up a reasonable offer of education or training is not a quick fix. Has the Minister considered whether sufficient suitable education and training places are available for young people? Penalising a person by reducing his or her dole payment because he or she does not return to training is not the way to solve the problem of unemployment.

I also have concerns about changes to the one parent family payment. The proposals in this regard are simply cost-cutting measures which do not address the complex issues surrounding one parent families. While reducing the qualifying age from 22 years to 13 years has its merits in certain cases, we must consider the bigger picture. The one parent family payment is designed to help single parents cope with all of the demands of a young child. It is of great assistance to a single parent who is genuinely raising a family alone.

Bringing up a child or children can be difficult, both emotionally and financially. I fully support the provisions made by social welfare to help families who need financial assistance to feed and clothe their children. However, the elephant in the room is the considerable number of young women, many of whom are still teenagers, who consider single parenthood a choice which can be financially rewarding. We need to tackle the mentality that having a baby outside a committed relationship is a ticket to social welfare support and leads in many cases to the allocation of a local authority house or generous rent supplement payments. I do not seek to make life more difficult for one parent families but we need to eliminate the culture of dependence and promote education, training and a work ethic which would help people to find employment and escape from the poverty trap. The entire system must be reformed to ensure those most in need can benefit from adequate State support in the form of the one parent family payment. I do not propose to repeat the story I related to the Minister earlier.

I continue to be surprised by the large amount of money spent each year on rent supplement. The figure has increased in recent years. In 2010, the Government will pay landlords €509 million in the form of rent supplement. This money could be spent in a more sensible and productive way. For example, thousands of empty apartments and houses around the country could be taken over by local authorities and given to people on rent supplement. The beneficiaries could pay the council a set amount each week and would then have a place to call home. I am baffled that such a step has not been taken and wonder what we must do to realise this proposal. The Government must think outside the box on this issue, rather than continuing to line the pockets of landlords, many of whom do not give a damn about the maintenance of their properties or how they appear in the community. We need long-awaited statutory standards imposed on landlords.

Following budget 2010, a number of welfare payments were reduced, including the blind pension. It is incredible that blind people are means-tested before receiving the blind pension. Blind people suffer from what is probably the greatest disability, yet we put even more obstacles in their way. How can the Government, in good conscience, continue with this practice? We need to support the most vulnerable and weak in our society, including the blind.

Another area in which reductions have been made is the supplementary welfare allowance. The home heating supplement, which falls under the supplementary welfare allowance, is granted in cases of exceptional heating needs. What does the Minister consider to be exceptional heating needs? I have raised this issue on many occasions in the House and in committee. I know many elderly people who live in senior citizens' complexes in this city in which the heating is switched off at 10 p.m. and is not switched on again until 7 a.m. The residents are not allowed to adjust the heating controls and are forced to rely on alternative sources of heat, such as electric fires, at night. This is a dangerous practice. I know many people who, if they wake up at night, must sit at home draped in blankets or return to bed because they are unable to switch on their heating. Many elderly people are afraid to switch on electric heaters because they cannot afford to pay higher electricity bills. The Government has not taken a sensible approach to this issue.

I refer to people who have been made redundant after many years in the workplace. A large number of people aged in their 40s and 50s who have worked since they left school now find themselves without a job, with few prospects of finding more work. They have paid their taxes through the years and while they are entitled to jobseeker's benefit for 15 months, what happens when the 15 month period elapses? They are means-tested and in many cases they are not entitled to any benefit because their spouse works. This is very demoralising for men and women who find themselves with no income after decades of paying their dues and taxes. Naturally they want to continue to provide for their families but the door is closed to them and they are turned away once again.

I know the Minister is a compassionate man; I have heard him speaking at many meetings. I urge him to consider the many issues that have been raised in this House, not only by me but also by other people and to deal with those that have real merit. We all want a fairer and more transparent welfare system, but we do not want to penalise people who need our help most.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.