Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)

I thank my colleague, Deputy Cowen, for giving us a chance to discuss social welfare in advance of the budget. I would like to pick up on what Deputy Ó Fearghaíl said about the staff of the Department of Social Protection around the country. They are performing an admirable job under huge pressure, particularly those who man the Oireachtas inquiry lines. Other Departments could study how the Oireachtas inquiry lines in the Department of Social Protection work in terms of providing information and assistance. The Department's staff throughout the country are doing a superb job.

Deputy Ó Fearghaíl briefly mentioned the situation with regard to social welfare appeals. All of us deal with social welfare appeals in our constituency offices. When I checked in my own office this morning, I found that the average delay on an appeal at the moment is between 12 and 14 months. Nobody in here should accept or be happy with that. If such a waiting list existed in a hospital or for a grant payment for something else, there would be a hullabaloo over it and task forces would be established. Surely it is within our ability in this House to come up with some sort of system whereby experienced civil servants from various Departments can be brought in to tackle this backlog. We fully accept that people with experience are needed to process appeals but it is not rocket science to assess eligibility or conditions.

I often think that many of those on social welfare are best placed to do this work themselves. Those who may be entitled to a payment, perhaps in the circumstances described by Deputy Troy, cannot be expected to wait for 14 months to have their appeals assessed properly. I appeal to the Minister to examine the possibility of establishing a specific initiative without incurring extra costs, for example by bringing in people from other Departments, to tackle this problem. Perhaps it can be tackled on a geographical basis.

Over the past two days, Deputy Troy and many other speakers have referred to the position of the self-employed. People whose businesses have collapsed through no fault of their own often come to our constituency offices to tell us how incredibly frustrating it is to have employed dozens of people and paid tax and PRSI and everything else, only to find that their former employees are in full receipt of social welfare whereas they cannot get any social welfare.

ISME has provided information on the distinction that is made between employees and the self-employed. It shows that unlike an employee who has an immediate entitlement to benefits depending on the waiting list to which Deputy Ó Fearghaíl referred, the self-employed do not have any immediate entitlements. They are means tested, their savings and income, including that of co-habitees, are fully assessed, as is the value of property other than the family home, and they are not covered for invalidity or disability. The difficulty associated with assessing property values is that despite many properties being no longer worth anything to their owners, they have attached to them a nominal amount which precludes the owner from receiving a proper and fair payment. I ask the Minister to consider specifically the introduction of a provision to give the self-employed, who are wealth and employment creators, a proper and fair chance. If she does so, she will do the country some service.

A number of speakers referred to the provision in the so-called jobs initiative to reduce employer PRSI. Having contacted the Department of Social Protection on the issue, I note that a catch applies in this regard. The community services programme, CSP, does phenomenal work, from providing meals on wheels services to caring for older people and promoting tourism. However, it is not allowed to transfer savings it secures as a result of the reduction in PRSI into its administration budgets, which are being cut to reflect savings. If we are serious about the services provided by the community services programme, we should offer it every possible support. As Deputy Troy stated, the CSP saves the State substantial amounts of money.

Deputy Ó Fearghaíl referred to the work done by family resource centres. I fail to understand the reason the Government transferred responsibility for the centres from the Department of Social Protection to the Department of Children and Youth Affairs. I am concerned about the allocation of their budgets and the standing they enjoy now that they appear to be boxed into the latter Department. Given that they do much more than deal with children, we should be wary about transferring them to the Department of Children and Youth Affairs. I ask the Minister to respond.

Given the significant work done by the previous Government to address fraud, it is a little rich for the Minister to trot into the House or state in the media that she is the queen of anti-fraud measures. She needs to address a number of specific areas. Some people from across the Border are using addresses in this State or various programmes to gain access to payments which are higher in this part of the island than in the other part of it. Various task forces were established in recent years - the former Ministers, Deputy Ó Cuív and Mary Hanafin, were particularly strong in this regard - involving the Garda Síochána, Revenue Commissioners and other bodies to tackle this aspect of social welfare fraud. The measures taken had a direct impact in some Border counties. These measures must continue to be enforced to ensure that those who claim benefits across the country are fully entitled to them. We must also be careful not to overstate the problem as the data available indicate that so-called false claims are not higher in Ireland than in most other European countries. For this reason, we must be wary of presenting welfare fraud as a major problem. Public representatives know that some of those who come to our offices are not entitled to social welfare benefits. Perhaps we must collectively decide to tell such people that they do not have an entitlement and refuse to deal with their case.

The Minister indicated she is seeking reductions from the ESB in respect of the fuel allowance. Thus far, she has managed to get away with cutting the fuel allowance because the cuts have not kicked in on ESB bills. Given some of the Minister's previous utterances in the House about these allowances, it is extraordinary that she has chosen to reduce them. As we move into the winter months when most people switch on their heating systems, I believe this issue will come back and bite the Government. The cut in the allowances may have been small but it was heartless given the type of people who will be most affected.

I wish the Minister well and hope she shows the same determination and vigour she has shown in pursuing the ESB when she pursues RTE to secure a reduction in the cost of television licences for people on social welfare. It is ridiculous that RTE has not agreed to reduce the television licence for those on social welfare. Various well paid RTE presenters are the first to lecture Members of the House and people in every other part of the economy about cutting expenditure. It is ridiculous, and in this respect I am being critical of former Ministers from my party, that this issue is only now being addressed. RTE must cut its cloth to reflect the current economic conditions. Rather than cutting the payments of pensioners and others with an entitlement to social welfare benefits, the Minister would be better engaged reducing incomes in RTE.

The coverage of social welfare is frequently reduced to soundbites and slogans targeted at particular audiences, depending on the speaker's particular political view. We have heard references to "deadbeat dads" and "scroungers" and arguments that people have been put on the bread line as a result of cuts in social welfare. When the Government was being formed I was struck by the fact that the Department of Social Protection, which has responsibility for one third of expenditure, was viewed as a junior Department. Irrespective of who was appointed Minister and the circumstances surrounding that appointment, the Department, as one of the most important Ministries in expenditure terms, should be the lead Department in breaking the cycle of poverty. It should lead the Departments of Education and Skills and Health in selling the message that social welfare is a temporary option for most people and send out a message to the children born into families who are on social welfare that they need not be on social welfare. It should also press the Department of Education and Skills to develop new programmes and revise existing programmes such as DEIS to make them more focused on the people who need them. The media attention given to the Department of Social Protection needs to reflect its importance in government and, more important, the lead role it and the Minister can play, should they so choose, in rebuilding society.

See this speech in context