Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

When it comes to lone parent and child income supports, the Government parties have been speaking out of both sides of their mouths. Last weekend the Labour Party Conference passed the following laudable motion:

Conference recognises that the single biggest barrier to the labour market for lone parents is the availability and affordability of child care [ESRI report on Female Participation in the Irish Labour Market 2009] and that the demand for such child care is not being met.

Conference recognises that lone parents of both genders often experience difficulty in accessing work, education and training opportunities because of a lack of good quality affordable child care and after-school care. This means that job choices are often limited and low-paid.

Conference notes the negative impact that budget 2011 had on lone parents and in particular recognises that the cuts in CE schemes impacted significantly on lone parents.

Conference therefore calls on the Labour Party in government to:

- Refrain from imposing any further cuts to benefits for lone parent families that would create further barriers to accessing work and education opportunities;

- Devise a focused and targeted scheme providing high quality, affordable child care for lone parent families;

- Develop a system of mutual obligation, similar to that of Nordic countries where parents are obliged to look for work, and, in return governments are obliged to provide employment and child care supports.

We saw it with child benefit and now in regard to lone parent supports - when it comes to child income supports, the Labour Party makes all the right sounds and then does the opposite in government. I appeal to Labour Party Deputies to think carefully before voting on this Bill. They clearly understand what is the right thing to do. The Minister of State, Deputy Shortall, articulated it well in the last Dáil from the Opposition benches, and their colleagues re-affirmed it last weekend at the party conference. Now it is time for them to have the courage of their convictions by voting against the Bill if the sections the Minister of State rightly identified as unacceptable to her party in opposition are not deleted.

It is ridiculous that we have legislation which purports to deal with two specific areas of social welfare provision, namely, lone parent payments and pensions but which the Minister now tells us will include major changes in 12 additional areas by way of amendments on Committee Stage. As a Whip, I have some idea of the timeframe scheduled for next week in terms of amendments. I understand Committee and Report Stages will be squeezed into a three-hour window, with a guillotine to be imposed next Wednesday. This is deemed sufficient time to deal with amendments from other Members in addition to the amendments the Minister has indicated she will bring forward. That is rushed legislation and it is entirely unacceptable. I urge the Minister to return to the Government Chief Whip and demand a proper Committee Stage debate with the necessary time allocated to tease out all of the details in full. I have tried to use my time today to fast-track some of the debate before next week. I will deal with the proposed cuts in job seeker's allowance and benefit when the amendments are presented. I hope the Minister understands that in terms of any changes in regard to days worked and so on, unless she moves towards the hour mechanism rather than days, it will end up in a cut for those who are underemployed or in part-time work.

In regard to the regulatory provisions relating to defined benefit pension funds, the Bill is a missed opportunity and should go much further. In this regard, I acknowledge the Minister's commitment to address some of the other changes required in terms of pensions in the next Social Welfare Bill. The provisions may have the effect of encouraging some of the funds to invest more prudently and in Ireland's economic recovery, but that is not guaranteed. Irish pension funds fell much harder than those in other countries in large part because they invested so disproportionately in equities. That they continue to do so suggests they have learnt very little either from the dotcom crash in the early 2000s or the latest financial crash. I support the direction in which the Minister is moving, but stronger legislative provisions will be required to ensure greater diversification and prudence in the future. Likewise, this Bill should have been used to ensure more private sector pension funds, currently estimated by the Irish Brokers Association to be valued at some €80 billion, are invested into specific, strategic and employment-intensive investment initiatives here in Ireland. A greater degree of such investment would create jobs and help to dig us out of the hole we are in. I acknowledge the changes that have been made but a great deal more must be done.

Unfortunately, the Acting Chairman has indicated that I have run out of time. I hope the same will not happen on Committee Stage where we will be debating the vast range of issues we have discovered are to be included in a Bill which was originally intended to deal with only two or three. I ask the Minister, in her summing up, to outline how she will give effect to the commitment she made earlier. Will she agree to delete the provision whereby the cut-off point in respect of lone parent support is to be reduced to seven years? In the absence of this and other changes, I am opposed to the Bill.

See this speech in context