Colm Keaveney (Galway East, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I would have much preferred that the Minister had seen the amendment I proposed but which has been ruled out of order. It would have given her an opportunity to explain to the House the detail of the counter-measures that everybody disputes because there is no confidence in the House that the scale of the Minister's anticipated activation measures will meet the demand of the number of young people affected. I agree with those who have expressed concern. Only 3,000 additional activation posts were announced in the budget. Relative to the number of people affected this does not add up to provision or a strategic plan for them. For that reason I will oppose the section.

The Minister lauds this Bill as an achievement to protect core rates of social protection. I said yesterday that her language on this subject sounds akin to my telling her that I would extend the ushers' rate of pay to cover her in her position as Minister and that it would not be a pay cut.

This is a cut in the core rate of social protection - nothing more and nothing less. The Minister cannot leave this debate, walk out of this Chamber today and say ever again that the Government has adhered to the commitment in the programme for Government to protect the core rates of social welfare. That is simply untrue.

See this speech in context