Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 18:

In page 12, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following:

“12.The Minister shall, as soon as practicable, and prior to the coming into operation of sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11, lay before each House of the Oireachtas a report on mitigating actions to be taken, to ensure that these measures will not act as a disincentive to employment.”.

I look forward to hearing the Acting Chairman's contribution from the Chair. I have tabled this amendment because I am greatly concerned by this legislation, in that while all Members desire welfare reform and would welcome radical welfare reform that would assist people in the transition from welfare to work, this Bill does the precise opposite. It is removing the limited safety net the State provides to people who have worked or who are currently in employment. The subliminal message being sent out by this legislation is while one should take up work, one does so at one's own risk. This particular message has significant economic consequences as it tells entrepreneurs they are better off playing it safe. It tells people not to start their own businesses, try to better themselves, take up employment or increase their hours of employment. Instead, people should be encouraged to do the precise opposite, that is, to take risks, to take the punt and the gamble and, hopefully, to create jobs.

If one considers the various sections of the Bill, section 4 deals with illness benefit, which is a contributory payment. Section 5 concerns maternity benefit, which is also a contributory payment. Sections 6 and 7 deal respectively with adoptive benefit and injury benefit, which are also contributory payments. The allowances for jobseekers also affect those who make contributions because of the dramatic restriction in jobseeker's benefit. If one takes the example of a young person who had been successful in gaining employment, who probably had a decent job and who secured a mortgage only to suddenly lose that job, the minute that person's benefit lapses he or she is down to €144 per week. The supplementary welfare allowance limits are also cut for such people and the mortgage interest supplement will now be abolished. As a result, there is a need to review immediately and urgently the implications of these decisions on people in employment.

In fairness to it, the Department is coming up with some novel initiatives. For example, the new computer package it has developed to show people how they are better off in employment is a welcome development. However, it is pointless unless it is made available via the Internet to enable people to access it independently. However, the single most detrimental blow to getting people off the live register and into employment is one of those hidden, dirty decisions made in the budget, namely, the withdrawal of the medical card for people who leave welfare and return to work. That is a monumental mistake that will force more people to remain on the live register. I have encountered numerous instances of people who are in employment but who, because the three-year threshold has now finished, are in the process of losing their medical cards. Consequently, such people are considering either a reduction in their hours or giving up their jobs in order to secure their medical cards because there happen to be medical illnesses in their households. It is an extremely retrograde step to take this decision.

My final point also pertains to the under-25s. The argument is being made by the Government that such people can access the back-to-education allowance and that will be at a higher rate. What about a 24 or 25 year old who is a graduate? Many people of that age are graduates, some have masters degrees and a few may even have a PhD. However, if their degrees are not in a field in which employment is available at present, they must go back to reskill but as matters stand, they are not eligible for the back-to-education allowance because of the progression rule that is in place. It makes far more sense for progression to be about progressing from the live register and into employment rather than progression in respect of a person's educational qualifications. Something must be done urgently in this regard because every single day, 200 people are flying out of the country. It has cost €180,000 of taxpayers' money to educate each such person before he or she leaves, which is a very significant loss to the potential economic development of this country.

See this speech in context