Tom Barry (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Social Welfare Bill. I welcome the balance that has been struck here. As has been mentioned, there is the increase in the living alone allowance, the Christmas bonus, the €5 increase in children's allowance at a cost of €72 million - a lot of money - and the topical one, the €100 subsidy towards the water charge for those on the household benefits package.

In mentioning the household benefits package, we need to review it and ensure it has proper oversight because it has come to my attention that while the State pays significant ESB bills for those on household benefits, it has no oversight.

There are cases where people are receiving cheques for their electricity allowance which make it clear that they are not living in the house. If they are not living there then it is the case that a social house is empty that someone else could use. Given that we are investing €2 billion in social housing, we must examine the current stock and ensure that claims are properly made. I do not take issue with the requirement by Irish Water for people to provide PPS numbers given the situation with the household benefits package. Previously, people who got an allocation of electricity units used them up and started again the next month, but now if one does not use them, one gets a cheque for the relevant amount. That is absolutely bonkers.

I welcome the increase, from 3,000 to 6,000, in the number of employees on the JobsPlus scheme. If the scheme is tied in with the JobBridge programme then a person could be employed for nine months, following which they would qualify for the JobsPlus scheme and they would be trained up for a small business that is trying to get some help to employ people. The change is valuable. The measure must be welcomed, as working for two years with a wage subsidy provides a chance for rural employment. That is evident in the increase in the number of people employed, which is approaching 2 million, yet criticism is coming from all angles of the Opposition. That is negligent. At some stage such Members will have to recognise the facts.

There are anomalies in the system. We must examine more closely the requirement for progression in terms of education courses in order to qualify for the back to education allowance. People should get a chance and there should be more flexibility in the system. I refer, for example, to a person who wants to do a level 5 course in a different area because he or she is aware that a job is available in the area. I accept that more flexibility has been introduced into the system but a little more would go a long way. People have come to my clinic who must become unemployed for nine months in order to qualify, and they would prefer to do a course rather than to collect unemployment benefit. We must tweak the system in one or two areas.

An article was published in The Irish Timestoday about the European Court of Justice ruling to the effect that economically inactive EU citizens who go to another member state solely to obtain social assistance may be excluded from certain social benefits. That is an extraordinary ruling. A member state must therefore have the possibility of refusing to grant social benefits to economically inactive Union citizens who exercise their right to freedom of movement solely to obtain social assistance in other member states. That is something middle Ireland feels very strongly about. We have no problem helping people who need our help but people who exploit the system are a different matter. One spokesman from the European Commission stated that it has consistently stressed that free movement is the right to free circulation. It is not the right to access freely a member state’s social assistance system. That will be an interesting topic of discussion in the House in future. We are good European citizens.

The budget is a very good one in terms of social welfare. I accept the following issue relates to finance rather than social welfare but I would have liked to see an extension of capital gains tax relief, even for another three months, because given the situation with rent, that would have allowed a lot of people to buy property and put it on the rental market which would make additional houses available to rent. It slipped by a lot of people who only have more money now and might not have realised what was happening. I will ask the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, to reconsider the matter if at all possible.

See this speech in context