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

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on the Social Welfare Bill. I welcome the Aire Stáit; it has been a long time since we had one in the Department of Social Protection. I congratulate him on his appointment.

I hope the Minister of State will seriously consider an issue I will bring to his attention, as I have spoken about it with a number of Ministers in the House but to date those comments have fallen on deaf ears. The Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection has decided to shelve any plans to means test child benefit. I have no difficulty with that. My fear is that because the issue has now been shelved, the reform of child benefit will be also taken off the table. That would be a missed opportunity that could benefit society as a whole.

Starting at the beginning of September, the Department of Social Protection has again recommenced its policy of issuing 600,000 letters to parents across the country, asking them to confirm that their children are in school. This is replicating a process already in place through the National Educational Welfare Board, adding significant unnecessary administration. There is a bizarre process whereby the Department of Social Protection, in issuing these 600,000 letters, is using enough paper to cover Croke Park 2.5 times in duplicating a system already in place. A principal is legally obliged to report a child who has missed 20 days in school if there is not a legitimate reason for the absence. Under the rules of child benefit, parents cannot legally draw down the payment unless the child is attending a school. Nevertheless, the two systems are unconnected. The control section of the Department of Social Protection issues these letters but it is replicating an existing system, which is leading to unnecessary bureaucracy. This is curbing the achievement of additional savings that could be made in the Department. Each year, the control section of the Department of Social Protection saves approximately €75 million to €85 million on child benefit alone. That is based on a nominal calculation but significant amounts could be saved by dovetailing the two systems.

There could be a major benefit not just in administrative savings and those related to overpayments and fraud but in long-term savings by identifying children in vulnerable households and ensuring they attend school. We all know the social and economic impact of keeping children in school and giving them the opportunity to access education. The current National Educational Welfare Board annual report describes a young girl called Jenny who is six years old. In December, the school principal contacted the National Educational Welfare Board, indicating she had been absent from school for 65 days. An officer from the board contacted the family, called to the house, wrote to them and issued legal threats. Eventually, the family ended up in court; the mother was fined €200 and the father was fined €300, and since they went to court, Jenny has attended school. Was that a good use of the limited social work resources available to the National Educational Welfare Board, the State's legal resources or the court's time? There were also associated costs. Most importantly, Jenny lost 12 months in school before the issue was resolved. Surely it would make far more sense if the threat of losing child benefit hung over the family if the daughter did not attend school.

We need to rethink how we are doing things in this country. We cannot have Departments in different silos and not being linked. We must start to get basic things right in this country by using the limited resources we have available to the State in a wiser way to benefit children like Jenny and every other Jenny in the country. I urge the Minister to seriously examine the issue and link the Departments of Education and Skills, Social Protection and Children and Youth Affairs, as well as the National Educational Welfare Board.

I will also raise the issue of the State non-contributory pension. There has been considerable discussion in the House in the past couple of weeks during the passage of the Finance Bill regarding the eligibility of retiring farmers to tax relief for a 15-year lease based on handing over the land to an active farmer. The debate has been about the definition of an "active farmer". That may be an issue in Deputy Kelleher's part of the country.

In my part of the country it is not a massive issue as we do not have many retiring farmers who lease out land and have a significant tax liability. A bigger problem is how farm leases are dealt with in the social welfare system, and I ask the Minister of State to examine this.

A father may not wish to sign over a farm holding to his adult child because he wants the security it gives, and there are numerous examples showing why it is wise to hold on to title in such circumstances. If he instead hands land to his child with a nominal long-term lease the Department of Social Protection will estimate the actual value of the lease and deduct that amount from the father's non-contributory old-age pension. The Department's view is that the father in this example is denying himself a source of income - he will be penalised financially for entering a lease with his son or daughter who is actively farming the land. The Department is forcing old people to forego the modicum of security such an arrangement gives and instead sign over the land as failure to do so is penalised.

Another example might involve an old bachelor farmer who is struggling to make a living and does not have anyone to take over the land. This farmer might lease his land to a progressive farmer in the area - the latter might wish to expand his holding, develop the land and ensure it is used efficiently. Every penny the bachelor farmer receives from this a lease will be deducted from his non-contributory pension but if he got a job he could earn €200 per week without it impacting on his non-contributory old-age pension. Every penny he earns through the lease, which is economically beneficial to the State in the long-term, will see the farmer penalised commensurately.

If we are committed to the objective of making changes that will release farm land to active young farmers I urge the Minister of State to examine how the social welfare system treats farmers in the circumstances I outlined. The system is delaying the release of land because it penalises farmers who hand over land to active young farmers who want to maximise its use. Difficulties and historical issues in the west of Ireland mean there are many farmers like those I mentioned and many fragmented holdings. The only way to make fragmented holdings viable financially is to allow them be subject to long-term leases. Far more use could be made of this land but the problem lies in the Department of Social Protection, not the Revenue Commissioners.

As we speak, 800 people are in hospital beds having been designated as delayed discharges. These people are fit to be discharged but there is nowhere for them to go. Around 600 of these people await a long-term nursing home bed but around 200 are waiting to go back into the community. Of the latter group, some need a family member to take them home but this cannot be done without additional home help so access to the carer's benefit is required. I know a person who applied for carer's benefit in October and received a letter from the Department saying medical approval had been granted but payment would not proceed until February 2015. At the moment in Longford the Department is processing applications received in July. Carer's benefit is black and white: one is either eligible based on stamps or one is not. There are not enough members of staff so applications are delayed at the moment by 12 to 14 weeks and this denies people the resources they need to support someone, usually an old or disabled person, in his or her home.

Carer's benefit is money well spent, as it saves the State a significant amount, but there is a bureaucratic delay at the moment. The application of which I spoke is black and white and has been medically approved so there is no reason payment should not follow within a couple of weeks. Staff in the carer's benefit section in Longford do a great job but there are too few people to process all the applications. The situation is equally bad when it comes to carer's allowance - people are awaiting this payment to allow them to take people home from hospitals. We have not provided the requisite level of staffing to process applications but we are prepared to pay €700,000 a day to keep 800 people in hospital beds. It seems we are not prepared to allocate a couple more members of staff to process applications. It makes financial sense and it means older people can stay in their own homes, where they want to be. I urge the Minister of State to consider this issue as it is causing serious financial hardship for families around the country. His Department is not allocating staff and I urge him to do so as it will save the Department of Health a great deal. Staff members working in Longford are doing a tremendous job under huge pressure and are getting it in the ear from people awaiting payment. It is a question of silos: the Department of Social Protection is not willing to process applications because it means a cost to that Department, but there could be significant savings for the Department of Health. I urge this Government to adopt joined-up thinking at long last.

See this speech in context