Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am pleased to have the opportunity to contribute on the Social Welfare Bill. In the limited time available to me, I will focus on a few issues.

A number of Deputies referred to the social employment and community employment schemes, which provide excellent training opportunities and employment, particularly in rural areas. However, the rules make participation difficult. I will highlight examples, namely, the three-year rule and the requirement that a participant be over 25 years of age. One has the opportunity to participate on a scheme for three years, be they consecutive or not. If someone does so before the age of 30 years, though, he or she cannot participate again before reaching 55 years of age. This makes no sense at all. The rule that prohibits those aged under 25 years and the three-year rule should be reconsidered. There should be greater continuity. Will the Minister and his Department consider this matter?

The rules make it difficult, not just for participants, but also for the voluntary groups that administer the schemes. They do excellent work in our communities. All that we need to do is look around and see what they do in our areas - Tidy Towns, the GAA and other voluntary groups. Without them, the work might not get done. If it had to be done through State investment, it would cost multiples of what it does now. A large social dividend is to be derived for the participants and the communities. Many participants might be able to avail of other employment, which would free places on the schemes' waiting lists.

I wish to refer to seasonable and part-time workers and their social protection entitlements. My colleague, Deputy Pringle, who is present, would be well aware of the industry from his Killybegs base, as would the Minister of State. Something must be done. Seasonal and part-time workers play an essential role in the rural economy, be they working in the fishing, agriculture or hospitality sector. The current scheme works against them, though. The requirement to have made 17 contributions over a three-year period equates to 39 contributions per annum. Thirty-nine weeks' work is practically impossible for people in those sectors. It is tantamount to telling them that they are better off not working. There is no advantage. The subsidiary income threshold of €12.70 per day, or €63.50 per week, is unfair. If a seasonal worker earns that income from farming, he or she is not entitled to receive unemployment benefit. All of this defies logic. We should be trying to incentivise people to work, but this is a disincentive. An annual subsidiary income of €3,300 should not be sufficient to deny anyone of the right to obtain a social protection payment. One's social welfare ceases when one is immediately required to make 13 contributions in order to transfer to the next claim. No allowance is made for the seasonality or unique nature of work in fish factories or the hospitality and agriculture sectors. The various changes to social welfare eligibility rules have worked against seasonal and part-time workers.

I will deal with this, together with my party colleagues, on Committee Stage and hope there will be universal support for my proposals.

I wish to refer to those in receipt of social welfare payments who have inadvertently and unintentionally drawn down payments in addition to their statutory entitlements. This happens, but I do not believe the majority of social welfare recipients set out to defraud the Department. When it happens and the mistake is recognised, it normally seeks to claw back 15% of an individual's social welfare entitlement. A person in receipt of €200 per week is expected to pay back €30. That might not seem like a lot, but it is a considerable sum for an individual in receipt of only €200 per week. The Department should be more humane in such circumstances. I am not casting aspersions on the officials who deal with these issues because there seems to be a rule of thumb, but they should be given greater flexibility in this regard.

The restoration of the bereavement grant should be considered by the Government in the context of the next budget.

I cannot understand, nor can most Deputies, why it takes at least 18 weeks to process an application for carer's allowance. Some applications may take longer to process if additional information is required, but if all of the boxes are ticked, applications should not take that long to process.

I hope my contribution will be heard and my concerns addressed by the Government. I will deal specifically with the treatment of seasonal and part-time workers during the debate on Committee Stage.

See this speech in context