John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

We just do not know.

Over 42,000 older people who have been robbed of their State pension because of the 2012 changes to pension bands and rates made by the Minister's party would see absolutely nothing in this Bill, despite total consensus in the House here that these changes were wrong and that they disproportionately affected women, discriminating against them either for starting to work at an early age or for taking time out to look after and help raise their families. A motion passed only a few weeks ago in this House calling for the total reversal of the 2012 changes gave these people hope that these changes would be forthcoming. I put these points to the Minister at the committee meeting this morning. How much longer do these people have to wait? There have been mixed messages from the Government on this, from the Minister and the Taoiseach. When will these older people receive the State pension they deserve? When it comes to righting wrongs money is an easy excuse. It is always peddled but it certainly does not wash with people when billions of euro can be found to bail out the banks and millions can be wasted in setting up Irish Water and bringing in water charges until the Government is forced into a U-turn which wastes millions of euro in taxpayers' money. The Government can spend €5 million on a public relations spin operation yet we cannot get a straight message about the changes to and reversal of the 2012 pension cuts. The Minister cannot suggest that money is not available to right this wrong which has affected over 42,000 people.

Where is Fianna Fáil in all of this? Why did it not push for this issue to be included in this Bill? It should be in it. Last year when I brought a motion to the House, Fianna Fáil unfortunately opposed it by abstaining. Now, after intensive lobbying by older people it has introduced a motion. It had an ideal opportunity to right the wrongs and get it included in the Social Welfare Bill and get the changes reversed but it did not take it.

Most of this Bill has to be welcomed, the increases in social welfare payments, the continuation of the back to work dividend, which was due to close to new entrants from next March and the extension of maternity benefit for mothers of premature babies among others. Questions have to asked, however, about other elements of the Bill. The renaming of the family income supplement as the working family payment beggars belief. The working family payment that was a cornerstone of Fine Gael's general election campaign last year turns out to be little more than a name change. The Department can promote work all it wants but if affordable child care is not available lone parents cannot return to work. If zero hour contracts, low pay and precarious working times and conditions are the only option for lone parents they are better off on social welfare. That is not good. It is not promoting welfare over work but it is the stark reality. Until a mandatory living wage is introduced, family income supplement, or the working family payment as it will be named, given to low paid workers is essentially a State subsidy for employers. If those workers were paid a living wage they would not need so much assistance from the State and the money could be put to better use in other areas.

We are still waiting on the Government Bill that will half-ban zero hour contracts and there is nothing on the subject in this Bill either.

Time and again, the Minister has committed to reducing child poverty. She has said it is her main priority as Minister but what is she doing to achieve this? Increases in qualified child payment is a specific measure which directly targets children in low-income households, in poverty or at significant risk of poverty. Despite knowing this, the Minister has increased the qualified child payment by a miserable €2, which is nowhere near enough.

We need to see specific key actions to take children out of poverty, including consistent poverty. An increase of €2 will not do that. While the Government talks about a growing economy and releases statement after statement welcoming falling live register figures, what happens to the 140,000 living in consistent poverty in this State? What about the majority of lone parents who are living in deprivation, who cannot afford a warm coat for their children or to heat their own homes? What about the young people on reduced rates of jobseeker's payment because of their age? What is a growing economy doing for these people?

In March this year the UN recommended that Ireland establish a child maintenance service. Did the Minister read this recommendation? Is she ignoring it? Why is she leaving lone parents at the mercy of a court system that is stressful, costly, and time consuming to seek child maintenance to which they are entitled? We need a structured and proper child maintenance service that assists and supports lone parents and their children that is in line with the UN recommendations.

There are more than 150,000 people registered as self-employed in this State. Bogus self-employment is a threat to all workers. It undermines pay and conditions, workers rights and security. It gives the whip hand to the most unscrupulous employers, undermines union organisation and negotiating power, takes all the risks that are common in construction and other industries and offloads them on the shoulders of the workers themselves. It smears the many genuinely self-employed people. Bogus self-employment leads to tax and PRSI losses that harm all workers. A conservative figure of €750,000 in employer PRSI is lost annually along with considerable reductions in workers' entitlements. I urge the Minister to address it immediately.

There are more than 5,000 men and women aged 65 in receipt of jobseeker's payments, not because they are jobseekers but because they have been robbed of their State pension for a year. This rule does not apply to all workers because the discrimination goes beyond that. Those in the public service are given a special supplementary pension but other workers are not entitled to this accommodation and are left without any income for the year unless they sign on to jobseeker's payment, receiving a weekly payment that is almost €50 less than they would have received in their State pension. For those who have worked their whole lives and paid their taxes and pension contributions, the result is that they must sign on to jobseeker's payment at 65 years. In 2021, the pension age will increase to 67 years and in 2028 it will increase further to 68 years. Does that mean that those who are forced to retire at 65 years will remain on jobseeker's payment for two or three years? What plans are in place to address this serious problem? We are waiting on a money message from the Government to bring forward legislation that I brought forward to abolish the mandatory retirement age, which would resolve this issue. If the Government is not forthcoming with the money message, I want to hear the Minister's plan.

There was no consultation on the increase in the pension age, it was not discussed, and there was no debate or vote. It was just a decision made without a thought as to the consequences. The Minister has reminded us on many occasions that social protection is about protecting the most vulnerable, unless one is a lone parent, a child living in consistent poverty, a pensioner on a reduced State pension, punished for raising her family, a 65 year old forced onto the dole, a young jobseeker, a young person or a person stuck in low-paid, precarious employment. Sinn Féin will allow this Bill go forward to Committee Stage. There are positive elements to it but there are other elements that require serious change and we will put forward many amendments to do that. Unfortunately, the Opposition cannot table amendments that have a financial cost on the State, which represents a serious problem. We must work with what we have. I will bring forward amendments and I look forward to the debate then.

See this speech in context