Frank O'Rourke (Kildare North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I will begin by acknowledging the positive changes, some of which are included as a consequence of the confidence and supply agreement between my party and Fine Gael in government. I will refer later to provisions that might be considered for inclusion in future budgets or perhaps even next year if it transpires that there is additional capacity within the Department.

The €5 per week increase for pensioners is most welcome and important. Older people have worked all their lives and it is vital that they be protected in retirement. This increase, together with the increase provided for in this year's budget, sends an important signal about our priorities. The increase of €5 in all social welfare payments is also welcome. It will make a particular difference to lone-parent families, many of whom are struggling. The extension of maternity benefit to families with premature babies is another positive change. As the father of a child who was premature, it is especially welcome to me, as reflected in my contribution to the debate on the Private Members' Bill that passed through the House.

The Christmas bonus will be restored at a rate of 85% this year. We must seek to move, as soon as possible, towards a situation where it will be restored at the rate of 100%, particularly for all pensioners who have contributed greatly to the State all of their lives.

Hopefully, those people will have many years in which to enjoy the bonus.

The restoration of the telephone allowance was a measure I called for and it is very welcome. The negative aspect of this is that it is going to be late and will not be implemented until next year. However, it is better late than never. It is very important for pensioners, whether they are living alone or with their partners. For most of them, it means two things, namely, it gives them contact with people outside their homes and removes the isolation and, more importantly, allows for them to feel secure through having access to panic buttons, panic alarms, etc. Many pensioners and older people have had to do without this allowance so I welcome the fact that it is being restored. I had called for this to happen in recent months. We want to extend the allowance to all pensioners, irrespective of their circumstances, as quickly as possible. It is important for all pensioners that they have access to the allowance. How the fuel allowance is paid is also positive because it will help people who are struggling.

I wanted to acknowledge these positives in the Bill as a backdrop for consideration of other matters in the period ahead. As the economy and the position of the Exchequer improve, it will be important to have reviews in order that additional funding, when it becomes available, can be channelled in the right direction in order to help those who are most vulnerable and struggling. To that end, I wish to address the issue of child benefit. During my 20 short months in the Dáil, I have met the Minister's predecessor - the current Taoiseach, Deputy Varadkar - on two or three occasions to discuss this matter. I have also raised it as on Topical Issues. Child benefit should be extended to students who are in full-time second-level education. With the advent of transition year, which comes two years before the leaving certificate, most students can be in full-time second-level education until the age of 18 or 18 and a half. It is the final year in second-level education that can affect families greatly because it is leaving certificate year and can be very expensive. Extending child benefit to those over 18 and still in second-level education was costed by the Department, at my request. Such a measure would cost €55 million. The dynamics may have changed in the interim but it would be worth considering my proposal again. At the time, the then Minister acknowledged that such a measure would be positive. He acknowledged on national radio that we should consider doing this. It has not been done and it was not factored in to the budget. We should consider it because it would help struggling families a lot, because it is really important and because it would make a difference. A child in his or her final year at school needs support. As a result of the fact that he or she started school at an earlier age, a person could be in receipt of child benefit while his or her fellow students may not. That is something of an inequity. I would ask the Minister to consider this issue.

I also ask the Minister to consider the matter of the bereavement grant, particularly as it affects people who may be in receipt of social welfare payments or pensions. I am aware that they can get some supports from community welfare officers through the provision of supplementary welfare payments. Obviously, however, those payments do not go anywhere close to what may be required. I ask the Minister to also give consideration to this issue.

Rather than revising a raft of issues already covered by previous speakers, I shall just focus on a few. An issue regarding the jobseeker's payment has come up a lot at my clinics in the recent weeks. If a person is in and out of casual work and then applies for the jobseeker's allowance, he or she is not paid for the first three days of the claim. That has been the case for years but it is now a disincentive and a negative aspect. If a person is offered work for a couple of weeks and then goes back to claim jobseeker's allowance for a week or two or vice versa, he or she will not be paid for the first three days of the claim. This is a lot in a five or ten-day window. People who are in temporary or casual contracts can be laid off and when they go back into the environment of the jobseeker's system while waiting for more work to come along, losing three days from a six-day payment has a great impact. Could consideration be given to this matter? I know that it is not relevant to the Bill but I thought I might take the opportunity to highlight people's concerns in order that we might discover what could be done by the Minister's officials.

Reference was made to the pensions anomaly.From working with my colleague, Deputy O'Dea, I am aware that the Minister is very open-minded on this and is working positively to address the anomaly that was introduced in 2012 and that she is trying to correct. If I understand the position correctly, there is a commitment to the effect that if there is any available flexibility within the budget for next year, the Minister will consider what might be done and that something will definitely be considered in the context of the budget for 2019. This is important because it has become an issue for Deputies at their clinics in the past six to eight months. Women who are reaching retirement age and are only realising the significance of the 2012 change now. Most people will not be aware of it until they submit their applications. This important issue must be dealt with comprehensively and in a positive manner. We need to support families that took the decision for a parent to stay at home, which was a good decision for the right reasons. They should not be penalised.

In the time remaining, I wish to refer to Tús schemes. I have spoken to the Minister about this on numerous occasions and she responded very positively. I am aware that there is a bigger picture regarding Tús and community employment schemes, both of which are massively important. The Minister and her officials, who I have met in the Department, acknowledge that flexibility will be introduced to those schemes. The Minister is considering doing this in early 2018.We know what the level of unemployment is right now, and the levels of employment equivalent, and when a Tús scheme placement is vacated after one year there is no one else coming through. We have acknowledged this and followed the path through the Department to show that the lists of people to interview to fill those vacancies are not coming through to the Tús supervisors. There are a number of losers in this situation. The real loser is the individual who may be at a particular stage in his or her life whereby he or she may not get full-time work again. I am not being discriminatory when I say that. The club will also lose out. It suffers because nobody is coming in to fill the space. The third loser is the community because there is a seriously negative impact. When we consider the host, the participant and the community collectively, we can see that there is a major deficit. This needs to be addressed by allowing some flexibility. If a Tús participant finishes his or her year, he or she should not have to vacate and the year should be rolled on. Obviously, this requires a change to the Department policy or the legislation to actually make that happen. For some people, the scheme provides a social element to their lives when they go out to work for 20 hours per week. Apart from the benefits and the worthwhile service they give to the community and the group, it may be the only interaction they have because they may live alone. There are a number of avenues and angles upon which I would like to see the Minister's commitment followed through as per the discussions we have had. The Minister said that she would bring in that flexibility in 2018 and I would like to see this happen in order to help in these areas, which are of great benefit.

See this speech in context