Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I do not agree with my colleague on the Opposition benches regarding housing. In fact, a great deal has already been done and is being done every day. It was the neglect of the local authority housing sector over the past 15 years that has left us in this situation. When housing responsibility was handed to the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection to fund it by way of rent support through the private sector, it suddenly all came unstuck. We now have a national emergency of proportions we never dreamed of in the past.

I will not level blame. When I hear this matter being moaned about regularly, however, it is time to take a stand. At least one former Minister with responsibility for social welfare made an attempt to offload the responsibility back to where it should have been with the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government but was unsuccessful. She had the right idea. The point is, however, at long last perhaps we are coming to grips with the fact that we have a social responsibility in respect of housing, that it affects the fabric of our society, that we must provide houses and that we cannot provide them overnight. If we wanted to provide them overnight we should have started this ten or 15 years ago. We should also acknowledge that there were huge numbers of people on the housing lists of local authorities during the boom. The fact is that because there was a boom, we did not need the houses. However, they are needed now.

Enough has been said about that matter which we will deal with, with other subjects, at a later stage.

I welcome the increase in social welfare payments. It is badly needed and much appreciated because many of the people who have found themselves having to rely entirely on the safety net of social welfare payments in the past few years are living in desperate conditions. Some were PAYE workers, while others were self-employed, but they have one thing in common - they are under the cosh. At last, some recompense is coming their way and I am delighted that that is the case. I must point out that if we did not have good management in the past five or six years, we would not have the money now. Therefore, these things do not happen of their own accord. Everybody says we should spend more on everything. Of course, we should, but we must also raise the money needed to do so. It is all very fine and easy to spend the cash, but it is not so easy to raise it and take the responsibility of asking people to make contributions by way of taxes or whatever the case may be. I listened with some cynicism to some of the suggestions I have heard made in the past couple of days in that regard.

The issue of pensions is moot and needs to be dealt with. I know that the Minister is dealing with it. Having had some experience in that area a number of years ago, it is possible to deal with it in a fair and equitable way, which is what must be done. A previous Government lurched in one direction to try to deal with it; for what purpose, I do not know as it escapes me, but it was not successful in that it created anomalies and a huge bill. I do not want to remind my good friend across the House, but there are times when I am stirred emotionally by his rapport and know that he means it sincerely in his heart. It is no harm, therefore, to throw the ball back in that direction once again.

Women who, for various reasons, left the workforce and then returned to it have a grievance, as do some men who find themselves in the same position, and they need to be dealt with. I know that the Minister is addressing the issue. We need to recognise the unfairness of it. The reason it is unfair is we are entering better times. Because of the sacrifices they made and made everywhere all over the country, it will be possible in the not too distant future to address their issues and concerns in a meaningful way.

A few points about administration have come to my attention. Means tests have been the bane of my life. With appeals, they really drive me up the wall, particularly when I have to attend the hearing of appeals. Generally, a person wins which raises the question as to why there had to be an appeal in the first place. The decisions on in inordinately high number of applications for carer's allowance are appealed. This should not be the case. I saw something a couple of weeks ago which involved a person who wished to care for their parents, one of whom was 89 years old, while the other was 94. I would have thought that it would have been simple to determine. I would not have spent too much time in evaluating the person's entitlement. If someone has managed to reach the age of 93 or 94 years, he or she is entitled to expect to receive some care from somebody who is willing to care for him or her and prevent him or her from having to rely on the hospital system. Obviously, it is good economics to examine their circumstances and put in place the necessary measures to ensure he or she will be catered for and it could involve a variety of things. It involves issues to do with security, health and companionship, plus quality of life. I know that the Minister is looking at this matter, but we need to encourage such an approach.

Another issue that has come to my attention and about which I worry is where Intreo decides to encourage people to go back to work on low pay. Such persons may be dependent on rent payment support. If they go back to work on low pay, they will receive little or no rent payment support because they will be back in full-time employment, in which case they will end up homeless. This issue needs to be dealt with quickly because those who find themselves in that group need to have their cases heard.

Another issue that does not amuse me is where a woman with children who cannot go out to work and receives a limited payment is advised to go to out to work. The logic escapes me. This issue has been in my mind for some time and I brought it to the attention of the Minister who is engaging on it. What I have highlighted should not be happening. We should apply a little logic to such circumstances. Obviously, the person concerned can care for somebody in the household, nearby or next door and always wants to do so. She always wants to make a contribution to society. That is what women do, but it does not always happen in that way. Because of this, we need to be conscious of their predicament and alert to the fact that they are vulnerable, particularly if they have small children, and dependent on the safety net society provides for them.

The House will be glad to know that I will not go on for as long as I would like. There are lots of things my colleague across the House stirred in my bosom when he spoke a few moments ago. They would tempt me to enter into a long dialogue, but I will restrain myself on this occasion.

See this speech in context