Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

Obviously the contents of the Social Welfare, Pensions and Civil Registrations Bill 2018 reflect the Minister's budget announcements. The Opposition cannot table amendments that would be a cost to the State. It is a case of put up and shut up; this is the Bill and that is it.

Social welfare payments are increasing across the board by the small amount of €5, but not until March 2019. As a previous speaker pointed out, when that is averaged out over the year it comes to €3.80 a week. This anomaly of delaying increases in social welfare payments was introduced during the austerity years. It used to be from 1 January, but in the past six or seven budgets the increases have been brought in later in the year at the end of March. This has to change in future. I could try to change it by way of amendment, but as it would not be accepted there is no point. Therefore we need to make the point here in the Chamber. This can be contrasted with the tax cuts that come into effect on 1 January to benefit mainly people at the top end of the wage structure.

The fuel allowance is to increase by 84 cent per week which hardly reflects the amount people are now spending on fuel, gas and electricity where prices have increased recently. A whole layer of people will continue to experience fuel poverty. There has been a general welcome for the full restoration of the Christmas bonus. The spousal pension benefit for same-sex spouses and civil partners who are members of occupational pension schemes has been also generally welcomed.

Section 10 which extends the existing provisions contained in the Act to ensure that a person who is in the care of the State on attaining the age of 18 is not subject to age-related reduced-rate payments of jobseeker's allowance. This amendment will come into effect on 1 January 2019. The Minister cannot argue that a person aged between 18 and 26, who is not in State care, should not get the increase. That needs to be the next step. This is pure and utter discrimination against a section of young people. The Minister will need to bite the bullet in the next budget and increase that payment to the full amount of jobseeker's allowance. How can the Minister regard one section of 18 year olds as not equal to another section of 18 year olds? It just does not make sense.

The problem is that the increases do not address the structural effects the austerity cuts inflicted on people.

The Bill and budget have failed the one in every six people in Ireland who live with an income below the poverty line, which is 16.5% of the population. This means 780,000 people live below the poverty line, 250,000 of whom are children and more than 100,000 of whom have jobs. People who are working are included in those figures. The Government has made a number of statements that the way out of poverty is into a job, yet 100,000 people who have jobs live below the poverty line. Poverty levels reached their lowest point in Ireland in 2009 when 14.1% of our population was considered poor. Since then the rate has increased. The budget lacks any serious initiatives to begin to significantly reduce poverty. At rates of near full employment, the simple policy solution to create more jobs no longer stands. Targeted measures aimed at high risk poverty groups, including children, people with an illness or disability, and people trapped in long-term unemployment, are needed. Social welfare payments must be increased to meet the cost of living. Budget 2019 has failed to start this process. The figures from Social Justice Ireland, some of which have been referred to already, show that 5.6% of people at work are at serious risk of poverty and 41.9% of unemployed people, 33.3% of students, 25.7% of people at home, 11.8% of retired people, 39.1% of ill and disabled people and 19.3% of children from zero to 17 years of age are at risk of poverty. The Minister has not even attempted to try to address those crucial issues in the Bill. The budget has failed to ensure that Ireland meets its child poverty target of lifting 70,000 children out of consistent poverty by 2020. In 2011, 107,000 children lived in consistent poverty. The 2016 figure was 142,000. The budget and the Bill have introduced small measures but they are not enough to ensure Ireland meets its 2020 target on child poverty.

The budget and this legislation failed to deal with the restoration of the jobseeker's allowance rates for under 26s. I made the point already. Lone parents and other parents are still waiting for the Nordic childcare model since the former Minister, Deputy Burton, made her austerity cuts for lone parents in the last Government.

When many of us heard the title of the Bill, we expected before we were briefed that the long-awaited legislation on the defined pension scheme was included in the Bill. We were advised yesterday in our briefing that no date or indication could be given as to when that legislation will be introduced. Can the Minister give a date for it? The outline of the legislation was introduced last year and in the meantime a number of companies, such as Irish Life, have stopped paying the defined benefit pension scheme. If that legislation had existed, there could have been some protection for those workers. A number of Deputies and I received emails from semi-State retired staff associations such as Bord na Móna, ESB, RTÉ, CIÉ, Bord Gáis, Eircom, Coillte and aviation staff. I know the Minister also received a letter because they said so in the covering note they sent with the email. The email I received states:

It is not commonly understood that many thousands of Irish citizens do not have a state pension or any of the associated benefits (medical, optical etc). The paradox is that a high proportion of these retired people have devoted their working lives for the benefit of the State. They provided the nation's electricity, gas, peat, radio and television, telecommunications, aviation and myriad other state services which we all take for granted.

The letter continues:

They do have company pensions, none of which have delivered any increase in pension for ten years. Furthermore, many pensioners in this category had their pensions reduced as a result of Minister Noonan's levy. These are NOT private pensions - they are semi state pensions under ministerial control.

The Retired Pension Associations of these companies have formed a united group to provide a single voice and we have written to Minister Regina Doherty explaining our case in detail. While we have received an official acknowledgement, we have not had a response from the Minister. We had the opportunity to present our case to the Joint Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection after which we were asked to present our case for legislative changes. This is our response to that request. It is most important to us that you understand fully the reality with which so many former state servants are living.

I could make a few points about their proposals. Some of their proposals are very good. I cannot understand why the Minister has not replied in more detail to some of the proposals. They call for a review of the minimum funding standard to potentially include flexibility on funding measures where necessary to avoid the overstatement of liabilities in pensions funds. They state that binding arbitration by mutual consent is essential and that definition of ultimate responsibility for funding deficits in public sector company pensions funds is needed. They state that the extension of employer debt to include a balance of funding proposal beyond a walk-away 12 month period is required in amendments to the Bill.

Some of their points are very progressive. Have they been taken on board? Are they being discussed as part of the legislation for which we cannot get a date because it is so complicated? We can reject the Bill. Many pensioners have told me that while the €5 is an increase, it is meaningless in terms of what they can buy with it. We are talking about a sliced pan and a box of tea bags per week. They might be able to afford that with the €5. The Government's policy of not addressing the fundamental structural issues which faced society before the austerity measures were introduced, but particularly after austerity measures were introduced, does not go far enough.

See this speech in context