John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It is very good of the Acting Chairman to give me an opportunity to speak. I will not reiterate all of the points that were made but I support this amendment.

It is noticeable the number of times that the issue of carers and carer's allowance has been raised by Members in this House, particularly in the past year. It has been on Leaders Questions and we have had motions on it. We are becoming more and more aware of the role of carers, particularly as we have an ageing society.

This may be slightly tangential but it gets to the point. How frequently have we heard about the issue of somebody who is either in hospital or is about to be discharged and they cannot get home support services or a carer and we have delayed discharges as a result? The level of support that comes with a home support package is quite minimal and in many cases, family members become full-time carers and they play a huge role. When we talk about it in this House, I often feel that we speak about it in the abstract and we do not realise how much it impacts. I look at my wife who became a full time carer on two occasions. She became a full-time carer to my daughter when she was unwell and in more recent times she was a full-time carer to her mother. When I observed it, I saw that it is all-consuming when one becomes a carer.

Deputy Penrose referred to a woman who said that she did not want the carer's allowance and that is down to the hassle and intimidation around means testing, which makes people feel so bogged down. This review is important and I also want to mention that it is not just the carer's allowance as Deputy Brady has specifically said, but a number of people will have been in the workplace and gone out on carer's benefit and it is the transition that affects them because carer's benefit runs out and they may not qualify for carer's allowance. They are then left in a bind because the person they are caring for still needs the care because they may not have passed on or they may not be in residential care. Their daily life will not have changed but just because they do not meet the means test does not mean that they can afford to live without carer's allowance. We need to have a look at this full picture.

We also have to be cognisant of people being work ready and getting them back to work, which the Minister often mentions, but if a person is out caring for an extended period, he or she loses those work skills. It is important to recognise that and to afford people who are carers an opportunity to work to ensure that when the time comes, they have the opportunity and the work skills to revert back to the workplace.

The amendment arose on Committee Stage and as Chairman of the committee I did not say anything. The Minister was asked to change the three months to six months. I hope the Minister accepts the amendment and while the six months affords her more time to do so, I am also conscious of the fact that it then proposes to revert to the committee and that brings us towards next summer so I ask the Minister to accept the amendment, not to wait for the Bill to be enacted and to commence this work as soon as possible so that the committee has it and can make meaningful recommendations to the Minister on a cross party basis in the run up to the budget. If recommendations are to emanate from this report that are meaningful, we should have them in the committee in time to have them seriously considered for next year's budget. That would be useful work from the Minister and from an all-party committee subsequently.

See this speech in context