Marc MacSharry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I wish the Minister the best in her tenure in this Department. I would be delighted if she had the Department of Rural and Community Affairs on its own because it is the kind of Department that requires someone with her expertise and commitment. I regret that in the division and reallocation of Departments, we have overloaded some of them with very important issues and the Minister's is one of them. I wish her the best of luck and we will try to help her as best we can.

I welcome this Bill, which puts the pandemic unemployment payment on a statutory basis. That is very important because it is a lifeline for many families and will be for the foreseeable future, until the pandemic is under some sort of control through a vaccine or treatments. We all yearn for that to happen very quickly. However, there are some anomalies with the payment that I would have liked to see addressed from the beginning. Take the issue of people over 66, for example. There is a small family business in Sligo, run by a husband and wife, which employed 13 people. Eleven of them qualified for the payment but as the owners were both over 66 and in receipt of the contributory pension, into which they had paid for more than 40 years, the system adjudged them to have had enough. For those over 66 who are still making such a contribution to society, it would be only reasonable for us to make up the difference between their pension and whatever full rate of payment would have otherwise applied to them. I cannot imagine that it would be a vast amount of money but this is about moral justice, fairness and an acknowledgment of these people who have chosen not to hang up their boots at 66 but to continue with their expertise. These small business owners and others are contributing to society and creating employment and we effectively penalised them for that in what may be the twilight of their working careers. If this Bill does not afford the Minister the opportunity to address this issue, I hope she has at least costed it and can outline to us how much it would cost. If we cannot do it, I ask her to explain why, because it seems only fair.

The issue of seasonal workers is a very real one. An amendment has been proposed on this matter and I ask the Minister to consider it carefully before making a decision on whether the Government will oppose it or not. Other speakers also referred to the performing arts and the many musicians and small bands that would work periodically and would get some level of support through the season. Even in this relatively locked-down period, when they cannot perform in their normal places, they are providing entertainment online and performing online concerts and so on, but that does not give them any income. Some performers have run these events to try to raise funds for some very important charities. I ask the Government to acknowledge that because these people make a huge contribution to our society and to our mental health. They entertain us and ensure we have things to enjoy in our downtime. They now find themselves with no potential to earn any income, despite being big contributors to our society. I would like the Minister to examine this area with her officials and see what, if anything, can be done to support these people.

Like others, I have seen the various broadcasts over the last number of days highlighting how people travelling have been approached by Department staff at the airports, supported by members of the Garda, some of whom were seconded to assist them. I see the necessity for rules and for them to be enforced, particularly if there is any fraud, but there are huge questions over exactly what is going on. I am not a big listener of "Liveline" with Joe Duffy but I happened to hear some of it today. There was a gentleman on the show who is married to a Romanian lady who is also an Irish citizen. They were travelling to Romania in June, with their children, to see to some ill family members of his wife. They were last in the queue to board a Ryanair flight. This man has a legal background and so when he was asked for his PPS number, he asked what the reasonable grounds were for the staff to be asking him that. The staff member replied that him leaving the country was reasonable grounds. He was in a position to inform her that under section 250(16) of the relevant Act, those were not reasonable grounds. Reasonable grounds would be if someone saw me working on a building site when he or she knew I was claiming unemployment benefits, for example. I imagine those are reasonable grounds. He challenged the woman and refused to give his PPS number, as was perfectly within his rights, and she said that was fair enough. Two gardaí then intervened, masquerading as an emigration check, and asked for his passport, which he gave them. They then proceeded to take down details from the passport and he queried this because he had not given permission for his details to be taken. They said they were entitled to do it. Off these people went to Romania to see to their loved ones who were ill, and they returned some weeks later to find their child benefit payment had been stopped. That is a universal payment which people get whether they are multimillionaires or penniless. I have a real problem with that.

This next part may not be true but if it is, I have a huge problem with it. In the interview, the gentleman in question said that the Department, supported by the Garda, is targeting certain flights, such as those to Romania or Poland. That amounts to ethnic or racial profiling, which is totally wrong. If we must have reasonable grounds to ask people for their details, the Department must establish and define what reasonable grounds are. Officials cannot simply decide to check everyone getting on a flight to Romania because they have a prejudiced view of Romanians and think they may be cheating the system. That is fundamentally wrong and is not the sort of ethos captured under our Constitution or, indeed, the Proclamation.

Statements from the Department were also read out on that radio show, which fell a good bit short of the sort of explanations I would have expected. I gather similar revelations were being broadcast in the media all week, but I just happened to hear that particular gentleman's story. When he contacted the Department and asked about the child benefit, he was told he was not allowed to get child benefit because he left the country. My oldest child is 16 years old and we have been getting child benefit all his life. Before Covid, we were blessed enough to be able to go on holidays abroad most years, though not every year. I do not remember anybody ever taking issue with us getting the child benefit payment, and nor should they have. This gentleman has now made an official complaint to the Department. I do not know his name but perhaps someone from the Department could listen back to today's "Liveline" and get all those details. I am glad he was on that flight and had a legal background because it is important that this information gets back to us. At best, this was an overzealous reaction by officers of the State, be they gardaí or social welfare officers. At worst, it was racial or ethnic profiling if they were selecting certain flights because some people have a prejudiced view. I know the Minister does not hold such views, and knowing her personally, I know she would not operate in this way, so we need to get a handle on that very quickly.

Data sharing is also an issue in such cases. Another speaker referred to someone who was out of the country, in Glasgow or somewhere, and was contacted after the fact to be told that their PUP had been stopped. The Department was able to cite the flight number and when and where from it departed. That is a problem. Of course we want to weed out actual fraud, but we cannot have a quasi-presumption of guilt without reasonable grounds. That is the big issue people have with this. People are entitled to go on holidays and they do. They might even be gone for a month or two to visit a loved one abroad or a parent who is dying.

I thought cutting child benefit was ridiculous, wrong and mean-spirited. I cannot imagine how or why it could have been legal. I hope the Minister will look into that issue and report back to the House. This is not an issue for us to blindly defend our team, as it were, or her officials in the Minister's case. There might be something fundamentally wrong, which might require addressing in this House so we can inform the nation that something did occur, it was wrong, it will not happen again, an apology has been made to the person concerned and the system improved so it cannot happen again. The Irish public are entitled to that, having been appalled to hear what went on via various broadcasts in recent days.

Regarding the Minister's staff, while I know there have been issues and the phrase coined some time back, towards the beginning of the crisis, was "speed trumps accuracy", we have now had some time at things. I pay tribute to the staff in the Minister's Department who administered all these schemes and managed to get money to people pretty quickly, in the main. They deserve much credit.

In making that point, however, I want to draw an analogy between the Minister's Department and other Departments and employees of the State for whom, frankly, Covid-19 has been great cover for doing nothing. I had dealings with one State agency lately, where no one will be back in that office until the end of August. They are working from home and it is necessary to talk to an answering machine. Most people have been allowed to return to work, particularly in the private sector. The staff in my office did not stop for an hour since the onset of Covid-19. We respected the lockdown, but worked from our office and dealt with people on phones etc..

Many elements of our State agencies, Departments and local authorities, however, are using this situation as cover to lie on the couch and watch box sets, returning an odd call here and there and doing the maximum of the minimum to tick over during this period. Productivity has fallen and that is unacceptable. Many in the private sector are back again at full tilt. I know the Minister has worked at full tilt throughout this time, I know I have, as have many colleagues, probably all, in the political world. Many people are not, however, and that needs to be addressed. Whether it is opportunism, coming from the labour relations side, laziness and-or poor management, it needs to be addressed because the country needs all its officials working at full tilt to get productivity levels up to the maximum so we get through this crisis in the best possible way. I thank the Minister, I hope she will be able to take on board those points and I look forward to her response.

See this speech in context