Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Tá sé fíorthábhachtach go mbeadh córas láidir leasa shóisialta ann chun a chinntiú go mbíonn cosaint ag daoine ó bhochtanas agus ó ghanntanas agus go mbeadh cabhair acu chun dul ar ais ag obair nó chun leanaí a thógáil agus le gach rud a théann leis sin. Tá sé fíorthábhachtach freisin go gcoimeádann na híocaíochtaí suas le ráta an bhoilscithe agus leis an ioncam gur chóir a bheith ag daoine i gcoitinne. Dá bharr sin, ní bheimid ag cur i gcoinne an Bhille seo, cé go mbeadh níos mó uainn agus go mbeadh rudaí eile déanta againn sa cháinaisnéis.

It is vital to have a strong, robust social protection system that supports all families, workers and individuals when they need it and to protect from poverty those who rely on it. It is a very basic objective. In this context it is our view, and it is a view we have advanced for a number of years, that a social protection and income adequacy commission, comparable to the Low Pay Commission, is needed. Perhaps less so in the past year or two but over many years in the longer run, the politics of the budget has very often been dominated by questions about whether €5 or €10 will be added to weekly payments. A more precise approach should be taken, with reference to issues such as the minimum essential standard of living, MESL, metric that has been worked on by the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice. A commission along the lines of the Low Pay Commission could recommend very strongly to the Government what the appropriate increase in social protection should be. It would ensure that some of the speculative nature of the run-up to the budget with regard to social protection payments is removed.

There is a social welfare Bill every year, which transposes the budget. While we would have done things differently in the budget, we will not oppose the Bill as, naturally, we want to see the increased payments going to workers, individuals and families. We want to see people received them without undue delay.

In our alternative budget, we allocated €1.7 billion to increase payments for pensioners, carers, people with disabilities and others who depend on social welfare for a wide range of reasons. This is significantly above what the Government proposed in its budget of €1.1 billion, or almost €500 million less. This is in the context of a cost-of-living crisis. Some of the people who expected more would feel the Government should have acted more decisively, particularly with regard to people with disabilities and carers. They deserve better. People with disabilities are at a much higher risk of poverty but there was no recognition in the budget of the increased cost of disability. This is despite the fact that for some time the organisations dealing at the coalface with people with disabilities have identified the need for such a payment. In this context, Sinn Féin proposed a €20 weekly increase for those on disability payments instead of the €12 core rate. There was no increase either in the carers' support grant, which would have been very much needed.

The cost of raising a child in Ireland is skyrocketing. This goes beyond the Minister's Department. The cost of childcare is a large component of this. The Government should have done more in social protection to assist families. I welcome the extension of child benefit to those aged 18 and in full-time education. I have been contacted by many parents who are disappointed that their children will not be in a position to receive it because they will turn 18 between now and next September. If there is scope to re-examine this, I encourage the Minister to do so.

The Children's Rights Alliance put forward a minimum of what it believes is necessary for a qualified child increased payment. What the Government provided with €4 a week for all age categories was far below this. Sinn Féin would have increased it by €5 for those aged under 12 and by €10 for those aged over 12. There was no increase in the core rate of child benefit. It is still below the rate it was at in 2008, which has been far outstripped by inflation. The impact of child benefit has lost a fair measure of the impact that it once had. It was cut by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Governments. No increase has been made since 2016 and it still remains below 2008 levels. This needs to be considered in the next year.

There were some positives undoubtedly and we welcome them. The extension of free school meals is very important. Mar theaghlach, tá an deis againn buntáiste a bhaint as sin muid féin. Tá sé fíorluachmhar agus tá sé fíorthábhachtach go síneofar isteach i ngach scoil é sin. Bíonn an-tionchar ag na béilí te ar an bhfaobhar a bhaint ón mbochtanas agus ar iarrachtaí chun a chinntiú go bhfuil gach leanbh in ann aird a thabhairt agus páirt iomlán a ghlacadh sa chóras oideachais. Free school meals are vital to ensure every child can be fully present and concentrating. It is very hard to do this on an empty stomach. It is something I passionately believe in. It has been the case in the North for many decades and I welcome the fact that it is happening here. I referred to the extension in child benefit earlier in my contribution.

In recent days, what has taken up a fair bit of what is in the legislation, what has accompanied it and what will be introduced on Committee Stage, are the changes to pensions on foot of the Pensions Commission's report. In the context of the voter response in the general election, when responding to the commission report, any Government should have ensured the right to retire at 65. It should have been a core part of the response. We are seeing PRSI increases, particularly on employees, in the context of the cost-of-living crisis. We have always acknowledged the fact there is a need to address the sustainability of the Social Insurance Fund and social insurance contributions.

In the teeth of a cost-of-living crisis with workers facing elevated prices in the medium term, the focus should have been on increasing the rate of employer PRSI. Our proposal to increase employer PRSI on the portion of pay above €100,000 would immediately cover the cost of introducing a right to retire on a pension at 65 years of age. That is fundamentally important. We had a conversation in committee yesterday. The Minister herself rightly acknowledged that she thought of the cleaner who would be trailing a hoover after themselves, and who has potentially been working for decades. Maybe they started work at 15 or 16, and have been working all of their lives. They have more than paid their way. I can think of many others. I know a 64 year old floor-layer who can only work three days in a row before they have to take a break. They are not at pension age yet. I think they should have the right to retire on a pension at 65. The Minister has said she will examine the payment at 65. If she is willing to examine it and reflect on the fact that it is not adequate, then why not simply restore the right to retire on a State pension at 65? I do not see the problem or difficulty with that. It is very often likely to be the case that those least in a position to retire without relying on the State pension are those who are least likely to be physically able to keep working. It is unfair to expect that of them and we need to go back to that. I fundamentally disagreed with the proposal to increase the pension age up to 67 and 68. That was reversed under pressure. I accept the Minister's bona fides in terms of the opinions she has expressed, but it was a Fine Gael government that thought this was a good idea in the first place. We will certainly stand full square against any proposal to increase it, and it should be brought back to 65.

We welcome that carers' contributions will be allowed to be considered. That is something we have been calling for and it is very welcome. We also hope the child maintenance legislation will come soon. It is welcome and something my colleague Deputy Kerrane has worked on for years. I will briefly say that I am not sure a review every five years is adequate when it comes to a review of actuarial inputs. It seems that in the course of five years there could be significant changes in inputs due to energy costs, inflation and so on. It should possibly be more frequent than that.

We will be supporting the legislation. The Government needs to do more, in particular in the areas I have outlined.

See this speech in context