Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Labour Party for bringing forward the motion and thank Family Carers Ireland and the young carers who have campaigned on it.

Like Deputy Stanley, I welcome that the Government is not opposing the motion but I warn Family Carers Ireland and young carers watching this that there is a big gap between not opposing a motion and actually implementing what is in a motion that is passed. If the last Government had implemented just 50% of what was passed in the previous Dáil we would be in a much better place as a country than we are, so the pressure must be kept up. What is outlined in the motion is the bare minimum the State should be doing to support young carers. It is nothing short of outrageous that the rules covering carer’s allowance and other income supports are still so restrictive they prevent young adult carers from going to college or taking up training or job opportunities. These are people who are, as has been mentioned, effectively doing free labour for the State out of love for a family member in most cases and then being punished for that by being prevented from being able to continue their lives alongside providing care. The entire system of means testing for carer’s payments needs to go. All carers, including young carers, should be entitled as a right to the equivalent of a living wage. That would recognise in a real, material, impactful way the incredibly important work they do and the vast amount of money saved by the State as a consequence of that work. It is striking and shameful one in four young carers has gone to bed or school hungry. That is a direct result of the social protection system refusing, effectively, to recognise the existence of well over 67,000 young carers aged between ten and 17 years.

Underlying the horrendous, forgotten way young carers are treated is the need for a transformation in the mindset and approach towards care in our society. This is again and again reflected in debates we have about how carers are treated, but also how services are provided for disabled people, how supports are provided for older people and how provision is made for children with additional needs. Again and again the default position of the State is to say this is on the family in one way or another. The State says it is on the family and on young carers - on children – to provide all the care people need. That should not be the default position. The onus should be on the State. That was effectively the crux of the Yes-No referendum campaign last year and it is at the heart of why the State is failing carers and children with additional needs so badly. There is an idea the role of the State should only be to provide funding and respite, but obviously that is the bare minimum. It must be much more than that. The idea is that fundamentally we leave care in the hands of carers, that is, of private individuals in the family home. We might compel the Government to give something in the form of money and respite, but it needs to be much more than that. The State should not be able to just offload its responsibility onto somebody, or anybody, else rather than providing services that should be provided as a right.

From the very foundation of the State, effectively, in terms of the role of the church and so on, the State never provided the kind of basic public services that were provided in other European states. Instead, on the one hand it outsourced to the church in various forms and on the other hand it passed responsibility onto the family. That gets to the heart of why we debate these issues repeatedly and why carers and young carers in particular are failed so badly.

See this speech in context