Ciarán Lynch (Cork South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 62: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when he will end the cohabitation rule for lone parents; and the justification for delaying reform in this area. [32184/07]

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government discussion paper, "Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents", put forward proposals for the introduction of a new social assistance payment for lone parents and other low income families with young children. It also proposed a range of additional services, including the expanded availability and range of education and training opportunities, the extension of the national employment action plan, focused provision of child care and improved information services. Under the proposals, the contingency of lone parenthood would no longer exist. The one parent family payment would, therefore, be abolished. Instead, a new payment would be made to all parents — living alone or with a partner — with young children and on low incomes.

As I recently reported to the House, the development of any new scheme to support low-income parents can only be introduced when the necessary co-ordinated supports and services are put in place by other Departments and agencies. This is why the non-income recommendations in the discussion paper are being tested in Coolock and Kilkenny. These tests are focused on identifying and resolving any practical and administrative issues that may arise in advance of the scheme being introduced. They are scheduled to run until the end of the year and a report will then be made to the Cabinet committee on social inclusion. Various reports have already been delivered to the committee.

The tests to which I refer will allow for operational and logistical co-ordination between the relevant Departments and agencies to be considered and will facilitate the development of the policy and operational details of the new scheme and accompanying supports. Although the exact terms of the new scheme have not been finalised, the objective is to ensure that the necessary financial and other supports are in place to assist families towards improved employment prospects and that all disincentives to work will be kept to a minimum.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is more than 18 months since the Department published proposals on providing supports for lone parents and it appears that little or no progress has been made in implementing these. The question relates specifically to the proposal to end the cohabitation rule. Does the Minister accept that it makes no sense for the State — as it is currently doing in respect of social welfare and tax policies — to actively encourage parents to live apart? If the answer is yes, why has he not taken action before now to end such behaviour and to enable lone parents to enjoy greater flexibility in the context of their family arrangements? Surely it makes sense for the State to remove any obstacles to parents living together. At present, there is a ridiculous situation whereby parents are far better off living apart than they are cohabiting or getting married. That is not justifiable or sustainable as a social policy. Why is the Minister taking so long to alter this ridiculous situation?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would not necessarily state that people are far better off if they are not married and are living alone.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They are better off. The figures prove that.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with the Deputy's principal point regarding the cohabitation rule. The latter was based, clearly and historically, on a purely financial consideration that took no account of the welfare of all involved in what would constitute a family unit. A child who is involved with both parents — regardless of whether they are married or single — enjoys a better upbringing and will have a better chance to become a more rounded individual. That is not to say that a child who happens to be in a one-parent family cannot achieve all of those things. However, the commonly held view among the various agencies and people to whom I have spoken is that involving fathers — most of these children are raised by their mothers — and allowing them to cohabitate without penalising mothers in the context of the benefits they receive, represents a far better way to proceed. I intend to progress this issue.

The Deputy raised several other points.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will take further supplementary questions from Members so the Minister may expand on his reply later. I call Deputy Enright.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Many people in the agencies involved in trying to resolve difficulties in this area want to ensure that the other services will buy into this change and that it will not all take the form of a simple payment.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am anxious to allow Deputies to contribute.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is what we must achieve.

Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What level of priority has the Government afforded to this matter? The Minister's predecessor announced this change in December 2005. We have almost reached the second anniversary of that announcement. At the time, it was expected that the change would be introduced during the following year. Does the Minister accept his predecessor's assertion that the aim of the review was to help people escape the poverty trap? If the latter is the case, why are will still discussing the matter two years later while people remain within that poverty trap? Does the Minister agree that family formation will not be facilitated while this matter remains on the long finger? Will he indicate a clear date by which we can expect real changes?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If it was merely a matter of changing the cohabitation rule, we could do it tomorrow morning. However, it is not possible to proceed in that way because there are huge knock-on effects, involving many other aspects of the social welfare system, which must be taken into consideration. I want to get agreement between the various parties to the different perspectives, particularly those who come from an especially narrow perspective to represent a point of view about a particular issue.

I accept that we must change the system. I would like the process to reach a conclusion very quickly. I would be happy to introduce legislation to deal not only with cohabitation but with the wide range of issues that surround it. I hope those involved in the process and in consultation can reach agreement. There are different perspectives on various aspects of this. Nevertheless, I fundamentally agree with the substantive point made by Deputies Shortall and Enright, namely, that the existing cohabitation rule is wrong and must be abolished. The quicker we abolish it the better.