Mary Upton (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Fine Gael Party for tabling this Private Members' motion. It is a great shame the Government's amendment to the motion consists principally of platitudes on how well it is responding to this crisis. The amendment is heavy on generalities with no specifics included. One would get a different response if one asked the recently unemployed what they think of the State's support for them. Ask the recently unemployed computer programmer in Crumlin if she thinks it is acceptable that waiting times for jobseeker's allowance is almost seven weeks. Ask the unemployed bricklayer in Ballyfermot if he thinks it is right that he cannot access mortgage interest supplement as his wife is still employed. Ask the lawyer in the Liberties if she still feels the system treats her well when she has to queue up on Thomas Street for an hour to get her social welfare payment. These are cases of people who have been in touch with me in the past weeks.

Figures released today by the Central Statistics Office show that 16,834 new people signed on to the live register in March, bringing the total number to 372,800, or 11% of the workforce. Unemployment has nearly doubled in a year. I remember when it was headline news when the queues outside the social welfare offices began to emerge in the autumn. Now it is matter of fact that the queues will be there day in, day out, and it is just taken for granted. It is unacceptable that people should have to stand in a queue for hours; it robs them of their dignity. A young man interviewed this evening on the news, said, "I am sick of it". His was a straightforward statement of frustration with the system. An element of hopelessness is creeping in that must be addressed and reversed.

The State's services for unemployed people are at breaking point. How could they not be, when the numbers utilising its services have effectively doubled year on year while its resources have not? Social welfare offices are bursting at the seams Community welfare officers are working unpaid overtime to try to process claims. Targeted action from the Minister is needed.

I welcome that additional staff have been hired and the Minister has introduced some measures such as on-line forms for jobseeker's allowance. However, contrast these measures against the procedures put in place to bail out the banks. In effect, the banking system could be tackled in the course of one night. Why can we not have this type of radical action from the Government to alleviate the problems for people on social welfare?

People should not have to wait for weeks for a payment. This drives them into the hands of money lenders, gets them into credit card debt or forces them to default on their mortgages. There must be flexibility in deploying people to where they are needed. For instance, staff from the Department of Health and Children could be trained up as community welfare officers.

There is a need also to co-ordinate the services and entitlements for people who find themselves in a new and frightening situation, where the system to them appears convoluted and difficult to access. Why should the onus be on the person to chase after that to which he or she is legally entitled? People have paid their taxes and their PRSI. Why should they not be told of the full gamut of supports to which they are entitled, shown how to claim them and where to go to get advice?

Like every other Member, I would like to extend my support to MABS and highlight the great work it does. Considering the unprecedented increase in demand for MABS advice, there must be a parallel increase in support for the service. Together with the citizens information centres, they have an invaluable store of sensible information for people who are looking for help with their finances or entitlements. MABS is under great pressure, however. Between the local offices and the telephone line, more than 8,100 new clients were in contact in the first two months of this year. The service must be given the resources to deal with the new influx of requests. There is an urgency about this and it cannot be shelved until next month or next year.

One issue not mentioned by the amendment or the motion is the role of the banking sector. One of the best ways to lessen the problems in social welfare offices is to prevent people losing their jobs. Despite the illusory guarantees the banks have offered, they are ruthlessly cutting overdraft facilities to shore up their vanishing balance sheets. Modest requests for credit have been refused with the consequence that small businesses are going to wall and individuals losing their homes.

This is an area where the Government must act to stem the closure of business and the haemorrhage of jobs in every village and town by forcing the banks, which took advantage of the State guarantee system, to offer real extensions of credit facilities. This is vital for employment, the economy and ultimately the banks themselves to have paying customers. More importantly, it is vital for the individual clients who are at risk of falling behind in their mortgage repayments, losing their homes and joining the ever-increasing dole queues.

Today the housing charity Respond called for banks to allow families in difficulty to renegotiate their mortgage repayments in line with their ability to repay. Numerous ways in which this can be tackled have been put out in the public arena. Various arrangements can be put in place, if the will is there to do it. It also is common sense. Repossession of homes means the State will have to provide social housing for those who lose their homes.

The banks are resolutely refusing to renegotiate mortgages for people on fixed rate terms. Unbelievable penalties are attached to mortgages when someone tries to move from fixed rate to tracker. It makes no sense for a mortgagor to attempt to change their terms and conditions.

The chaos in rent supplement and mortgage interest supplement must be sorted out. The number availing of mortgage interest supplement has increased by 175% since the end of 2007 to 11,000 people, yet there is no flexibility in the system. For example, in the case of a couple paying a mortgage, if one partner loses his or her job, the couple are not entitled to access mortgage interest supplement if the other partner is working. If they cannot afford their mortgage, this acts as an incentive to give up employment or acts as a disincentive to taking up new employment. This is a classic poverty trap that must be addressed.

The last any Member wants to say to a constituent at an advice clinic is that he or she would be better off on social welfare. However, it is coming to the point where this is likely to be the best advice. I wholeheartedly support the need for legislation on debt collection. There is a real fear that because of the developing demands on people who cannot meet their repayments that they will be driven into the hands of debt collectors who will treat them badly.

Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Margaret Conlon and Deputy Charlie O'Connor.

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to speak on this motion, which relates to the most important issue we face as a country, namely, the joblessness situation. What we are concentrating on here is what we do in terms of an immediate response to provide some help to the increasing numbers of people who have lost their jobs. Currently, 11% of people are on the live register, 320,000 of whom are fully unemployed. It is crucial that they get the welfare they need as soon as possible and that any debts they may have taken on when they could afford to do so are dealt with properly and fairly. Above all, we must ensure that people do not lose their homes. That must be a top priority for the Government and the House that people are supported to remain in their houses. Not alone is significant damage done to individual families who lose their houses – thankfully the numbers who have lost their houses are still low – but when that happens extensive damage is done to the economy also.

One can say what one likes about it but one of the drivers of the economy was the increase in house prices and a decrease in prices is bad for an economy. That is accepted by economists all over the world. The more repossessions that take place the more availability that will create in the housing market, which will lower prices to an artificial level because supply is driven artificially rather than by the market. That will further lower prices, which does not help the property market in any way nor the economy generally. In addition, there are the costs of housing people who have lost their homes and the associated social costs.

One of the big issues we will have to face is that of negative equity. Some refer to it as people being under water in terms of their property value vis-À-vis the mortgage. According to economists, negative equity is one of the factors that reduce one's incentive to pay back one's mortgage even if one can. If one is still in a good job and one's family home or apartment has reduced by 30% or 40%, which has occurred, one has less of an incentive to pay the mortgage. Negative equity makes it almost impossible for people to re-finance to a cheaper mortgage when they are in difficulties. They might be able to continue to pay if the option of re-financing was open to them. Some foreign institutions, largely owned by our nearest neighbour — in effect state banks — are not passing on the full mortgage reductions announced by the European Central Bank.

Some people who have jobs are having difficulty paying their mortgage and if they could easily transfer it then those difficulties could be alleviated. However, negative equity is preventing them from doing that. In addition, one cannot expand or change one's home if one needs to do so. I am aware of people who bought a one-bedroom apartment who got married and had twins but they cannot move up the ladder because of negative equity. That is something we will have to tackle. It may be a matter for the Minister for Finance, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government or the Department of Social and Family Affairs to consider what can be done about negative equity.

I have examined schemes in America and other locations around the world that have not been altogether successful but, nevertheless, we should consider them. They involve the concept of debt forgiveness where the principal sum owed is amended and banks take the hit. All manner of excuses are offered by banks as to why they cannot do that. However, if the reality is that the banks will never recover the principal, or the value of the property will not recover in the immediate or mid-term future then there is no point in pretending a principal exists if a house is to be repossessed and the bank will have to take a hit at that stage. It would be preferable for banks to take the hit before that happens, thereby encouraging borrowers to keep paying their mortgage and make it easier for them to do that and in so doing to maintain the economy.

There are ways of doing it. Schemes have been introduced in some parts of the world whereby an institution forgives some of the principal but charges a slightly higher interest rate. There are pros and cons to the solutions that can be found. As people could take advantage of such schemes, at all times those solutions should only apply to principal family dwellings and to those who are most in need. We will have to consider the issue of negative equity. In a place such as Stamullen in my constituency nearly everybody has moved in since the 2001 census and many but not all of them are in negative equity. That is true of many of my neighbours, probably including me – I have not checked lately——

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

One is better off not looking.

Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——but I am not moving house. I urge the Minister to deal with the issue as it links back into repossessions, one's ability to pay debt, helping families and the pressure on mortgage interest supplement. We should consider what people can afford to pay on their mortgage. One should not have to pay more than 35% of one's net income on a mortgage. The Government will have to take the lead and force the banks to do that. We are familiar with the term, postponing the inevitable. We must consider the alternative to that which is bringing forward the inevitable. That is what we need to do in many of these cases so as to prevent some of the problems that are arising in terms of the overloading of the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS, mortgage interest supplement payments and the courts.

I made another suggestion on repossessions to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, which was to take all family home repossession cases out of the High Court. The Minister told me he does not think that is possible, but it should be possible to introduce legislation to restrict all repossession of family homes to the Circuit Court. As a solicitor I have dealt with business repossessions in the Circuit Court and it does not strike me as very nice if Start Mortgages is able to bring repossession cases for average homes into the High Court when people do not have the resources. The attendant costs of High Court cases are much higher and that adds to the ultimate debt. I congratulate the High Court and the Courts Service, which is much more efficient than most Circuit Courts. There would be an in-built delay in the process if such cases are taken in the Circuit Court.

On the issue of civil debt and prison sentences, I have been involved in a case where I tried to get someone sent to prison for not paying a civil debt. It was a family law situation where the father of a child refused to pay maintenance. He was sent to prison as a last resort. We did not want that but the man was working and he was completely failing in his obligations. There is room in some limited circumstances, where people can afford it, for them to go to prison for non-payment of debts. I cannot see how anyone would be sent to prison if they are genuinely making an effort to pay back debt. I have not come across it. Imprisonment was more than justified in the case to which I referred. In the same court I have seen a person let off their entire debt because the judge felt they should never have been given a loan in the first place. Judges can be flexible in their own courts but perhaps legislation is required to give them more flexibility.

I referred a constituent to MABS early last summer and he is back to me again having obtained a car loan for €15,000. There is something wrong with the system as some people have far too easy access to credit. In spite of all the difficulties and the lack of credit people are still getting credit they should never have got it. Perhaps that is not the case in 2009 but it was certainly happening as late as summer 2008. Judges will have to take into account whether some people should ever have got loans from banks. If the banks were found to be at fault then in some cases they should not be able to get the money back.

Margaret Conlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. The economic recession that grips our country has caused an unbelievable increase in workload at our social welfare offices and for community welfare officers throughout the country. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Mary Hanafin, acknowledged last night that waiting times are too long in some offices. Tackling this is a key concern for the Government. It is very important that people who find themselves out of work have their claims dealt with as speedily as possible.

I will concentrate my remarks this evening on a number of matters, but particularly matters relating to the area of debt enforcement. Deputy Enright raised a number of important points in this regard yesterday evening. Issues relating to debt come before the courts in many guises, including, for example, family law maintenance agreements, hire purchase agreements, creditor loans and failure to pay loan repayments to financial institutions, including credit unions. The courts take the view that, where possible, such disputes are best resolved through mediation between the parties involved, thereby avoiding court intervention unless absolutely necessary. I share that view. However, we must recognise that there are circumstances, undesirable as they may be, where it is necessary for people to be able to rely on the courts to enforce the terms of a contract. I cannot concur with the view that we should legislate to make accessing these rights more difficult. It would leave Ireland in a most unfavourable light internationally if our law prevented people from exercising their contractual rights.

The law provides that a judge shall only send someone to prison where the failure to pay is due to that person's wilful refusal or neglect. This provision is intended to ensure that if a debtor is genuinely unable to meet the repayments under an instalment order, steps can be taken to ensure that such a debtor is not sent to prison. The judge may order an adjustment in the payments schedule in order to meet the debtors changed circumstances. The threat of imprisonment is a last resort, but it can be effective. Many debts are paid off when the prospect of imprisonment looms. However, it is an appropriate remedy only where the desired result cannot be achieved by other means and the defendant's active co-operation is a vital ingredient. The imprisonment of defaulters — I understand this is a very emotive subject — is very much a last resort and people are generally given every opportunity to pay their debt and afforded an opportunity to show how they can pay.

It should not be presumed, as Deputy Enright recognised last night, that all persons who fail to meet their debts do so because of poor financial circumstances. Deputy Byrne highlighted some examples of this when he spoke earlier. The numbers so committed in any one year are very small compared to the overall numbers sent to prison. For example, in 2008 just under 12,000 people were sent to prison, with just 276 of that number committed as a result of failure to comply with a court order relating to the non-payment of a civil debt. The average sentence served by a person for this category of offence last year was 20 days. Indeed, if people had paid their debt while in prison, they would have been released immediately from custody.

Deputy Enright also made the point that only 20% of debtors appear at court hearings. This is unfortunate, because they lose a critical opportunity to have their side of the story heard. However, I am not convinced that if the process in the courts is changed to some other alternative form, there will, somehow, be 100% compliance. In fact, without the eventual prospect of a court sanction, there may be less compliance by debtors who will feel it is easier to default on payments.

It is not the primary function of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform or the Courts Service to take on the significant role, in terms of personnel and resources, of operating a debt management service for persons who find themselves, for whatever reason, in arrears to banks, finance houses or public utilities. I am unconvinced that the issue of over-indebtedness, where the causes and effects are so multifaceted, can be dealt with primarily in a justice context. I join the Minister for Social and Family Affairs in encouraging persons with debt issues to engage as soon as possible with the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS.

MABS is a national free service for people in debt or afraid of getting into debt. It assesses the financial situation of these people and prioritises significant debts. It provides an invaluable service in aiding people draw up a budget and restructure their loans and it helps them to manage their limited income and focus on their repayments. There are local MABS offices in every county, providing a crucial service for people who require help and advice in making their way out of serious debt. The Government continues to make significant financial resources available to the service. I believe that the approach adopted by MABS offers a better way of achieving a result acceptable to both creditor and debtor.

Numerous constituents have contacted me recently about their fear of court proceedings in cases of mortgage arrears. It has become apparent recently that some lending institutions routinely apply to the High Court for repossession orders. This has the effect of discouraging borrowers who are in arrears with repayment from defending proceedings because the cost of so doing is so prohibitive. I agree with Deputy Thomas Byrne that all repossessions or sale proceedings relating to housing loan mortgages should be taken in the Circuit Court. This would reduce costs and the inconvenience involved in making a court appearance, thereby encouraging borrowers who are in arrears to enter a defence in such proceedings. There is an onus on banks to act responsibly and to sit down with their clients and renegotiate the terms of loans and mortgages to take into account people's changing circumstances.

I also have major concerns with regard to debt collection and feel this issue should be highlighted. Many people are terrified and genuinely scared and worried that the next time the doorbell rings it will be a debt collector. Many people have been intimidated and terrorised by these people. I would advise that any person who is threatened or intimidated by debt collectors should report the incident to the Garda so they can investigate the claim and take appropriate action where necessary.

All Members are aware of the pressures of modern society and of what may be the fallout from the difficult economic circumstances in which many people now find themselves. The situation has been exacerbated by an unfortunate availability of consumer credit in recent years. Unfortunately, many are now experiencing the downside of having over-extended their borrowing arrangements or getting into difficulties because of a change in personal circumstances. The financial institutions must answer for this sin. Many people were given credit they had not sought. How many of us found when we got our credit card statements that our credit limit had been increased significantly? People automatically presumed this gave them a licence to spend free money.

I am aware that District Court judges recognise the work of MABS. In some instances, they recommend that people who are before the courts avail of the service. It is, however, often difficult to persuade persons in debt to engage in the process until their debts have reached a point where they are subject to a court process or where imprisonment looms. The willingness of a debtor to manage his or her case is crucial and seeking expert advice is the best way forward.

Deputy Cyprian Brady made the point last night that in February 2008, there were approximately 190,000 people on the live register, but that this number had increased by 165,000, or 87%, by the end of February 2009. This is an unprecedented and rapid increase. A welfare system must adjust and cannot just be changed over night. The Minister is committed to delivering a quality service so that all queries are dealt with in a speedy manner with the minimum turn-around time. Tied in with all of this is the need to tackle welfare fraud. I commend the Minister on the action she has taken so far in this regard. The Garda and the Customs Service are working closely with the Department to stop this criminal activity. It is a criminal activity, because any person fraudulently making a social welfare claim is stealing taxpayers' money. This cannot be condoned and should not be allowed to happen. It is imperative that it is stamped out once and for all.

Resources are scarce and many genuine people require assistance. Any person involved in fraud, no matter in what state they reside, should be pursued with the full rigours of the law. I would go so far as to say that as taxpayers there is a moral obligation on each of us to provide information to the authorities if we become aware of the existence of such activity. I encourage the Minister to maintain her efforts in this regard, whether that is by further cross-Border or EU-wide co-operation. I commend the amended motion to the House.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to make a brief contribution on this motion. I compliment my colleague on the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Enright, on her work thereon. The motion gives us the opportunity to make remarks on a number of issues that are of concern to us. Deputy Enright should understand that not everybody on this side of the House would disagree with the sentiments of her Private Members' motion. As others have stated, we are in unprecedented times and in a very difficult economic climate. I will certainly not stand in the Government benches and say people are happy.

Reference was made to growing unemployment. A total of 7,261 people are unemployed in Tallaght alone. Unemployment is an issue for us all. I speak as one who was a client of the local social welfare office in the past. I am always anxious to state we must continue to do all we can, in modern buildings and friendly atmospheres, to help those who are unemployed and seeking jobs. The Minister has great sympathy with this view. Let us not forget, in the context of this motion, that the best way out of social welfare difficulties is to provide employment.

Deputy Enright and I attended the briefing today with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. We had a very good discussion with Combat Poverty and many issues were raised. Perhaps the issues do not relate to every aspect of the motion before us but they are relevant to the challenges we face.

Everybody seems fearful and upset over what will happen on 7 April. I hope the Government will take account of the fact that the public is saying to all of us that the budget must be fair. The views in Tallaght are no different from those in Waterford, Tipperary or Laois-Offaly. I am very proud of my party's record over many years on addressing social inclusion issues. I hope those affected will not be abandoned next Tuesday and that we will continue to look after the vulnerable and those who need more help than others. I often said that, at a time when big boats are rising, we must remember the little ones. Now, as the big boats are struggling, we absolutely must remember the little ones. I hope we will continue to do so.

People should be aware of their entitlements and the system should be as customer friendly as possible. This should be the case in both good and bad times. Those who experience the trauma of seeking assistance should be able to seek it easily. Colleagues have made points on all the difficulties people face. People should know their entitlements and the information must continue to flow in this regard. I hope the Department will continue to ensure this is the case.

I particularly support the view that the Department should make the process as easy and as efficient as possible for those who must claim social welfare. I hope people are claiming only because they must. As the last speaker stated, I have no sympathy for those making fraudulent claims. Those who are in absolute need should be facilitated. The Minister has guaranteed that everything possible will be done to reduce the time for which people are waiting. We must continue to support this process. Where extra staff, facilities and resources are required, they should be made available. This is the business of the day and the challenge the Government faces.

Reference was made to the enforcement of court orders. I listened recently to an excellent speech by Senator Harris on dealing with law enforcement and crime. I take the view that we should lock up criminals in our jails rather than people who have difficulties other than those associated with crime. I am not suggesting people should tolerate people not paying their bills or living up to what is expected of them but there must be a better system than that which puts such people in jail. Yesterday a constituent of mine was collected and jailed for five days because of the failure to pay a fine. While I do not condone the non-payment of fees or fines, I believe there should be an alternative to putting in jail those who offend in this manner. I hope the Government will continue to consider this, particularly in these difficult times.

We all strongly support the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS. There has been an office on High Street in Tallaght for quite some time. I took the opportunity some weeks ago to bring the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, to that office to show her the excellent services being provided there. I am very proud of what is being done. We know MABS provides an effective range of supports and assistance to those in debt and who need help and advice to cope with debt problems.

When we visited the MABS office, the local manager, Marie White, spoke to us. She made a point with which we are all familiar and to which reference was made by many of us, that is, that there is now a new poor. I refer to those who, even a few years ago, had no difficulty with their debts or in taking on new credit cards or mortgages, or buying new cars.

I am no different from anybody else in that I received invitations from almost every financial institution to take on a credit card. Famously, I remember receiving an invitation from Manchester United to take on one of its credit cards. During the week, a local football club, Shamrock Rovers — I do not want to sound critical of it because I am not — was in consultation with a local bank with regard to credit cards. We should be careful about such trends.

When MABS briefed me, the Minister and others, it stated there are people who never had to cope with debt but who must now do so. This suggests a new form of poverty. People need to receive as much assistance and advice as they can. I am glad MABS appears to be providing that service and I hope the Minister will understand that, as we proceed through this economic crisis, people will need to have an increasing amount of advice. I hope resources will be made available in this regard.

A number of colleagues referred to the community welfare officer system, which is operated by the HSE. There is a range of challenges. At the meeting with representatives of the Department of Social and Family Affairs this morning, Deputy Shortall made a very good contribution on rent subsidy. This presents a challenge to many families in the changing economy. The business before us is understood by us all and we understand the problems in all our constituencies. Every time we have contact with our constituents in our advice centres, these problems arise. The Minister should understand they are important and that she should continue to resource the required services. I hope this very clear message will reach the Department.

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

I wish to share my time with Deputies O'Mahony, McHugh, Terence Flanagan, Neville, Crawford and Burke.

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

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

I am pleased to speak on this motion. I compliment my constituency colleague, Deputy Enright, on bringing it before the House. It is really about the dire straits in which people find themselves. This is brought home to public representatives on a daily basis at our clinics. People come to us at their wits end. They have lost their jobs and are unable to make their mortgage repayments. The threat of eviction hangs over them like the sword of Damocles. These people are frantic with worry. Many have children and families to support. It is a heartbreaking situation.

To a large extent, these people were duped into the situation in which they now find themselves. Banks and building societies handed out mortgages to anybody who asked. They promised people they could have it all, even a 100% mortgage and €25,000 for a wedding, if they wished. They masqueraded as organisations which cared for their customers. There is not much evidence of the caring side of banks or building societies now. While top officers in the banks continue to receive large bonuses, the sheriff's office is being sent to people's houses. The spectre of eviction looms as it has not done in this country since the penal times. Our folk history and folk memory have given the Irish nation a horror of eviction. Historically, the courts have been loath to evict people since the foundation of the State. However, the aggressive practices of foreign sub-prime lenders in particular have resulted in Irish families being made homeless yet again. In my constituency, Laois County Council has ordered a number of evictions for 10.30 a.m. tomorrow.

Some clinic cases refer to the sinister and dangerous new element which has emerged in the debt collection sector with the entry of former gangland figures like Martin "The Viper" Foley and assorted eastern European Mafiosi with links to Russian Mafia. People and families have been threatened with serious personal violence and even death by these criminals who take a hefty chunk of commission when a debt is paid due to their efforts. Property has been vandalised and people are terrified to report the matter to the Garda such is the sinister reputation of these thugs.

Recently, I tabled a series of parliamentary questions to no less than four Departments seeking clarification as to whether the Government plans to take action on this growing problem. I asked each Department to clarify its responsibilities in this regard. The Departments of the Taoiseach, Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Finance all declined to accept responsibility in this area. This scandalous abdication of responsibility characterises the Government's rabbit in the headlights attitude to every problem which arises.

We need a system that involves the vetting of those who collect money to protect those under pressure who are unable to meet their debts at this time due to extraordinary economic circumstances. Ireland is almost unique in the western world in having no system of regulation for debt collection. We have lessons to learn from our neighbours to the east and to the west in this regard.

I do not wish to detract from the importance of personal responsibility with regard to the repayment of moneys borrowed. We must all do our best to honour our debts and be responsible about taking on debt and responsibilities. Reckless lending has brought us untold economic difficulties. The spectre of large scale evictions can only exacerbate matters. Fine Gael and Deputy Enright in particular have suggested a number of practical steps in this regard. I hope the Government is listening with an open mind because this matter needs to be addressed as one of urgency and importance.

John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am glad to contribute briefly to this debate and to strongly support the motion tabled by Deputy Enright and Fine Gael. In recent weeks, the clinics of Members on all sides of the House have become almost like unemployment offices in the sense that people seek help with regard to the delays they face. The present economic difficulties of our country happened so quickly that in a matter of months thousands of people have seen their dreams and ambitions blow up in front of their eyes. Our Government has been in denial for the past year. It suggested that we were a strong economy which could withstand any difficulties. This reassurance was taken in good faith. Now we know differently and it is rather pathetic to see how the Government has been so slow to react to the plight of our citizens who cry out for support and assurance in their hour of need.

The trauma of losing a job, or in many cases two jobs in the same household, is difficult enough to cope with but the blow could be softened if help is at hand quickly, discreetly and in an uncomplicated way. This is what is at issue here this evening. Mothers and fathers are desperate to hold on to their homes and to have immediate access to social welfare entitlements. It does not help if, as we saw on the "Six One" news this evening, the unemployed have to queue halfway down the street in towns throughout the country for an office which is inadequately staffed by the Department.

This is no criticism by me of the staff in these offices. I have spoken with many of them in recent weeks and they eloquently described the difficulties they are in and how they are overwhelmed by the avalanche of applications. Our system should be flexible enough to react to emergency situations by transferring staff from other areas. I understand that staff in all of the offices are doing their best in trying circumstances but they need help and they need a plan. In my constituency of Mayo the unemployment rates have increased by almost 90% in the past 12 months. Immediate and radical measures are required to cope with this.

I am pleased to see that this motion also deals with the present debt collection system which sees a waste of taxpayers' money on court cases which are to the advantage of nobody. These structures are outdated, archaic and were never intended to deal with a crisis such as what we are going through at present. The courts should be used for people who refuse to pay even if they have the money. They should not be used for people who want to pay but cannot at present and will honour their commitments when their circumstances improve. The courts should be the last resort and not a first point of contact. Deputy Enright eloquently articulated the type of alternative dispute resolution system she has in mind and I welcome it.

I do not have time to go over many of the points Deputy Enright made but I strongly support the motion in the interests of thousands of people, many of whom are unemployed for the first time and find themselves in very difficult circumstances. The unemployment figures for March added another 16,000 people to structures already overwhelmed. It is in everybody's interest that this motion is supported. If the structures are not coping with the unemployment figures at present, how can they be expected to cope with the thousands added each month? We have seen an increase of 80,000 since Christmas. The unemployment rate has increased from 5% to 11%. The figures speak for themselves and I commend this motion to the House.

Joe McHugh (Donegal North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I ask the Minister of State for guidance on how I can communicate with my constituents ways and means for them to get out of their predicament. I will give an example of a woman in her 50s who has been defaulting on her mortgage for the past 12 months. She has been living off a credit card for the past two months. She cannot get a job. She hears in the news and reads in the newspapers that interest rates are coming down and that the property is going into negative equity. However, she does not hear anything about her telephone bill coming down or a decrease in the price of food to keep her going on a weekly basis. How can we allow a situation like this to develop? In the past 12 months her mortgage provider has not contacted her with regard to her default. It has not written to arrange to meet her to discuss ways to deal with the situation. Rather than meeting with this client, the bank has allowed her to move to another bank to obtain and live off a Visa card. This situation is spiralling out of control. Next Tuesday, we will be faced with a similar situation. People trying to make ends meet will have their income reduced. We need to allow the Government to govern.

With regard to regulation, what is the taxi regulator doing? Taxi drivers speak about more than 20,000 taxis being in this city, yet prices have not come down. The prices of only certain items are reducing. The Government's role is to govern regulation. Regulatory arms of Government can do this but they are not doing so. I know I am moving into a different arena that does not entirely involve this issue. What emphasis should the Government be placing on banks to make them live up to their responsibility to bring their customers in and not allowing 12 months to pass without trying to arrange a meeting with them? People are led into a false sense of security when the banks are not hunting them and it allows them to get into further debt. We need to take control and help those who need budgetary help.

We need vetted and regulated debt collectors. In my five years in the Seanad, Senator Shane Ross shouted from the rooftops about the lack of regulatory control of auctioneers. We also need to do this with debt collectors. The Government can talk about international turbulent waters. We have a problem in this country and we are not taking control of it. That is where we need to start.

Terence Flanagan (Dublin North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have a major unemployment crisis in this country, with 371,300 people now on the live register, according to the Taoiseach earlier today. This represents an incredible increase of 173, 300 in the short space of one year. More and more people seem to be laid off on a daily basis, with another 600 people to be laid off tomorrow from SR Technics at Dublin Airport. These people find themselves turning to the State for support. Unfortunately, the State is badly letting them down as the State institutions cannot cope with the demand on their services. People are waiting an average of six weeks to claim jobseeker's allowance, although it can take up to 16 weeks in some cases. The queues at some social welfare offices run down the street, leaving some people waiting hours to sign on. It can also take an average of six weeks for a person to see an adviser from the MABS organisation.

Our Front Bench spokesperson on social and family affairs, Deputy Enright, has quite rightly brought this motion to the House, because the Government has failed to address this crisis. Our comprehensive motion calls on the Government to redeploy staff to social welfare offices, for the role of MABS to be expanded into mortgage renegotiation and for the debt collection industry to be regulated. There clearly is a huge backlog of jobseeker applications in the system. The Minister has approved some additional staff, but this response is not adequate. It is completely unacceptable that people must wait up to 14 weeks to claim some unemployment benefit. The Minister needs to get real and redeploy sufficient staff immediately to tackle the huge backlog of applications.

We are still waiting on the new promised social welfare offices to come on stream in Dublin, Sligo and Carrick-on-Shannon. The Minister also needs to appoint hundreds of additional community welfare officers to deal with the huge demand on services. The HSE embargo clearly needs to be lifted for this to happen. Since the beginning of 2009, there has been a 35% increase in the demand for the services provided by MABS, yet the Minister for Social and Family Affairs has failed to adequately address the staffing levels at MABS branches. There is currently a six week waiting time in my own constituency of Dublin North East. I telephoned the local MABS office today to find out to my horror that there are only two staff working in that office, yet they have to deal with over 150,000 people. I am aware that this excessive waiting time is mirrored in other offices throughout the country. While I commend the service, particularly the help line service that puts people onto the correct offices, clearly a waiting time of six weeks is too long.

The resources of these offices are at breaking point. More important, the staff morale in the MABS offices and in the local social welfare offices are at an all-time low. The reality is that more and more people will be turning to MABS for assistance, given the current economic climate. We need surplus staff in the Civil Service to be redeployed into these offices to look after people's needs.

There are four simple measures in this motion that could be adopted easily by the Government. It needs to redeploy staff to social welfare offices and to MABS offices to deal with the current volume of welfare claims. The sub-prime industry needs to be clearly regulated. There are many cases coming before the courts which clearly do not need to do so, and which are putting people off turning up in court. The role of MABS needs to be expanded into mortgage renegotiation, and the debt collection industry needs to be regulated.

Dan Neville (Limerick West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. I wish to look at the psychological and emotional difficulties for people who have been rendered unemployed. There are pressures within the family, within life itself and personal pressures such as self-esteem due to concerns about the future. There has been an 85% increase in requests for emergency welfare assistance, which shows how deep and how difficult the situation has become. The fact that there is a 35% increase in the number of people seeking support from MABS highlights the difficulties that have developed within society. There are currently more than 9,600 people in receipt of mortgage interest supplement, which is an increase of 134% on the figure at the end of 2007. It is extremely concerning that 276 people were jailed last year for failing to repay debts, many of whom failed to pay loans to credit providers.

The issue I want to raise is the difficulty and stress experienced by people who have been rendered unemployed. It is very stressful to be made unemployed, and this is particularly the case for young men and men in middle age. People see employment as their status within their community. The first thing a person is asked is where he or she is from, and the second thing asked is what he or she does for a living. A person who has been employed for a number of years can find it extremely stressful to be made unemployed. Financial difficulty is another issue that causes extreme stress to the person and his or her family. This is especially the case when it comes to foreclosures and the threat of losing one's home. The home is seen as the primary investment and makes a statement about the person.

International research has shown that unemployment, financial difficulty and home foreclosures have led to an increase in the rates of suicide. American psychologists have coined the phrase "econocide" to explain a wave of suicides that have been caused by the current recession in that country. There is a need to invest in the suicide prevention policies and the 12.5% cut on the €4.5 million grant to the National Suicide Prevention Office is an absolute disgrace. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs allocated €11 million to families to deal with family crises as a result of the economic crisis, yet at the same time the Government is ignoring the fact that there will be a higher level of psychiatric difficulties, suicide and self harm among family members. Why not deal with both issues, as they arise equally within families?

Seymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Enright for bringing this motion before the House. It has been an extremely useful debate, and hopefully some good will come from it. I refer to the attachment of fines. Fine Gael has introduced Bills to the House several times. We were promised immediate action by the Government at least to avoid the people concerned having to go to jail and to ensure that fines were paid on a detached basis either through income or social welfare. However, nothing has happened. Some simple measures could be introduced which would not cost any money. They would save staff and jail time and would be a good deal better for everyone concerned.

We all accept that with 371,000 people on the dole there is a good deal of pressure on the system. We must ensure that they can be dealt with in the most sympathetic way possible. While I accept that those seeking jobseeker's benefit are not in such a bad position, those seeking jobseeker's allowance, especially those who were self-employed and who subsequently found themselves out of work and income, and in some cases in serious debt, find themselves in such a position. That issue must be dealt with in a more sympathetic and urgent manner.

The farm assist scheme was introduced during the previous economic downturn and we were assured that up to 40,000 people would benefit. However, the number of recipients never rose above 8,000. That was partly because of the way the regulations were imposed. As a result of the current economic situation, many farmers' sons who had been in good employment in the building industry or elsewhere now find themselves back at home and under significant pressure. The price of product generally has come down and there has been a disaster in the milk sector. Sometimes, when social welfare officials visit a farm and see the new buildings forced on farmers in recent times as a result of the nitrates directives, they might get the impression that the place is doing well with good stock and new buildings. However, there is no income, which is the real issue. The potential income of such people should be the only means by which the farm assist scheme should implemented. In recent times, grants have not been paid. Those who will be paid will only receive 40% and a further 20% two years later. However, the REPS 4 payment was due last October. According to an answer to a parliamentary question from the Minister last week, up to 50% of the payments have not yet been made. There is a very significant crisis in the sector with which we must deal.

I pay tribute to social welfare officers, who do a great job. I also pay tribute to the community welfare officers. Such staff are often on the front line and must make instant decisions on whether a person is entitled to money. They are the first line of assistance in very difficult situations. I thank them for the work they carry out.

I refer to Start Mortgages and those affected. It is important that we change the rules and ensure that firms may not simply go to the High Court and impose High Court costs, which is completely unfair. I was interested to hear many Government Deputies emphasising the need to stop fraud and I agree with them. However, let us remember some situations in the past where people were investigated by social welfare officers and their allowances were withdrawn, but they were reinstated some weeks later because of political pressure. I hope that changes and that fraud is properly addressed.

Ulick Burke (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank my colleagues for sharing time and I commend Deputy Enright for introducing the motion. I wonder about the seriousness of the Government and the Minister with regard to the motion, given that the first element of the amendment notes that the average processing time nationally is three weeks for jobseeker's benefit and six weeks for jobseeker's allowance. I cannot reconcile that with the fact that only two weeks ago in the House, in reply to an adjournment matter I tabled, the Minister acknowledged that the average waiting time in Gort, County Galway, was more than ten weeks, the third worst waiting time of all centres in the country. The Minister stated that the issue was now resolved. I do not understand what she means by that. The chaos which exists in that centre is unbelievable and the conditions under which the personnel must work is unimaginable. Nothing has been done despite the ever increasing numbers that have joined the unemployment list. It is time that the Minister for Social and Family Affairs got a handle on the situation and examined the reality of what is taking place at the coal face with regard to the number of unemployed in the country today.

With approximately 370,000 people unemployed, there is a very significant wealth of talent in various areas which could be utilised very well. I refer to the number of electricians, carpenters and highly qualified personnel who are unemployed. There is an onus on the Minister and the Department to categorise those talents and put them in groups so that, where possible, the resources available could be used.

The FÁS scheme has been very successful in many areas throughout the years and such talents could be put to good use in repairing local authority houses. Local authorities have had to let people go in recent months because they can no longer pay them. There is a very significant logjam in works to be carried out with regard to housing for the elderly, tenants repairs and other schemes. It is not good enough for the Government to walk away and suggest people are being provided with funding. Most of those with talent wish to get back to work and are not being afforded the opportunity to do so. I call on the Minister of State, Deputy Hoctor, to ask her colleague to lift the embargo on recruitment. I call especially for a derogation in the case of FÁS trainers.

Only two months ago in Loughrea, some 180 people were made redundant at Cigna. In fairness, FÁS immediately came on board as part of the economic group which responded to the needs of the workforce which had been made redundant. FÁS came on site and provided an accelerated information technology course for those people. However, when the current group finishes its training course, that will be the end of it because of the embargo. I call on the Minister to provide a derogation from that embargo to allow some relief to those who have been made unemployed. There is no point in a Minister talking from both sides of her mouth, pretending she and the Government is concerned about rising unemployment while, at the same time, denying those affected the opportunity to up-skill. We have been told time and again in the House that up-skilling is the priority. I call for this to be rectified as a matter of urgency.

I refer to the delay in and the nature of appeals. For example, I have papers from a person who applied for an old age pension. The papers were sent back by a deciding officer and a statement of means was referred to. That person was supposed to appeal the pension application. However, there is a blank page on this statement of appeals, which is simply not good enough. It is grossly negligent for the deciding officer involved to make such a reply to an application and this must stop also.

Máire Hoctor (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Gabhaim buíochas leis na Teachtaí Dála a labhair aréir agus inniu faoin rún tábhachtach seo. I realise Members on all sides of the House are genuinely concerned about the needs of constituents who have lost their jobs, are having difficulty paying their mortgages and who are struggling with debts. The Government shares that concern and, as the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, outlined last night, steps are being taken to ensure people can access financial and other supports as early as possible.

Members have spoken about the delays in some areas in processing claims for jobseeker payments. While the average processing times nationally for applications in February was three weeks for jobseeker's benefit and six weeks for the jobseeker's allowance, they are significantly longer in some areas. This can make things difficult for people and I assure the House that measures are being put in place to address this issue, with the provision of nearly 266 extra staff and the introduction of more efficient and streamlined processes for deciding on claims. All of this is aimed at reducing processing times in order that people need not wait for too long.

The community welfare service can, through the means tested supplementary welfare allowance, provide people with immediate support while they are awaiting a decision on their claims. Total expenditure on the supplementary welfare allowance scheme in 2008 was €882 million, including more than €58 million in administrative costs provided to the HSE.

The community welfare officers, CWOs, are under considerable pressure in some areas. The issue of increased demand on existing resources is a matter for the HSE in the first instance to prioritise workloads and to redeploy resources where necessary so that frontline services are maintained. The Department of Social and Family Affairs is working closely with the HSE to ensure effective delivery of services and any request by the HSE for an additional staffing allocation will be given due consideration by the Department within the overall context of the Government policy on public sector numbers. The extra staff being assigned to the Department's local offices with a view to reducing processing times for jobseeker claims will help to relieve some of the pressure on the community welfare service.

The Private Members' motion also refers to the mortgage interest supplement. In recognition of the increasing number of people having difficulties paying their mortgages, the Government has increased the provision for the mortgage interest supplement from €12 million to almost €30 million in the 2007-09 period. Almost 11,000 people are in receipt of this payment, an increase of nearly 7,000 on the number in payment at the end of 2007. As the Minister stated last night, the Government is conscious of the need to ensure the mortgage interest scheme will continue to meet its objectives in the current economic environment. The scheme is being reviewed to that end.

We are determined to ensure that practical advice and support is available to people with wider debt problems. To this end, the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS, has more than 250 staff in 65 locations. It also operates a national telephone helpline available from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday to Friday at lo-call number 1890 283 438, while the website www.mabs.ie can be accessed 24 hours per day.

In 2008, more than 16,600 new clients approached MABS for assistance with debt difficulties, with the telephone helpline dealing with almost 11,000 callers. More than 90% of callers to the helpline find that their money management and budgeting issues can be resolved with the assistance of the helpline adviser. Only an approximate 10% of callers need to be referred to the local MABS office for appointment. In 2009, almost €18 million was provided to assist MABS in dealing with its workload.

MABS is represented on the Legal Aid Board's consultative panel and the two organisations work well together. It also works closely with other organisations, such as the credit union movement, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, the community welfare service and local authorities. MABS provides an invaluable support for people in helping them to re-organise their debts, reach agreements with debtors and try to avoid confrontational situations with debtors. Like me, Deputies are concerned about people going to court over debts and fines. Deputy Conlon has already outlined the position in this respect.

I would like to conclude by assuring the House that the Government is determined on every level to ensure that, in these unprecedented times, all of those in need of support receive it as soon as possible.

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

May I share time with my colleagues, Deputies Stanton and Enright?

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am delighted to have the opportunity to contribute to this debate and I compliment Deputy Enright on tabling the motion, which is opportune in light of the severe haemorrhaging of jobs nationally and, as the Minister of State is well aware, in our constituency of Tipperary North.

The Department of Social and Family Affairs provides an excellent service to Members and many Departments could take a leaf from its book in terms of the manner in which it responds to our queries. While I had much on my mind as I listened to the Minister of State, one of the most insulting comments she could have made about the excellent MABS service was that 90% of callers to its telephone help desk get assistance without needing to make an appointment. This comment was amazing and belittled the role of MABS and the serious effort made by its staff, much of it outside their own working hours.

The Minister of State was present when, almost 12 months ago at the start of the unemployment crisis, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, visited Thurles in Tipperary North to open a new MABS office. They were told that the office did not have enough staff, amounting to one money adviser and one part-time administrator. The same pertained in Nenagh despite the constituency comprising 66,000 people. Subsequently, MABS applied to the Department of Social and Family Affairs for approval for a money adviser co-ordinator, but the application was rejected. This is the Government's opinion and is the subject matter of this motion. The current staff are doing an excellent job, but they cannot cope with the volume of work required.

I have been dealing with a constituent since April 2008 when he or she made an application for carer's allowance. However, the application was refused in July, a decision that my constituent appealed. The oral hearing was heard only this week, some 11 months later. Is this the service of which the Minister of State is proud and that she claims is good enough for the people during this crisis?

It has been interesting to listen to speaker after speaker confuse the issue of debt and to lay the blame for our difficulties on one factor after another without mentioning the roles played by the Government and greedy bankers. People must repay mortgages on properties that have entered negative equity because they were placed in that position by greedy people. I hope the Minister is listening to the debate and will take action.

To give another example, a woman in her late 20s is the mother of an 11 year old child who has been diagnosed with leukaemia. The grandmother made an application for carers allowance to look after her granddaughter and daughter. The case has been deferred because the medical evidence is not strong enough. It is not good enough for the doctors at the Department of Social and Family Affairs that an expert at St. James's Hospital has been treating the patient.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy has one minute remaining.

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for my remaining minute. As the Minister of State knows, a community welfare officer can no longer attend a building in Borrisalee because the HSE has deemed it unsuitable for health and safety reasons. The people of the area must travel to Templemore, a round trip of 15 miles, to meet a social welfare officer who has been inundated by calls from Templemore and Roscrea due to the area's volume of unemployment. The people of Borrisalee do not only need a better and proper service, but to receive it in a dignified and private manner, which is what they as citizens deserve.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I join with colleagues in praising the workers of the Department of Social and Family Affairs, which I have often done. I wish to make a number of comments. First, I am concerned by the community welfare officer service, which is at breaking point. According to those working within the service to whom I have spoken, they cannot cope. I am alarmed by the Minister's amendment, which recognises that the HSE is reviewing the allocation of staff. Will the Minister of State tell the Government to allocate more staff as a matter of urgency, as the service's workload has increased significantly? The staff cannot cope and I am afraid the system will crash.

My second point pertains to those whom Members described earlier tonight as the new poor. I refer to people who were self-employed, the entrepreneurs who took chances and risks in the past. It has recently come to my attention that many such people now are in limbo because they are not entitled to draw jobseeker's benefit as they have not paid the correct stamps. Furthermore, they are not entitled to draw jobseeker's allowance because they may have had an income last year. Many such self-employed people, plasterers, small business people and so on, have had no income this year. While I understand the Department has been asked to be flexible, I have encountered a number of cases in which flexibility has not been shown.

Many such people have mortgages and children in college. Because they had an income last year, many of them are paying fees but cannot qualify for maintenance and are caught in a trap. This issue must be considered as a matter of urgency and I suggest they should be allowed to claim jobseeker's allowance, at a minimum. While they cannot get jobseeker's benefit, they should be eligible for the allowance. When such cases go to the appeals office, it is a case of sending the fool further because the appeals office will not allow it either, given the manner in which the rules are drawn up. Changes must be made in this regard as a matter of urgency.

The third point is that as greater numbers of people move into unemployment, and into long-term unemployment in particular, a real danger arises, as was evident in the past, in that the longer people remain in receipt of social welfare, the more their self-confidence and capacity becomes depleted. The Government must introduce innovative measures to help people return to gainful work or employment. Some employers wish to take on people but are afraid to so do. In Germany after the Berlin Wall came down and the country entered a recession, certain schemes were devised which worked very well. People received slightly more than they would have done in social welfare payments but were in employment and were doing something that provided them with training and skills. Employers became more confident, matters took off and Germany became successful again. Innovative schemes from the Government are required now to get people out of their homes and into some form of employment. One may call it community welfare or social improvement schemes, job training or whatever one wishes. However, employers must begin to engage with unemployed workers, of whom there will be increasing numbers. I do not discern such initiatives emanating from the Government at present. Instead there is much throwing up of hands in the air and asking what can be done in the face of the oncoming international tidal wave. That approach is not good enough and the Government must begin to do more.

I am somewhat concerned about the social insurance fund, which is depleting rapidly. Consideration must be given to the question of what will happen to it. Essentially, I made three points. First, community welfare officers need to get more help as a matter of urgency. I am familiar with the HSE's ability to review matters for years. Second, people who were self-employed last year need help and, third, innovation is required to get people out of their houses to do something useful to boost their confidence, make them employable and get the economy moving again.

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

I thank Members from all sides of the House for their contribution to the debate. In particular, I thank Labour and Sinn Féin for their support of the motion.

I wonder where is the elusive Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The Government's response to this motion demonstrates the extent of the problem because no Minister or Minister of State thought it worthwhile to address in the Chamber that half of the motion which deals with debt. Before making that comment, I checked through the speech I heard the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, make last night, in which she told Members the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform would contribute to this debate and that he would deal with the Legal Aid Board, the role of the justice system in respect of debt enforcement and the relevant legislation. People are losing their homes or are being forced into prison and no one in the Government considers it worthwhile to enter the Chamber to inform Members what it intends to do about it. In itself, this provides a fair indication of the Government's attitude to people.

While listening to the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, I detected no sense of urgency from her as to how she intends to tackle the various issues in this motion that relate to her brief. Staffing levels are absolutely crucial. As for measures such as putting forms on the Internet, that is not a big deal as all Members have them in their offices. While it might be handier for some people to avail of the Internet, at the rate things are going some will not be able to afford to use it, such is the serious nature of the problems in which they find themselves. While the introduction of appointment systems may be fantastic, this should always have been available to people. These are not big ideas that will deal with the scale of the difficulties that have arisen in respect of the long delays being experienced in social welfare offices.

Such long delays have resulted in an over-reliance on the community welfare system, which is evolving into something it should not be and that it certainly is not staffed sufficiently to be. The Government is forcing a position in which people must undergo a double assessment. In nearly all cases, applicants are obliged first to go to a community welfare officer for an assessment, after which they undergo another assessment in the social welfare system that asks almost all the same questions. While community welfare officers can do this in one week, waiting times of up to 16 weeks and longer are being encountered in the Department of Social and Family Affairs when appeals are made. As the same test is used, this issue must be addressed.

The Minister stated last night that any requests from the HSE for additional staff would be given due consideration. Can I assume from this that despite all that has been said and despite the claims by the CWOs that they are beyond breaking point, the HSE has not sought additional staffing to deal with this problem or has not examined how it might reallocate staff within its own offices? Each day this problem is ignored, the position worsens for the individuals and their families who are affected.

During Question Time last month, I suggested the beefing up of MABS so that people everywhere should have access to qualified individuals who are able to deal with negotiations. At present, the Government is asking individuals in dire circumstances to go up against someone in a financial institution who spends the entire day crucifying people to squeeze the last penny out of them. Does the Government consider this to be a fair balance? That is what is being stated by its speakers in response to this motion. I mentioned this suggestion again last night, as did Deputy Noonan, and the Minister said it was a good idea. If so, something should be done about it. The system should be changed to make available this good idea to people, who then will be able to get the help they need.

For the past 12 years, the Government has allowed financial institutions and sub-prime lenders in particular to act at will. They lured people into the situations in which they now find themselves. However, the Government's amendment appears to perceive the debtors as the authors of their own destruction and the creditors as the wronged parties. The Government is setting up a David and Goliath scenario, except this time it will not be David who wins. All the stakeholders, including the creditors, are in favour of an alternative dispute resolution system. I do not know the Government's attitude to this issue because no one has bothered during this three-hour debate to tell Members where it stands. The manner in which some Government Members stated that there must be recourse to courts was simplistic. Fine Gael's motion does not deny this, as such recourse is essential. However, it must be the last resort and not the first option, which is the difficulty at present. The Government's moratorium is not enough and I want to know what happens to the credit rating of a person who avails of the moratorium. My understanding, from speaking to those involved, is that such people get a negative credit rating even having availed of the moratorium. I seek clarity in this regard.

The Minister of State who is present should think of a young couple, perhaps in their early 30s, who live in a house that is worth tens of thousands less than they spent on it. They are out of work and have young children. The Government is giving such people nowhere to turn and nowhere to get advice. While MABS will give people some advice, it can only advise them on how to spend the money they have. As MABS does not have the people, time or skills to negotiate with the financial institutions, another system must be developed. MABS itself has recommended that an alternative dispute resolution system should be established. As nearly every other country in Europe has acted on this, why has this not happened in Ireland? Is the Government telling Members it still defers to the financial institutions?

The Government should address the disastrous waiting times and get rid of duplication in the system. It should give people the respect to which they are entitled and should provide them with their entitlements when they need them. Moreover, the Government should make the criteria for mortgage interest supplement relevant to the present climate. Above all, those in debt should be provided with the opportunity to receive the advice they need to help them get out of the situation in which they find themselves, without fault on their own part in respect of losing their job, and to come to an agreement with their creditors in a manner that respects both sides.

Finally, the Government should desist from talking about averages. If one is waiting 16 weeks for receipt of €204, it is no comfort to learn that somewhere else, the waiting time is two or three weeks. It is one's family that one cannot help survive.