Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to have the opportunity to contribute on this important issue tabled by Fine Gael in Private Members' time. The Fine Gael motion is very important because it has focused on some of the key areas in the budget again, especially changes to the benefits to the blind, the disabled and carers. These are areas no one would have expected any Government to hit or target with cutbacks. Fine Gael has sought to have these cuts redressed and I fully support the proposal. We are all aware of the nature of the budget at this stage and that the Government has gone out of its way to target the least well off in society, including those on social welfare across the board, whether the blind, deaf, disabled, carers, widows or those on supplementary allowance. The Government has targeted everyone. Child benefit and jobseeker's allowance has been targeted as well. All of these areas have been hit savagely.

We have just finished debating the Bill on public sector pay. The public sector has been targeted again in a similar fashion, irrespective of the amount earned by any public sector worker. From the lowliest labourer, the clerical worker or the first-time employee, whether such people earn greater or less than €30,000, whether part-time or otherwise, every euro such people earn will now be subject to a minimum of a 5% cut. It is an absolute disgrace that the Government has provided for such measures.

Even more unfairly, next year, the year in which this budget will become operational, will be the European Union year of combating poverty and social exclusion. Was the Government aware of this when it decided to target the poor, those who will face poverty and those who are socially excluded? It should have been moving in the opposite direction.

The Cabinet handbook requires poverty-proofing but that did not take place. The handbook was thrown out the window. In addition, the Lisbon treaty, to which we have recently signed up, requires similar poverty-proofing for all legislative activities of the European Union. The European Union must take cognisance of the impact of all legislative proposals on people and communities and it must ensure that any such proposals do not adversely impact on such people. That has been disregarded totally as well.

This is an unfair and divisive budget, probably the most unfair and divisive in the history of the State. I do not believe anything has been so divisive since the Civil War of 1922. I have no doubt bitterness will be engendered by this budget that will carry on for many years and decades to come. It will have the same impact as taking the shilling from the old age pensioners. However, in addition to targeting the poor and less well off, the budget is also very divisive because it targets one section of society and lets another section off scot free.

No attempt was made to deal with those responsible for the economic crisis we now face; the bankers and financiers we discussed only minutes ago made the decisions that almost ruined the country and brought it to its knees. Nothing was said about the inability of this legislation to bring Anglo Irish Bank within the remit of public sector provisions even though it is now a State bank, having been nationalised. Notwithstanding that, the mandarins in the Department of Finance and the Fianna Fáil Cabinet have decided that Anglo Irish Bank, which brought about so much of the culture of corruption that came into this country regarding financial matters, will be immune from any attempt to extract tax in order to make up the €1.3 billion that must be made up by the public sector.

One sector in Irish society is burdened with the entire load of trying to balance the books, and that is totally unfair. To top that, we find that those people referred to in the Bill, the blind, the disabled and the carers, will be deprived of the Christmas bonus. Even that element of Christmas cheer that enabled people to buy those extra things at Christmas, deal with bills and provide that extra bit that tided them over the difficult winter months, will not be available. This is a double whammy hitting the poor. This is Scrooge doubled. It will be a miserable Christmas for all the people this Government has targeted to help ensure the balancing of the budget takes place.

Medical cards are being delayed to such an extent at present that a great number of poor and disabled people are without medical card coverage. There is the extra charge on prescriptions whereby people must pay per item. The same delay applies to rent subsidies where accommodation needs that are determined by the local authority are taking forever to be determined. We have a system that delays inordinately. With the demoralisation and decimation taking place in the public sector, there is no doubt the system will become further delayed and ordinary people will find that normal processing of their statutory entitlements will not take place for long periods of time, for months. Every Deputy in the House has had complaints in that regard.

Of course, there is a better way which the Government should have taken. It was proposed by the trade union movement and came from this side of the House. Those proposals would not have allowed such targeting to take place. However, this has happened, but we would like at least a reversal of the most severe and savage hits that have taken place. This Private Members' motion proposes that at the very least the Government would look again at this matter. A relatively small amount of money is required which the Government could easily make up from other sources. We repeatedly outlined those areas where the Government could look for extra money if it were minded to do so. It could at least try to bring some cheer to those who are at the lowest end of the scale, the disabled, the carers and the blind. We could add to that list of people very easily but it should be possible to ensure that these sectors do not continue to be the recipients of the brunt of this budget.

We are facing the European year of combating poverty and social exclusion and I do not know what our Government will do when it is asked by the European Commission what steps it has taken to combat poverty and social exclusion. If the Government heads off to Europe and presents its budget for 2010, how will the European Commission, Parliament, Council of Ministers or Council take to that? It would present a very negative reflection on Ireland's commitment to dealing with the problems it faces.

Michael Woods (Dublin North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand the Minister of State, Deputy John Moloney, is sharing time with Deputies Mary O'Rourke, M.J. Nolan and Cyprian Brady.

Mary O'Rourke (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

How many minutes does the Minister of State have?

John Moloney (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I believe I have ten.

Yesterday, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Mary Hanafin, entered the debate by explaining the reasons for the Government's decisions regarding the reductions in some social welfare payments. I will not go over all of that except to say I agree with the Minister's presentation and support what she is doing.

My area of responsibility is disability and mental health and it is clear some of the proposed reductions will affect people with disabilities. Some months ago when I took this position in the Department of Health and Children, I made clear to all groups representing disabilities and mental health issues that the last thing the Government would do was to hide behind the recession or try to reduce services by making the excuse of harsh economic times. The budget was crafted to a level that gives belief to people in the disability and mental health sectors that the Government is keeping faith with its commitments in the programme for Government and the national disability strategy.

I do not intend to use the few minutes I have to outline the funding that is still in place but at the same time it is very important to explain at every opportunity to people in the disability and mental health sectors the deep commitments and proposals that remain intact. In the past 15 months I have met, on a weekly basis, at least three or four groups representing the two sectors and have given clear commitments of what we should do for the future. Regarding mental health, I committed to securing a multi-annual capital programme and I am thankful to say it is now in place. In the disability sector, while I acknowledge the difficulties within the economic sector in recent times, at the same time it is important to acknowledge the work done by the service providers 365 days per year. I try to show a serious commitment remains by pointing out that in spite of a very serious economic decline the renewed programme for Government reaffirms our commitment to the area of disability.

There was consistency regarding this sector and the budgetary debate. Some €3 million was provided in this budget for an innovation programme to ensure that people with disabilities could make the transfer from institutionalised care to residential care in the community. Again, it is a matter of trying to underline that even though we are in difficult economic times our commitment remains. During last year it was brought to my attention by many of the voluntary groups, Inclusion Ireland in particular, that the Government was not providing funding for the inspection of children with disabilities who were in residential care. This point was made to Government on many occasions and it is fair to point out that in the budget commitment funding was approved for this specific area.

I am trying to bring balance to this debate by saying that, on the one hand, there have been cuts under the social welfare code affecting the disability and mental health sectors but, on the other, there is also provision to retain the strategy.

A total of €1.6 billion is set aside by Government for the disability sector. Some months ago I announced a review of this sector, but I want to reaffirm the senior Minister's commitment, and that of the Government, that this will not be a device to secure funding or divert funding to some other black hole in the health sector. I have given a public commitment that anything saved by this value for money review will remain within the disability sector. That confirms that while we are in harsh economic times, nevertheless, the underlying programme commitment remains. To prove that this is not a device to divert funding, I have insisted that two people from the disability sector be appointed to the review committee and I am pleased the two people concerned have accepted the appointment.

In terms of where the disability and mental health sectors go from here following the recent budget, I take the point made by Deputy Costello regarding the need to poverty-proof the Cabinet handbook in this area, but it is fair to make the point also that the Secretaries General of the five sectors involved in this area are also working with Government to ensure that we adhere to the commitment we made in the disability sector. I am pleased to say we remain loyal to the commitment that 7,000 people with disability would be at work by 2010.

It is fair to make the point also that by changing the support structure in that specific area, the disability sector is acknowledging that is the position we are moving toward. Also, even though there have been cutbacks in the sector, there has been a 15% increase by way of disability grants by local authorities to the disability sector and to the elderly.

It is important also to state, and this has been accepted by many people I meet who have disabilities, that even though we are in a difficult economic time, we must prepare a five-year programme which must take into account funding for housing for people with disabilities, ensure that the job commitments we have made are realised and, more importantly, and this is the most important aspect in terms of my sector, that the review we have announced is not just a way of saving money. It is well known that the disability sector is concerned to ensure that the review we speak about is not just a money saving exercise.

I want to refer briefly to the retention and promotion of policy in the education area in the recent budget and the retention of our commitments to fund education. The renewed programme for Government announced in 2009, which is supported in the budget, commits the Government to further investment in the development of services for pupils with special educational needs. It is fair to make the point that this is a significant achievement in a time of reduced public spending. The renewed programme commits to the expansion in the number of psychologists employed directly by the National Educational Psychological Service.

I am not trying to hide the fact that funding has been reduced but the overall plan for the future is to assure the disability sector in terms of the objectives of the review now in place, and I want to thank Mr. Crowley for accepting the position as chair, and ensure that the report will be with the Government before the end of March.

I speak directly to the disability sector when I say that, notwithstanding the motion before the House, which specifically refers to certain reductions, the current review will examine the disability services in Ireland funded by the Health Service Executive, including the statutory and non-statutory sectors; deliver a comprehensive analysis of data in regard to services and service providers; review current policy objectives; and provide policy objectives for future service provision. I expect this review will be completed by March and in terms of what we will be announcing some time in February by way of job promotion, it is not just a clearing of policy, so to speak. It will become a regional drive on behalf of the Government to involve entrepreneurs, business people, the State and semi-State sectors and local authorities in ensuring that we deliver upon that commitment.

The strategy recognises that we are living in difficult times and is consistent with the principles in A Vision for Change on the mental health side. The drive will be toward ensuring that we maintain a base level of funding to retain what was achieved in better times.

I will conclude by echoing what the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, said last night. No Minister or Deputy on this side of the House is in the business of making life difficult for people in receipt of social welfare payments, but there is also a responsibility to ensure that the economy arrives at a point where we can maintain levels of service for those in receipt of social welfare. The difficult decisions were made in that context. People should stand back and consider, first, that funding that has been retained, second, earmarked funding has been added to and, third, the national disability strategy remains in place and will continue to be supported.

Michael Woods (Dublin North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Under the sharing arrangement I now call Deputy Mary O'Rourke who has five minutes.

Mary O'Rourke (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy John Moloney, for sharing his time in this fashion. I am glad to have a few minutes to speak on the issue. I am sorry Deputy Costello has left the Chamber because he asked what we would say to Europe when it comes a-calling to find out what we were doing to eliminate poverty in 2010, which will be the eliminate poverty year. When it comes a-calling, we will say that in a time of very difficult economic circumstances, even allowing for the changes we have provided in the Social Welfare Bill, €21.1 billion will be spent on social welfare in 2010, which is €676 million or 3.3% more than what is expected to be the outcome figure for this year. We will be telling Europe that we are budgeting 3.3% more for 2010 than we budgeted for 2009.

I remember from my time in education when they would talk about cuts, yet the expenditure would have increased. That is the case this year with social welfare. Expenditure has increased by 3.3%, but nobody wants to talk about that or recognise that it has happened in a time of great difficulty.

I want to mention the carers because like every other Deputy in this House we all met with groups of carers in recent months not just at the centralised arrangement which took place in Buswell's Hotel, but also at local level. There is a carers' representative in the midlands and she came to see me at my clinic with a group of people who were in receipt of the half-rate carer's allowance. The thrust of their argument was that they would be left with the half-rate carer's allowance. I remember it distinctly because they were vehement in their exhortations to me that they would be left with the half-rate carer's allowance. For some reason, a rumour went around that the half-rate carer's allowance was to be abolished, bearing in mind that it only came in in 2007, and I suppose they thought it would be targeted for removal in 2009 but it was not, and I am happy it was not.

There were no cuts in the carer's allowance or other allowances for those over 66 and the half-rate carer's allowance was retained, and there has been great acknowledgement of that.

I freely admit this has been in the midst of receiving many telephone calls, or meeting disgruntled people, perhaps from mothers with children in particular. While I accept this, I also accept that child benefit rose greatly in recent years and simply could not continue to rise in such a fashion. In particular, I wish to record that I have met people who have told me they were glad the half-carer's allowance was kept as a payment. I also wish to pay tribute, because from desultory and brief conversations with the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, in recent months-----

Michael Woods (Dublin North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

One minute remains to the Deputy.

Mary O'Rourke (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes. I know she worked very hard night and day to ascertain how, even in the midst of cutbacks, she could bring about equity or fairness for people, particularly those with young children, and she has done so.

Interestingly, as I travelled somewhere last Sunday evening, by chance I heard on the car radio the vice-president of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, Professor John Monaghan, who appeared on a programme the name of which I cannot recall but which is broadcast at 6 p.m. on a Sunday evening. In his opening remarks, before getting into what one might call the tough stuff, he wished to acknowledge immediately the significant efforts of the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, towards ensuring that in the case of people with young children who lost child benefit initially, it would be made up by the increased qualified child allowance, as well as by family income supplement, FIS, for those who are eligible. The Acting Chairman is making faces at me.

Michael Woods (Dublin North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy's time is up.

Mary O'Rourke (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is it really? Amazing.

Michael Woods (Dublin North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is. That is the reason I indicated that one minute remained, just to let the Deputy know.

Mary O'Rourke (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to acknowledge that, in the context of child poverty in particular and all it entails, the Minister has made strenuous efforts to seek to ensure that for people with children, the income coming into the house on their behalf is not diminished.

Cyprian Brady (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. When one gives somebody something which he or she becomes dependent on, it is very difficult to take it back. Nobody on this side of the House welcomes or wants to see any kind of cuts, in particular to the areas we are discussing tonight, but we have to balance cuts with the €2.1 billion we will spend next year in these areas. In fairness to the Minister, the choices were stark and difficult.

There is an acceptance that payments have vastly improved in these areas over the past number of years and particularly over the past five or six years. There have been significant increases and people have trotted them out in the House on numerous occasions. I have spoken to many different groups and individuals since the budget. There is a general acceptance that we are where we are. The reality is that if we did not make these choices now, the chances are that the cuts which would have had to be made next year would have been savage. This part of the budget, while a large part, is still only part of the overall budget. The choices which had to be made were made to minimise, as much as possible, the effect the changes would have on peoples' lives.

On the two areas we are discussing, the value of carers and their families was recognised by this side of the House many years ago. A lot of work has gone into improving supports, training and facilities for carers, in particular since 1997, as have supports for the representative groups of carers. We have all dealt with them, as previous speakers have said. Every Deputy in the House was contacted by a group or organisation on behalf of carers. The fact the Minister managed to maintain the half-rate carers allowance is an indication that she listened to the many groups she met regarding this issue, something which has come across in the social welfare budget for this year.

We have made significant changes regarding people with disabilities. I have spoken to many individuals and groups who, for whatever reason, have to avail of disability payments. They accept that over the past number of years things have improved. I remember discussing with my former colleague, the late Senator Tony Kett, who worked hard and diligently in the area of disability, the Disability Acts as they passed through the House. Major changes were fought for by individuals and groups representing people who needed extra support and a hand up, something which they did not receive until a number of years ago. They were ignored for many years by successive Governments, but that has changed.

The fact is the choices made were made for a reason, namely, to ensure that next year we can continue to pay the allowances and grants which are needed and to support those who need it most. In fairness to the Department and the Minister, every effort is being made to ensure that those people who need help the most receive it.

Michael Woods (Dublin North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Stanton wishes to share time with Deputies Paul Kehoe, Olivia Mitchell, Joe McHugh and George Lee. Is that agreed? Agreed.

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

It is amazing to hear Government Ministers and Deputies coming in here one after the other to say how fantastic it was to able to give increased payments to people on disability, carers and people who are blind during the past number of years. They seem to justify the current cutbacks by pointing to the increases which were given in the past. Are they saying the increases given in the past were wrong, not needed or unjust and are now being taken back? I am sure they would not agree with that question. What has changed?

Obviously, there are major economic difficulties out there. However, the Government has made a choice to target people with disabilities, carers and people who are blind in this budget. I was shocked when I saw this happening. I could not believe it when I saw it in the Budget Statement and thought it could not be true. We have had many debates on people with disabilities and the problems they face. The Central Statistics Office maintains that the risk of poverty for people with disabilities is 37% higher than the rest of the population. Some 55% of people who are at risk of poverty live in households headed by a person who is outside the labour force, that is, a person in a caring role, a person suffering from a disability or an older person.

People with disabilities already face a number of higher costs. The National Disability Authority proposed a number of years ago that an extra cost of disability allowance be given to people with disabilities. This was not done, even though it has been called for time out of number. What has the Government done? It has decided, instead of giving extra money in the budget, to take it away. It justifies the measure by saying it gave a lot of money in the past and now it can take it away. That is cock-eyed logic which does not make sense. The money and support involved were needed in the past and should not be taken away now. It was the right thing to do then and the wrong thing to do now.

Before I came into the House I spoke to a carer who is caring for her husband who is in a wheelchair. They are angry and very worried because of the shift in the policy of the Government. Until now, this House was united in the need to look after the most vulnerable in our society, but that has now changed. The Government has decided to target these people and take from them what they need the most.

The Minister of State with responsibility for equality, disability issues and mental health, Deputy John Moloney, spoke some time ago about the national disability strategy. He is very sincere and hardworking. However, the national disability strategy has been abandoned and no longer exists. It was composed of the Disability Act and the Education of Persons with Special Educational Needs Act, which have been postponed indefinitely. They were the two central planks in the strategy. I was involved in the debates here and the passing of the Acts by this House. We worked very hard on them and many people came into the House to make presentations on them.

The personal advocacy service, which was due to come into place in 2008 to assist people who were blind and suffering from intellectual disabilities and autism in accessing services, has been abandoned. In March this year, the national carers strategy, which was promised for many years, was abandoned. A review has been set up, but where is the strategy? It does not exist. Let us stop fooling people. Let us not trot out all these Acts, etc. Deputy Cyprian Brady, who just left, mentioned the Disability Act. Perhaps the Minister of State opposite might let him know at some stage that it has now been postponed indefinitely and that, effectively, it does not exist anymore.

We were told that the multi-annual investment programme consisted of €900 million from 2006 to 2009. I challenge the Minister of State opposite and any other Minister to lay before the House a detailed account of what has happened to that money. I have been trying for some time, but cannot get it. Much of it has been diverted and much of it may never have existed. I have asked for information on it through parliamentary questions and other debates; it does not seem to exist. I believe something is really wrong there. In his report, the Comptroller and Auditor General criticised the HSE on this issue. He said that the accounting procedures were all wrong. It is serious if all that money was supposed to have been provided and it was not pinpointed for people with disabilities. It is now impacting on services that were supposed to have been provided to people with disabilities.

By cutting the money people are getting, the Government is imposing further hardship on them. A lot of sleight of hand is going on here. What do we get? In spite of all the debates we have and all the legislation that was introduced, the Government has abandoned all that and set up another review. My concern is that this review will be solely about cutting back further on funding and support for people with disabilities instead of cutting back on the quangos the Government has established. It puts all its friends on boards and pays them large sums of money just because, as the former Taoiseach said, they were his friends. The policy and philosophy that exists on the other side of the House is to see whom it can put on a particular board and give him or her bonuses, directors' fees and all the rest of it. It has no difficulty taking money from people with disabilities so that these people can get all this money.

Many of the organisations that are doing considerable good work are finding the cutbacks are already impinging greatly on the work they are doing. I call on the Government to reconsider. People with disabilities and their carers cannot protest outside here because in this weather they cannot get away to do it. The Government knew what it was doing and knew that if it targeted these people they would not protest in the middle of winter. It was the one group it could really hit and get away with it. That is what it did and it is an appalling shame. Of all the choices it could have made, this was the wrong one.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Naughten for tabling this very important and timely motion. Since the Budget Statement was delivered in the House last week, many people have contacted my office. Deputy Stanton is right in what he said about the people the Government hit. The blind, people with disabilities and carers are the people who cannot represent themselves. The Government got a major lesson last year when it tried to take the medical card from the over 70s and when those people protested outside this House. If the people whose social welfare payments were cut last week had the health and ability to be able to come out and show their vengeance against the Government, I have no doubt that it would reverse the social welfare cuts and support the Fine Gael motion before the House tonight.

Fianna Fáil, the Green Party and the so-called Independents have hit the most vulnerable in society, carers, the blind and the disabled. I have observed Fianna Fáil in recent years. The former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, whom people thought was great, was the man who was meant to look after people with disabilities. He introduced the Disability Act and was a champion for people with disabilities. Many of the Members opposite were the same. These were the people who stood up for people with disabilities. It is unbelievable that they have cut allowances for blind people. I was given a gift in life, the gift of sight. Unlike me, many others were not given that gift. I would have liked the Minister to have closed his eyes when walking from his office to the Chamber on budget day in order to feel what it would be like to be blind for that five-minute walk. I wonder if he might have changed his mind then.

I met a group of carers a number of months ago. Their commitment to their loved ones is something I have never previously witnessed. The work they do and the commitment, care and attention they give their loved ones is unbelievable. Ministers sat around the Cabinet table and supported the budget, and when it came to the Government backbenchers they also supported it. It is unbelievable how some of these people can talk out of both sides of their mouths. With all their utterances about people with disabilities, carers and the blind, if they had any standards in politics, they would have spoken out against the budget and voted against it. Earlier tonight, Deputy M. J. Nolan from Carlow spoke about how the savings needed to be made and the Minister played the cards she had been dealt. It was absolute rubbish.

While I might have heard Deputy Cyprian Brady wrong, I believe he asked whether they would get this money back. However, these people will never get the money back. It must be most annoying for people to see millions of euro being given to the banks, electronic voting machines, PPARS in the health service and the pensions and wastage of money in FÁS.

I am very lucky not to have a member of my family or anyone connected to me who is blind. My mother was a carer for my father and I know the work she put in and the commitment she gave my father before he went into a nursing home. No member of my family has a major disability. However, I know plenty of people who have family members with disabilities. It is unbelievable that the Government would do what it did last week and that a Minister would have the gall to cut the social welfare benefits of people who are blind or have major disabilities and of carers. While most of the Members opposite have not bothered to come in for the debate, if they are listening on their monitors and if they have any heart at all, I ask them to support the Fine Gael motion tonight.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I shall start on a positive note by suggesting a saving in Government expenditure by turning off the air conditioning in the Chamber for the rest of the winter. Cold air is being pumped down on us non-stop, come hail rain or snow. Today we are in the direct line of an arctic flow of air and air conditioning is still being pumped in here. Somebody should tell the OPW in order to save some money.

Michael Woods (Dublin North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will refer on the Deputy's request.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not think it will have any impact whatsoever.

Before the budget, there was widespread agreement that €4 billion needed to be taken out of the economy. There was recognition that the quantum of money was important. However, how the cuts were to be made was equally important. Where would the spending cuts be made? What priorities were to be established? What incentives or disincentives would be put in place or removed? They are important for two reasons. First, we had to establish that whatever the Government was to do, it would be fair - otherwise, it would not gain acceptance among the public, of whom we are asking quite a lot - and, second, cuts and spending decisions must be targeted in such a way that they are counter-cyclical. That is the big flaw in the budget. Ideally, the budget should change economic behaviour so that at the end of next year, when we face another budget, we will not face even more difficult choices. The Government's actions have simply reinforced the cycle of economic decline, making even more drastic cuts necessary next year. That is my major criticism of the budget: we are asking people to take all this pain for virtually no gain.

Cutting social welfare for able-bodied people of working age may change economic behaviour by making people more anxious to look for work or willing to take work they would not otherwise have considered. However, cutting benefits for carers and blind and disabled people will not change their behaviour. After the cuts they will still be blind or disabled or carers. All the Government has achieved is to make life much more difficult for them. We have asked them to take a disproportionate share of the burden. It is not just the loss of €8.50 a week; they are also facing other cuts. They are bearing a disproportionate burden compared to the able-bodied, particularly in the area of health. The increase in the excess on drug payments, the introduction of prescription charges and the reduction with regard to dental treatment will all fall more heavily on this sector.

Since the recession began, we have all denied responsibility for it. Nobody has put their hands up - not the bankers, not the Government. Everybody else is to blame except ourselves. However, it has never been suggested that the blind, the disabled or carers had anything to do with what was visited upon us. We all, to some extent, see ourselves as victims, but I do not think anyone would deny that these people are utterly blameless victims and should not have to suffer a disproportionate share of the cuts.

Cuts have to be made, but the Government can make choices about where they are to be made. There are two areas in particular in which they should have been made. For months before the budget was introduced - even before the McCarthy report came out, but mostly after it came out - the media, the newspapers and the politicians in the pubs were worrying about where the cuts would fall. What quangos would be abolished, what administration would be streamlined, what bureaucracies would be got rid of? It turned out to be none. None at all. It was all a distraction - a trifle to keep us amused while the Government got on with what it was going to do anyway. It was merely softening up public opinion. In fact, the Government had no intention of making any of those changes.

Ultimately, it is business as usual. We still have major waste and outdated programmes and processes. To sustain that kind of spending into the future, we are cutting benefits to the most dependent. Most reprehensible of all is that the Government did nothing to reduce the actual numbers on social welfare. In fact, it planned for an increase in the number drawing social welfare benefits. Of course, that number can only grow in the absence of a jobs stimulus package, which should have been at the heart of this budget. Only economic growth can take us out of this hole and stem the tide of unemployment and emigration. Only economic growth will ensure that we can continue to support carers and blind and disabled people. However, there is nothing in this budget that will achieve that. All we have done is to reinforce the downward cycle and ensure that the contraction in the economy will be even greater next year.

Michael Woods (Dublin North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy has one minute left.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is all I need.

In my own area of interest, the travel tax was left in place. This tax, which is absolutely counterproductive, was retained despite all the advice from business groups and the Government's own advisers, including the tourism renewal group and, this month, the National Competitiveness Council. It is madness for an island country dependent on inward travel to bring in tourists - and, indeed, for ordinary business purposes - to deliberately make access more difficult and expensive. We stand idly by while our airlines move out of Ireland to support tourism in the UK and mainland Europe. Even today, Ryanair announced that it is to open its 38th foreign base, in Malaga, and not one flight will be into Ireland - they are all going to other European countries. The only result of this is to put thousands more on the dole around the country and, worst of all, to ensure that the Government will have to impose further cuts on the most vulnerable people in the community.

I ask the Government to consider all these issues and to try to put the economy at the heart of this budget. It must ensure that we have fewer people on social welfare and that those who are on social welfare can be looked after.

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

I thank Deputy Naughten for tabling this motion. It is significant in its symbolism and a watershed in terms of the political period in which we find ourselves. People at the most vulnerable end of the spectrum are being targeted in the budget. This sets a dangerous precedent and we need a debate on the issue.

Deputy Kehoe hit the nail on the head in terms of people mobilising in some form of protest against these cuts. We as politicians are trying to gauge the mood of the people in response to the budget. I am detecting varying degrees of feeling, from ambivalence to betrayal. If this budget had come out six months ago, we would have had to contend with an angry public. We must question the lifespan of the public's anger. Six months ago we would have had demonstrations on the street. We must ask why this is not happening now. The danger is that we have entered a phase of ambivalence, apathy and disenchantment among society. This is something of which we must be cautious, but the Government has completely failed to realise it.

Anger can be mobilised through demonstrations and so on. It manifests itself in different ways. A vulnerable group is being targeted and that is a dangerous situation. From speaking to people in my constituency and trying to gauge the mood of people who are unemployed and in employment, I believe this sense of betrayal and apathy will, in the future, be manifested in a dangerous way. Young people who have graduated from college with skills and have been in employment are looking to Canada and Australia. Emigration is back on the agenda. We find ourselves at a dangerous crossroads.

Another thing I have heard in the last week, since the budget was announced, is that people who bought property at the high end of the market feel there was no hope offered to them in the budget. There was no way forward for those who find themselves in negative equity. This feeling is combined with the reaction to the proposed cuts to the incomes of the vulnerable. There are varying degrees of vulnerability, but, in addition, many groups are involved. There are people who have been let down by the Fianna Fáil-led Government that has been in power throughout my lifetime in politics and those who were let down by the banks. We can talk in political jargon, but what people cannot understand is how we can take from the vulnerable yet continually give to the banking sector. We heard about €6 billion being thrown out in the last week to recapitalise Anglo Irish Bank. That is what does not make sense to the public.

What the Fianna Fáil-led Government has done over the past ten years is to completely ignore and disregard the ordinary word on the street. This does not have to be uneducated; it is actually the most educated opinion. The word on the street over the past ten years was that the property boom could not last and was not sustainable. However, the word on the street is now silence. That is the danger in which the Government now finds itself. Silence is a very dangerous concoction in the field of politics and in terms of trying to get us out of the current situation. That is something we must be aware of and we on this side will help to devise and create a new script that is needed to bring this country into the future.

George Lee (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I support this motion for common sense and decency, and I greatly regret that the Government has decided to cut these welfare payments for people who are so vulnerable, namely, the blind, the disabled and carers. Earlier today new figures were published by the Central Statistics Office, CSO, regarding the Quarterly National Household Survey, which tells us a great deal about the labour market. It gives us some background to the difficulties these people are experiencing and it tells us that employment fell by 185,000, or 8.8%, which is unprecedented. Unemployment went up by 120,000, so that means two thirds of those who lost their jobs became unemployed. The remaining one third left the labour market and emigrated, because they had somewhere to go.

The figures show that men lost their jobs almost 3.5 times faster than women in the past 12 months. Two thirds of the men who left the labour force were under the age of 25. They tell us, instructively, that 11,000 females left the labour force, but that 25,000 females under 25 left the labour force. Female workers were, therefore, able to find some new jobs in the labour force and came into it, but the young people are going. Some 60,000 people under the age of 25 left this country in the last 12 months, equivalent to a 94% drop in the labour force. I lament the fact that these people are going, but they are lucky because they have decided they are able to go. In the situation we find ourselves, where prosperity has been destroyed, hopes ruined and jobs are hard to come by, these people at least are able to seek new opportunities elsewhere. Not so for the blind - it is very difficult to go to new countries when one is blind or disabled. It is extremely difficult when one is a carer because the person for whom one is caring cannot come. These people are trapped in Ireland.

The social welfare system is supposed to do many things, including address poverty. It is relatively successful in addressing poverty in Ireland. Without social welfare payments, aside from pensions, 33% of people in this country would be at risk of poverty. With the social welfare transfers, the figure is 18%, so there is some success in that regard. However, 18% at risk of poverty is above the European average, which is 16%. Therefore, our social welfare system still has some way to go. We are now at a point where we are cutting it so we will not address poverty, but rather make it worse. That is very regrettable.

Consumer prices fell in the past year by 5.7%, but the Christmas bonus was cut for those on social welfare and they have to face these cuts in the budget as well. When these two things are added together, it means that the carer's benefit has been cut by 5.6%, much more than rate of inflation when the mortgage element of that is removed. It means the fall in real consumer prices has been far lower than 5.7% and in fact is only 2.2%. Therefore, carers have had their benefits cut by 5.6%, which is almost 3.5% more than inflation. Those on disability have had a cut of 6%, well above the rate of inflation. The CSO did a survey of disability in Ireland. Among the most commonly reported disabilities, 56% have mobility and dexterity problems and cannot move; some 47% live in pain; some 35% have problems remembering and concentrating; and 34% have psychological and mental health problems. They cannot work and it is very difficult for them at the moment to be trapped in a situation whereby they have nowhere to go and the Government does not take their concerns into consideration when making cuts. I know cuts are difficult, but choices can be made.

Studies have been done on consistent poverty, one of which was published by the CSO earlier this year. Consistent poverty has a number of indicators, including having no substantial meal at least one day a week over the past two weeks due to lack of money; having no heating at some stage over the past year due to lack of money; experiencing debt problems for ordinary living expenses; unable to afford two pairs of strong shoes; unable to afford a roast once a week; unable to afford a meal of chicken or fish at least every second day; and unable to afford a warm water-proof coat..

The CSO found that 16% of those with disabilities in Ireland are in consistent poverty, 3.5 times more than within the average population. These people are trapped and in taking this initiative the Government has made a very harsh choice about cutting their benefits and welfare. This is shameful. Obviously, the Government needed to find money, but there were many things it could have done in this regard which it did not do. Everybody in this House has a standard of decency and it would have been in keeping with this to find the money somewhere else rather than taking it from the most vulnerable.

I call on the Minister of State to remove those cuts and I support the motion before the House.

Áine Brady (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to the Fine Gael motion on the subject of supports for people with disability and carers and to sum up the arguments in favour of the Government's counter-motion.

I appreciate that the cuts being made in the welfare area will not be easy for people, but I believe that if the Government does not take the steps now to reduce overall public expenditure and avoid excessive borrowing, we risk making the economic situation far worse for everyone, including welfare recipients in the long term. The Government has avoided making any cuts in the State pension. We have also fully protected more than 420,000 children in welfare dependent and low-income families from cuts in child benefit and ensured that cuts in weekly rates for those aged under 66 are lower than the decreases in prices over the past year, so that their income has been protected in real terms.

As the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Mary Hanafin, highlighted last night, the improvements made in recent years have been unprecedented. These include increases between 1997-2009 in the weekly rates of payment to people with disabilities and carers, which were more than three times greater than the rise in the cost of living in that period; greatly increased eligibility for income support payments as a result of significant easing of the means tests, with much higher income disregards; and the introduction in 2007 of the half-rate carer's allowance, which provides significant additional support for carers in receipt of social welfare payments. The value of the respite care grant has also been increased from €254 in 1997 to €1,700 in 2009.

There have been real improvements in additional supports that many people with disabilities and their carers receive, including the household benefits package of free television licence, electricity and telephone as well as free travel. As a result of these and other improvements delivered by the Government, expenditure on the disability allowance has increased fivefold since 1997, while expenditure by the Department of Social and Family Affairs on supports for carers has increased fourteenfold in the same period. Even with the reductions in last week's budget, the weekly rate of payment for the disability allowance and carer's allowance will still be almost 20% higher next year than in 2006. In the context of a very difficult budget, the Government has avoided any cuts in the carer's allowance for those aged over 66.

I understand that people with disabilities face particular challenges in their daily lives and that family carers have to make sacrifices in order to look after their loved ones. Caring for someone else can be very challenging, as I know from personal experience. Caring for another person, especially on a full-time basis, can have an enormous impact on the carer and his or her family, often meaning that employment opportunities have to be sacrificed, and the carer's health can even be affected. I strongly believe for these reasons that such groups should be a priority for Government and I am glad that, when the resources were available, the supports to them were dramatically increased.

As the Minister stated last night, however, the Government was faced with a stark choice in this budget. The major improvements in welfare payments in recent years were made possible by increases in the amount of money the State was taking in from taxes. This year, the tax receipts have dropped dramatically and, as a result, Ireland is borrowing €400 million weekly to pay, mainly, for welfare, health and education. If the country does not reduce its borrowings not only will it have to pay enormous interest in the future, but we face the very real prospects of international banks not lending to us. Our risk was to be in a far worse position next year and to have to make much harsher cuts then in welfare payments. This was not an easy choice. It was not a decision the Government took lightly, but it was the right thing to do.

A number of Deputies also raised the issue of social welfare fraud. It is worth repeating, however, that there is absolutely no evidence to support the contention that 10% of all welfare recipients are engaged in fraud. In fact, the level of fraud is generally very low. Nonetheless, every euro of welfare expenditure that is fraudulently claimed is one euro too many. There are more than 600 staff working in areas related to the control of fraud and abuse of the welfare system. More than 600,000 individual claims have been reviewed this year. Controls on payments such as child benefit to EU workers have been tightened up this year, and the Social Welfare Bill passed by this House last week included extra powers to tackle welfare fraud. Welfare fraud is theft, which is a serious crime. The Department of Social and Family Affairs is doing everything it can to crack down on people who abuse the system.

The reduction in weekly payment rates in this budget is necessitated by the dramatic drop in tax revenue this year. They are difficult, but unfortunately they are necessary.

Michael Woods (Dublin North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand Deputy Denis Naughten is sharing his time with Deputy Terence Flanagan and Deputy Alan Shatter. Is that agreed? Agreed.

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

I also welcome the opportunity to speak briefly on this Fine Gael Private Members' motion. I thank my colleague, Deputy Denis Naughten, for bringing the motion before the House. The motion is simple and straightforward. We want a complete reversal of these cruel cutbacks, which will hit the blind, the disabled and carers. In last week's budget, the Government made a huge mistake with these cuts. History will clearly prove that. It was unprecedented, unjust and short-sighted of the Government to hit the most vulnerable in society. One must considers all the money that has been in this country in the past 12 years. Not so long ago we were told the country was awash with money, and for this to happen is beyond comprehension.

The Minister said that stark choices had to be made concerning the various budgetary options, but only €108 million needed to be saved to ensure these payments continued. Better choices could have been made including cutting the number of Government quangos that exist. In addition, administration in Departments could also have been cut, as our party leader, Deputy Enda Kenny, said this morning. There were real choices and an opportunity to save this money in other ways. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs has failed the people by deciding to make these miserable cuts.

It is a shame that not enough has been done to deal with social welfare fraud. The Minister of State said it was not as much as 10% of the welfare budget, but there is a clear perception that at least one in every ten people is defrauding the taxpayer. That must be tackled seriously by the Minister and the Government. The Minister revised her annual fraud target, reducing it by €82 million for next year. That is shameful considering that she is not currently reaching the target. It is a cover-up and an opportunity for the Minister not to be held accountable for how bad things are.

The work that carers do has been undermined and is not appreciated by the Government, which has reduced their payments by €8.80 per week. It rubs salt in the wounds of carers following the shelving of the national carers' strategy earlier this year. Without carers the State would be in complete chaos. If those being cared for at home were to be taken into State care, it would be a disaster because the Government could not cope. Much has to be done in this regard and the work of carers must be appreciated. Fine Gael recognises the work that carers undertake and if we were in Government we would not make such a cruel cutback. We would make up the savings in other ways. It is estimated that a full-time carer saves the State up to €40,000 a year, but the real figure is a lot more because one must include the social benefits involved. In addition, the care and attention that is given by family members to their loved ones is much better than a nurse could ever provide. That is because a nurse is not related and does not know the patient personally.

The 4.1% cut in blind pensions is also cruel. Blind people have a lot more expenses as they must adapt their homes and their heating costs are higher. It is a very low blow to go ahead with such a cutback. The Social Welfare Bill was guillotined last week to stifle the debate and to try to bury all this information. We are not lying down, we are standing up for the most vulnerable people in society. We are asking all TDs to vote according to their conscience and do the right thing for the sake of those who are being cruelly discriminated against.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I support the motion, which was tabled by Deputy Naughten on behalf of Fine Gael. We have had an interesting day in the House. This debate is not simply about the issues which are the subject of the motion. It also concerns our value system, how we perceive what political parties should do in Government, how they perceive society, what role political parties should play and what obligations we have to the most vulnerable people. The motion wants to reverse cuts for carers, the disabled and the blind, which the social welfare budget seeks to implement. It is a straightforward and simple motion that I would have hoped had the support of all sides of the House. There is a fatal flaw in the Government parties, however. In Government from 2002 to 2007, Fianna Fáil laid the foundation for an economic and financial disaster, the nature of which we have not seen in the history of the State. They are now joined at the hip by the Green Party, which managed to make a bad situation worse by sitting mesmerised in Government for two years and ignoring the economic cataclysm around them. In each budget, both parties have gone for the easy options.

Tough decisions had to be made and the Fine Gael front bench spent many weeks working out the detail of an alternative budget. We did so for two reasons. We wanted to set out clearly that there is an alternative that does not involve attacking the most vulnerable people who are dependent on social welfare, or those on low pay. We also did it because we had no confidence in the capacity of this Government to make the right choices. We published our budgetary proposals a number of days in advance of the budget in the vague hope that the Government might implement some of them. In bringing about the cuts necessary to try to move at least one step in the direction of correcting the budget deficit and our borrowing requirements, we sought to make the right choices. In doing so, we chose a number of things. On social welfare, for example we said there would be no cut in pensions. That we said there be no cut in the old-age pension is probably what influenced the Government not to make such a cut. Last year, the Government targeted the elderly with regard to medical cards. If it can be put this way without any disrespect, the grey voters came out and barricaded this House. They protested loudly and the Government was forced to change course. The Government was terrified it would find itself in the same position again, so it backed off. It then looked at who would be the least likely to give trouble if their benefits were cut, so who was targeted? It was the blind who, given their difficulties, would not lay siege to this House, the carers - many of whom are lucky to get a week's respite per year from what is essentially a 24-hour, seven-day a week job - who certainly did not have the time to mount a protest, and the disabled. A government could not have more callously chosen and targeted the most vulnerable group within our community to effect cutbacks. The Government displayed its values when it did that. It displayed bad values and made bad choices. In making those choices, it was protecting bankers.

I said today has been an interesting day. It is a day when the Government has rammed through the House legislation that attacks the pay of those in the public service who earn €30,000 or less. Many of them will find themselves caught in a poverty trap. They earn below the average minimum wage. At the same time as making these cuts, the Government is protecting bankers. Not one employee in Anglo Irish Bank, a nationalised bank that has brought the country to its knees, is impacted detrimentally by any measure introduced in the budget. The Government is bankrupt of ideas, values and morality. I believe it no longer has the authority to govern.

The best that could happen would be for the Government to leave the House, ask the President to dissolve the Dáil and call a general election, but it does not have the courage to do that. I challenge the Government to present the value system it seeks to implement in this ill-conceived legislation to the electorate. If it does, I guarantee that after the election has taken place, the Government will find itself on this side of the House, with far fewer Deputies than it has currently.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank all of those who contributed to this debate. I listened with interest last night to the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Mary Hanafin. She tried to defend the cuts being made to the most vulnerable in society on the basis of increases they got in the past. As Deputy Stanton asked earlier, does that suggest the increases they received in the past were unjust or undeserved? I do not think so.

In recent years the cost of living here has increased significantly, mainly due to the gross incompetence of the Government. As highlighted here last night, many people who receive social welfare payments had to borrow to improve their quality of life. All we need do to realise the seriousness of the situation is read the heart-wrenching story in yesterday's newspaper of the couple in Waterford who borrowed to be able to move into a house specially adapted for their disabled son. The bank is now foreclosing on them. People on the breadline are struggling to cope with a high level of debt because of the gross incompetence of the Government to manage the economy. What use is there in telling the people that deflation is running at 2.8%, but that the Government will cut their payments by 6% to ensure they really feel the pain of recession? Why is the Government taking €108 million from carers, the blind and people with disabilities when, at the same time, it is deciding, behind closed doors, to give 55 times that amount to Anglo Irish Bank to bail it out of a further mess it has created? The Government is planning to give €6 billion to Anglo Irish Bank next year, but it cannot find €108 million for the most vulnerable in society.

Many alternatives could have been put forward by the Government to raise the €108 million, rather than take it from the vulnerable. Member after Member who spoke this week and last lied in saying there were no choices. There are choices that could have been made to make the €4 billion of savings. We all agreed savings had to be made. There were plenty of choices and these were outlined by my colleagues. Instead of planning for 75,000 job losses next year to make a saving of almost €700 million, the Government could have accepted the Fine Gael proposal that would have created 50,000 jobs next year. It could have got rid of 150 quangos that have on their boards the friends of Fianna Fáil but, no, it would not do that or interfere with those agencies. It could also have stopped the ongoing and continual waste of public moneys that has gone on over the past 12 years, including the proposed frog census. Is it right that we are spending money to count frogs, but cannot support carers, the disabled and the blind?

I could mention the waste in the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Some €4,000 a minute is leaving the country and being squandered through fraud. At the same time, the Minister failed to deliver on the target she set in April with regard to fraud. On 8 April this year, she stated here that her first priority was to tackle fraud with regard to jobseekers. However, she is €112 million short of her target in that regard. Strange as it may seem, only €4 million is needed to support the most vulnerable groups in our community through protecting the carers and those they care for, people with disabilities and the blind.

I remind Government backbenchers that the Taoiseach said recently that budgets are not simply about balancing the books, but that is the attitude being taken by the Government currently. He said budgets are also about acknowledging what we see as important in society. The Government backbenchers have a choice to make tonight. They can decide what is important for society. Do they believe the elderly, carers, people with disabilities and the blind are important or do they believe the bankers and their friends are the people who should be bailed out and that they are the people who are important? Those backbenchers have a choice to make, whether they want to support the vulnerable or the people who have created the mess we are in currently. Let them decide. Let them go up the steps and decide whether to go left or right, whether to choose Tá or Níl and whether to support the vulnerable and people who work 24 hours a day, seven days a week, all year long, to help the most vulnerable - people who are sick or disabled who will never have that choice.

I commend the motion to the House.

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As provided for under Standing Orders, I would like to call a division other than by electronic means to give the Government Deputies an opportunity to support the Fine Gael Party's motion.

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That vote will now proceed.

Question again put: "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to."