<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rdf:RDF
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
  xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
  xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
		
<channel rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/mp/?pid=107">
<title>Olwyn Enright - Recent appearances (From KildareStreet.com)</title>
<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/mp/?pid=107</link>
<description></description>
<dc:language>en-gb</dc:language>
<dc:creator>KildareStreet.com, mprss.php script</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-15T16:11:18+00:00</dc:date>

<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-09.327.0&amp;m=281#g335.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-08.329.0&amp;m=281#g337.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g218.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g215.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g213.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g210.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g208.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-01.487.0&amp;m=281#g554.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-01.487.0&amp;m=281#g534.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g468.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g466.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g454.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g452.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g434.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-25.395.0&amp;m=281#g584.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-11.452.0&amp;m=281#g529.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-11.452.0&amp;m=281#g497.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-11.269.0&amp;m=281#g270.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-05.305.0&amp;m=281#g316.2" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-05.305.0&amp;m=281#g308.2" />
</rdf:Seq>
</items>

</channel>

<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-09.327.0&amp;m=281#g335.0">
	<title>Cystic Fibrosis: Motion | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-09.327.0&amp;m=281#g335.0</link>
	<description>I wish to thank Deputy Reilly for tabling this motion.  We have the highest incidence of cystic fibrosis in the world, and the most severe type, yet we allocate the poorest resources in Europe to...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="335.1">I wish to thank Deputy Reilly for tabling this motion.  We have the highest incidence of cystic fibrosis in the world, and the most severe type, yet we allocate the poorest resources in Europe to dealing with it.  Five or six years ago, I remember raising the case of a young man in Kerry whose brother-in-law was a constituent of mine.  He was awaiting a lung transplant but that young boy has since died because he did not get the required operation.  We are now in 2009, but we still do not have a transplant office within the Health Service Executive to provide a framework to implement the independent processes needed to enhance the quantity of lungs available for transplant.  That has not happened in that length of time and we still have some patients going to Newcastle.  There have been some improvements in terms of being able to facilitate operations here, but our overall attitude to cystic fibrosis sufferers has not improved and last week’s actions do not show any improvement.  </p><p pid="335.2">Despite the current budgetary context, we had 12 years during which this situation could have been improved.  The Minister was in office for all of those 12 years.  Last week, she looked in the eye young people who know they will have a much shorter life expectancy that the rest of us.  They were told they would have to wait longer, but they do not have time to wait.</p><p pid="335.3">Our health staffing levels are seriously inadequate, we have an unbalanced service which is thinly distributed and we have too many small units.  The biggest issue for cystic fibrosis patients is a lack of isolation facilities.  The Pollock report, which was published in 2005 when we still had money and were wasting it - I think it was around the time we announced decentralisation - said that all cystic fibrosis patients should be in single, <i>en suite</i> toilet facilities to prevent the transmission of dangerous organisms.  However, nothing was done about it at that stage.</p><p pid="335.4">I hope the Minister’s commitment this week will come to pass so that the unit will be provided within the stated timeframe.  I am sceptical about it, but I hope it happens.  In the meantime, what will the Minister do about the six interim beds that were promised?  Some 14 in total were meant to be delivered by the end of summer 2008, so will they come on-stream in the meantime?  Can the Minister give a clear commitment that the unit will be delivered in the stated timeframe?</p><p pid="335.5">I have often heard the Minister say that there is no low-hanging fruit in health and I appreciate that because it is a difficult portfolio.  Looking back at what happened in Portlaoise in autumn 2007 and listening to “Morning Ireland” today about what went on in Ennis, at least those awful things could be described as system failures.  They were scandalous but it was much more difficult to say they occurred because of a choice that was made.  In this instance, however, it is about choices.  I am glad the Minister did a U-turn on the decision to cancel that unit.  The choice that was made last week said, more or less, that 25 more young CF sufferers will definitely die this year, given last year’s statistics.  I do not know what it is like to grow up being aware that if I had the good fortune to live a few miles up the road in Northern Ireland I would live at least ten years longer.  I do not know how that feels, but I do know from speaking to Orla Tinsley and families and patients with cystic fibrosis how they feel.  I ask the Minister to try to remember that when she is making decisions and choices in this respect.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-04-09T11:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-08.329.0&amp;m=281#g337.0">
	<title>Financial Resolution No. 11: General (Resumed) | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-08.329.0&amp;m=281#g337.0</link>
	<description>This budget is effectively an attack on Irish families.  Several measures have made life far more difficult for young families in particular, and I dread to think what slightly more mature...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="337.1">This budget is effectively an attack on Irish families.  Several measures have made life far more difficult for young families in particular, and I dread to think what slightly more mature families will have to face when the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy O’Keeffe, is finished with his proposals.  We must see these families as real people and not simply as cash cows for the Government.  I will give a real example of the impact of its decisions.</p><p pid="337.2">The average family with both parents working will pay at least €2,500 in extra taxes, and many will pay significantly more.  However, we must remember this couple bought their property at the height of a boom that the Government blew and now live in a house that is no longer worth what they paid for it, which they will be paying off through a mortgage for up to 30 years.  Now they face losing the mortgage interest relief on which they rely, depending on when they purchased their house.  The same couple may have thought their home was a first step on the property ladder onto which people were almost coerced into climbing - a one-bedroom or, if they are lucky, two-bedroom place they had planned to move out of when they had a family.  Now they find they cannot sell the house as nobody can afford to purchase it, and they are in negative equity.  In the meantime they have had two children and are paying €1,300 a month in child care costs.  They have relied on the early child care supplement even though the Government has already chopped it twice.  Now it is being abolished across the board.  For this couple, that is another €2,000 gone, even though their child care costs have not changed.  They also have been told that child benefit will be taxed or means tested next December.  The Government has hit them in every way possible.  This young family has no voice.  They are not represented by any interest group or trade union.  They were struggling to get by anyway, and now they are sinking.</p><p pid="337.3">What does the Government plan to do to alleviate the burden on this family?  What is the sop to make things seem less harsh?  It will give them one year of free pre-school.  It is estimated that approximately 81,000 children fall into this age bracket.  The Government is promising to have these places available next January.  How on earth can it achieve this?  This promise is coming from a Government that is already spending €50 million a year on prefabs in schools.  Now it is telling us that in eight months it will create 81,000 pre-school places.  Nobody believes that.  I ask the Minister to tell us how it will actually work.  Where will these places be available?  What spare capacity is out there in the pre-school sector?  Will it be a mix of public and private?  Will it be available in every locality?  How many fully trained pre-school teachers are free to do this work at the moment?  The ratio of children to adults in pre-schools should be 10:2, and the Government is committing to having 16,000 adults providing this service by next January.  That is a lot to ask and I doubt it can achieve it.  The space requirement is 2 m2 per child, so at a minimum we must provide 160,000 m2 of space as well.</p><p pid="337.4">The principle behind this measure is one I and Fine Gael have long espoused.  I remember the former Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, saying a few years ago that it had no educational value.  After 12 years of having the money to implement such a measure and not doing so, the Government has decided to introduce it, not because it suddenly believes it to be worthwhile but because it allows a bigger saving to be made somewhere else.</p><p pid="337.5">I wish to deal with comments from Government members - and from the Minister opposite and other Government Ministers - that there have been no cuts in social welfare.  I heard the Taoiseach say last night the Government would not countenance cutting social welfare rates.  What do people think the cuts in the Department of Social and Family Affairs are?  They are cuts, plain and simple.  It is time people realised that the Christmas bonus for families on social welfare is not beer money.  For many - including carers, pensioners and the disabled - it is the only little bit extra they get.  Today I spoke to representatives of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, who said that many use it to buy coal or fuel to fill their tanks and thus cannot use it for any extras over Christmas.  For some it is a decent Christmas dinner; for a carer, it may go towards paying for somebody to help with caring for a few hours.  For families with children, it allows Christmas actually to happen.  This year, is Santa, instead of leaving presents, supposed to leave a note saying “Sorry, children, I have no Christmas presents this year, but don’t worry, the Taoiseach says things will pick up in 2011 -  something to do with green shoots in America”?  That is what the Government is telling these families.</p><p pid="337.6">This payment is crucial.  Its abolition is a social welfare cut, pure and simple, and it is mean.  What is the alternative for these families?  There is none, except to turn to moneylenders.  Someone from my own credit union told me this morning that is what they are seeing already.  What will it be like without the Christmas bonus?  There will be deeper debts, and the prospect of debt collectors, which this Government last week refused to regulate, calling to doors in January.  There were alternatives open to the Government.  It did have a choice.  How about tackling waste in a few more quangos and monopolies, or in FÁS?  The Taoiseach said this was the fairest possible path, but it is not.</p><p pid="337.7">I welcome to some degree the changes in the back to education allowance, but they did not go far enough.  It is a pity the Minister took so long to make these minor changes.  In changing the access time for this allowance from 12 months to nine months for third level, the Minister said the allowance could be accessed after nine months only if this was recommended by one of the facilitators from the Department of Social and Family Affairs.  Next year there will be 500,000 people - half a million - unemployed in this country, and only 60 facilitators.  The three months people will save due to this measure will be long used up waiting to see one of these facilitators.  The Government cannot explain its way out of that one.</p><p pid="337.8">Some of the changes to the back to work enterprise allowance are an improvement and some are the opposite.  Yes, it is good that the Government has reduced the time by which the allowance is available to unemployed people, although not by enough.  What stopped it from changing it to six months?  Can it not see the lack of logic in how it is approaching these allowances and the way in which it is depriving people of hope and opportunity?  Why has the Government made the decision to give the allowance for only two years when it was previously four, especially in such a difficult climate for business?  It is difficult for someone trying to start a new business to make it work in only two years.  The Government is pulling the rug out from under people before they even start.</p><p pid="337.9">The Government members keep saying “Jobs, jobs, jobs”, but yesterday they did nothing to make this a reality.  There was no stimulus package, no job-creating tax changes, and minimal changes to these valuable and useful allowances.  There were choices open to the Government.  It made decisions yesterday, just as the colleagues of the Minister opposite, although not the Minister himself, have made the decisions over the past 12 years.  Yes, we are where we are, as the Government loves to say, but it brought us here, and this budget will not point us to a way out.  It has chosen the soft options and asked already hard-pressed families to pay for the mistakes made by this Government - or most of it - in the past 12 years.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-04-08T15:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g218.0">
	<title>Order of Business | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g218.0</link>
	<description>The T&Atilde;&iexcl;naiste should ask the gentleman sitting behind her because it is listed for 22 and 23 April.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="218.1">The Tánaiste should ask the gentleman sitting behind her because it is listed for 22 and 23 April.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-04-02T11:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g215.0">
	<title>Order of Business | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g215.0</link>
	<description>There is a proposal for another social welfare Bill.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="215.1">There is a proposal for another social welfare Bill.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-04-02T11:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g213.0">
	<title>Order of Business | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g213.0</link>
	<description>I was hoping the T&Atilde;&iexcl;naiste might answer the question.  Many people are very concerned.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="213.1">I was hoping the Tánaiste might answer the question.  Many people are very concerned.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-04-02T11:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g210.0">
	<title>Order of Business | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g210.0</link>
	<description>In light of the fact that in today&acirc;��s newspapers we see pictures of 700 people queuing for food parcels in Dublin yesterday and that approximately 450 per day turn up for food at the Capuchin...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="210.1">In light of the fact that in today’s newspapers we see pictures of 700 people queuing for food parcels in Dublin yesterday and that approximately 450 per day turn up for food at the Capuchin friary what can we expect from the now promised social welfare Bill in two weeks?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-04-02T11:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g208.0">
	<title>Order of Business | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-02.15.0&amp;m=281#g208.0</link>
	<description>For how long has the Government been aware of the pension deficit at Bord na Mona?  How many other semi-State companies are in the same position?  What discussions has the Government had with...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="208.1">For how long has the Government been aware of the pension deficit at Bord na Mona?  How many other semi-State companies are in the same position?  What discussions has the Government had with Bord na Móna on the issue?  What is the view of the Tánaiste and the Government on the proposed compromise of paying 37% of the accrued benefit to pensioners in Bord na Móna instead of their full entitlements?  I ask this in the context of the industrial relations (amendment) Bill.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-04-02T11:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-01.487.0&amp;m=281#g554.0">
	<title>Social Welfare: Motion (Resumed) | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-01.487.0&amp;m=281#g554.0</link>
	<description>I thank Members from all sides of the House for their contribution to the debate.  In particular, I thank Labour and Sinn F&Atilde;&copy;in for their support of the motion. I wonder where is the elusive...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="554.1">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.</p><p pid="554.2">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.</p><p pid="554.3">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.</p><p pid="554.4">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.</p><p pid="554.5">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.</p><p pid="554.6">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.</p><p pid="554.7">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.</p><p pid="554.8">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?</p><p pid="554.9">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.</p><p pid="554.10">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.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-04-01T20:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-01.487.0&amp;m=281#g534.0">
	<title>Social Welfare: Motion (Resumed) | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-04-01.487.0&amp;m=281#g534.0</link>
	<description>One is better off not looking.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="534.1">One is better off not looking.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-04-01T19:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g468.0">
	<title>Social Welfare: Motion | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g468.0</link>
	<description>We made that suggestion a month ago on Question Time.  We need action on these matters.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="468.1">We made that suggestion a month ago on Question Time.  We need action on these matters.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-31T19:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g466.0">
	<title>Social Welfare: Motion | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g466.0</link>
	<description>People need help to do that.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="466.1">People need help to do that.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-31T19:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g454.0">
	<title>Social Welfare: Motion | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g454.0</link>
	<description>It is practical.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="454.1">It is practical.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-31T19:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g452.0">
	<title>Social Welfare: Motion | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g452.0</link>
	<description>CWOs are able to do that everywhere.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="452.1">CWOs are able to do that everywhere.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-31T19:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g434.0">
	<title>Social Welfare: Motion | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-31.433.0&amp;m=281#g434.0</link>
	<description>I move: That D&Atilde;&iexcl;il &Atilde;�ireann: noting: that the processing time of welfare applications, particularly jobseekers supports, is too long with some individuals and families waiting up to 16 weeks for...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="434.1">I move:</p><p pid="434.2">That Dáil Éireann:</p><p pid="434.3">noting:</p><p pid="434.4">that the processing time of welfare applications, particularly jobseekers supports, is too long with some individuals and families waiting up to 16 weeks for their claim to be processed, and with potential delays of many months in processing appeals;</p><p pid="434.5">official HSE figures which show an 85% increase in the number of requests for emergency welfare assistance over the past two years, while the number of community welfare staff has remained unchanged;</p><p pid="434.6">the unacceptable delay in recruiting additional staff to deal with the dramatic increase in welfare claims;</p><p pid="434.7">the 35% increase in the number of people seeking support from the Money Advice and Budgeting Service (MABS);</p><p pid="434.8">that the Legal Aid Board has a function to provide legal advice and representation to people with debt problems;</p><p pid="434.9">that there are currently more than 9,616 people in receipt of mortgage interest supplement, an increase of 134% (4,111) over the number in receipt of payment at the end of 2007;</p><p pid="434.10">that the new code on mortgage arrears does not sufficiently protect borrowers and fails to include any sanctions for breaches of the code; and</p><p pid="434.11">that problems experienced in repaying debt are not limited to mortgage debt, but that the recently unemployed face difficulties repaying a series of debts including: household bills, credit card repayments, car loans, personal loans, hire purchase agreements and so on;</p><p pid="434.12">considering:</p><p pid="434.13">that 276 people were jailed last year for failing to repay debt, many of which were jailed for failing to repay loans to credit providers, and received an average sentence of 27 days and served an average of 20 days;</p><p pid="434.14">that this Government has not taken any steps to update or reform the current system of debt enforcement which is ineffective in collecting debt, is extremely costly to taxpayers and wasteful of Court, Judge and Garda time;</p><p pid="434.15">that unlike many other EU countries, Ireland has no system of regulation of debt collectors; and</p><p pid="434.16">pending the completion of the Law Reform Commission Report, that there is a need for urgent measures to be taken, as set out below;</p><p pid="434.17">calls on the Government to:</p><p pid="434.18">immediately increase the number of Community Welfare Officers, Social Welfare and Social Welfare Appeals Office staff by redeploying staff within the HSE and the Department of Social and Family Affairs;</p><p pid="434.19">encourage MABS and the Legal Aid Board to co-operate more closely so that they can deal with the surge in people seeking advice and support for debt difficulties;</p><p pid="434.20">expand the role of MABS into debt settlement and mortgage renegotiation, which will take less time, is less expensive to the taxpayer and offers a more integrated and effective approach when dealing with consumer debt;</p><p pid="434.21">introduce legislation to regulate debt collection and to ensure that debt collectors are registered and vetted; and</p><p pid="434.22">review legislation including the Enforcement of Court Orders Acts 1926 and 1940 and the Bankruptcy Act 1988.</p><p pid="434.23">I wish to share time with Deputies Noonan, O’Dowd, Ring, Connaughton, Doyle and Joe Carey.</p><p pid="434.24">I welcome the opportunity to introduce this motion on behalf of the Fine Gael Party.  It is a timely non-contentious motion which seeks to ensure that our social welfare system is responsive to the needs of the people it is supposed to serve and that it is adequately staffed to carry out this function.  We are seeking the creation of an alternative dispute resolution system for those who find themselves in debt, together with greater co-operation between the money advice and budgeting service, MABS, and the Legal Aid Board in order that both organisations might deal with the surge of people seeking advice and support with debt difficulty.  We are also seeking to have the role of MABS expanded in order that it will be sufficiently resourced to allow it to deal with — through the further training of staff — debt settlement and mortgage negotiation for which, unfortunately, there is a growing need.</p><p pid="434.25">Fine Gael is further seeking the introduction of legislation to regulate debt collection and to ensure that debt collectors will be registered and vetted.  In addition, legislation such as the enforcement of court orders Acts and the bankruptcy Acts must be reviewed and amended to take account of the current climate.</p><p pid="434.26">I am disappointed with, but not surprised by, the Government’s amendment to the motion.  The amendment displays the typically unimaginative everything-is-all-right, head-in-the-sand approach we have come to expect from the Government.  I do not believe anyone will deny that over-indebtedness is a serious problem in the lives of many Irish people, although the amendment prompts me to question whether the Government has any idea of the extent of the problem.</p><p pid="434.27">During the past decade, the personal household component of private sector credit has risen to record levels in Ireland and in many other countries.  In 2007, the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland admitted that the gross indebtedness of the household sector in Ireland — before account is taken of its financial net worth — is high by comparison with that which obtains in other euro area countries.  In 1997, personal sector credit as a percentage of disposable income was in the region of 60%.  Ten years later, this figure had risen to well over 175%.</p><p pid="434.28">Many people have a variety of debts.  These include mortgages, personal loans, credit cards, car loans, hire purchase agreements, household debts, store cards, etc.  While this was a matter of concern in times of high employment, it is of even greater concern now.  The downturn in the economy and the increase in unemployment has placed a massive strain on Irish families.  People are losing their jobs, are unable to repay loans to a variety of institutions and are under severe pressure.</p><p pid="434.29">The delays in the processing of social welfare applications and the subsequent delays in appeals are adding further to the strain.  While families are awaiting the processing of their applications or of appeals, they often find themselves being plunged further into debt, with their mortgage bills unpaid and their electricity, gas and car loans mounting as they struggle to pay for their day-to-day household and living expenses.</p><p pid="434.30">It must be remembered that one third of the cost of houses in recent years went on taxation.  For many individuals and couples, one third of the mortgages they are struggling to pay off went directly to the Exchequer.  Many of these people’s homes are no longer worth what they paid for them and they are struggling to pay off loans they took out during a building bubble from which they obtained no benefit.  If a house is repossessed by the State, these people will be obliged to seek rent supplement and to return to their local authority housing lists.</p><p pid="434.31">There are currently more than 9,600 people in receipt of mortgage interest supplement.  This represents an increase of 134% on the figure that obtained at the end of 2007.  The Government is in the process of reviewing the mortgage interest supplement.  However, I am unclear as to what is the aim of this review and I am gravely concerned that — like many previous reviews — it is designed to make the supplement more difficult rather than easier to obtain.  There are a number of serious difficulties regarding the way in which the scheme operates at present.  Claimants are not eligible for mortgage interest supplement if their mortgages are considered to be too expensive.  However, there seems to be huge discretion across the country with regard to what is “too expensive”.  This raises questions in respect of the uniformity of the system.  In addition, the scheme ignores the fact that a mortgage may have been affordable when the person who took it out was in employment.  If a mortgage is granted on the basis of two incomes and one income is lost through unemployment, illness or disability, the household will still not be eligible for mortgage interest supplement because there is still one income coming in.  That people have mortgage arrears seems to be irrelevant when this criterion is put into operation.</p><p pid="434.32">There are also extreme difficulties for people who were self-employed but who are now unemployed, particularly in the context of producing up-to-date accounts and the fact that the previous year’s accounts are generally taken into consideration.  There are many people who were working last year and who had steady incomes but who literally do not have an income at present.  These individuals find it extremely difficult to access the supplement.  Unbelievably, there is a lack of valid data.  As the Minister previously admitted, the Department of Family and Social Affairs does not collect figures regarding the number of people who want to apply for mortgage interest supplement.  It is, therefore, extremely difficult to judge the fairness of the system.</p><p pid="434.33">Why does the Department not collect such data?  I am aware from speaking to a number of community welfare officers that they retain this information.  What kind of system allows us to pay a supplement to some and refuse it to others?  Why is it not possible to examine the objective criteria that are being used to decide who is paid and who is refused?  The system must be changed.  I urge the Minister to obtain the data to which I refer from community welfare officers and to make it available in order that we might discuss people’s real needs in an informed way.</p><p pid="434.34">There is also a lack of awareness regarding the existence of the supplement, which is a matter of some surprise.  It is as if the Department hopes people will not become aware of the supplement in order that it will not be obliged to pay it.  This matter must be addressed because it is giving rise to real difficulties for some people.</p><p pid="434.35">Perhaps one of the biggest scandals in the banking sector in recent years was the length to which financial institutions and sub-prime lenders would go to encourage and induce people into consolidating all their loans into a single mortgage.  Needless to say this seemed an extremely attractive proposition at the time, particularly when people had a number of debts with various institutions in respect of which different repayment dates applied.  These individuals received letters or saw advertisements suggesting that they “consolidate it all into one simple mortgage”.  Matters have not proven to be so simple.  Many people who consolidated their debts are being particularly badly hit if they find it difficult to meet their payments because the mortgage interest supplement is paid only in respect of the portion of the mortgage that relates directly to the purchase of their dwelling house.</p><p pid="434.36">Poor Government regulation over the past 12 years allowed lenders to operate as they pleased and to actively encourage people into this position.  Those making the type of commitments to which I refer would have been unaware of the criteria relating to the mortgage interest supplement and would certainly never have expected to find themselves in their current position.  These people must be given the benefit of the doubt.  We should, by all means, ensure that the regulations will be in place from now on and we should make people aware of that.  However, it does not make sense to provide people with support only in respect of the portion of the mortgage that relates to the house.  If the lender calls in the loan and repossesses the house, the proportions involved will be irrelevant.</p><p pid="434.37">Repossession orders sought by banks and mortgage lenders soared by more than 100% last year.  Figures compiled by the Court Service show that in 2008 some 758 new applications for repossession orders were brought before the High Court.  The figure for the previous year was 347.  The increase in the figure for repossessions is the largest recorded by the courts and it points to aggressive tactics deployed by some lenders to recover their debts.  The Master of the High Court, Mr. Edmond Honohan, recently warned that an avalanche of home repossession cases is anticipated.  He stated that the number of such cases is increasing weekly, with an emerging ratio of approximately 80:20 between sub-prime lenders and mainstream banks.  Mr. Honohan expects an avalanche because few of the cases that have appeared to date relate to recent job losses.  In all cases before him since last October, the mortgage arrears were already in excess of nine months when proceedings were initiated.  It is estimated that there are approximately 15,000 sub-prime mortgage holders in Ireland and it is feared that many of them are in difficulty.</p><p pid="434.38">The Government must act to protect all struggling home owners.  While the recent code in respect of mortgage arrears is welcome, provision has not been made in respect of breaches of that code.  In addition, the code has little or no impact on sub-prime lenders.  The Government must address this matter immediately.  The dismissive amendment to the motion effectively informs people that their difficulties are a matter for them and their financial institution and will only serve to isolate them further and escalate the problems they face.</p><p pid="434.39">The majority of people want to repay their loans.  However, the downturn in the economy and the increase in unemployment means that many are finding it increasingly difficult to repay their debts.   In dealing with individual cases, I have been struck by people’s determination to find a way through their current difficulties.  There is a strong desire on their part to find alternative employment in order that they can recommence paying their mortgages as soon as possible.  These are people who entered into mortgage agreements in order to purchase homes for their families.  They did what was considered the right and sensible thing.  Many purchased houses at hugely inflated rates and are now finding it impossible to make ends meet.</p><p pid="434.40">Our changing economic environment brings into focus the current system of debt enforcement in Ireland and makes me question what we achieve by dragging an impoverished person under pressure from a debtor through an intimidating, costly and ineffective legal process.  I accept that there must be a constitutional right of recourse to the courts.  However, this is not the place from which we should start.  Ours is one of the last governments in Europe to accept that fact.</p><p pid="434.41">Our debt enforcement legislation was last updated in the 1940s and has little or no relevance to the society in which we live.  Most debt enforcement procedures take place at District Court level and assess the capacity of the debtor to pay.  However, the way judgments are enforced is outdated.  Many believe that the open court procedure — whereby people are exposed to members of their communities and the press in their local courts — is a natural deterrent.  If a debtor does not file a defence, there will be no hearing and judgment for the amount claimed will be given in his or her absence when the solicitor for the creditor files the correct papers.</p><p pid="434.42">According to the Free Legal Advice Centre, FLAC, only some 20% of debtors appear at hearings.  As a result, judgments are made in their absence and in the absence of up-to-date financial information.  The repayment schedules that are decided are, therefore, often at a level which debtors cannot afford.  In many instances, a debtor will be unaware that a judgment has been made against him or her.  It is important to point out that many creditors are also unhappy with the system as it currently operates.</p><p pid="434.43">Last year alone, 276 people were imprisoned for failure to pay debt.  The average sentence received was 27 days and the average sentence served was 20 days.  Where is the financial logic for such a system?  The person comes out of prison still owing the debt.  They still have no means of repaying it.  The creditor still does not receive the money and yet we have paid the courts system, judges, gardaí, prison officers, legal fees and whatever else.  There is no economic sense to this system.</p><p pid="434.44">The overall cost to the State of over-indebtedness is hard to quantify but it is time for a complete overhaul.  We must also bear in mind how innocent parties suffer.  Chronic debt and imprisonment for failure to pay debts will have consequences for partners, children and relatives of the debtor who find themselves struggling further while their partner, father or relative is imprisoned, with the debt still hanging over the family.</p><p pid="434.45">I appreciate that there are those who could repay their debt and choose not to, but a real distinction must be made between those who cannot pay and those who will not pay.  Money advisers will say that this becomes very clear in most cases, and those who will not pay should be subject to the full rigors of the law.</p><p pid="434.46">Is the Government and the Minister satisfied with the existing system and do they intend to take any action to relieve families suffering from debt?  The existing system is archaic and there is common agreement among all stakeholders that it does not serve the interests of the creditor, debtor or taxpayer.</p><p pid="434.47">There are actions that can be taken immediately to address the situation.  First, we should simplify documentation.  Too many people under pressure from debt do not open registered letters and if they do, they panic at the prospect of court hearings and documents that are unintelligible to them.  No explanatory information is included to explain the consequence of the legal proceedings in plain, understandable language.  No contact numbers for MABS, the Legal Aid Board or FLAC, which the debtors could contact for assistance, are included.  Effectively, people just see the long hand of the law reaching through their front door and try to bury their head in the sand.</p><p pid="434.48">It is not clearly explained to people that the creditor may also apply for legal costs or that interest may be claimed, increasing the debt substantially.  A covering letter accompanying the summons will suggest that the debtor contact their solicitor for advice.  Many cannot afford that and individuals can wait months for civil legal aid, depending on where they live.  The system must be changed to ensure the legal jargon is removed.  People receiving the documents should be able to understand clearly what they mean and the consequences of them.  They should also be advised as to where they can turn for help.  We must move also to regulate debt collectors, an issue Deputy Flanagan will expand on tomorrow.</p><p pid="434.49">We must examine a means of having an alternative dispute resolution system.  We must review legislation.  The legislation dealing with this area was introduced at a time when borrowing money was extremely rare.  The process must be amended to deal with debt in a more effective way.</p><p pid="434.50">The Government must create an alternative dispute resolution system to help with debt settlement and mortgage renegotiation.  MABS is an extremely useful service but its function is somewhat limited in that it is not equipped to engage or negotiate directly with lenders, although it has done some good pilot work in this area.</p><p pid="434.51">The approach to debt enforcement through this system will take less time, prove to be less expensive to the taxpayer and will be a more integrated and effective approach when dealing with consumer debt. Most stakeholders, except the Government, agree with that.  The Irish Banking Federation supports calls by FLAC and MABS for an overhaul of the system.</p><p pid="434.52">I will deal briefly with the Government’s response to the huge increase in the numbers of people seeking jobseeker’s assistance.  At best the response is inadequate.  Every Member in this House has received complaints about the length of queues in social welfare offices.  Restricted opening hours together with shortages in staff have resulted in serious queues.  Community welfare officers have seen an 85% increase in the number of requests for emergency assistance in the past two years.</p><p pid="434.53">Last December, after much pressure, the Minister eventually announced the provision of 115 additional staff.  The response was too little too late, and it is not clear if all of those have taken up their positions.  She may tell us that tonight.  It must be borne in mind that staff being deployed do not necessarily have the skills in this area.  They have to be trained, which takes considerable time.  We are expecting a continuously growing number of people in receipt of unemployment benefit in the immediate future.  The Minister must act now to ensure sufficient numbers of staff are trained to cope with that.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-31T19:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-25.395.0&amp;m=281#g584.0">
	<title>Pre-Budget Statements (Resumed) | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-25.395.0&amp;m=281#g584.0</link>
	<description>Will the Minister examine the issue of tax compliance and the black economy?  We recently passed legislation to recapitalise several financial institutions.  However, they have been slow to offer...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="584.1">Will the Minister examine the issue of tax compliance and the black economy?  We recently passed legislation to recapitalise several financial institutions.  However, they have been slow to offer credit but I hope they will do so again.</p><p pid="584.2">Someone who acquires a State contract is obliged to provide a tax clearance certificate and is subject to relevant contract law.  The State is effectively able to ensure companies are tax compliant prior to receiving contracts.  Some small-scale builders, employing a few workers, have recently contacted me.  They find it increasingly difficult to compete with those who are not tax compliant, who work for cash and therefore charge significantly less than tax compliant builders.  The Minister could deal with this by imposing a requirement on financial institutions to obtain proof of tax compliance when giving mortgages.  This should also be introduced in respect of compliance with health and safety requirements.</p><p pid="584.3">Last year 12,000 one-off houses were built and it is expected that approximately 9,000 will be built this year.  The Exchequer receives 37% of the price of each house but there is no way to ensure it will receive all the tax revenues it should from them.  This is worth examining and could be achieved in a way that is not overly bureaucratic.</p><p pid="584.4">There is still scope for improvement in the rent supplement scheme.  I have highlighted savings that could be made through reductions at the high end of the market because rents have been reduced.  The low end of the market is different.  It is hard to believe that, despite questions from Members and the Comptroller and Auditor General, we continue to pay almost €500 million in rent supplement every year without having a system to check that the landlords who receive this money are tax compliant.  The deposit system also needs to be changed.  If the Department of Social and Family Affairs recovered the deposits, that would return €7 million to the Exchequer every year.</p><p pid="584.5">Will the Minister also examine the back to education allowance?  It has never been more important for people to see light at the end of the tunnel.  The criteria in operation make it very difficult to avail of the scheme.  Some have to wait up to 23 months, depending on when they lose their jobs.  This can be addressed.  The difference per annum between receiving unemployment assistance and the back to education allowance is €500.  People would be far better off attending a third level institution, upskilling or obtaining a qualification than sitting at home trying to fill time.</p><p pid="584.6">Carers are close to everybody’s heart and need recognition.  The promised national carers’ strategy has not been published.  Carers are very concerned about the impact of the budget on them.  They save the State €2.5 billion per annum.  There are 161,000 of them, 3,000 of whom are children providing full-time care.  This work needs to be acknowledged.  I do not expect any improvements in their conditions but hope there will be no disimprovements.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-25T18:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-11.452.0&amp;m=281#g529.0">
	<title>Unemployment Levels: Motion | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-11.452.0&amp;m=281#g529.0</link>
	<description>I know.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="529.1">I know.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-11T18:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-11.452.0&amp;m=281#g497.0">
	<title>Unemployment Levels: Motion | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-11.452.0&amp;m=281#g497.0</link>
	<description>I commend the Labour Party on tabling this important motion.  It is particularly timely in light of the unfortunate, if somewhat expected, increase in the live register figures in the past month....</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="497.1">I commend the Labour Party on tabling this important motion.  It is particularly timely in light of the unfortunate, if somewhat expected, increase in the live register figures in the past month.  That the unemployment figure is likely to exceed 450,000, as the Taoiseach has acknowledged, is a matter of great concern to everyone. </p><p pid="497.2">I will speak principally to those aspects of the motion which are related to social and family affairs.  We are all aware of the increasing number of unemployed.  To date, no action has been taken to ensure a system is in place which will treat people who apply for social welfare entitlements fairly and with dignity.  In some areas people must wait for only two weeks to have applications for social welfare payments processed while in others the waiting time is up to 16 weeks.  Unemployment benefit applicants are worst affected by these delays which are having a massive knock-on effect on the community welfare system.</p><p pid="497.3">The longer I am a Member of the House, the more I realise how little joined-up government we have.  The Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, has stated that community welfare officers are not her problem as they are the responsibility of the Department of Health and Children.  The Minister must accept that she is responsible for recipients of social welfare benefits.  I have been unable to secure a satisfactory answer to the following question.  How can a community welfare officer obtain all the information he or she needs from a person to adjudicate on an interim supplementary payment application within five days or one week when the Department of Social and Family Affairs takes up to 16 weeks to arrive at a decision?  Community welfare officers, in making supplementary welfare payments, must have a good idea that applicants will be ultimately adjudged to be eligible for the payment.  They do not hand out money willy-nilly but make good assessments within a few days, without forcing people to wait for long periods, as the Department does.</p><p pid="497.4">While I appreciate that additional staff have been transferred to work in the social welfare system, the number is not sufficient.  We must bear in mind the training requirements for those working in the Department.  These are technical roles and one cannot expect people to be able to do the job immediately.  Change is needed and more staff must be deployed to this area to enable applicants to access their entitlements.  The problem with making people wait for a payment is that it causes them to delay paying off debts.  Although mortgages are of greatest concern, people also have to pay ESB and gas bills and credit union and car loans.  They ran up bills or took out loans at a time when they did not envisage becoming unemployed.  Suddenly they find themselves in major difficulty and unable to pay their bills or repay their loans.</p><p pid="497.5">A major problem has arisen in the administration of the mortgage interest supplement, largely because community welfare officers are extremely busy.  The Money Advice and Budgeting Service requires additional resources to enable it to employ people with expertise in the mortgage area who are able to negotiate with financial institutions on behalf of MABS clients.  The moratorium on repossessions does not go far enough as it applies only to the main financial institutions.  The problem persists among sub-prime lenders which are not subject to the moratorium.  These institutions actively encouraged people to consolidate all their loans, including those for holidays and so forth, in their mortgages using their homes as security.  People in this position now find that the mortgage interest supplement is only payable on the portion of their mortgage which relates to their home.  While it may not have been a responsible decision to consolidate loans in mortgages, people took this decision in a different climate and are now finding it difficult to cope.  Changes are needed in this area.  MABS, for example, should be resourced to tackle the problem.</p><p pid="497.6">On the back to education allowance, we heard a great deal about education and training at the recent Fianna Fáil Party Ard-Fheis and the Government made an announcement in this area this evening.  We must ensure people do not have to wait 12 months to become eligible for the back to education payment but are instead facilitated to attend a third level course.  Under the current criteria, a person who loses his or her job in October must wait for 12 months before becoming eligible for the allowance.  At that point, however, the college term for the following year will have commenced and the person will have to wait 23 months before being able to commence a third level course.  Despite the 12-month eligibility condition many applicants must wait for much longer.  Even as matters stand, 12 months is too long to wait.</p><p pid="497.7">While I accept exceptions have been made for employment action plan and redundancy areas, only a small number of people have managed to access courses through this stream.  I ask the Minister to review the eligibility criteria for the back to education allowance.  We need to ensure that rather than being a purely negative event, the loss of one’s job will be regarded by some people at least as an opportunity to change career direction or up-skill.  Quicker access to the allowance would mean that losing one’s job would not be a major crisis for some individuals.  The difference between the back to education allowance and jobseeker’s allowance is €500 per annum.  The implementation of the former lacks common sense and must be changed.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-11T18:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-11.269.0&amp;m=281#g270.0">
	<title>Planning Matters. | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-11.269.0&amp;m=281#g270.0</link>
	<description>Question 38: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government   the measures he plans to address a backlog of appeals being dealt with by An Bord Plean&Atilde;&iexcl;la; and if he will...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="270.0"><i>Question 38:</i> To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government   the measures he plans to address a backlog of appeals being dealt with by An Bord Pleanála; and if he will make a statement on the matter.   <b>[10232/09]</b></p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-11T13:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-05.305.0&amp;m=281#g316.2">
	<title>Pension Provisions. | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-05.305.0&amp;m=281#g316.2</link>
	<description>They were short-term measures which were important and needed.  I do not know whether the Minister grasps the fact that people are terrified about what will happen when they retire.  They do not...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="316.2">They were short-term measures which were important and needed.  I do not know whether the Minister grasps the fact that people are terrified about what will happen when they retire.  They do not know what will have happened to the schemes that they have paid into for their entire lives.  When will the Government reach a decision?  We are forced to ask questions on different things.  The Minister is ruling some things out, but we do not know what she is ruling in and actually considering.  When will we get some kind of coherent response on this matter?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-05T15:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-05.305.0&amp;m=281#g308.2">
	<title>Pension Provisions. | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-03-05.305.0&amp;m=281#g308.2</link>
	<description>It is not possible to have any weaker supervision arrangements than we have had in place up to now.  There has been a lack of effective regulation in this area.  Another aspect that is of equal...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="308.2">It is not possible to have any weaker supervision arrangements than we have had in place up to now.  There has been a lack of effective regulation in this area.  Another aspect that is of equal importance was the lack of awareness among employees of the risks to which they were being exposed in that they are only now discovering, in the light of what has happened in Waterford Crystal, the risk to which they are exposed in terms of their pensions.  Is the Government considering providing any type of State guarantee for occupational pensions schemes that are in deficit?  The Minister said she is examining this area and that a report will be published.  When will it be published?  Can she at least advise the House today what exact area she is examining in this context?  Is this issue being examined in that context?  Is the Government considering providing any type of State guarantee for these schemes?  Effectively, a massive failure of regulation has exposed hundreds of thousands of people at this stage.  The schemes were too heavily invested in equities.  In good times they were able to take money out.  Now we see the result with approximately 90% in deficit.  When does the Minister expect the results for the 1,355 schemes so that we can get an accurate figure rather than that 90% assumption?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-03-05T15:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>


</rdf:RDF>