Brendan Daly (Fianna Fail)

Were this not dealt with, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs would have seen the scheme entirely terminated. It is most unfair to make attacks on particular aspects of this scheme without looking at the overall picture. This scheme made a valuable contribution and I compliment the Minister for Social and family Affairs, Deputy Coughlan, on her innovative way of addressing it.

The Minister has made an enormous contribution to the overall development of the social welfare code. Over the last number of years, enormous increases have been made to the social welfare budget. Up to 1 million people now benefit from these substantial increases in one kind or another. This year alone up to €11 billion will be spent on the budget. I recall when I was Minister in the Department for a short time a number of years ago, we would not have contained ourselves if we had that kind of budget. Again, there is this picking on small aspects of the budget and counting the number of cuts. We had a dozen cuts before. No matter who is Minister in the Department, they will always have to apply certain restraints in spending. Otherwise, the future of the social welfare fund itself would be put in jeopardy. I compliment the Minister on the innovative schemes she introduced in this budget. While all Members welcome the increases made, there are limits to what can be achieved and delivered within the spending restraints of each Department. With the guidelines set down by the Government, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs has done remarkably well in her welfare brief. The majority of the public is grateful to the Minister for the work she has done in this area.

I would like to speak about a few aspects of the Bill. I hope the Minister responds to my comments if she gets the opportunity to do so. I am not aware of the current value of the training fund to which we have been making contributions since 2000. I do not know what benefits are accruing from it. The Bill makes provisions in respect of the fund. I am not sure if the Minister has already commented on the matter. I would like the fund to be expanded because funding and innovative training schemes are needed, especially in the high-tech area. Many young people require additional training to help them to make a more meaningful contribution to the economy. I would like the Minister to state what use or benefit is being derived from the fund. What amount of money is currently in the fund? I would like to know if the fund can be expanded, even if it means that bigger contributions have to be made.

Section 22 inserts new provisions into the Pensions Act 1990. The new section 81E of the 1990 Act, which relates to equality in pensions, is the most cumbersome procedure I have ever seen. It mentions the Director of Equality Investigations, the Circuit Court and the Labour Court. If an issue needs to be addressed or redress needs to be provided, a less complicated procedure should be put in place to that end. I am sure the new section 81E has been included for a reason, but it seems cumbersome. It may be expensive for one to get redress in such a way, especially if one has to use the Circuit Court. I ask the Minister to examine the section to assess whether the overall issues can be addressed without having to involve the Labour Court, the Circuit Court or the director of pensions.

I pay tribute to the regional offices for the work they are doing in dealing with specific cases. There has been a dramatic improvement in the performance of the local offices since I have been in the House. I pay tribute to the staff of the local offices for their courteous way of dealing with the public. We should acknowledge the dramatic change in this regard in the last few years. I pay tribute to the staff of the Department for the invaluable work they are doing in guiding and helping people, especially with some of the complicated issues that are involved in this area.

I cannot finish without referring briefly to the grievance felt by widows and lone parents, in particular, because of proposed changes that relate to a date in January of this year. There are approximately 2,000 lone parents and 3,000 widows in County Clare, although they are not all affected by these changes. It seems somewhat unfair that if one has a claim in existence, one does not have an entitlement if one makes a claim after the January date. This sets up a form of discrimination because widows in equal or similar situations will have differing levels of payment. People who have contributed to schemes will receive half of the disability or unemployment payment that was made. The amount involved is not very significant in the overall context of the budget under discussion.

While it may not be possible for two payments to be made from the fund, it may be possible to devise a form of allowance that could be paid in the same way as supplementary welfare allowance is paid. This might help to retain a balance between people who have made claims and are drawing down the benefit and those who will be deprived of the benefit as a result of certain circumstances in which they will find themselves in the next few months. I would like the Minister to re-examine this matter before we conclude our consideration of the Bill. Is it possible to find a way of remedying the grievances of widows and lone parents? It is possible to help them without massively disrupting the social welfare budget or discommoding the Department of Social and Family Affairs.

I compliment the Minister on the magnificent work she has done in all aspects of her complicated portfolio. The Bill makes provisions in respect of 50 payments of various kinds. The improvements that have been made recently, which have been acknowledged by the public, exceed greatly the expectations of many of us. I did not think that pension payments would reach their current levels. I hope the Minister will find a way of making adjustments to deal with certain anomalies before the House concludes its consideration of the Bill.