Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister to the House. I also welcome the Bill, which is a real achievement. The Department of Social and Family Affairs will benefit from having a strong Minister which Deputy Brennan has been throughout his career.

I wish to make a number of general points. It has become a cliché that Seán Lemass said that a rising tide lifts all boats. I worked through six volumes of his speeches in the Taoiseach's office and I could find no trace of that statement. It is to be found at the back of a book written by Brian Farrell and it is the latter's summary of what he thought Seán Lemass's philosophy to be. However, there is no direct quotation to be found. The phrase, which I have seen attributed to John F. Kennedy and others, is a serious distortion of Seán Lemass's philosophy. He was not laissez faire, he was an interventionist during his entire time as a Minister. There is a quotation from Lemass which sums up his philosophy and which I will, with the indulgence of the House, read into the record. It is as follows:

All human experience bears out the lesson that social justice must be organised, that Governments have the duty to intervene to protect the common good of all citizens, without preference for any individual group, although giving more attention to the less fortunate citizens who are less able to defend their rights and assert their legitimate claims; and that unless this is done indefensible inequalities persist and tend to become more widespread, including the too ready assumption that social benefits would follow automatically economic achievements, and that they would be fairly shared amongst our community.

That is the exact opposite of the "rising tide lifts all boats" approach. Governments must intervene to lift boats that are in the channels which the rising tide will never reach.

It is a real achievement that on budget day the Minister managed to announce a package of €874 million. However, if this is taken with what is contained in the Estimates, the increase actually amounts to over €1 billion. The 2002 budget was also quite generous and provided social welfare increases amounting to €850 million. That was the previous peak and this year's increase exceeds it. Let us compare what is happening here with what is occurring in parts of continental Europe. I visited Germany in August when a debate on serious social welfare cutbacks and the implementation of the so-called "Hartz decision" by a social democratic Government of the left was raging. Obviously the amount of money available, consistent with sound public finances, is a reflection of sound management of the economy.

I am glad the Minister reviewed some of the measures that caused controversy last year. There cannot be movement only in one direction with nothing being changed or adapted. Often social welfare policies, particularly cutbacks, are inspired by the Department of Finance, not the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Early on in the Estimates process, a menu of cuts is presented to put pressure on the Department of Social and Family Affairs. One cannot assume that money is unlimited now or in the future, and we must pay attention to sustainability, but I hope during the Minister's tenure it will be possible for social welfare policy to be made in the Department of Social and Family Affairs and not in some section of the Department of Finance.

The general increases were impressive, with €12 for pensioners and a larger increase of €14 for those on unemployment assistance. These increases were criticised in previous budgets and Social Welfare Bills by Fr. Seán Healy as reflecting an attitude about "the undeserving poor". As the old age pensioner reaches the €200 per week mark, it is right to give a slightly larger increase to those on the lower payments.

The social welfare package and the tax provisions in the budget were extraordinary. They received the praise of CORI for the first time in 20 years. I recall a conversation with Fr. Healy back in 1997 about Deputy Quinn's last budget, which he condemned as he has most budgets before and since. I asked him if he could tell me of any budget in the past ten years of which he approved to which he replied that he would need notice of that question. It is, therefore, a real achievement to have overcome that barrier.

There is criticism of Government policy on children from two angles. I heard the head of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul say that more money should have gone to child dependants. That was dealt with in the Minister's speech and I recall a study done during the rainbow Government where the view was taken that the child dependant allowance created poverty traps that discourage people from leaving unemployment and that it was better to put money into child benefit. Child benefit has increased enormously — it is €100 more than it was in 1997.

We must look at child care over the next year. I understand the demand by hard-pressed parents for help with that. The problem is how we avoid the providers simply putting up the price to take account of any tax concession, as has happened with the relief given in the tax code in second-hand houses for first-time buyers? That is an argument that must be addressed.

None of us is under any illusions that even with the increases it is easy for anyone to live on welfare payments. Widows of people who contributed in the pre-stamp era in the 1930s and 1940s feel they should be brought up to parity and that is a kindness the State can afford. I ask the Minister to look at that area.