Margaret Cox (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister and am delighted to speak on the Social Welfare Bill. I draw the Minister's mind back to 15 December 2004 when we discussed social welfare here and I suggested that if a person is caring for three of four children in his or her home perhaps a disregard could be introduced. I welcome that provision in the budget.

We also discussed social welfare in March this year. I spoke to the Minister about child benefit, highlighting that child benefit was not recognised as something that addressed child care costs and the importance of introducing something different that would be recognised as a payment towards child care. I think the Minister agreed with this view. I compliment the Government on the introduction of the child care payment of €1,000 for children under six years. It was an innovative and smart measure that will make a significant difference to the lives of many people, regardless of whether both or only one parent is working. It is a sizeable amount of money that is made payable in every quarter, and for which people can make plans. It is very welcome. This House has commented on child benefit and child care costs going back to at least the year 2000 and I am pleased they have now been heeded.

The House recently discussed the phased extension of maternity leave with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, and I welcome the extension of maternity leave by four weeks. As the measure is not to be implemented until March, pregnant women whose babies are due before that may feel aggrieved that their due dates do not fit into the Minister's schedule. Increases in tax on petrol and alcohol used to be implemented at midnight on the night of the budget. Changes such as the extension to maternity benefit should be introduced from the day of the budget so that anywoman who goes on maternity leave from the day the budget is announced gets the benefit of those extra four weeks. Not many families are affected but it would have a substantial impact on those parents and children. They cannot change their due dates.

The purpose of a child care policy is to focus on the child and the family. Anybody who has started maternity leave since the budget has another 12 or 14 weeks to go, so it would not be too difficult to extend it. Perhaps this is not possible but we should examine it. No matter how difficult it is for employers to deal with vacancies as a result of maternity leave, they would recognise the benefit of the extension to the family and the child.

I will never support calls for child benefit to be taxed or means tested but given that the additional payment of €1,000 for every child under the age of six years of age is a separate payment, I suggest that we look at whether it is important to means test or tax it, or the annual increases that will accrue. We could examine net pay involving situations where both people are working, one person is very well paid, child care is not the household's biggest cost or where child care costs can be afforded. It is easy to develop a means-testing system that recognises net pay less mortgage repayments, child care costs, transport costs and a measure of necessary disposable income as a percentage of income that reflects the differing needs and lifestyles of people with different income levels. When young families need this payment so much, it should not be eaten up because it is given to people without any measurement of need, particularly when the amount is so significant.

The child care issue we have not dealt with appropriately is support for employers. As we move into partnership discussions, we must examine supports for companies to introduce family friendly initiatives. We have committed a substantial sum over the next five years for the supply of child care places. We should take some of that money and put it into a separate grant support scheme to support organisations to put structures in place to introduce flexible hours and part-time work. A small company may not find it financially feasible to pay for a broadband connection to a worker's home and install a computer if all the structures are in place in their own business. By supporting such companies, however, we could eliminate the need for a place in a crèche and a parent could work at home while caring for the child. We are using the same money, it does not cost any more, we are just looking at it differently. The Minister may not be aware of the fine reports in the The Irish Times, Irish Examiner and on "Morning Ireland" on differing child care needs. The conclusion to all of these reports was that there is no single solution, it is a complex issue that requires joined-up thinking.

No one has recognised the change in structure where the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, has been given a much wider-ranging portfolio for children, with responsibility being removed from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, which makes sense. The €1,000 grant for children under six should form part of the Minister of State's budget. I also compliment the Minister for maintaining our commitment on child benefit —€670 for four children per month from March will make a significant difference.

Paid parental leave must form part of the partnership discussions. We are fooling ourselves if we do not recognise that parental leave at present is for those who have plenty of money who can afford to take a 14 week break from work. It is unfair on those who do not earn enough. We must introduce paid parental leave on a staggered basis, with an initial period of perhaps four weeks.

This is a great budget for social welfare and the Minister should be proud of it. An increase of €1.5 billion in spending on social welfare on top of a budget of €12 billion is a significant contribution to the less well off and will provide the social structures we want. I welcome the increase in the income disregard for carers. I apologise for annoying the Minister by saying this repeatedly but widows and widowers, particularly widows, who are in receipt of a widow's pension and who are caring for someone, because of the rule about not receiving two payments from the Department of Social and Family Affairs, are losing out because the spouse is dead. There is no equity in that system. I plead with the Minister to make this a priority.

Could the Minister reflect on the rent allowance system in the course of the next year? It is a scandal that we spend so much taxpayers' money to pay private landlords in rent allowance while they make huge profits. If we took on a pilot basis 25% of the rent allowance budget and gave it to local authorities to buy houses at the best possible price, the rent paid would pay the mortgages on those houses which would then be State assets and not assets for developers and landlords making money from them. Everyone is entitled to make money but we must stop the continuing payment of vast sums of money until social housing is addressed.

People said that the Minister was not happy when he was given this portfolio but he has demonstrated his commitment to it. He has introduced tremendous changes and fought hard for the increases we are giving to people. I am proud of the changes in the social welfare budget and I commend the Bill to the House.