Michael Brennan (Progressive Democrats)

I thank the Seanad for providing me with the opportunity to speak about the proposed reforms to the support arrangements for lone parents and low-income families.

These proposals are the culmination of a year-long, comprehensive analysis and consultation process on the levels of social exclusion and risk of poverty faced by many lone parents and their children. They have been set out in a major Government discussion paper which was published recently, entitled Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents. The paper was discussed at Cabinet and has been the subject of extensive discussion and debate, both here and abroad since it was published.

The report puts forward a range of proposals, some complex and others radical, for the reform of restrictive social policies in the area of lone parents and low-income families generally. In essence, the report searches for solutions to the problems confronting lone parents, their children and other families on low incomes day in and day out in areas such as access to employment, education and training, income supports, child care, child maintenance payments, cohabitation rules and grossly unfair stereotyping.

This analysis of the obstacles to lone parents in achieving a better life for themselves and their children was commissioned by the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion as part of the Ending Child Poverty initiative under Sustaining Progress. As Members are aware, tackling child poverty is a key objective under Sustaining Progress, the national action plan against poverty and social exclusion and the national children's strategy.

This is the most comprehensive review on the support arrangements for lone parents for several years. Research has shown that children of lone parents are one of the major groups at risk of poverty. The discussion paper presents a review of the issues facing lone parents; sets out the supports in place and the barriers to achieving economic independence; and seeks to tackle the relatively high risk of poverty and social exclusion faced by many such families and their children. The document also points the way towards solutions, new opportunities, greater fulfilment for lone parents and better lives and prospects for their children.

There are currently some 80,000 lone parents in the State, with 130,000 children, in receipt of one-parent family payments from my Department. Most are women but there are some men who run one-parent families. The annual cost of that payment is up to almost €800 million, which is a considerable investment by the taxpayer. When other supports and entitlements are taken into account, including child benefit, rent supplement and family income supplement, total expenditure in the area of lone parents comes to €1.3 billion this year. That is considerable investment coming from taxpayers.

As we are aware, there has been unprecedented growth in the Irish economy over the past decade. In recent years spending on social welfare entitlements has seen a doubling of investment in supports. The spending is now €14 billion this year. That has doubled in approximately six or seven years. Despite that spending and the enormous increase, the fact remains that lone parents continue to be one of the groups who are particularly vulnerable to poverty, and especially child poverty, which does not have any place in 21st century Ireland.

I state clearly that the reforms being progressed are not about achieving savings for the Exchequer. In fact, the reforms, if introduced, would require increased funding in the short and medium term before better policy bringing in savings in the long term. The reforms are about introducing more enlightened social policies that directly target and benefit the lives of tens of thousands of people, especially children, who are for the most part caught in restrictive poverty traps.

I have said it before and I repeat it in the Seanad this afternoon. I consider lone parents to be a valuable resource for this country. They are not a problem; they are a resource. Behind the statistics are very real lives, people with day-to-day pressures, lives given to providing the best for their children and lives searching for greater fulfilment. Lone parents have the added responsibility of providing care for their children, as well as often being the only breadwinner.

Up to 60% of lone parents are working, but as Members are aware, most of that work is for low pay and generally does not have any major career enhancing prospects. We have a responsibility, therefore, to use the income support system and wider welfare supports to address the problems behind those income needs. We also have a responsibility to confront the social issues and pressures that blunt fulfilment and curb aspirations.

All the research shows that movement into employment is the best route out of poverty and it is a transition that can transform people's lives, but that transition is not always smooth. Obstacles can emerge along the way. The reforms I am working towards are to tackle those obstacles and replace them with incentives and activation measures designed to meet people's needs and abilities. These reforms are about making every possible effort to ensure that no individual's talents or contributions are overlooked or neglected, whoever he or she is in society or from wherever he or she comes. Whether people want to work, upskill through training, return to education or wish to remain at home, there must be a system that provides an income that is adequate and child care support, which is critical but allows for flexibility.

The reforms recommended make clear the need to recognise parental choice when it comes to the care of young children, while at the same time expecting that parents will not remain out of employment indefinitely. The reforms are also about ending the cohabitation rule, which does not have any part to play in the 21st century. It is a rule that says the parents of a child or children cannot live together as a family, free from the current restrictive arrangement that has State inspectors checking on them. That is dreadful social policy for any state to pursue at this time in our history.

Reforms must also be about re-examining our attitudes to some fathers and their role in the family, and issues such as easier access to their children. Reforms must also examine better and more direct ways of ensuring that fathers contribute through maintenance child support payments to the raising of their children. Members may have seen some statistics in that regard recently which indicate that this simply cannot go on. It is not acceptable that a large number of fathers are either not required to make a contribution or are not making a contribution. The figures, if one looks at them closely, are alarming in that regard.

Overall, the conclusion of the Government report is that while income support remains crucial and must be adequate to meet needs, passive income support alone is not sufficient. It is certainly not sufficient if poverty, particularly child poverty, and social exclusion are to be comprehensively addressed and people are to have financial independence and reach their potential.

I have said previously in this House that the supports provided to lone parents to date, while substantial as regards Exchequer funding, have been largely passive in nature. There has been no active or systematic support in assisting the person to take up education, training or employment opportunities. We must reverse that. In addition, the education level achieved by many lone parents is well below the rest of the population generally. That is all the more reason to ensure we get them back to education, training and employment as soon as possible.

The reality is that a person currently in receipt of a one-parent family payment can continue to have that payment paid until the child is 18, or 22 if in full-time education, with no direct intervention by the State. No one picks up the phone to see if we can help him or her back to education, training or employment and that is the case from the time the child is born until the age of 22. It is not fair to lone parents to leave them stranded in that way. None of us here today consider that this long-term welfare dependency is in the best interests of the lone parent, their children or society in general.

The proposals that have emerged from the report are for reforms that are significant and, in some cases, radical. They propose the expanded availability and range of education and training opportunities for lone parents, the extension of the national employment action plan to focus on lone parents, focused provision of child care, improved information services for lone parents and the introduction of a new parental allowance instead of the lone parent's allowance for low-income families with young children. That is all low-income families, not just lone parents who will be included in it.

I am proposing the introduction of a new support structure for lone parents and all parents on low income. This new means tested payment, which I am calling the parental allowance, will be paid to any parent whether married, cohabiting or single, who has a child. As I have already stated and as is accepted generally, the best route out of poverty and social exclusion is through employment. That is the reason I am introducing an element of positive activation into my proposals. For example, when their youngest child is aged five, recipients of the parental allowance will engage with a facilitator who will provide information, support and advice on the various options available in further education, training or employment. Such intervention does not take place at present and most lone parents are stranded and left to their own devices in this regard. These supports are designed to ensure that by the time the parental allowance ceases recipients will be in a position to achieve financial independence. Although the report suggests the supports should cease when the child is aged eight, I have an open mind on it.

It is important to note that the activation expectation is positive and not simply focused on moving people into employment or harassing them into low paid jobs. I am not interested in that. I am interested in helping people to achieve satisfying employment of their choice through education and training, and to help, advise and support them through that process, rather than abandon them as the present system does. The aim is to facilitate, support and encourage people to gain the skills to enable them to achieve financial independence. While conditions must be placed on receipt of payment, supports are offered in a structured and systematic manner to the persons concerned.

The Government asked the senior officials group to draw up an implementation plan to progress the non-income aspects of the proposals including those related to child care which, I have been told so often in the House, including by Senators present today, is at the centre of this issue. Education, training and activation measures are also included and work on this issue is already under way.

The proposals have already been the subject of some debate. I recently called together a public consultation forum, which met in Farmleigh, with representatives from lone parent organisations, the unemployed and State agencies. We held an excellent meeting with all of the groups and had an excellent discussion on the proposals we are discussing here today. I was also pleased to invite members of the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs, some of whom were able to attend. At this public forum, I heard first-hand the views of the groups, their concerns for the proposals and, most important, their wish to work with the Government to advance the proposals further.

I should also acknowledge the open-minded nature of the Opposition. It has taken a constructive role in studying the proposals and seeking to help us achieve a better position while, as I fully understand, reserving its right to oppose aspects of it or even the legislation in its entirety if it wishes. One cannot make these types of reforms in the face of serious opposition stirred up on the ground and fears being fanned. We know the fate of reforms when that happens. I am pleased that we have reached this stage. We have had at least 12 months of intensive discussions on these reforms with a fair amount of constructive debate and discussion.

I want to stress that I have an open mind on how we will bring this to a conclusion, and what the final shape of legislation will be. I would welcome the honest and considered views of Senators on the proposals. They amount to new social policy, and include a new parental allowance, new conditions for receipt of payments, ending cohabitation rules, which is not necessary in my view, and improving maintenance payment methods. They place major focus on supporting low-income families because they are low-income families and not because they happen to be a lone parent or another type of family unit. That is the test, not the category in which they fall. With one child in every three now born to a single parent, it is not sensible to categorise people. It is better that we focus on low-income families and not establish categories in an almost judgmental mode, as we tended to do in the past, although perhaps with good reason.

I look forward to a good discussion. I was pleased to introduce in the 2006 budget some changes to start on the road. We increased the upper earnings limit for the one-parent family payment to €375 a week, increased welfare rates and substantially improved the family income supplement. We recently ran a television campaign to encourage more people to take it up. I am pleased to tell the House, which asked me to do this, that as a result of the television campaign, we had a substantial increase in the number of families applying for the family income supplement.

We already started this process and I hope this is the next stage. Child poverty is most prevalent in lone parenthood. No one in this House or in the country would regard child poverty in the 21st century as being in any way acceptable in modern Ireland. These reforms are essential. I have an open mind on the details. I am prepared to engage with the Opposition on how we will finally mould them.

I trust the reforms will not become a political issue. I do not intend to make them one because they affect the lives of so many people. Approximately 80,000 families depend on us making these improvements. It is critical that we make them properly and sensibly and that we get them through. They should not fall foul of a lack of constructive discussion, of which I know we will have a great deal. I thank the Cathaoirleach for giving me a hearing. I look forward to a good discussion.

I welcome the visitors from Galway in the Visitors Gallery. It is not the Minister's duty to do so, it is the Cathaoirleach's, but as a Galway man I cannot miss the opportunity.