Nicky McFadden (Fine Gael)

I am glad to welcome the Minister of State to the House and to meet her for the first time, and I thank her for taking the time to deliver an informed speech. The new budget increases the rates for carers by €14 per week. There are 161,000 carers saving the State €2.1 billion per annum. In return for this service the budget increase amounts to just over €2 million although they save the State ten times this amount annually.

The 2006 census recognised that there are 5,433 carers between the ages of 15 and 19 in the State. Budget 2008 has failed to provide anything for these young people. Adolescence is a time when teenagers need as much support as possible for their education, personal development, socialising and holidays. Take Bridget, for example, who sat her leaving certificate last summer and has decided to defer her college place to selflessly dedicate her teenage years to providing full-time care for her 84 year old grandfather. She asked me to urge the Government to take the issue of young carers to heart and to implement the commitment made in the national agreement, Towards 2016, to research the needs of young carers in Ireland and provide a programme for specific supports. By acting as carers, these young people are experiencing role reversal.

In Towards 2016 the Government promised to deliver a national carers' strategy by the end of 2007. The Minister of State said this has been pushed back to next summer. I hope it will be not be any later than that and I look forward to seeing it.

The increase of €12 in the non-contributory State pension and €14 in the contributory pension reflect increases of 6% and 6.7% respectively. Inflation, however, is running at 5%, which cancels out any benefit from the budget. In its programme the Government promised to increase the basic State pension by 50% by 2012. The small increase in pensions, however will make it difficult for the Government to reach the proposed targets. Adequate pension provision has now slipped down the list of Government priorities.

Furthermore, the Government has failed to increase fuel allowance despite an increase in the price of oil and gas. Many elderly people will not be able to meet their fuel costs. Instead, that must come out of their pension, and an extra week per annum is not a worthwhile increase.

The level of child poverty in Ireland is one of the worst in the European Union. One in nine children lives in consistent poverty here. The Government is already behind its schedule to eliminate consistent child poverty by 2007. Under the national anti-poverty strategy, the Government promised to reduce the number of children in consistent poverty to below 2%. This target has been postponed until 2012. It is now anticipated that it will be at least 2016 before these targets have been met, and even that target date is hopeful. Budget 2008 provided the Government with the opportunity to reduce child poverty but it has failed to deliver. Does the Government not have a moral and social obligation to reduce and eradicate child poverty, rather than stand idly by as the nation's children freeze and starve on the streets this Christmas? It is important to note that children are not considered poor in their own right but that they are poor as part of a family. Almost a third of all households at risk of poverty today are headed by a person with a job. These families are the working poor; despite having at least one partner in full-time employment they live below the poverty line. The only effective way to combat child poverty levels is to target these families. If our constitution recognises the family as the "natural primary and fundamental unit group of society", why is this Government ignoring their most basic needs? The Government should be protecting these families rather than exposing them to the harsh reality of the Celtic tiger.

More than half of all households at risk of poverty are headed by people in the labour force and such low-income families do not pay income tax or PRSI. This means they do not benefit from changes in the budget and the most effective way to help low-income families is to make tax credits refundable. At the meeting of the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs last week, Fr. Sean Healy of the Conference of Religious of Ireland, CORI, called for this measure to be introduced. It would allow low-income families feel the full benefit of their tax credits.

I now wish to address the issue of habitual residency as the number of children that are being deprived of the most basic and fundamental necessities, such as food, clothing, school books and medicine, is approximated to be at least 3,000. Parents in these cases cannot afford to purchase necessities for their children primarily because they do not qualify for child benefit under the habitual residency condition.

Existing Government policy excludes the children of those living in direct provision from receipt of child benefit. This is grossly unfair to children, directly contradicts the Government's policy towards the reduction of child poverty and is also in breach of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Ireland ratified in 1992. This convention promises to protect the rights of all children within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, including any prejudice based on their parents' status. Furthermore, article 26 of the convention states that every child has a right to benefit from social security and this should be without condition. Children who do not qualify for child benefit under habitual residency are expected to survive on €9.60 per week. This, according to Robin Hannan, chief executive of the Irish Refugee Council, is not only pushing people into poverty and isolation, but also has been extremely dehumanising and has caused a lot of stress and, in many cases, depression.

It is extremely depressing, considering that it has been estimated that the cost to the Exchequer of paying child benefit to all children, including those currently outside the entitlement, would be less that €6 million euros. Moreover, it is disappointing that the Government did not use budget 2008 to restore child benefit as a universal payment. The refusal to grant this payment is contrary to international law and the Government's own policies on child poverty.

Homelessness is an issue that greatly concerns me and one need only walk down Molesworth Street or Dawson Street to witness it. It has become one of the biggest problems facing this society and is a recurring theme in debates in both Houses of the Oireachtas, which we too often ignore.

Recently, there have been stories that people are being forced to sleep in wheelie bins in cities around the country. This was brought to media attention only through the tragic death of Kevin Fitzpatrick, whose body was found in a refuse recycling centre in Limerick after he tumbled into a compact lorry during collection and was crushed. This is only one story and there are thousands of other harrowing accounts of what homeless people have had to experience.

Among a host of others, I wish to acknowledge the work of charities such as the Simon Community and Focus Ireland in fighting homelessness. However, without sustained spending on programmes to tackle homelessness, as well as changes in rental supplements, there is a strong possibility that the number of homeless people will increase.

I welcome the increased allocation for social housing provision and feel it will go some way towards helping those suffering and in need of a home. However, Focus Ireland maintains that the Government has failed to live up to previous ambitions outlined by the Taoiseach earlier this year at the launch of the Government's National Action Plan for Social Inclusion. He referred to an ambitious agenda for social change that guarantees to make a significant impact on poverty reduction for the future.

We are discussing some of the most vulnerable people in our society and it must be pointed out that they would not be homeless if they could access the necessary resources. Many have other problems beyond homelessness, including drug and alcohol problems, which continue to contribute to the situation, and I urge that these also be addressed.

The last area I will address is the issue of lone-parent families as they still cannot compete in the world today. There are huge pressures and strains on parents and it is estimated that the number of lone-parent families in the State has increased from 153,000 in 2002 to 189,000 in 2006. This represents a 23% increase and lone-parent families now account for 18% of all families living in the State. There has been a 41% increase in the number of lone-parent families with children under 18 years of age. It is important to note that this number is continuing to rise.

It is a shame that I must now conclude because I have more to say but I hope to have another opportunity.