Dan Boyle (Green Party)

I welcome the passage of the Bill through the House and its prior passage through the Dáil. It is the third item of automatic legislation that stems from budget 2008, the other two being the Finance Bill and the Social Welfare Bill, which takes care of provisions put in place from 1 January onwards. This legislation will deal with future increases in social welfare expenditure from 1 April onwards. It confirms that the Government is meeting its commitments in the programme for Government and under the social partnership programme to those in our society who are living without. I hope these commitments will be met over the lifetime of the Government, including the increase in the State pension to €300 per week. On those grounds the Bill is welcome and is a statement of the Government's intent on striking a balance in the area of social provision and in emphasising the importance of social policy in general.

There are two areas where, of necessity, the Bill is treading on water because of ongoing work. It had been hoped that the national carers' strategy, as indicated in the programme for Government, might have been ready by the end of 2007 and could have helped to inform this Bill. Due to the administrative constraints of a number of Departments involved, that was not possible. While it has been established, it is an ongoing process. There have been a number of meetings of the consultative committee and I am confident that later in the year, in informing the 2009 Bill, we will have those recommendations on which to work.

There is only a small reference to carers, that is, the welcome increase in the respite care grant. Everyone in the House would acknowledge the importance of the national carers' strategy and in ensuring a range of measures will be in place for next year's Bill which will meet an ongoing commitment that most of us in political life have towards carers. It is a commitment that values their work, which is of particular relevance to the Irish situation where the existence of people in the home and the community is an opportunity to offer levels and standards of care that cannot exist in State-funded and State-directed systems found in other countries but which, to date, we have not funded or properly acknowledged. That is one of the issues on which the national carers' strategy will come to a conclusion.

While there are detailed pension provisions in the Bill, much ongoing work is needed. Consultations on the Green Paper on pensions will come to a conclusion in mid-2008. Many of us look forward to that because there are important decisions to be made in regard to the balance between a State provision, the encouragement of private pension provision and whether, as in the past, it should be done through tax mechanisms, or whether there are other ways of encouraging people to have a State pension which is adequate, and may be added to in terms of private pension provision.

I noted with interest the contribution of Senator McFadden who articulated a long-held Green Party position on refundable tax credits. The Commission on Taxation is due to meet and to report by the end of September 2009. That in itself will be another contribution towards important debate in this area.

What we need to do in the whole area of social welfare policy is to get away from talk of the actual amounts of the payments involved and into a more detailed examination of the categorisation of the payments and whether the existence of certain types of payments and their categories are impediments to people progressing in life. Welfare traps exist because of the way in which the welfare system is structured.

It takes a degree of clarity and, that much abused term in political debate, courage, to tackle some of these inconsistencies because to achieve a long-term benefit there might be a short-term disadvantage. I am aware the Minister and his predecessor have tried to deal with the inconsistencies and contradictions that sometimes arise in trying to bring about change, particularly in the area of payments to lone parents. That debate has been well informed and has engaged with representative groups of lone parents.

I am confident that the changes that will eventually come about will recognise the need to acknowledge the income-maintenance needs of families who exist in that situation and the need for people not to be perpetually in situations which become welfare traps. Given that most lone parents are women with children, the balance we need to achieve is that women are given the opportunity to improve themselves through education and to contribute as needs be to the workforce. There is also a balance to be struck in terms of meeting child care needs and the role of a stay-at-home parent or a parent who can stay at home as often as possible. This is the contradiction that most of the studies are trying to bridge.

In regard to the reforms that might come about in the yeas ahead, I give credit to the Department of Social and Family Affairs for the way in which it has improved its customer relations. That is probably not acknowledged enough. Down through the years, in periods of unemployment, I recall visiting unemployment exchanges and trying to account for personal welfare needs. I was struck by the interface that took place, the public relations element and how lacking it was. We have come a huge distance since then in terms of how information is provided to people and how they are dealt with at a more human level, which many of us would admit did not happen in the past. This should be acknowledged.

The type of reforms and balance we need to achieve in terms of customer service is centred on how people access the service. There has been controversy in the past, and this is ongoing with regard to how information technology can be used best to benefit all in our social welfare system, as well as how it might be at times intimidating for older members of our society. While I am not sure if it is an area for which we can legislate, I would like some type of acknowledgement from the Minister and the Department as to how this area is being tackled. If we want to have a welfare system for the 21st century, it must involve our citizens in helping to shape that. In any case, this has yet to happen. We are still dealing theoretically with many of the modern ways of producing a social welfare service. My hope is that this Bill which, as I said, is treading water, will be a small step towards achieving that type of change.