Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)

Fáiltím roimh an Aire agus, go mórmhór, an díospóireacht ilghabhálach a bhí againn go dtí seo. Tá sé soiléir go bhfuilimid ar aon aigne faoi staid eacnamaíochta na tíre i láthair na huaire agus na deacrachtaí a bheidh ann amach anseo. I welcome the Minister and compliment her on successfully negotiating her Department's budget. I also compliment her departmental officials. It is evident from our debates on financial matters so far, that the Government's policy of putting the most vulnerable people in society first, is still being maintained.

I thought that Senator Norris's histrionics earlier were a little over the top. I have great regard for Senator Norris because he generally takes a stand on behalf of those who are less well off. It makes no sense, however, to suggest that a Minister who delivers a speech on her portfolio is, in some way, an instrument of somebody else. As Members of the Oireachtas, we understand the system as it operates in every single presentation to this House. I must therefore question why it was necessary for Senator Norris to do that. I know this point is not central to our debate but it is important to put that on the record.

Over the years, my experience of people in receipt of social welfare allowances is that many of them would prefer not to have to depend on such payments. We all know that the unemployed would prefer to work. It is a matter of human dignity but people often find themselves out of work through no fault of their own. We should start our debate on the basis of humanity. No matter how challenged an economy is, it is vital for us to ensure the dignity of the individual. That is the bottom line but in order to do that, other people may have to suffer. As I have said a number of times since the debate on financial legislation began, those who are able to pay should do so. I do not know whether that view is palatable, but I must make the point, which is in order to ensure that others can live in dignity. In light of financial developments and aspects of other legislation, the Government's approach to ensuring that people can live in dignity has been to make cutbacks or savings in order that the most vulnerable can be looked after.

I am not able to make a case for or against the Combat Poverty Agency, CPA. While I am not familiar with what it has done, I am sure that its work has been great. I clearly recall that, when we were challenged economically, a number of people looked for a termination of many quangos. It is understandable that each termination will affect someone with an interest in the quango in question. Often, Departments can feel under pressure, but many aspects of the work would be better served and serviced by a Department. I will take up Senator Boyle's point. While I am guessing, the Department will surely provide outreach assistance if necessary. As such, the good work done by the CPA in combating poverty, which is a matter of monitoring and looking after immediate needs more than it is just a question of money, will be carried out anyway.

I welcome the reference to pensions, a matter that I have discussed several times in the House. Where something is not mandatory, it can be difficult to get a young person of a certain age to focus on the idea of contributing to a pension fund that he or she will use 40 or 45 years later. However, I have personal experience of other situations. I am old enough to look back on a period of, for example, 25 or 30 years and I know people who, at the end of that period, regret having refused their employers' offers. I look forward to the report. Despite other pressures, we should regard this as an immediate problem. In the final analysis, we must consider issues of this kind over the short and medium terms.

I will refer to a point I raised with the Minister in a different context, namely, the dignity of the individual. The Government should consider how to retain people who are upwards of 55 years of age and working on FÁS schemes until they reach retirement age.