Pearse Doherty (Sinn Fein)

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire go dtí an Teach. Baineann an cheist gur mhaith liom a ardú os comhair an tSeanaid leis na bónais Nollag a bhí á íoc ag an Stáit dóibh siúd a fhaigheann airgead leasa sóisialta. Tá a fhios againn gur chuireadh ceal leis an íocaíocht sin i mí Aibreán na bliana seo. Agus muid ag tarraingt isteach ar an chéad seachtain de mí na Nollag, tá gá ann an íocaíocht a dhéanamh. An bhfuil sé ar intinn ag an Rialtas tarraingt siar ar an chinneadh atá déanta agus an airgead seo a íoc chuig na 1.3 milliún duine a bhraitheann go mór air le linn an Nollag?

This matter concerns the need for the Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy Hanafin, to reintroduce the Christmas bonus. The wording of the motion may not be correct in that I should have made it clear that I was talking about the Christmas bonus for social welfare recipients. When we consider the legislation passed in the House recently or some of the information we received, it is clear that bonuses are still being paid. In regard to NAMA, bonuses are being paid to the bankers who are being allowed to receive salaries of €500,000. Only a few weeks ago we heard that Professor Brendan Drumm who is earning a salary of over €400,000 had been paid a bonus of €70,000, yet in the April budget the Minister for Social Welfare decided to cancel the Christmas bonus for approximately 940,000 social welfare recipients and their dependants. Approximately 1.3 million people are dependent on some of the lowest payments from the State, many of them receiving €204 a week on which to survive. I am not talking about people who have lost their jobs in the last month or recent months or those who may have had savings in the bank but about those in receipt of long-term social welfare payments, for whom the €204 a week is all they have to survive.

The term "bonus" is probably flawed because in real terms this double payment which was usually paid on 4 December was a necessary part of budgeting for those on the lowest incomes. In 2007 the then Minister said repeatedly that Christmas was one of the most expensive times of the year and that payment of the bonus would go some way towards meeting household Christmas costs. When the current Minister introduced the bonus last year, she said that, even in the challenging budgetary environment, the payment of this additional money to social welfare customers was a clear sign that helping those most in need of support remained the key priority for the Government. Since the Minister has decided to cancel the payment for 1.3 million people, it is clear the Government's priorities have changed. What are its priorities if they are no longer helping those most in need?

I have always found the Minister of State to be a fair person, although it is a pity the Minister cannot be here at this late hour in the Seanad because it is she who should be questioned on the issue, although I accept it is a Government decision. The reality is that by cancelling payment of the Christmas bonus for those paid €204 or even less a week the Minister is, in effect, cancelling Christmas for them. That is not just my view or that of Sinn Féin. Other organisations such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul which work with the most vulnerable and those at risk of poverty are of this view also because the additional payment was used to buy extra bags of coal to provide more heating, presents for grandchildren or new clothes for Christmas.

A report issued today by Older and Bolder states many pensioners are deciding to heat only one room at a time because they cannot afford to heat the entire house and that many have forgone buying new clothes because of the restrictions the Government has imposed in the budget.

I ask the Minister to consider an alternative to the cancelling of the Christmas bonus. The Government has told us it has no alternative because it must save the €223 million the Christmas bonus costs, but that is a flawed premise. If it were to pay the Christmas bonus, everyone who would receive it would spend it in the local economy. It is not like Professor Brendan Drumm and his salary of €400,000 and bonus of €70,000. He will not spend all his money, but the person who depends on the €204 a week would spend all of the bonus in local shops. There would be an immediate comeback for the Government in VAT receipts of approximately 21%, but it would also boost the local sectors into which the money would be injected. It amounts to a withdrawal of support from the local economy. In my county 54,000 people are dependent on social welfare payments. That is a huge number of people who next week will do without, many of them for the first time since the 1980s, the double payment at Christmas. It is estimated that the loss to the local economy alone will be €9.5 million.

I ask the Minister to get her priorities right. Last week my party highlighted the areas where money could be raised, whether through additional taxation, including wealth taxes, or the standardisation of discretionary taxes. There are many avenues open that not only my party but others have highlighted, but, unfortunately, the Minister and the Government have decided that the first port of call is those who are dependent on a sum of just over €200 a week. I cannot understand the reason the Government did not consider asking those earning more than €200,000 a year to pay a little extra, but instead it has decided to take the Christmas bonus from those dependent on €204 a week. It does not make sense. I ask the Minister to listen not just to my plea on behalf of the 940,000 who would have been due to receive this payment next week but also to that of the many groups, charities and organisations which work with the most vulnerable which are stating this is one of the cruellest decisions the Government has made. It is Scrooge-like and mean. Of all the decisions it has made, this is the one on which it will look back with regret. A society is judged by the way it treats its weakest and most vulnerable members; we should not be screwing them. I use that terminology because I believe that is what the Government is doing to the most vulnerable and those most in need of this payment.