Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)

I beg the Leas-Chathaoirleach's indulgence. I refer to the aforementioned employer cases, as I have found the relevant statistics. In the full year figures for 2009 there were two instances of failure to pay PRSI, four instances of failure to produce maintained records and one case of failure to provide the employment details of employees. As the total number of employers' cases finalised in court was seven, it is a myth that many employers are being caught in serious cases. As for the outcomes, three were fined, one was given the Probation Act, one was given community service, one case was struck out and one was withdrawn. If one excludes the latter two cases, that equates to five convictions. Consequently, it is not the huge ball of wax that people sometimes consider it to be. Therefore, the amendment would not have had the effect Senator McCarthy might have anticipated. However, it is worth asking the question and the answer is interesting. Certainly, when I received the statistics, it was reassuring.

As for rent supplement, I held a meeting on this issue last week with Focus Ireland, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, the Simon Communities of Ireland and one other group. I held meetings with some of them previously and continuously engage with them. Many issues arise in this context that must be considered. First, the State is paying approximately €500 millin - I believe €512 million was allocated in the Estimate this year - which is a lot of money. Second, one must be clear that my Department, not the HSE, is the payer. While community welfare officers handle this matter for my Department, they, in turn, are due to transfer to the Department of Social Protection, which will make it much clearer that it is the payer. However, my Department neither has nor seeks to have a relationship with the landlord. In other words, the tenant, not the Department, is the tenant of the landlord. If we were to make the Department the tenant of the landlord, there would be further complications about the appropriateness of the accommodation and so on. Obviously, the Department sets a general condition when paying, but, fundamentally, one picks one's own accommodation.

While the Department asks for PPS numbers, it does not receive them in all cases. In fact, it does not receive them in many cases. I should specify - funnily enough, some of the aforementioned groups dealing with tenants are reluctant to impose this - that every landlord should produce a PPS number or there will be no rent supplement payable. Moreover, this is the time to do this when there are plenty of houses on the market and when it is a buyer's, rather than a seller's, market. It is not satisfactory that someone could rent a house, have the State indirectly pay for it and not account for all of their taxes.