Lisa McDonald (Fianna Fail)

I rise to speak with a heavy heart, as do most today, because it is not easy to discuss cutting social welfare payments and the necessity of having to do so. I take issue with the contention that the Minister is somehow cutting the payments of the vulnerable and that this is somehow a choice he has. There is not very much choice in respect of what we must do. Unfortunately, the economy and bigger picture dictate that these cuts need to be made.

With regard to the four year plan, it is important to have money to pay people. The alternative choice, which is stark, is one that people do not want. From having walked up and down the streets of Wexford and from having discussed matters in my clinic during the week, I noted that people accept, albeit very reluctantly, that this is their lot and that they must take the cuts. They are not happy about it and would rather see a few bankers going to jail. They would rather see the people who caused this crisis being brought to justice and held to account.

The Minister is one of the Deputies with the biggest social conscience in the Oireachtas. I congratulate him on the fair and balanced nature of this budget. Although it is so hard even to say that, I believe the Minister must bring his influence at Cabinet to bear on bringing to justice those who have forced us to make these decisions.

There are many people in receipt of social welfare, be they among the 400,000 people on the live register or the 1.1 million in receipt of child benefit. Making the cuts in the manner achieved by the Minister is probably the fairest approach although it is unpalatable. We must remember our budget is still €20.9 billion, which compares to a budget of €17.8 billion in 2008. The social welfare budget was €6.7 billion in 2000. That speaks volumes. It is not easy for any Minister to put forward a balanced portfolio of cuts but we must recognise - it is disingenuous of anyone to accept otherwise - that our economic situation necessitates this and if we were not to do it in this measured and controlled way, it would be much worse. No one would say that the Minister's priority is not to protect the vulnerable. I would certainly feel that such is the case. If we must, first and foremost, stabilise the public finances to have the money to pay people, anyone who ignores this is not living in the real world.

I commend the Minister on leaving the State pension for senior citizens unchanged. It is important we protect the people who have built up this country through their blood, sweat, tears and taxes. They have made this country what it is and those in it what they are.

I have been heartened by the number of senior citizens who have spoken to me in recent days and told me they would have taken a cut but at the same time accept and are delighted at the knowledge and recognition of their work over the years. It is important to note as well that senior citizens do not have an ability to raise income in the future and to protect what they have. They deserve their special treatment for that. I do not accept for one minute Senator McFadden's contention that Fianna Fáil is somehow afraid of the grey vote. She, too, welcomed that old age pensioners have been protected and one cannot have it both ways. Her party more than likely will be in government after the next election and she needs to be clear on where she stands in that regard. She either is in favour of protecting it or should state her party will not cut it because it also is afraid of the grey vote. It is one or the other.

We also need to recognise the benefit to older persons of the free television licence, free bus pass and gas allowance. All of these are most important and they have been brought in by successive Fianna Fáil Governments over the years. It is important to have an elderly population with a good standard of living. I am delighted the Minister has been able to retain it and I would say that was a big battle.

We also must recognise that the Minister has retained the half rate carer's allowance and that will continue to be paid to those caring for one person or more. There have been other elements of the budget that he has managed to retain such as the family income supplement, the back to school allowance, the footwear allowance, the domiciliary care allowance and the widowed parent's grant. These are all matters that we must welcome in the context of cuts.

The fact that child benefit has been reduced by €10 for the first two children and by €20 for each subsequent child is not something that sits easy with me. I am someone who receives child benefit, and God knows the day will come when I will need it, but there are people who do not need it. I think the Minister agrees with that even though I am not sure of his stand on it. Perhaps he would expand on it. I understand the concept of a universal payment and all children need to be treated equally, but at the same time in this context there is need for serious reform of this benefit. There is even an argument to look at those suffering from serious poverty to see whether there is any way of making that payment in a better way to ensure it gets to the children and that it assists their standard of living. On both ends of the scale it is skewed. It is skewed at the lower end of the scale and the well off in society do not need it. In that regard, it saddens me that for a series of budgets we have stated that we cannot reform the system because we do not have the time. I understand the pressures the Minister and his Department are under are immense but at the same time somewhere along the line we must take time out to devise a better system, and that is what I would look for.

On the €10 less in the payment, we need to recognise that the children's allowance has increased by more than 300% in a ten year period. Given that we are in a deflationary period, the purchasing power of that payment has increased. That is a reasonable comment to make. Our Fine Gael colleagues need to look at their own record when they were last in Government on children's payments to see that it is not all that easy, but at the same time those who are on high incomes should not receive child benefit at a time when we are borrowing to pay ourselves. No business person would do that and we should not do it here either.

We must acknowledge that our benefits are still higher than those in the UK. If we look at where we have come from as a country and where we are going to when the four year plan is implemented, in an effort to be positive about the future, I would hope all these payments, the social welfare and child benefit payments, would be increased again when we are back on our feet. At the same time, we will be looking at increasing employment and activation measures to try to ensure we get back on our feet. These matters are important to look at because the last thing most want is to be dependent on any payment. People prefer to be working for themselves. There is an issue where people who cannot do so, and that needs to be acknowledged.

In that regard, I commend the Minister on the Tús scheme that has been introduced by his Department. I want to know a little more about it, but something that includes 15,000 more places for persons to work on community schemes is to be welcomed. Given that there are 60,000 places in enterprise and community employment schemes and under back to education allowances even before this scheme is implemented, an additional 15,000 places is to be welcomed. The manner in which the Minister has thought this out is good, bringing persons in to work in the community and voluntary sector. Perhaps he would flesh it out a little more in his response. It is a commendable scheme and, if I may say so, it has the stamp of the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, all over it.

The internships which involve bringing persons such as architects, solicitors, etc. into work to ensure they are keeping up their skills and which is being introduced with the Department of Education and Skills answers something I was calling for last year, namely, the need to ensure those who are highly educated are kept up to speed. If employers are to play their part in that, that must be welcomed too. I am not sure whether many employers would like to have qualified persons, what are called the white collar unemployed, working for free in their offices because the nature of an employer is to value the worth of the employee, but at the same time we need to look at some sort of boosting payment system and I would like to hear from the Minister on that. Perhaps it is not his direct remit but if it is, I would like to hear him on it.

The internships in the public service will also assist persons. Very much unlike Senator Quinn, I employ only two persons in my practice. At the same time, it is two persons more than would be otherwise employed. It is difficult to understand where they would be working otherwise. As a nation which likes to work and wants to work, we need to understand there are many right now who would work for free because they are bored and want to keep up their skills. We need to find some way around that. Perhaps some sort of an advertising campaign would be in order because I am not sure many know about the internships and the possibility of working for a year for free. We need to look at all that to see whether anything can be done to highlight it. I am inundated with persons - solicitors, secretaries and even office runners or whatever - looking to come in. It is difficult to take someone on in that regard and I repeat my suggestion of a boosting payment.

The incentive for young persons to up-skill themselves is something we introduced in the last budget. This is where we were making persons under 24 go on to education and training courses. That is working to a certain extent. I would like to see more diversity in the courses available. I know much work is being done behind the scenes on this, but it needs to come more to the fore because we need courses that activate the mind and get people interested in what they are doing, not ones which are absolutely irrelevant in the current economic environment.

I acknowledge the fact that fraud control measures in the Department have saved €533 million this year and that no one has done more on this front than the Minister. It is welcome that the public services card is finally being introduced. I would like to hear more about certification and the electronic means to be used and how it will work. Is it possible to see where a person is, as one can with the new iPhone and Facebook systems? There are the means to do this, but I am not sure whether it is within the remit of the Department's computer system. Much is happening with regard to fraud and such measures could be brought to bear even more. I am concerned about what Senator McFadden stated about attacking fraud. It sounded more like a Gestapo style and I am not sure the public would take it. The fact that it is happening is something that needs to be highlighted. It is definitely the way to decrease the number signing on and working in the black economy.

There are other comments I wish to make, but I will leave them for another day. The Bill contains good proposals. It is not easy to make cuts of this nature. We must acknowledge, however, that the cost of living has decreased to April 2007 levels, but the standard rate of payment is still €2 above this, as any reasonable person would acknowledge. We face huge challenges in returning people to employment, an issue on which we need to move as a matter of urgency. I must acknowledge these are very difficult times and nobody wants to introduce cuts. However, in this regard they are a necessity. I commend the Bill to the House.