Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister to the House and I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. Having listened to some of the previous speakers and also having listened to the Dáil debate on recent social welfare Bills, there seems to be a departure in thinking on social welfare. Given the extent of the social welfare budget, the numbers of people claiming it and that the country is in a very distraught financial state, a significant number of people are concerned about how the social welfare budget is being spent and that a number of people who are not entitled to do so are claiming social welfare. In our attempts to regulate the system, stamp out fraud and bring a degree of realism to the social welfare code, we need to be careful not to penalise those who genuinely depend on social welfare. We cannot ignore the fact that the majority of the unemployed are genuinely unemployed, and that the majority in receipt of social welfare payments genuinely need them. We need to reflect upon this when we go on a mission to make savings and detect fraud in the social welfare system.

Many now speak of the social welfare industry. Given that the Department of Social Protection is spending in excess of €20 billion, we must concede it is almost an industry. We must determine how the money can be used most effectively. Old-age pension payments and other such payments have a set purpose but the moneys we are spending on supporting the unemployed, disabled and recipients of child benefit may sometimes be spent in more flexible ways.

The Government has made a commitment that there would be no cuts to social welfare in the next budget. Most have very much welcomed that statement. We must differentiate between cutbacks and savings, however. A lot of money can be saved on administration and the Bill contains measures that will be helpful in this regard, including measures on the transfer of information across various sectors.

We need to examine means testing. There is a plethora of means-testing agencies and we should be able to prevent duplication, thus saving money.

I have always found the plethora of social welfare schemes a little confusing. As practising politicians, we nearly need to carry around our social welfare guides. There is a social welfare Bill and budget every 12 months but the very useful social welfare guide is published only every two years approximately. Generally, six months into the two-year period the Department runs out of copies. Perhaps this could be addressed because the guide is very useful. When one notes the great number of social welfare benefits available, one realises there must be room for streamlining the number of payments, but not the amounts being paid.

These smaller measures could be helpful in saving money. Money saved on one side of the social welfare budget could be put to good use assisting those who genuinely need further assistance. While I am a believer in spending very cautiously, I recognise a very significant number of people are finding it exceptionally difficult to make ends meet. If we could keep the money in their pockets, or put more money therein, if possible, it would be welcome. To do this, we need to make savings throughout the Department. Administrative costs must be examined.

The purpose of the Bill, namely, the restoration of the national minimum wage, was debated many times before and after the election. The Minister is present today to fulfil the Government's election commitment. Let us hope it will work. While the cut to the minimum wage did not put tens of thousands of people back to work and its restoration may not prevent tens of thousands of people from going back to work, a political promise was made in this regard and it is now part of the legislation. We will see how it works out.

The Government's jobs initiative was regarded as modest when all was conceded but was certainly a step in the right direction. The Government is now introducing the social welfare legislation to provide for it. We hope the initiative will begin to make an impact on the jobless total. We must accept that progress will be slow. It has taken us almost a decade to get the country into the mess in which it is now. We will not solve all the problems overnight but the jobs initiative is only a small step in the right direction.

Senator Moloney, who is on the Government side, spoke about carers. This matter, which may be beyond the confines of the Bill, is one about which I speak very often in the House and feel very strongly. The Minister has a very eclectic and broad view of politics. Members of both Houses have spent considerable time discussing the difficulties affecting nursing homes. As I stated in this House last week, €100 million that appeared to have been lost from the nursing homes scheme was found again. I asked the Minister of State who was present, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, to reflect on the fact that if 10,000 additional people had the full carer's allowance to assist them in looking after elderly individuals, it would make up the missing €100 million. One of the Minister's predecessors, the late Séamus Brennan, discussed with me during debates on various social welfare Bills the concept of removing the means test for the carers allowance to allow the full allowance to be paid for those genuinely providing full-time care to those genuinely in need thereof. His estimate of the cost of doing so was quite modest by comparison with social welfare expenditure in general.

I ask the Minister, in conjunction with the Minister for Health, to consider carefully over the coming months the carer's allowance and carer's benefit schemes not just in terms of cost but also in terms of the broader common good. Do we really believe that sorting out the fair deal problem in the nursing homes and nursing homes regulation is all we must do for the elderly? Should we not try to see the bigger picture and satisfy the needs of the tens of thousands of elderly people who want to remain in their own homes with their families and in their communities? The carer's allowance and benefit have a major role to play in this regard. I ask the Minister to do the calculations in this regard. There is considerable value, not just economic but also social, to be obtained from being generous with the carer's allowance by way of radically improving the criteria associated with the means test. I concede the means test was improved a number of years ago and that there is a genuinely impressive income disregard. This matter is not directly related to the purpose of the Bill but I hope the Minister will give it consideration.

I welcome the Bill and the presence of the Minister in the House. She has a major job to do and a huge budget to spend. She should try to spend that budget carefully and put it to good use. I wish her well in planning for the next budget and social welfare Bill, which I suppose will be the next big step forward.