Katherine Zappone (Independent)

Are we to believe resources will be located within the next budget? From where will they come? Those who no longer qualify for the one-parent family payment will seek the jobseeker's allowance if they are fit for work. If a single parent claims that he or she is only looking for part-time work because of child care costs, it is likely he or she will be refused payment. Assurances that claimants will be treated sensitively are not good enough.

We are deeply concerned about the changes introduced through the Social Welfare Act 2011, including the lowering of the earnings disregard in respect of the one-parent family payment. It is at €130 this year and will continue to decrease to €60 by January 2016. We wish to recall the rationale for the introduction of the payment in 1997. It gave recognition to the greater practical financial burden faced by lone parents when trying to access employment and raise children, namely, the cost of child care. A greater income disregard was afforded to one-parent families who engaged in employment, usually part-time, so that they might retain part of their social welfare payment. With the reduction of that disregard and an inadequate affordable child care system, single parents are disincentivised to take up part-time work, even if they want to, and are genuinely unavailable for full-time work. This change increases the chances of ongoing poverty.

In a simple exercise, I compared a couple in receipt of jobseeker's allowance with a person in receipt of the one-parent family payment where both households took up part-time work for €160 per week. Each family had a three year old child. In 2016, the one-parent household will have €18 more income than the two-parent household. This money is spent on child care, amounting to €60 to €80 per week. If the single parent has two children, he or she will still only have €18 more. Does this reform sit with the vision of our Minister?

We are trying to submit an amendment to oppose the Bill's changes in respect of the mortgage interest supplement. We will argue that the relevant section should be deleted and that no proposals to limit the supplement further should be enacted until an overall package of supports is available to ensure the protection of borrowers who have the capacity to remain in their homes with appropriate targeted support. Without such supports, the proposed changes will undoubtedly have the effect of abolishing the mortgage interest supplement in everything but name.