David Cullinane (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his responses. We believe the Government amendment, No. 6, has gone some way towards alleviating some of our fears. Senator Paul Bradford mentioned the word "hope" a number of times. I sincerely hope the mechanism for debt relief notices will work, but we have to be realistic in terms of how they will apply.

Amendment No. 17 refers to section 24(2)(b), which provides for a net disposable income of ¤60 per month; that is less than ¤15 per week. The Minister mentioned a workable solution and common sense. We do not believe that ¤60 per month is sufficient and we have to reinforce that point. A recent Irish League of Credit Unions report indicated that many people have less than ¤100 of disposable income. That caused consternation and much concern, with people asking how anyone could survive on less than ¤100 of disposable income per month, yet ¤60 per month is the amount provided for in the Bill for those subject to a debt relief notice.

The Minister mentioned other jurisdictions in the context of reasonable household expenses. The cost of living in the State is much higher than in some of the countries he mentioned. If the cost of living is higher the thresholds should be higher for net disposable income and for reasonable household expenses. We have had a number of debates on equality-proofing and poverty-proofing. While those issues are important, the Minister cannot deal with them in this Bill. I do not claim to have a monopoly of wisdom in this area, but in all the decisions we make we need to find some mechanism on which the political establishment can agree in terms of measuring poverty. Some countries have clear equality-proofing and poverty-proofing mechanisms in place. Amendment No. 6 refers to such measures and indicators of poverty set out in Government policy publications on poverty and social inclusion and it also refers to the consumer price index published by the Central Statistics Office.

I said initially that I took some comfort from the Minister's initial contribution when he said that the ¤60 per month of disposable income would not exist into eternity and could be changed. My question is how and when. If it is changed, what formula will be used to arrive at a new figure? If it is to be ¤60 per month it is reasonable for us to ask for how long it will be ¤60. Will the amount be reviewed on an annual basis? What formula will be used? Will it be the consumer price index? If there are to be changes to the figure at some point in time, perhaps the Minister can allay some of our fears by setting out how they would be calculated.