Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am always reluctant to comment on the excellent work the Leader of the House does in ordering the business of the House, but I have to express the concern on this side that in recent weeks, particularly since the resumption after Christmas, there has been a singular lack of legislation in the programme put before the House. I am sure the Leader will agree that it is not in the best interests of the House or its future that on a Wednesday there are very long suspensions when there is no business to be conducted. I understand the Leader is relying on Ministers to bring legislation before the House, but I would like to put down a marker and suggest he increase the pressure on his ministerial colleagues to try to bring more legislation before the House because it deserves it. Ministers who come here will testify that this House acts in the most professional way possible in dealing with legislation. Ultimately, this enhances the House.

The first report of the advisory group on tax and social welfare was published yesterday. I understand that overnight the Minister for Social Protection kicked the report into an Oireachtas committee and that the newspapers are reporting that it could be 18 months or after the next general election before an attempt is made to address the issues raised in it. The Minister should come before the House to outline her views on the report which she has had for over one year.

Last evening we could see on television a member of the committee which drew up the report and even she admitted there was no guarantee the savings that would accrue as a result of the implementation of these recommendations to reduce child poverty. Ultimately, the impression being created by this report, its recommendations and the immediate aftermath of its publication is that the Government would save ¤200 million through its implementation but there has been no discussion about how to address the wider issue of providing support services.

This country does not have a great record for support services for children and it is obvious from reading the report that if any aspect of the two preferred options would be implemented, it would not only have a severe impact on the squeezed middle but would affect those at the lower end of the income scale. The recommendation on the top-up payments is that there should be abolition of the family income supplement. Ultimately, the people targeted by the recommendations would lose out.

It is important in that context that the Minister should come before the House and outline her views not just on child benefit but how the money would be distributed if the recommendations were implemented to address support services. For example, there is the high cost of child care. The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Fitzgerald, some months ago indicated her belief that there should be a change in child benefit and that it should be targeted at child care places. Before we take on any recommendations that will affect those at the bottom end, there is a need for a debate on how the money for child benefit is distributed.