David Cullinane (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

There is not much evidence of that latitude, all I can hear are interruptions. The Leas-Chathaoirleach, when he was in the Chair, allowed for a proper and free-flowing debate.

When we seek to highlight such issues, namely, the need for proper pre-budget debates, we are informed that we should raise them when the legislation comes before the House. When we do that, we are informed that our amendments or recommendations have been ruled out of order. When are we to raise the issues? I would argue that this is the time to do so. The Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Bill is currently before the House and it presented the Government the opportunity to make changes in respect of social welfare, which it has not done.

The first of the recommendations that were ruled out of order related to the respite care grant. We could have focused on any of the cuts made by the Government in recent years but the one to respite care grant is seen as being particularly cruel.

The cut to the respite care was seen as a particularly cruel cut on people who do a very good and very difficult job. Yet the Minister cut the respite care grant in the last budget. Through the amendment in this section we sought to overturn the cut to the respite care grant. That was one of the amendments we tabled.

I wish to speak about two other amendments on overpayments that were ruled out of order. That is a very important issue because as the Minister knows many people are in poverty. We set social welfare rates at the minimum amount of money people should be living on. I do not know if the Minister read the submission made to the Department by the round table discussion on social welfare law that was commissioned by the Community Law and Mediation Service. It made two recommendations. I will be brief on this because I accept we need to move on to the other amendments.

Its first recommendation was that section 13 which was amended in previous Social Welfare Bills be reformed through amending legislation and that at a minimum the previous position where no one is forced to live below the State's minimum level of basic income based on the supplementary welfare allowance rate of €186 be restored. As the Minister knows that is no longer the case because of changes made in the past.

For example in the case of a single person the allowed deduction amounts to €28 per week compared with €2 before the enactment of section 13. That means if the personal contribution of €30 per week for those on rent supplement is taken into account, a single person is expected to live on €130 a week if they have to make an overpayment. That is even below the supplementary welfare payment. The first recommendation is that we would deal with that.

The report's second recommendation called for the introduction of a statute of limitations. It recommended that a limitation period be introduced whereby the Department of Social Protection must act to recover an overpayment within a specified time period after which the Department is stopped from pursuing such a recovery process. It recommended a limitation period similar to that contained in the Statute of Limitations 1957, which is six years in the case recovery of a debt from the date on which it first becomes due. If this period is deemed too short it further recommended that the limitation period should not exceed 12 years which is the limitation period applicable to the enforcement of the judgment.

That covers the amendments that were ruled out of order. I am sure the Minister will accept that the Community Law and Mediation Service put a lot of work into this report. It made some interesting observations. If the Minister is not in a position to accept its recommendations this year, I hope she will consider them for future budgets.