Seanad debates

Wednesday, 15 April 2015

One-Parent Family Supports: Motion

 

2:30 pm

Photo of Terry LeydenTerry Leyden (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators Katherine Zappone, Jillian van Turnhout, Mary Ann O'Brien and Fiach Mac Conghail for tabling this motion. The ability of Senators to work together and put forward a proposal in the House to which the Tánaiste has listened proves how useful the Seanad is. Fianna Fáil is happy to support the motion.This week marks the third anniversary of the promise made by the Tánaiste, Deputy Burton, not to proceed with these one-parent family payment cuts unless appropriate child care supports were in place. This is a commitment the Tánaiste has failed to honour and the consequences of her ill-thought-out policy continue to have devastating effects on one-parent families. The cuts imposed by the Tánaiste have led to huge financial losses for working lone parents and have increased the obstacles to lone parents seeking access to third level education. The cumulative effect of these changes is now clear. A lone parent working 20 hours per week on a minimum wage has lost €108 per week as a result of these so-called reforms, and in the absence of child care, work will no longer pay for many parents. These weekly losses are made up of a loss of €28 due to a reduction in income disregard, a loss of €50 in 2015 on cessation of one-parent family allowance and an additional loss of €30 in 2017 when the back-to-work family dividend will end. There has been a drop in the number of lone parents in paid employment and a drop in the number of applications to the Central Applications Office by lone parents. Moreover, while the European Union survey on income and living conditions, EU-SILC, report of 2013 showed there was no significant increase in consistent poverty in the general population, which increased from 7.7% to 8.2%, there was a shocking 32% increase in consistent poverty among one-parent families, the rate of which increased from 17.4% to 23% and is almost three times higher than that of the general population.

I look forward to the Tánaiste's response to this motion because the Senators have put forward a well worked out and researched document. On looking through it and on foot of the advice I have received from the Fianna Fáil research office, which has considered the points put forward by the Senators and has found nothing in the motion with which it can disagree, Fianna Fáil's response is we have considered and fully support the motion. I revert to and reiterate the point on the proposed major reform of this House, about which I have strong reservations. This is because the concerns Members have expressed and which the Tánaiste represents could not be represented by a well-off representative in New York who might be elected to this House. Such representatives would not have the interest, the concern or the effect the Members present have. This is a small second House of Parliament and it strikes me that while one seeks more representations from different outlets and outlooks, this time the Government appointed a wide range of people, who have been joined by Senator Craughwell after the by-election. Therefore, there is a broad range of views in this House and that is why this motion is particularly appropriate and important. It is something Deputy Burton should act on as Tánaiste and as leader of the Labour Party, which places her in an onerous position as someone who retained the Ministry of Social Protection. This was a brave decision on her part as it would have been easier for the Tánaiste to have taken on another portfolio that might have been easier to manage. This is a difficult portfolio. I believe it is the second highest spending Department in the State, and it is extremely important to the most deprived people in society.

If one looks back on Fianna Fáil's last time in government, it put funds into child care and into crèche developments throughout Ireland, which incidentally has never been recognised. In addition, Fianna Fáil also gave the first full free preschool year. I hope the Tánaiste will be able to bring about a second preschool year and that such a proposal might appear in the next manifestos. It was a great support to and help for families that they could have one free year of preschool facilities. Moreover, the buildings that were constructed and provided throughout the countryside are really top-class buildings of quality. When one analyses the position put forward by the Senators, the Tánaiste will see that any effect it will have on a low income base is devastating. My daughter is a councillor who is working with parents who are under terrible pressure at present. They are trying to hold on to their houses, to local authority houses, and are trying to rear a family. They are finding it very difficult to get child care, which has become out of the price range of anyone who seeks to return to work. In most cases, such people do not receive income that is adequate to pay for a child in child care.

These are all areas in which, as Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, the Tánaiste can consider the individual effect this measure has. She can ask whether this has a major effect on the recipients. As it has, the Tánaiste has a duty and responsibility to examine the situation and tell her Government colleagues that this is not acceptable. She should do this in her extremely influential position as Tánaiste, that is, supporting and being part of the Government as Deputy Prime Minister, as well as the Minister with responsibility for this sensitive portfolio. I must state she has done her utmost in that Department, in so far as possible, in trying to protect the rates of allowances in difficult circumstances. The elderly have been affected badly by the removal of free services that were in place, such as free telephones and painful decisions were made. I note they were more painful for those who actually were deprived of those services. While the Tánaiste retained the free travel system, which is appreciated, other facilities have been withdrawn from people, which is not welcome. The Tánaiste should consider this motion to ascertain whether she can agree to defer this measure. I do not believe it is a question of voting and, if possible, this motion should not be put to a vote. The proposal should be examined by the Tánaiste. While the Government more or less has the numbers in this House, perhaps that is not true in this case and the Tánaiste may find that this motion will be approved. All 14 Fianna Fáil Members are supporting this motion 100%, as will other Members. Perhaps it would be advisable to review the Government amendment to this proposal and to revert to Members with concrete proposals to alleviate the concerns expressed.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.