Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister and commend Senators Zappone, van Turnhout and the others who have proposed the motion and given us the opportunity to debate this important issue. I commend the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, on the reform measures she has introduced. I second the amendment to the motion, if that is necessary. Senator Moloney, who has a long track record of working on the issue, has already spoken on behalf of the Labour Party group in the House. The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education and Social Protection, under the chairmanship of Deputy Tuffy, has done a great deal of work on the issue. Given that there has been much empty rhetoric in the House, I will make three key points on which we can all agree.

First, it is important to acknowledge the diversity of lone parents. They are not a homogenous group and it is important that we do not stigmatise or stereotype lone parents by referring to all lone parents as poverty-stricken or stuck for a few shillings. Census figures tell us that more than 200,000 family units with children are headed by lone parents, comprising over 18% of family units and 25% of family units with children. As of January 2015, there are 69,773 recipients of the lone family payment. According to the data available, 42% of lone parents are at work, and this is the principal economic status of lone parents. It is important to point out that there is a very broad diversity of lone parents and that we should not stereotype or stigmatise them in any way.

Everybody who has spoken agrees that the current system of payment is not working. The system was introduced in 1997 to replace what had previously been the unmarried mothers’ allowance. The unmarried mothers’ allowance was very progressive when it was originally introduced to bring single mothers out of the poverty trap, enable them to rear children alone and replace the appalling situation for lone parents which involved mother and baby homes, women being forced to give babies up for adoption, women travelling to England to have babies there and the dreadful stigmatising of lone parents that took place right up until the 1980s. The genesis of the lone parent allowance has been very progressive. However, everybody acknowledges that the current one-parent family payment has not succeeded in bringing single-parent families out of the poverty trap. Everybody has pointed out that unacceptable levels of poverty remain among lone-parent families. Even during the height of the economic boom, lone-parent families were at much more risk of consistent poverty than the population as a whole, and we must acknowledge this. Reform was necessary, and was recommended in the 2006 report on proposals for supporting lone parents, five years before the Government took office. The report recommended a time limit for receipt of payments and that lone parents should be engaged with in a systematic manner to facilitate movement to education, training and employment.

We can all agree on my third point, which is, as Senator Moloney put it so succinctly, that the best way out of poverty and social exclusion is through education and employment and that keeping people out of the labour force and away from employment opportunities for long periods of time is no more than a welfare and poverty trap. The aim of these reforms is to reduce long-term welfare dependency for lone-parent families by ending the expectation that lone parents will remain outside the workforce for ten or more years. This is very important for all of us. We are all conscious, from our personal and family experience, of the vital importance of education and employment opportunities in order to enable people to escape poverty and welfare traps.

It is difficult to listen to Sinn Féin's views on the issue given that the party is in government in Northern Ireland and that similar reforms were introduced across the UK some time ago. Income support for lone parents in the UK ceases when the youngest child reaches the age of five. There has been a general move across Europe away from long-term and unconditional support towards more active engagement and work activation measures of the sort that have been introduced here. We must all agree with it in principle. I cannot see how anybody could support the current system without some measure of reform.We know the reforms began to be introduced on a phased basis before the Government took office. I pay tribute to the Minister and the Oireachtas committee for seeking to ensure the reforms were impacted in a way that was positive and did not lead to income loss. Two issues have been raised and there is a critique of the reforms. The first is access to child care and the Government has put a very significant amount of money in place to ensure there is support for child care programmes but there is not sufficient affordability and accessibility of child care. I speak as a parent of young children and a user of child care services. I know the cost of child care and it is a major issue the Government must do more on. I am hopeful the Government will do more on this during the year to come.

The other issue raised was the minority of lone parents affected by the loss of income in July because they are already on the family income supplement and have reached the cut-off age for the one parent family payment. Deputy Joanna Tuffy has engaged with this issue through the committee she chairs and has pointed out that all those transitioning to the jobseeker's transitional allowance, who are working fewer than 19 hours, are in the group about whom there should be most concern and with whom there should be the greatest engagement. Deputy Tuffy pointed out on that lone parents currently on the one parent family payment can improve their access to income if working hours are increased to 19 hours. Deputy Tuffy has provided an example of a lone parent of three children who, if she increased her hours from 15 hours to 19 and moved from the jobseeker's transitional payment to the family income supplement and the back to work dividend, she would be better off by up to €200 per week. It is important there is engagement with those most affected. The reforms brought forward envisage extensive engagement, increased opportunity to engage with education, training and employment supports and services and aim to develop the skill set of lone parents with the aim of securing access to employment in the first place. Others have pointed out the need for access to education and training in the first place, which is also very important.

The role of employers is very important and Senator Moloney referred to providing incentives for employers to provide school hours employment. The level of school hours employment, of 20 hours, covers the time when children above seven years are in school and this is the kind of employment we are looking at. Marks & Spencer's does this and it is also possible in the Civil Service. We must examine ways of doing this.

We should also provide for crèches in workplaces. Trinity College Dublin is a good example of a workplace that has provided a crèche for a long time and others paid tribute to the incoming president of Trinity College Dublin student union, Lynn Ruane, who is returning to education. Across third level, we see a strong commitment to provide child care facilities but it must be supported further and more strongly by the Government.