Marie Moloney (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House to take this motion. The tabling of this motion has given us an opportunity to debate the issue of the reform of the lone parents payment, a debate which needs to take place. Many of us have called for this debate over the past few weeks so it is time that the matter is discussed in detail.

My opinion on this matter has been well documented and aired over the past week or two. It is a well known fact that I have, along with a number of my colleagues, had a private meeting with the Minister to raise some concerns about the reform, to highlight the impact the initiative is having on lone parents and to put some proposals to her. I have also been vocal about this matter at parliamentary party meetings.

I fully support reform, as do many of the people in this Chamber, but I have a difficulty with anyone losing income in the name of reform. As I said before, and will say again, nobody should be worse off working than on social welfare. The reason I strongly support reform is because I have worked in politics for the past 25 years. During my time I have worked with many lone parents. I have dealt with many people who lose the lone parents payment, sometimes after 22 years and even longer, depending on the number of children they have had. I encountered women who felt bewildered and intimidated by the process of applying for the jobseeker's allowance. I refer to the fact that people suddenly had to comply with the rules for the jobseeker's allowance and be actively seeking employment. Under the scheme of jobseeker's transitional allowance, lone parents do not have to satisfy the availability for work clause until such time as their youngest child reaches 14 years of age. They can, if they so wish, engage with the Department and avail of the services in the Intreo office, the local employment service and the Jobs Club. They can then be ready, when their youngest child reaches the age of 14 or earlier, if they choose to enter the labour market.

I appreciate the fact the Minister said in 2013 that changes would not go ahead unless there were adequate child care provisions. Since that statement she has made a number of changes to the scheme. The jobseeker's transitional payment has been introduced which does not necessitate the requirement to be available for work. The back to work family dividend has been introduced. There has also been a concession whereby lone parents can work up to five days a week without it affecting them, like those in receipt of the jobseeker's allowance. However, I am 100% convinced that even if we had state-of-the-art child care facilities in this country, we would still have this debate today because nobody likes to lose income. If nobody was losing income, then we would not be here today and everybody would welcome the reform.