Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House. I will not be going through this section by section. I know we will have that opportunity on Committee Stage. There are some very positive steps in this Bill and it is important to acknowledge them. The movement with regard to jobseeker's allowance for the under 25s, while it does not go far enough in fully restoring their payments, is important. Steps have also been taken with the carer's allowance and I recognise also the increase in income disregard for lone-parents as a very, very small step towards what needs to be an urgent review of our work in this area.

The Joint Committee on Social Protection has heard testimony of the impacts of these cuts and I know these have already been discussed extensively on Committee Stage, and no doubt they will emerge here again. The figures basically still speak for themselves in that only 3,000 lone-parents - by the Department's own figures - are estimated to have moved on to the family income supplement and thereby potentially escaping poverty, though even that is debated.

We know that almost 40,000 people, predominantly women, were moved from the one-parent family payment. There has been a massive shift in policy and a massive wholesale movement of people from one payment to another payment and we have been hearing the impacts of that. I am glad to see, and I very much welcome, that the amendment which requires a report in this area has been accepted in the Dáil.

I echo the call by my colleague across the floor in asking the Minister to endeavour to bring in the report in six months rather than nine months because it is absolutely essential that we have the findings of this review. From those who have been monitoring the situation on the ground, we already have seen the impact. We must, however, have the report in time to ensure that it informs our next budget so it can bring about a rethink of our actions and policies with regard to lone-parents and place them at the centre of the next social welfare Bill, if we debate it next year.

We know there are poverty rates of 59% among this cohort. We know there are huge consequences for these people. This is the cohort who not only have a lower income but also have a lower wealth reserve and who are least equipped to bear the period of experimentation that has been thrust upon them. I encourage the Minister to ensure that the report reflects the voices of lone-parents and their advocate groups and that the report from Millar and Crosse - with the UNESCO project at National University of Ireland, Galway, and believed by many people to be an excellent report - is not lost. The Millar and Crosse report did not receive the debate it should have.

I note that the Minister was going to have a review of the jobseeker's transition scheme that is to commence in 2017. That would be interesting. Within that jobseeker's transition I urge the Minister to also consider what might be learned with regard to qualified adults. For example, if we were to look to voluntary, supported access to employment and activation opportunities not based on sanction or the criteria of full-time availability but that looks to opening up new opportunities in a supportive way to the many thousands of people, especially women, who are qualified adults.

One group which did not receive an increase are those people in direct provision. The Government's own report has recommended increases in this area. The €5 increase would have been a very small step. The Minister has said this increase is dependent upon the Department of Justice and Equality but I would appreciate it if the Minister would inform the House of how he might have engaged with that Department so we can add to the pressure on that Department to support the Minister in being able to redress, even as this Bill passes through the House, the fact that those people in direct provision in Ireland are still living on the same amount of money as was issued in 2004. That is a shame on our nation. It is something on which we could move forward. I ask the Minister to tell us how we can support him in working with other Departments to make that happen.

I will now turn to my key concern in this budget and in the Bill.We have been told there will be a €5 increase in payments and that this will help to take aggregate payments to pensioners back to 2009 levels. However, we must be honest because most women in Ireland in receipt of the contributory pension will not receive a €5 increase. I would like the Minister to clarify whether those on the reduced rate of contributory pension - the majority of women in receipt of that pension are on the reduced rate - will receive a €5 increase or, as I understand it, a pro rataincrease.

What is being done in terms of pensions and older people? Nothing is being done to address the pensions gender gap. We need to not only match the reduced-rate increases by the amounts that are being put forward but to address the fact that the band changes and losses suffered by those on the lower rate of contributory pension are far in excess of those in receipt of the full rate of contributory pension. An opportunity has been missed. We are discussing pensions but are doing nothing about the pensions gender gap. We are not even redressing the widening of the gap that has arisen due to changes in the contributory threshold during the years of recession.

Others have proposed amendments to the homemakers provision and credit. As the Minister knows, I have clear proposals on a care credit with which we need to push forward. The Minister has spoken about the importance of recognising the contributions that are being made. There is a fundamental point, namely, we need to recognise that care is a contribution. We need the system to recognise that and to move past the language of disregard towards something which will give clear recognition to the contribution of carers.

There have been changes to how the self-employed are treated and Members heard passionate debate across the House about the contribution they make in driving the economy. That economy and society would not be possible without carers. I would like the Minister to consider that issue.

I will propose practical amendments around voluntary contributions and how people might be facilitated in making more voluntary contributions, something which has also been a great obstacle to women.

I have one last point on pensions. The Minister has spoken about PRSI contributions. More ambitious changes to our pension system than are proposed in the Bill can be paid for by the significant subsidies that have been given to private pension tax relief. In the House this week I will raise with the Minister for Finance the large subsidies and waivers available in terms of capital gains tax that have been given to the private pension industry.

We are paying significant amounts into the private pension industry in this country. If that approach is moving ahead at the same time we are being told we cannot afford to take action and need a long-term review, we are flaunting and defying the basic principles of equal treatment under EU law and the commitments of the Government to equality and gender-proofing of our budget.

The Minister has moved on farm assist, but I ask him to comment on the European directive encouraging PRSI contributions for the spouses and partners of those on family farms. Does the Minister think that will make a difference in terms of increasing our PRSI contribution take?