Gerard Craughwell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister for Social Protection to the House. Two years ago when I brought up the issue of class K PRSI, I was told at the time I was being rather brave. I am delighted everyone has now come on side and seen the inequality that such a drastic measure involved. It was in fact a tax on public service. The Minister has gone some of the way in resolving this issue for our city and county councillors. However, he has not gone all the way. To think we are charging PRSI to members of the Judiciary and Oireachtas Members at 4% with nothing for it. Last Sunday week, I heard the Minister say on radio that he did not believe in anyone making a payment for social insurance when they could never draw down on it. Will the Minister move Oireachtas Members and members of the Judiciary to a public service tax at 4%? I would be happy to pay it as a tax. I am not at all happy to pay it as a PRSI payment. The Minister then penalised Oireachtas Members and members of the Judiciary who want to maintain their class A record by making them pay a voluntary contribution. For me this year, it will be €660. It is a penal payment because I have paid my full 4% like everyone else. That is another day's work, however.

On the issue of moving city and county councillors to class K to class A, my colleague, Senator Boyhan, brought up the issue of retrospective payments. There are a number of councillors who are over 66 years of age who have been paying the class K all along. Some of them are in their early 70s and others up to their 80s. For the small number involved, surely we can make the entitlements retrospective and give them a contributory old age pension pro ratato whatever contributions they had paid. I am also conscious of county councillors in particular who lose their seats after a period and are below retirement age. We need to ensure they have full entitlement to jobseeker's benefit, illness benefit, etc.

I compliment the Minister for taking steps with regard to the back to education allowance. It does not go far enough, however. This is not the Minister's problem but the Government's. I used to teach a course at the Dún Laoghaire senior college, which had excellent employment prospects at the end of it. The cost of entering the course was €1,000. How is someone on €193 a week going to come up with that?The VTOS programme was excellent when it was running but we now have a back-to-education initiative and allowance and VTOS. There is a mix of all. However, there is a need where somebody is taking on a new course of action. Perhaps the person worked in manual labour and decides to move into technology. If that person wants to take a course in the area of technology, he or she is looking at approximately €1,000. I was a second-chance learner myself way back in 1994 and it was much easier at that stage to get in because the costs were not so high. Today, I have seen students who sign up for a course, are there for a month or two before finding it is unaffordable and are then gone. That is a waste of time for the student and the college and it is a drain on resources. We could do without that. I say "Well done" to the Minister on taking some steps but he might look at extending the programme fully to invalidity and disability allowances and benefits. Someone who was working in manual work and had a serious injury might be able to go on to do something of a more administrative nature. It would be useful if such persons could avail of whatever training is available.

The Minister is to be congratulated on the school breakfast scheme, but let us be aware of something here. I have a relation who works in a very well-heeled school on the west side of Dublin. The teachers in the school voluntarily buy breakfast for the kids because it is not a DEIS designated area. It needs a little bit more than sort of a social-class approach. My colleague spoke about training supports and I agree with him completely. It is no use simply putting people into CE schemes; one has to give them something that gives them employment prospects at the other end and allows them to move from the career trajectory they were on to a new trajectory which gives them enhanced possibilities.

I cannot let today go without saying "A fiver". I know the Minister did not have a great deal to give out, but a fiver represents a half a packet of fags a week. Really and truly, we would have been better off to give lots of fivers to one group and a lot fewer to some other groups. From that point of view-----