Dan Neville (Limerick West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 128: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his views on research carried out by the Combat Poverty Agency on the working poor; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11930/05]

Dan Neville (Limerick West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 131: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his estimate of the number of families in the category of the working poor; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11929/05]

Michael Noonan (Limerick East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 133: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his plans to deal with a relatively new issue of the working poor; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11931/05]

Séamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 128, 131 and 133 together.

There are two main indicators for measuring poverty. The first measures the proportion at risk of poverty by virtue of the income they receive. This is the general indicator used by the European Union and it is based on an income threshold of 60% of median income. A new EU survey on income and living conditions, EU-SILC, carried out in 2003 showed that 22.7% of the total population were at risk of poverty. This indicator, however, does not take into account the length of time a person had been on low income and the other assets a household might have, such as ownership of their house etc.

It is for this reason that Ireland has also developed a consistent poverty indicator. This measures the degree to which people with incomes which are less than the at risk of poverty threshold of 60% of median income are also deprived of goods and services considered essential for a basic living standard in Ireland. A list of eight such basic goods and services are used which include, for example, having "to go without heating at some stage in the 12 months prior to the survey due to a lack of money" or "that there was a day in the past two weeks where the family did not have a substantial meal due to lack of money". They are based on surveys of what people in Ireland consider essential for a basic living standard.

The latest information for this indicator was also collected in the new EU survey 2003. This showed that 9.4% of persons were in consistent poverty, that is, with an income below the 60% median income threshold and experiencing deprivation under at least one indicator. I should say that there are acknowledged difficulties regarding the comparability of the results of the new EU survey with the results of earlier surveys, particularly in respect of this measure of consistent poverty. How to deal with these difficulties is something which I am currently having examined.

A total of 9.2% of those at work are at risk of poverty compared to 22.7% generally. In the case of consistent poverty, those at work comprise about one in 30, or 3.5%, compared to 9.4% generally. Being at work, therefore, reduces significantly the risks of poverty and deprivation. The major reduction in unemployment has been in part due to a series of policy initiatives designed to make work pay which include changes to the taxation system, the introduction of a minimum hourly wage, provision of employment training, assistance with job search and placement, and changes to the social welfare system.

The difficulties which family responsibilities can create in relation to employment and poverty levels is a particular concern for my Department. The earnings capacity of a single person or that of a couple, both of whom are working, which previously was sufficient to keep them from being at risk of poverty, may become insufficient to overcome the risk of poverty when they have children. This arises from the additional cost of providing for the care of children and from the effect child care responsibilities and costs have on parents' availability for work. The findings of the EU survey show that families with children who are most at risk of poverty are lone parent families and large families where it may be difficult for the second parent to work full-time.

The family income supplement, FIS, scheme is designed, in particular, to address this problem. The scheme provides cash support for employees — minimum 19 hours per week — 38 per fortnight — on low earnings with families. This preserves the incentive to remain in employment in circumstances where the employee might only be marginally better off than if he or she were claiming other social welfare payments. FIS is paid on a weekly basis over a period of 52 weeks, taking into account a family's earnings and the number of children under age 18 or aged 18 and 22 years and in full-time education.

Subject to a minimum weekly payment of €20, FIS is calculated at 60% of the difference between a person's net family income, that is, gross pay less tax, PRSI, health levies, superannuation and the income limit applicable to the family size. Most social welfare payments are included in the assessments, with some exceptions. Although FIS is not paid concurrently with unemployment payments, it can be paid with the one parent family payment, subject to the overall means assessment.

Budget 2005 increased the FIS earnings thresholds by €39 in respect of each family size. This increase was unprecedented since the introduction of the scheme in 1984 and added €23.40 to the weekly payments of most existing FIS recipients from January 2005. The cost of this measure is estimated at €15.53 million in 2005 and in a full year. Following the increased thresholds, it is estimated that 2,600 additional families became eligible for a FIS payment.

The ongoing development of the scheme has resulted in current levels of both applications and claims in payment being at an all time high. In 2004, there were 21,000 applications and over 15,000 claims in payment. The current average FIS payment is almost €94.00.

Consideration of the further development of the scheme, based on a study commissioned from NESC, is being co-ordinated by the senior officials group on social inclusion in the context of an examination of obstacles to employment. This examination is focusing particularly on the position of lone parents, and in relation also to the further development of child care. The work is being advanced through interdepartmental working groups, including a working group chaired by my Department which is dealing with income support.

Effective and adequate support for making work pay will continue to be a major priority for this Government. Research undertaken by the Combat Poverty Agency on the needs of the working poor is, therefore, most welcome and timely in this context, and the findings will be fully taken account as they come to hand.