Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 19: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position with regard to his discussions with the European Commission regarding the Government's implementation of the two year habitual residence requirement in regard to qualification for social welfare benefits; if changes to the requirement have been introduced or are planned; if a final response has been received from the Commission on this matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17376/06]

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

The requirement to be habitually resident in Ireland was introduced as a qualifying condition for certain social assistance schemes and child benefit with effect from 1st May 2004. It was introduced in the context of the Government's decision to open the Irish labour market to workers from the new EU Member States without the transitional limitations which were being imposed at that time by many of the other Member States.

The effect of the condition is that a person whose habitual residence is elsewhere is not paid certain social welfare payments on arrival in Ireland, regardless of citizenship, nationality, immigration status or any other factor. The EU Commission wrote to the Government on 22 December 2004 raising a number of issues concerning its compliance with EU law in relation to workers and their families. Officials from my Department and the Attorney-General's Office met with Commission officials on 15 May 2005 to discuss the issues raised.

The formal process of the Commission's examination of the matter was completed on 4 April 2006 and the Commission is satisfied that Ireland complies with the European Court of Justice case law in applying the habitual residence condition.

Furthermore, in the decision making process, full consideration is given to the requirements of EU legislation regarding Free Movement of Workers within the European Economic Area. Rules which apply to migrant workers, that is, persons who have taken up employment in Ireland following their arrival here, are strictly observed. In November 2005, a clarification was issued to Community Welfare Officers explaining that supplementary welfare allowance is considered under EU legislation to be a social advantage and must therefore be subject to the principles of equal treatment to all EU workers regardless of nationality. Any EU worker who suffers loss of income because he or she has lost employment through no fault of their own, or becomes unable to work through illness, is entitled to claim supplementary welfare allowance.

The operation of the habitual residence condition has been and continues to be monitored constantly by my Department, and a full review of its operation is currently being finalised. If I consider that it is necessary to make changes as a result of this review, I will bring forward proposals to Government.

Bernard Allen (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 20: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his views on the assertion by the NESC (details supplied) that significant minorities in the population here are currently experiencing one or multiple forms of social disadvantage, and present strategies and policies are not proving adequate in helping them; the different forms of social disadvantage that these people face; the figures for same; the steps he is taking to counteract this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17668/06]

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

The NESC report on the Developmental Welfare State, referred to by the Deputy, constitutes an important contribution to the development of policy, particularly in relation to combating poverty and social exclusion. The report has also significantly informed the NESC's latest strategy report, People, Productivity and Purpose, which is a key input to the current social partnership negotiations.

The NESC report recognises that the causes of poverty and social exclusion are multi-faceted and can result in those affected experiencing multiple forms of disadvantage. These can include unemployment; lack of adequate education and training; incapacity or reduced capacity for work; age; lone parenthood or having a large family, which can make it difficult to reconcile employment and caring responsibilities; sexual orientation; and, being an immigrant, member of an ethnic minority or Traveller.

Since 1997 with the first National Action Plan against poverty (NAPS), the Government has been adopting a strategic approach to combating poverty and social exclusion, which involves an integrated, multi-policy response at national, regional and local levels. This process has now been aligned with that being coordinated by the EU, following the pledge by the European Council at Lisbon in 2000 for Member States "to make a decisive impact on poverty" by 2010. The third plan under the EU process is currently being drawn up and a summary streamlined version is due to be submitted to the EU Commission by September.

Ireland's major achievement in the period since 1997 has been the reduction in unemployment to a rate that is now the lowest in the EU. This has been combined with a major increase in employment participation, particularly in the case of women, which has increased from 40% in 1994 to 56% in 2004. The major increases in economic and employment growth has made possible significant improvements in income support and other services.

My Department plays a key role in this whole process. It is the largest spending Government Department with almost one in every four euro spent by the State being on social welfare. Spending on social welfare has risen from 5.7 billion euro to 13.6 billion euro between 1997 and 2006. Each week welfare payments go out to over 976,000 people benefiting some 1.5 million persons. Over the period 2001 to 2006 the lowest social welfare rates have increased by 55.5% while the Consumer Price Index has increased by just over 16.4%. In Budget 2006, the average increase in payments was 10.5%, which is almost four times the projected rate of inflation for 2006.

In 1997, for example, some 7.8 per cent or 283,000 persons were in consistent poverty, as measured by the Living in Ireland Survey (LIS). In 2001 the figure had reduced to 4.1 per cent, or 149,000 persons, a reduction of some 134,000 people, based on 1996 census figures. As a result of new features in the EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) which replaced the LIS, there was an increase in the percentage classified as in consistent poverty, but the results from the latest EU — SILC show that the downward trend has continued, with a significant reduction of 2 per cent in consistent poverty from 8.8 per cent in 2003 to 6.8 per cent in 2004. Using 2002 Census figures, this would equate to a reduction of some 78,000 people. Therefore, the results show that the greatly increased resources being devoted to social welfare and other social services are having a significant impact on poverty.

However, the minorities referred to by the NESC, while experiencing significant improvements in their standards of living, especially in recent years, have not benefited from our economic success to the same extent as the majority. This is mainly because they were unable to take up employment or employment that provided an adequate income. This occurred during a time of unprecedented employment growth and when we have had to rely on immigration to fill many jobs here.

The recent EU SILC survey shows, for example, that lone parent households had the highest consistent poverty rate in 2004 at 31.1%, compared to the national rate of 6.8%. Ill or disabled persons and unemployed persons also experienced higher than average rates of 21.7% and 19.2% respectively. There was a higher incidence of consistent poverty in the Border, Midland and Western region (8.6%) than in the Southern and Eastern region (6.2%), and in urban areas (7.6%) than in rural areas (5.5%).

In light of this, a major strategic priority in the coming years is to remove barriers to employment that exist for these minorities. It will also require greater coordination of policies and their implementation at local and regional levels as well as at national level to achieve better outcomes, not just in terms of employment, but also in relation to income support, access to services and living standards generally. For example, households with children require a combination of improved child care, education, more family friendly employment and other services as well as income support. Other minorities require different combinations of policies with coordinated implementation.

The overall thrust of the next National Action Plan on inclusion, therefore, will be to mainstream social inclusion policies. This will involve all relevant policy areas being progressively developed and adapted to ensure that, as far as practicable, the same outcomes will be achieved in each policy area for the minorities referred to by NESC, as for the majority. The will be accompanied by the progressive development of greater coordination of policy and of its implementation at all levels of Government. I am confident that through this approach the Developmental Welfare State recommended in the NESC report will be achieved and that it will more effectively meet the needs of minorities in the years ahead.