David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 111: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the progress that has been made in the development of a second tier payment for children in low income families and in the introduction of a single payment for all parents, either living alone or with a partner, with children on a low income as contained in Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39567/08]

Ciarán Lynch (Cork South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 153: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the outcome of her deliberations in respect of the proposed introduction of a new family payment to support children in low income families. [39559/08]

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 111 and 153 together.

The Government discussion paper, "Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents," put forward proposals to tackle obstacles to employment for lone parents and other low income families. These included proposals for the expanded availability and range of education and training opportunities for lone parents; the extension of the National Employment Action Plan to focus on lone parents; focused provision of childcare; improved information services for lone parents and the introduction of a new social assistance payment for low income families with young children.

Under the proposals the lone parenthood category of payment would no longer exist. Instead, a new payment would be made to all parents (living alone or with a partner), with young children, on low income. This new payment is currently being developed in the Department, taking into account the various issues raised in the consultation process.

Any proposed new payment scheme can only be introduced when the necessary co-ordinated supports and services are put in place on the ground by other relevant Departments and Agencies. This is why the Senior Officials Group on Social Inclusion has been tasked with bringing forward a plan on the key issues of childcare, education, training and activation measures.

The non-income recommendations contained in the discussion paper were examined in two areas: Coolock and Kilkenny. These studies, which took place between November 2007 and February 2008, were carried out to facilitate the development of the policy and operational details of the new scheme. The process involved both lone parents and qualified adults. It was carried out on a voluntary basis and the take-up was low.

The experience has however highlighted how both lone parents and qualified adults are not a homogenous group, are of different ages, have experienced different routes into their current situation and have different needs. Educational levels of those who participated were generally low, there was little or no engagement with FÁS, some participants intended to return to full or part-time work when their child was a few months old; others, however, had been out of the work force for a considerable period of time. Earnings from previous employment were generally low. For almost all of those intending to return to work affordable childcare was a critical issue.

The experience of this engagement process is feeding into the development of our approach to working with lone parents and qualified adults to support them into education, training and employment.

The Programme for Government 2007 — 2012 proposes that Qualified Child Increases (QCI) and Family Income Supplements (FIS) would be amalgamated in order to develop a second tier of income support targeted at the poorest families. Under the terms of an earlier Social Partnership Agreement, the National Economic and Social Council was asked to examine the feasibility of merging these payments with a view to creating a single second tier child income support. Dr. John Sweeney of NESC examined the issues and developed proposals for a second tier child income support scheme but NESC did not reach agreement on the matter. Dr Sweeney's proposal was published as a research paper towards the end of 2007. However, this proposal raised a number of significant issues which would require a further detailed examination by the Department and by other agencies.

The Economic and Social Research Institute has also undertaken recent research in this area and concluded, inter alia, that full take-up of the Family Income Supplement scheme would reduce child income poverty by 3%. Arising from this research, the Department undertook to determine the current level of take up of FIS among qualifying families and to ascertain the reasons underlying the failure to avail of this payment, where applicable; and carry out an analysis of the existing FIS customer base. This research is now nearing completion.

In considering the future direction of child income support policy, it is important to keep in mind the multiple objectives behind the provision of such support and the research undertaken by Dr. Sweeney, the ESRI and the Department will inform future policy developments in this area.