Social Welfare Bill Update

Published: Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Below are extracts from the second stage speeches on the Bill made by Aengus and his party colleague Martin Ferris. Aengus focused on youth unemployment while Martin focused on the one parent payment scheme. alternatively you can view Aengus' speech

Aengus also tabled an amendment (see below) which if adopted would have forced the more odious provisions of the Bill to be repealed if a range of concrete activation supports and iniatives were not put into place by government. Unfortunately his amendment was not accepted by government.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh 16th June 2010:

"This Bill puts the cart before the horse. It threatens welfare cuts at a time when sufficient education, training, child care and job opportunities simply do not exist, either for the 361,000 claimants affected by this Bill, or for the almost half a million on the dole as a whole. This Bill is mean spirited, nasty and counterproductive. Nobody can have a problem in principle with activation policies moving people from social welfare to paid employment. The vast majority of those dependent on social welfare would prefer to be in paid employment, paying their way in society and having an income that could contribute to enhancing their lives and their children's lives. Regrettably, the Minister's approach in this Bill is not activation, but compulsion. It is penal. It is all stick and no carrot, because there are no jobs, there are too few educational courses and fewer still training opportunities. Of course, there is always an Bád Bán, the Government's safety valve for decades, namely, emigration. The Minister is confirming the message of the Minister for Finance in last year's budget when he cut young adults' jobseeker's allowance. He basically said to them, "Young people of Ireland, you know where the boat is. Get lost."
Is the Minister telling us that all these courses, training opportunities and jobs will be in place by the time this Bill is passed? There is not a hope in hell that half a million job opportunities, courses or training places will be created by July when he intends to have this Bill rammed through the Dáil.
What is the definition of a 'suitable' job offer? It is not defined in this Bill and it is another discretionary power for social welfare inspectors. What constitutes an education and training offer? These are important questions, as they could be the difference between life and death, the difference between being on the bread line and under it. Living in poverty is a daunting prospect and a daunting reality already for many in Irish society today, yet the Minister is looking to condemn more to that reality with this Bill.
Getting people back to work will not happen as a result of unfair cuts to the jobseeker's allowance. It will happen when there is meaningful and appropriate training, education or work placements for everyone within three months of becoming unemployed. It will happen with the creation of jobs. There is a gaping hole where appropriate education and training opportunities should be. We are now over two years into an unprecedented economic crisis and this Government cannot even come up with a proper jobs creation strategy. Such ineptness deserves to be punished, and hopefully it will be. Roll on the election."
Martin Ferris 17th June 2010:
"The Bill makes cuts to the lone parent payment scheme. It seems the Government now wants to punish families who have growing teenagers. The Minister has claimed that the changes are aimed at addressing the high number of lone parent households in poverty. I would welcome steps to address this level of poverty, but sadly this Bill is not an anti-poverty measure. It is the opposite. It is an unscrupulous, penny pinching measure, primarily directed against the less well off in our society.
This Bill is not about moving people off welfare and into paid employment because the job, education and training opportunities simply do not and will not exist on the basis of current Government policy. It is about moving lone parents from one welfare payment and onto another less flexible, less supportive and unsuitable payment. This will also have severe and counterproductive consequences for lone parent claimants in low paid part-time employment. There is no denial that the lone parent payment scheme is in major need of reform. The Government's own 2006 report, Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents, contained a range of recommendations including a recommendation that the age of qualifying children be lowered. However, that report clearly stated that any such move must be accompanied by ensuring that child care supports are available. Even the Minister has admitted that the availability of after school and summer supervision support is patchy at best. The 2006 report also stated that the selection of a particular cut-off age is a matter for decision by Government following a consultation process.
Where was the consultation process? Why pick 13 years as the cut off age? Research conducted by the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice into the cost of a minimum essential standard of living clearly demonstrates that households with adolescents spend more on food, social inclusion and education than households with younger children. What then is the logic behind this? Does the Government expect all single parents to rush into marriage before their children reach the age of 13? Perhaps it envisages a situation where all 13 year olds will, in a few years time, be able to get full-time jobs working for its gombeen friends overcharging people for coffee and breakfast rolls, if and when the economy ever recovers.
The Minister might think he will make savings with these penny pinching, but he should not kid himself; over the longer term if parents are forced to cut spending on these essentials, he is storing up far more costly problems for society in the future. However, that thinking seems to be completely absent on the Government side, where the whole focus appears to be on how to take more from those who have the least. That is what underlies the proposals to cut social welfare, and also what lies behind the earlier signalled intent of the Government to allow employers to opt out of agreed minimum wage rates."

The Amendment proposed by Aengus:
2. In page 6, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following:
"2. -- (1) Each of the following sections, namely sections 7, 18, 19, 20 and 25
shall stand repealed on December 31st 2010 unless a resolution is passed prior to that date, and each year thereafter, with debate by both Houses of the Oireachtas resolving that the necessary activation supports and services and job opportunities including those referred to in subsection (3) exist in sufficient number to allow for the safe operation of the sections.

(2) Before a resolution under this section in relation to a section specified in
subsection (1) is passed by either House of the Oireachtas, the Minister for Social Protection shall arrange for an audit to be conducted into the adequacy and sufficiency of existing activation supports and services and job opportunities and shall cause a copy of a detailed report on the outcome of the audit to be laid before that House, before the date of the moving of the resolution in that House.

(3) The audit conducted under subsection (2) shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering, whether the following have been put in place-

(a) a youth jobs fund to create 20,000 new jobs for persons under 25,
(b) an individual plan for the long term prospects of every person under 25 who is on the live register,
(c) 2,000 places on a "One More Language Scheme" to give the young unemployed a chance to learn an extra foreign language,
(d) 5000 free ECDL advanced places,
(e) 10,000 new CE places,
(f) 1,000 places on conversion courses at third level to help graduates convert their skills to potential growth sectors,
(g) a review evaluating the usefulness of FÁS training courses resulting in the elimination of those found to be of little value,
(h) measures to treble the number of under 25's who are self employed including a national entrepreneurship programme, access to credit and greater support for high potential start ups,
(i) a publicly owned green tech firm for Ireland and a major drive to attract FDI in renewable energy,
(j) measures to make Ireland a digital media leader through support for skills,
infrastructure and entrepreneurship,
(k) "National Development Scheme" to employ people directly on public works projects employing 2,000 workers, and
(l) universally accessible child care and after school supervision options.".
-- Aengus Ó Snodaigh.