Ceisteanna ar Sonraíodh Uain Dóibh - Priority Questions
81. Deputy Louise O'Reilly asked the Minister for Social Protection if he is aware of concerns raised about the nutritional value of school meals; if he has considered utilising non-profit groups like an organisation (details supplied) for this service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21757/25]
View answerMy question is fairly straightforward. I am aware the Minister is doing a review. I have corresponded with him with regard to taking the profit motive out of school meal provision to the greatest extent possible. Has the Minister examined that or is he open to further discussion or consideration of it? My question cites the meals on wheels service but there are obviously others that would fulfil similar criteria.
I thank the Deputy for her question and correspondence on this issue. On the nutritional value of school meals, I am very aware of the concerns that have been expressed. It is important to note that each week, parents are provided with a menu of food options and it is the parents who select the food to be served to their children in that week. It is important, in my view, that parents continue to have this role. Second, the menu of food options presented to the parents is required to comply with standards set by the Department. These standards, the nutritional standards for school meals, were developed by a technical nutrition subgroup comprised of dieticians from the Irish Nutrition and Dietetic Institute, the HSE, Safefood, and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland. These standards are available to all schools and suppliers and are publicly available on gov.ie.
My Department provides the funding for the meals directly to the school. All schools are responsible for choosing their school meals supplier in a fair and transparent manner in accordance with public procurement rules. These rules clearly define the successful tenderer's responsibilities and obligations, including in particular adherence to the nutritional standards. My Department does not select the suppliers. In that context, if a school were to contract meals on wheels as its supplier, then that would be permitted, subject to procurement, nutrition and the other applicable requirements being met.
The Department conducts site visits and inspections in schools to identify if, among other things, the menu options are compliant with the specified standards. I have directed that a review of the scheme’s nutritional standards be undertaken. This will be conducted by a dietician who will be supervised by the Department of Health in co-ordination with the interdepartmental group on school meals. I have asked for a report on those standards be submitted by the end of the year. In the meantime, food that is high in saturated fat, sugar and salt will be removed from school menus by September 2025.
I thank the Minister for his response. The reason I raised this issue is that I have a concern about the nutritional quality. Parents cannot control the quality of the food, although they can select from the menu of options. Concerns have been raised about the traceability of food and labelling such as "pasta sauce". At the end of the day, the companies that are involved in this have a loyalty to their profits and business. I am talking to the Minister as he is wearing both of his hats. He looks after part of the school meals programme but also has responsibility for community employment, Tús, the rural social scheme and other schemes. That would be very beneficial. Will he consider not-for-profit provision? We saw what happened in England with turkey twizzlers and all that kind of stuff. We do not want to go down that road. My fear is we are part way down it already and we need to pull it back. The best way to do that is to remove the profit motive from that programme.
I would certainly be happy to consider that. There would be logistics issues. Some schools feed hundreds of students every day with a range of meal options. It could work, from a nutritional point of view as well, in that locally supplied food is generally healthier in this context. It is something we might even ask the nutrition review to consider as well. Anything we can do to help in the not-for-profit sector in this space, which is doing really amazing work as it is, I would be happy to do.
On Tuesday this week, I attended a presentation on the meals on wheels network. There was a representative from the Minister's office there as well. The network is absolutely fantastic. Day in and day out, the volunteers do a really good job. It is not just a food delivery service but they are really conscious about the quality of the food. They have a more hands-on approach. They are local. They do not have a corporate office so they might struggle to put in a very swanky and slick tender into a tender process. They do not have that kind of backup or administrative support. I welcome the fact that the Minister will consider getting the nutritional review to have a look at that. To the greatest extent possible, if we can remove the profit motive from the school meals programme, there will be benefits for the children, social benefits that come out of that, but also local benefits. Taxpayers' money could not be spent more wisely than putting it into the meals on wheels network.
Next week I will attend the celebration of 50 years of Balbriggan meals on wheels. It provides an absolutely exemplary service. I am really looking forward to it. The recipients of the service have good words to say about it when I talk to them. It is about the nutritional value as well as the service of calling to people's doors.
I join the Deputy in wishing a happy 50th to Balbriggan meals on wheels; it is welcome to the club. I agree with the Deputy. We will certainly have a look at it. The first thing to do is review the nutritional standards. We will complete the roll-out of the school meals programme into every remaining primary school in September. That is a good time to stand back, take stock and see how we can improve it. This is a very substantial investment on the part of the Department.
Many of the suppliers are not complete corporate monoliths; they are small local companies as well doing local things. I want to give credit to the local companies in this. We will have a chance to take stock and the issues the Deputy raised are definitely worth reflecting on.
82. Deputy Liam Quaide asked the Minister for Social Protection if he will report on the social welfare supports available to young people leaving State care, who may be at risk of experiencing homelessness; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21565/25]
View answerAccording to the Simon Community, the number of people aged 18 to 24 experiencing homelessness is approaching 1,800. This represents an 8% increase over the past year. Some of the most vulnerable and those most at risk of experiencing homelessness are young people leaving State care. This cohort of young people often leave care without a support network. They have also experienced trauma in their lives and we know homelessness is a very traumatic experience. Ensuring that the State is there to support them is vital. Will the Minister outline the financial supports available to these young people, in particular to prevent them from becoming homeless in the first instance?
The staff in my Department are acutely aware of the challenges faced by young people who leave care and are available to them to assist with the provision of social protection income and employment supports. The Department's staff engage with a range of stakeholders and advocacy groups working with vulnerable people. For instance in Dublin, staff engage with the Dublin Regional Homeless Executive and in the local network of children and young people's services committees as part of the process of co-ordinating the delivery of supports to vulnerable people, including the group the Deputy has referred to, those leaving care. There is legislative provision that age-related reduced jobseeker’s allowance rates do not apply to young jobseekers who were in the care of Tusla for any period during the 12 months immediately before their 18th birthday. The full standard rate of personal jobseeker’s allowance of €244 per week is payable in these circumstances.
With regard to the specific issue mentioned by the Deputy, we operate a person-focused national protocol in conjunction with other agencies to help those who are homeless. Importantly, a person does not need a permanent address to apply for a social protection payment or service or to receive a social welfare payment. Where necessary, short-term rent supplement can be paid by my Department. This scheme provides financial support to people living in private rented accommodation whose means cannot meet their accommodation costs and where accommodation is not available to them from any other source. That could include somebody leaving care on their 18th birthday. Also, additional needs payments are available to assist those who have essential expenses such as rent deposits, rent in advance and household bills that they cannot pay from their weekly income. This full range of supports is available to young people leaving care. We work in conjunction not just with the statutory authorities but with advocacy groups as well to address this. I am more than open to suggestions as to how we tighten this up.
I am aware from consultation with the Simon Community that young people leaving the care system are often not aware of the supports the Minister has outlined which are available to them. I ask the Minister to ensure information about housing and homelessness services, and social protection supports are made available in schools, local communities and youth services.
Another issue I would like to raise is the collection of data. Currently, Tusla does not provide any distinction in its data about where young people find themselves after leaving State care following their 18th birthday. We just have one crude figure to cover young people who end up in a variety of settings such as in hospital, prison, homeless services and mental health or disability services. If we are to establish how best to help young people when they leave care, it is essential that we know precisely where they end up. I would be grateful if the Minister could respond on this, in particular the gathering of information and bringing it together to ensure that these young people who are so vulnerable are not falling through the cracks.
Tusla has a duty under section 45 of the Child Care Act 1991 to make a decision whether each person leaving care has a need for assistance and then to provide services in accordance with the legislation, subject to the resources. On reaching the age of 18, a young person is deemed to have left State care. Young people who have a care history with Tusla are entitled to an aftercare service based on their eligibility and assessed needs. The assessment considers a number of factors, including the young person's educational and accommodation needs. If deemed necessary, Tusla will provide financial support to eligible care leavers who are engaged in a qualifying educational course or training programme. That aftercare allowance amounts to €300 per week. It is dependent on the eligible young adult attending an accredited education course, a third level course or a training programme as outlined in their own aftercare plan. The allowance is provided to cover a young adult's day-to-day costs, including accommodation, as they progress in their chosen course or training programme. I will come back in the next round on the question relating to information.
Those are the main issues we wanted to raise today. I thank the Minister.
83. Deputy Louise O'Reilly asked the Minister for Social Protection if he is aware that there is a disparity in the assessment of child maintenance across different forms of supports; if he will give consideration to standardising this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21758/25]
View answerWhile I am aware the Department does not use child maintenance as a criterion by which to assess, it is alone in that regard. It is incredibly hit and miss across local authorities. Some count it whereas others do not. Does the Minister agree that child maintenance is for children and should not be considered as part of means tests for essential supports for adults and families? I hope the Department takes the lead on this because there is no standardisation, not even across local authorities. Part of the reason for that is each Department is making up its own rules, as are the local authorities. Standardisation is needed. I am hoping the Minister will work with me to develop and ensure that is achieved.
I thank the Deputy for her question and for raising this issue. As she will be aware, the Social Welfare and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2024 provided for changes to the social welfare means test to exclude child maintenance payments from assessment in all means-tested payments that my Department provides. This was one of the recommendations of the report of the child maintenance review group into the social welfare system. This change to the social welfare means test came into legal effect from June 2024. As a result of this change, the full amount of child maintenance a person receives is no longer being assessed in the means test for any social welfare payment. This change means that people on reduced rates of payment may have seen their payment increase and those who may not have qualified at all up to then may now be able to access a payment.
Following the introduction of this change, my Department reviewed approximately 65,000 claims for one-parent family payment and jobseeker's transitional payment in payment. As a result, child maintenance payments were removed from the means assessments of approximately 15,800 people, something we can all agree is a positive measure.
The means test or income assessments for other State services, such as the medical card, are a matter for the relevant Minister with responsibility for those payments or services. On foot of our discussions arising from the Deputy’s question, I will highlight what has been achieved in my Department with colleagues in relevant Ministries.
There are 190,000 children in Ireland today classified as at risk of poverty. Child maintenance is essential. I find it incongruous that although child maintenance is absolutely essential, it is included in assessments for some necessary supports.
I welcome the Minister’s words. I hope he will work with me across party lines on this matter. No one will disagree with the idea that child maintenance should not be included when calculating assessments for supports because those supports are often for families, whereas child maintenance is for the child. Given those stark statistics and the fact that organisations such as Social Justice Ireland tell us that all once-off payments, which the Minister said will be discontinued, do is mask an increasing trend of child poverty, that needs to be tackled. The Minister can send a message to families on low incomes and people dependent on supports and payments by saying what is recognised by the Department of Social Protection must be recognised by all other Departments.
It is incredibly confusing for people when means tests are assessed in different ways for different schemes and services. This is the case even within my Department. There are often valid reasons for this, however. Schemes are being developed to cater for people in different circumstances and who are experiencing different and difficult contingencies. That said, the social protection system does not operate in a vacuum. The means-testing aspects of our social welfare system coexist with means tests in operation across other domains such as health services, education, housing and preschool childcare. It is a matter for each Minister. Based on our experience since last year, however, I intend to highlight and bring to their attention that experience. The report to which I referred did not examine areas outside the Department of Social Protection. That may be something for the incoming social protection committee to reflect on as it begins its work programme.
We will consider this as part of the work programme if I have anything to do with it. The Minister rightly highlighted that it is confusing when different methods of assessment are used. While he said there are sometimes valid reasons for this, there are actually no valid reasons for including child maintenance in assessments. The louder we say that and the more people we say that to, the more likely it is that this will be standardised across the board. The aspect that is confusing for people is they cannot understand why child maintenance is included for one payment but disregarded for another. It should be disregarded for all of them. It is not a payment to the family; it is a payment to the child. We need to be clear in that regard. I welcome the Minister’s words and I hope this is something on which we can work together. I will most definitely have it on the agenda for the work programme for the incoming social protection committee.
84. Deputy Mark Wall asked the Minister for Social Protection if he will update the Dáil on the work his Department has carried out in designing a cost of disability payment, as outlined in the programme for Government; the expected date of introduction of such a payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21989/25]
View answerWill the Minister update the House on the work his Department has carried out to date on designing a cost of disability payment, as outlined in the programme for Government, the expected date of such a payment and the amount involved?
The Government recognises the additional costs associated with having a disability and is committed to improving outcomes for disabled people. In the programme for Government, we are committed to introducing a permanent annual cost of disability support payment. These commitments will build on progress made in recent years where we have taken steps to recognise the additional costs associated with having a disability. As part of last year's budget, significant supports for people with disabilities were introduced, including: an October 2024 cost-of-living bonus for people in receipt of a long-term weekly social welfare payment; a €400 cost-of-living lump sum payment for people in receipt of disability allowance, invalidity pension or blind pension in November 2024; a €200 cost-of-living lump sum payment to people who are getting a living alone allowance in November 2024; and a €12 increase in the maximum personal rate of weekly disability payments from January 2025.
The Indecon report on the cost of disability, commissioned and funded by my Department, found that the extra costs of disability are due to factors including higher costs of healthcare, transport, education and other services that arise because of a higher level of dependence on these services by people with disabilities. The report noted that addressing these costs was not simply a matter of a higher welfare payment but would need to incorporate improvements in services. This report recommended that any additional public expenditure should be targeted on areas where high potential costs are creating hardship, rather than spreading resources thinly.
An Taoiseach is chairing a Cabinet committee on disability with a view to driving and monitoring progress on implementing all programme for Government commitments in this area. As part of this work, my Department is examining the best way of delivering an annual cost-of-disability payment within the overall budgetary context. The Deputy can be assured this is a matter I intend to progress during my term in the Department.
As part of the work of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Autism, we had a number of presentations on the cost of disability to families. One of the most recent reports I have seen shows there is an additional €30,000 per annum cost for a family with a disability or a loved one with a disability. That is obviously substantial and causes hardship. A lot of that hardship is ongoing. The Minister mentioned temporary payments in the context of how they mask what is really going on behind the doors of those families who are scraping to get by to pay for their loved ones, heating and everything else they must pay. Can the Minister provide a timeframe? While he said he would commit to this throughout the lifetime of this Government, can we get some more dates as to when we can actually see a cost of that?
The services he mentioned are very important for families. If they do not get the additional payments, which we are being told will not come in the next budget, we are going to see a lot of families scraping by. They will be in a lot of trouble come the winter months in particular with the cost of disability as it stands at the moment.
I do not have a specific timeline yet but we are working on it. There are a number of different reports on the cost of disability, which have widely varying figures. One of the first things I am trying to do is address and come up with a figure that actually reflects the reality of it. When we have a figure we can work on, we will look at a timeline.
From next week, applications for domiciliary care allowance can be made online, which is a small but important change that gives people the chance to avail of that option. I am absolutely focused on this space in order that we can do it in a way that reflects not just the cost but also the pressures that people with a disability and their families are under at this time and in a way that treats them with respect and dignity. It is something we will examine, working through the Cabinet committee on disability, which meets monthly, to come up with a timeline on it.
I thank the Minister. Reference has been made to the work programme for the social protection committee. I am sure, along with others in the House, that this is something that we would love to have included in the work programme. It is very important for many people when they are looking at an additional €30,000 that they have to scrape for to find. This is a substantial amount. This is an average that has been outlined in one of the most recent reports that I have seen. I look forward to engaging with the Minister at the social protection committee on this topic. It is important that it forms an early part of our discussions on the work programme. Too many people are suffering from a lack of supports, particularly now, when we have heard the kite flying from Ministers that there will be no more temporary payments come the budget next year. There are a lot of worried families. We can do some good work on the social protection committee by trying to come up with some solutions for those families.
I will work closely with the committee. It has always been a very collegial committee and has the interests of those with disabilities at heart. I am determined to work with the committee to come up with solutions and reforms. This applies not just to social protection but across services as well. We have a lot of work under way in this space and I hope that by the time we come to the end of our term in government that there will be a lot of positive change in this space.
85. Deputy Roderic O'Gorman asked the Minister for Social Protection for an update on the commitment in the programme for Government to increase the income disregards for carer’s allowance in each budget, with a view to phasing out the means test during the lifetime of the Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22000/25]
View answerDuring the general election campaign, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael promised to abolish the means test for the carer's allowance. The programme for Government contains a commitment to phasing out the means test during the lifetime of the Government. Will the Minister tell us in which budget the means test will be abolished?
I had this question down on behalf of Deputy O'Gorman but I thank Deputy Murphy for the question. The carer's allowance is the main scheme by which my Department provides income support to carers. There are currently 99,256 people in receipt of carer's allowance. Expenditure in 2025 is estimated at more than €1.24 billion. In common with other social welfare payments, the primary objective of the carer's allowance payment is to provide an income support to people experiencing a contingency that significantly limits their ability to earn an income through employment.
Carer's allowance is means tested under current social welfare legislation. Within the social welfare system, means tests are used as a means of targeting income transfers to those most in need, in a progressive and equitable manner. However, it is also important that income limits used in means tests are calibrated to reflect the ability of recipients to earn income from other sources and, in so doing, reduce their dependence on a welfare payment. In this respect, the income disregards for carers are already the most generous in the social welfare system and are being further improved. This July, the weekly income disregard will increase from €450 to €625 for a single person, and from €900 to €1,250 for carers with a spouse or partner. This means that a carer in a two-adult household with an income of approximately €69,000 will still retain their full carer's payment and even with an income of €97,000 will retain a partial payment. As the Deputy said, the programme for Government commits to continue this process and to significantly increase the income disregards for carer's allowance in each budget, during the lifetime of the Government, with an aim to ultimately phase out the means test during the lifetime of the Government.
I will work with my colleague the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to give effect to this commitment over a number of budgets. Other supports for carers are also provided by the Department that are not based on a means assessment. These include the carer’s support grant, carer’s benefit and the domiciliary care allowance.
It was interesting that the Minister used slightly different language in his answer from what is contained in the written replies to parliamentary questions. In written replies the Minister states that the programme for Government has set out a timeline that commits to significantly further increasing the income disregards. He left out, quite understandably, the point about having a timeline because, presumably, he knows that the programme for Government does not contain such a timeline. All it sets out is a general commitment to a view to phasing out the means test. I presume the Minister is not in a position to give me a timeline. While the increase in the income disregard is welcome, it is not sufficient. A means test is not something that can be gradually abolished. Either we have a means test and all of the pressure that puts on people or we do not. It is not only about the income; it is also about the fact of the means test being a demeaning process that people go through. They have to fill out a large form, along with a medical report to justify the work they are doing, which is saving the State approximately €20 billion a year.
I thank the Deputy. I meant to clarify in reply to Deputy O'Reilly earlier that we are conducting a review of the means test process across all schemes in the Department. Means tests are important but they are how the process is implemented. I look forward to hearing people's views on that. We will engage with the Minister for public expenditure on this issue. He is aware of the commitment in the programme for Government. If we look at the changes that have been made in recent years to the income disregard, they show a direction of travel that we intend to continue. The commitment is there in the programme for Government. It is based on me having the resources to do that and I am determined to fight for those resources on an annual basis during the term of this Government.
I worry that this is one of those promises made during the general election campaign that is then watered down in the programme for Government and that will end up falling by the wayside. In the past few weeks, a number of commitments made by the Government have been abandoned under the guise of the Trump tariffs, by saying that now is not the time for extending. I worry that that is where we are going to end up. The Minister may not have the figures in front of him, but of the almost 100,000 carers, I wager that a significant majority of those are women. There is no getting away from the fundamentally gendered nature in our current society of this work and that is linked to the undervaluing of this work by the State. The refusal to provide a clear timeline with dates to abolish the means test is fundamentally a sexist policy of the Government that places women in a position of continued dependency on their male partners. Economic independence is vital for gender equality, especially at a time when finding affordable housing is the main impediment to women leaving abusive relationships. That is another reason we should abolish the means test.
The commitment has to be looked at in light of the improvements that have been made in recent years, which I am determined to continue. In the context of the Deputy's final remarks, the long-term carer's contribution scheme was introduced in January 2024. Under this scheme, a person who has been a full-time carer - and yes, the Deputy is right that they are predominantly women - for an incapacitated dependant for at least 20 years, now get long-term carer's contributions that will cover gaps in their contribution record and help them to qualify for a contributory State pension. As part of budget 2025, the carer's support grant was increased by €150 to €2,000. That is the highest rate ever for this grant. As we have also reflected, the carer's allowance weekly income disregard will increase in July from €450 to €625 for a single person and from €900 to €1,250 for a couple. Since June 2022, there has been a cumulative increase of €292.50 for a single carer and €585 for a carer who is part of a couple. We increased the capital disregard in June 2022 so a carer with a spouse or partner can now have capital of up to €100,000. The trajectory of the commitment in the programme for Government is backed up by the changes that have been made over the past number of years. Those kinds of changes and level of commitment to carers will continue.
