Company Closures
1. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment the protections his Department will install for workers to prevent the situation that occurred at a company (details supplied) being replicated at other companies, whereby workers are left without any form of income for prolonged periods; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [62594/25]
Last month, one of Ireland's largest delivery companies went into receivership, leaving 300 direct employees' jobs at risk and impacting a further 600-plus jobs, including subcontractors, franchisees and seasonal workers. These workers have been left in limbo and are still technically employed by Fastway but no longer getting paid. What protections will the Department install for workers to prevent the situation that occurred in Fastway being replicated in other companies, whereby workers and subcontractors are left without any form of income for prolonged periods?
I thank the Deputy for this very important question. My thoughts are with all those affected by the receivership and all of their families because I know it is a very difficult and uncertain time.
I also know the news can be very distressing for all of those involved.
Receivership is a long-standing legal mechanism for the enforcement of a security. Usually in Ireland, a receiver is an individual appointed by a lender, such as a bank, to take control of a company's or an individual's assets that were used as security for a loan. In general, a receiver's primary function is to secure the assets of the company, which has been mortgaged or charged in favour of the security holder who appointed him or her, and realise those assets so the secured creditor's debt is repaid as quickly and efficiently as possible. Receivers are independent in the exercise of their functions and I cannot intervene in such matters. Where employees are affected by receivership, the Government works in a co-ordinated way to assist with income supports and employment and training opportunities for those affected.
I received a collective redundancy notification from the receivers of the Nuvion Group on 31 October 2025. I understand the receivers are undertaking a 30-day consultation with employees' representatives as required by law. It is important to note there is no specific statutory restriction on employees from taking up additional employment during the consultation period in circumstances where they are not expected to attend the workplace. Provided they do not resign from the current employment, there should be no obstacle to them retaining their statutory redundancy entitlements.
Where their employer has become insolvent, employees' entitlements are protected under the redundancy payments scheme and redundancy Act. This scheme guarantees employees' statutory redundancy payments and certain wage-related entitlements such as arrears of wages and minimum notice. The receiver is responsible for applying, under the redundancy and insolvency payment schemes, on the employees' behalf. The processing of these claims cannot occur until the termination of the employment has taken place after the 30-day consultation period concludes. Following the completion of the 30-day consultation process, employees may apply for jobseeker's pay-related benefit or jobseeker's allowance, if their employment ends. Employees in need of immediate financial assistance should visit their local Intreo centre social welfare branch office, where an application for an urgent needs payment can be processed as a high priority.
I thank the Minister and I know the discussions we are having obviously overlap with the remit of the Minister for Social Protection. In these situations, it is very important that there is tight communication between both Departments to put in emergency services. The Minister said people can go to their Intreo offices, but in these situations it is important that dedicated personnel are available to people to answer all of their queries. The huge shock that comes with a receivership announcement leaves hundreds of families devastated. There is a lot of confusion. In particular, what workers and subcontractors were trying to find out was whether any of the payments the Minister cited would impact on their redundancy. They would need written confirmation of that because they do not want to find out, months down the line, that they have taken something that has jeopardised that. It is hugely important that we can protect those workers during prolonged periods without income when their employer has gone into receivership.
I have also been in constant contact with the Department of Social Protection on this issue to ensure employees are supported. We have also been in touch with the Revenue Commissioners, particularly for those who are self-employed and linked to this. I am very clear that the approach the Revenue will take will be a very understanding one, considering the stress of cashflow when people get news like this or a company closes urgently. For those protections, provided the employee does not resign from his or her post, the redundancy is protected. That is the key issue. I am obliged to adhere to the EU collective redundancy directive, which is very clear that the consultation period has to be completed before other supports can be given. We have in place urgent needs support from the Department of Social Protection which will be available to assist employees. There is a lot of judicial precedent around that particular directive, particularly in Luxembourg where a number of cases were taken to ensure Ministers are unable to intervene in that 30-day period. While we are bound by that directive, we are working very closely with employees and their families and any support we can give will be forthcoming, particularly in future. We have to ensure there are huge opportunities in the economy to future-proof for the workers' families and get additional income for them at a very difficult time. This is very concerning for families but we are there to support them.
It would be very useful if the Minister and the Minister for Social Protection drew up a definitive list of actions and supports. I will work with them in doing that, so that if this situation happens again, we will have something - almost a pack - to present to workers showing them the do's and don'ts of what they are allowed to do, so people will have clarity around that. Will the Minister consider a number of measures to strengthen worker protections in similar circumstances? The first would be to have enhanced oversight of franchising and subcontracting models. Many of these arrangements blur the line between employment and self-employment. We need clearer legal definitions and enforcement to ensure the people doing the work are afforded the rights and protections of workers, including redundancy notice and holiday entitlements, even where corporate structures try to say otherwise. That is critically important.
The Minister must also remember that workers all over the country are impacted by this, including in my constituency.
Absolutely, and I know there was a Fastway depot in my home town of Mullingar where a number of workers are affected. My thoughts are with them. The Government is here to support and work with them under the current framework. I note again the significant challenges presented by the 30-day consultation period, but it is there to protect workers. Any holiday pay or wages that accrue will be paid by the receiver. It is up to the receiver to take details from the self-employed as well, particularly proof of invoices, etc., which is very important for payment of workers later down the line. We have been in very close contact with families and the Department of Social Protection and we are happy to receive any further ideas on how to deal with these matters in the future. There is a lot of legislation in place to protect workers in this regard. If there are any allegations of any other activity, the Corporate Enforcement Authority and An Garda Síochána also stand ready to investigate, should any issues be raised with them.
Visa Applications
2. Deputy Charles Ward asked the Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment whether he plans to review the employment permits process, with a view to making the process faster; whether his Department has considered streamlining the process with the visa process, in conjunction with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [62597/25]
I would be grateful if the Minister would let me know whether he plans to review the employment permits process during his term as Minister. The process of applying for a permit can be slow at times and I would like to know his plan to address this. Has the Department considered streamlining this process via the visa process?
I thank the Deputy. Over the last number of years, my officials, in collaboration with officials in the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, have been working strenuously to deliver a more efficient and streamlined employment permit and visa system. A key element of this is the implementation of a single application procedure for both employment permits and immigration permissions, in line with the single permit directive. It is expected that this will reduce the complexity of the current system, ensuring that the process responds effectively and quickly to meet skills and labour needs into the future.
A programme implementation team, co-chaired by my Department and the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, has been established. The initial focus of this group will be on streamlining the existing processes and co-ordinating external communication; scoping the feasibility of technological, legislative and data-sharing solutions; and agreeing and laying the groundwork for subsequent implementation. The expected delivery date for this complex project is 2027. I and my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Brophy, recently met with officials from both Departments and we remain actively engaged with regard to driving momentum to ensure progress is maintained and milestones are achieved with regard to work on the single permit directive.
The modernisation and integration of the IT systems in both Departments are integral to delivering this project. I am pleased to report that earlier this year, my Department launched the new employment permits online system. This portal-based system has made the application process easier, more secure and more intuitive, resulting in a more streamlined processing experience for applicants. It sits on a Microsoft Power platform, which is based on similar technologies that the Department of justice will use, and it is expected to move to and support the infrastructure required for a single application process across both Departments.
I have assisted my constituents in applying and reapplying for employment permits in recent months.
The process can sometimes be unnecessarily long, particularly in the case of employment permit appeals. At the moment appeals in respect of this permit take around five months via the Department, which is a very long time. The current system of people having to wait for their employment permit to be granted before they can apply for the visa is inefficient and causes unnecessary delays. It does not make sense for the process to be separated. It is very frustrating for people and employers who are waiting for answers. They are left in complete limbo. The current process should be streamlined to allow for faster decision-making. Has the Minister of State considered working with the embassies to ensure that both are granted at the same time to give people better clarity? As it stands, employers are unable to properly plan and accommodate employees.
I thank the Deputy for his feedback. Our Department has taken significant steps in making the employment permit system faster and more efficient. As I said in my earlier contribution, we launched the employment permit online system back in April of this year. We have already seen how it has transformed the application process. It makes it easier and more secure. Over 47,000 successful registrations have been completed and the permit submissions have returned to pre-launch levels. Currently the processing times are around 31 business days for general employment permits and 16 business days for critical skills permits. These timelines continue to improve. It is part of the broader digital transformation project we are undertaking and it allows Ireland to become and remain competitive on a global stage in regard to critical skills and critical skills' employment permits.
With full employment, employers who are relying heavily on employment permits have found it increasingly difficult in recent years to find people to fill important roles. It is clear that an efficient system is required for employers to address the labour shortage to allow them to plan, recruit and maintain their business. Is the Department working with employers to ensure the current system is workable for them? Can the Department improve communications with employers regarding specific applications? Employers lack efficient communication channels with the Department regarding employment permits. The current application process seems like a box-ticking exercise focused on rigid criteria rather than individual circumstances. The Department needs to work with employers if we are to address labour shortages going forward.
We have implemented a huge modernisation of the permit system here in recent times. As I said earlier, it was launched in April of this year and, as part of that, we engaged extensively with business representatives and trusted partners. We went out most recently with a consultation process on the updated occupation list. We have also enhanced our learning and engagement to ensure that when employers are looking to make an application, they have the learning and the engagement, so they can get it right first time. That is really important. As part of that digital transformation, it is critical that we get the single application process in place, that we get the employment permits along with the visa application, and that the immigration process is streamlined under the single permit directive. We are very much working together with officials in exploring ways we can expedite the visa process for critical skills. It is really important. The economy is still going strong and there are labour shortages in certain sectors. We need to address that. The next phase of this is to have the single online process in place by 2027.
EU Directives
3. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment how he is taking account of the views expressed by the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Enterprise, Tourism and Employment in its scrutiny of the proposed omnibus directive, in particular the committee's concerns that the proposals extend far beyond the simplification of burdensome regulations for small and medium enterprises and could weaken the due diligence obligations of large companies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [62596/25]
I want to talk to the Minister about the proposed omnibus directive and in particular the enterprise committee's concerns that the proposals extend far beyond simplification of burdensome regulations for small and medium enterprises and that these could weaken the due diligence obligations of larger companies. It is really important that we need to know where we stand on it. Is Ireland voting in favour of deregulation or to protect the corporate sustainability due diligence directive?
As the Deputy is aware, simplification and burden reduction is a key issue at EU level with a view to improving EU competitiveness and ensuring there are no disproportionate burdens on business, particularly SMEs. In this context, the omnibus on sustainability was published in February 2025. I wish to acknowledge the work undertaken by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Enterprise, Tourism and Employment in relation to the omnibus on sustainability. This included public sessions held on 11 and 18 June, the latter of which included participation by officials from my Department in relation to the implications for the corporate sustainability due diligence directive, CSDDD, and the corporate sustainability reporting directive. I have noted the contents of the subsequent report from the joint committee, dated 18 July 2025.
In line with the call from EU leaders to make early progress on this omnibus, a negotiating mandate was agreed by member states on 23 June 2025 on the content aspect of the proposal. I understand that the European Parliament is scheduled to adopt a position on the proposal today, after which it is expected that trilogue negotiations will shortly commence.
I welcome progress on the proposal, which will significantly help EU enterprises and, most notably and critically, SMEs. While changes have been proposed in the published directive, in the context of the EU simplification and burden reduction agenda, the intention remains to promote responsible business conduct. It is envisaged that in-scope companies will continue to be required to conduct risk-based human rights and environmental due diligence and to integrate due diligence into all corporate policies and risk management systems. Ireland has sought to play a constructive role in the negotiations and I will be mindful of the observations of the joint committee when the trilogue negotiations get under way.
Everybody agrees on what needs to be done for small and medium businesses in particular, and for any other businesses, in addressing the administrative burden, the duplication and a lot of the nonsense around requirements that are made on businesses. Deputy Charles Ward, my Donegal colleague, is here and when I hear about deregulation, I am mindful of what the defective concrete block scandal is costing us right now. We are going to have to pay billions of euro because of light regulation. I really do not want us to go down that road again.
The Irish Coalition for Business and Human Rights, whose members include ICTU, Christian Aid Ireland, Trócaire, Oxfam, Friends of the Earth Ireland and many other civil organisations and academic experts, says that CSDDD will not be effective unless it includes maintaining the CSDDD risk-based approach to due diligence and allowing companies to focus on prioritising those risks to human rights and the environment within their chain of activity. We really need to get this right.
Anyone who saw the Draghi scorecard published a fortnight ago will see it really points out the implementation process of the simplification revolution and how slow it is. We really need to have an impetus on this. I spoke to all the MEPs in our party in the European Parliament to really get a big push on this. There are six pieces of omnibus legislation currently with the Parliament. We need to see simplification really borne out for our SMEs. We see from the original proposal that 35% of a reduction can be achieved by 2030, with some €37 billion of a saving for SMEs. No one is talking about key regulation that protects our citizens in terms of what the Deputy spoke about in relation to on mica, defective concrete blocks and products like that. That is key for our economy. We have learned a lot over the past decade and previously about our regulatory processes. We have a huge number of regulators in the State now but we need to ensure their interoperability with SMEs can be enhanced, that we do things a little easier, that we are making progress and that we are not putting an unnecessary burden on businesses, which is key for me as an enterprise Minister.
I do not think the two things are contradictory in the sense of what we need to do in this space. Obviously, we need to do everything. Small and medium businesses are really struggling right now but we do not need to sacrifice, for example, how we are going to meet our emissions targets or how we are going to ensure that employees' and workers' rights are protected within this space. Maintaining the CSDDD harmonised civil liability regime to prevent fragmentation and increased legal costs and ensuring justice for victims are really important. We also need to ensure that the CSDDD requirement to put into effect climate transition plans is maintained.
We need to protect the CSDDD provisions on stakeholder engagement. The changes brought about by the omnibus proposal not only render the CSDDD ineffective by making sure that companies will fail to identify the most severe risks that take place further down their value chains, but also fail in their stated aim of simplifying legislation. The changes will mean that all due diligence obligations are passed to suppliers. There is a way of getting this right but we need to get the balance right.
This is about simplification. One of the key issues is the need to support our SMEs to ensure the burden placed on them is not inappropriate. With regard to each of the issues mentioned, a risk-based approach will continue, which is important. Stakeholder involvement will be core to the directive, which is also very important.
With regard to harmonised civil liability, obviously national governments will be able to make a determination on this, which is also very important. With regard to our climate policies, it is key that we look at implementation and this is what the new trial will be focused on. It will be focused on the implementation of climate action and how we support businesses to try to embark upon transition. The key issue is that we have too much regulation. We know from our SMEs and businesses the pressure they are under and we need to ensure we have proportionate legislation and that, as an economy, we incentivise innovative approaches and ensure we are protecting citizens. In no way am I talking about watering down the regulatory requirements of key processes in our State, which are so important. This is about doing things quicker. We saw from the Draghi and Letta reports the work we have to do in a European context. Now is the time to get on with the job.
Artificial Intelligence
4. Deputy John Clendennen asked the Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment the progress being made by his Department on creating an operational AI regulatory sandbox by 2 August 2026, in line with the EU AI Act 2024; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [62583/25]
What progress has been made by the Department on the creation of an operational AI regulatory sandbox by 2 August 2026, in line with the EU AI Act?
As Deputy Geoghegan is aware, the EU Artificial Intelligence Act entered into force in August 2024 and provides a harmonised regulatory framework for AI systems developed or deployed in the EU. It is designed to provide a high level of protection to people's health, safety and fundamental rights, while simultaneously promoting the adoption of human-centric, trustworthy AI. Its provisions will start to apply in a phased manner over the period to August 2027.
Earlier this year, the Government agreed to adopt a distributed model of competent authorities, leveraging the State's established sectoral regulatory authorities, to carry out supervisory and enforcement roles for the purposes of the AI Act. The Department is leading across government on the national implementation of the AI Act, and officials are working closely with colleagues in other Departments to devise the optimal configuration of a national competent authority for the Act to ensure comprehensive, robust and effective implementation in Ireland.
To date, 13 public bodies have been designated as market surveillance authorities and four as notifying authorities, with some of these public bodies having a dual role. The Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment has also been designated to act as Ireland's single point of contact, as required by the AI Act, to facilitate co-ordination and to provide a number of centralised functions for the distributed model until a new independent entity, the AI office of Ireland, is established on a statutory basis to carry out this role.
As Deputy Geoghegan noted, the AI Act stipulates that member states should ensure their competent authorities establish at least one AI regulatory sandbox at national level to be operational by 2 August 2026. The AI Act introduces AI regulatory sandboxes as a key mechanism to foster innovation. They should aim to enhance legal certainty for innovators and the competent authorities' oversight and understanding of the opportunities, emerging risks and impacts of AI use.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
They should facilitate regulatory learning for both authorities and businesses. The participation in the AI regulatory sandbox should focus on issues that raise legal uncertainty for providers and prospective providers to innovate, experiment with AI in the European Union and contribute to evidence-based regulatory learning.
The AI office of Ireland will act as the central co-ordinating body for the EU AI Act and provide a focal point for the promotion and adoption of transparent and safe AI in Ireland to ensure that we fully capture the strategic opportunity that AI presents. The office will also be responsible for ensuring the timely establishment of the national AI regulatory sandbox.
It is important to note that in addition to preparing practical guidance to support member states setting up national sandboxes, the European Commission is also required to adopt implementing acts for sandboxes, setting out principles regarding participation, co-operation and procedures. Officials are actively involved in EU working groups related to these matters and we await the first drafts of these proposals from the Commission, which are expected in the first quarter of 2026.
The Department will continue to engage with the European Commission, other member states, industry, the SME sector and our regulators to look for opportunities to help inform and shape preparations and to identify opportunities to collaborate in establishing an operational AI regulatory sandbox.
I thank the Minister of State for the reply. He indicated the establishment of the AI office will be crucial in respect of the regulatory sandbox. I look forward to primary legislation being introduced on this and to it coming before the Committee on Artificial Intelligence, of which I am Vice Chair. One of the things that struck me when we were in Estonia recently at a digital summit was just how far ahead some other EU countries are in the adaptation of AI. What the Department is doing in respect of ensuring small businesses in the enterprise sector can stay competitive by harnessing the benefits of AI is a model that other countries could emulate. Beyond the Department of enterprise, we could go a lot further. I am heartened to hear there is a lot of cross collaboration taking place in respect of the establishment of the AI office. Does the Minister of State agree that the forthcoming EU Presidency could create a great opportunity for Ireland, given that we have lot of the large language model, LLM, companies based here, to have an AI summit to promote the benefits of AI and what it could bring to this country?
I thank Deputy Geoghegan for his interest in the AI Act. There are questions here today and certainly his welcome for the AI office is crucial. The Minister, Deputy Burke, allocated more than €1.4 million for its establishment, with the staffing plan now in place, and to ensure the sandbox is operational by August next year, which is not far away. We are also working with the EU digital innovation hubs and CeADAR to provide technical expertise and support for businesses. We need to continue to ensure the AI office can be functional in this time. For us, the sandbox is not another bureaucratic hurdle; it is certainly a tool that can support SMEs on their innovation journey. They can test AI systems safely, reduce compliance uncertainty and speed up market access. We have a good story to tell in regard to new start-ups in the AI sector. We want to become a leader among many competitive members in the EU to ensure we are at the fore of AI regulation. This initiative is very important on that journey.
In the enterprise sector, work is under way and has been done historically in Ireland when it comes to attracting investment and technology companies here. Now we see in Ireland the work Enterprise Ireland has done in supporting the hyper scaling of technology companies and start-ups. We saw some measures in the budget and, hopefully, there are more to come in future to support the emergence of an indigenous technology industry here. Some of the steps we have taken could be adapted in other Departments. Perhaps we could see the leading role this Department is taking in other spheres, such as health and education. We can look at what other EU countries are doing. The hosting of the EU Presidency by Ireland presents a unique opportunity. A number of years ago when Estonia held the Presidency it created a digital summit. We could demonstrate that we are the lead in class when it comes to the regulation of AI and we could harness some of the benefits that are coming.
I agree with Deputy Geoghegan. It will be an important opportunity when Ireland takes over the Presidency to showcase our SMEs, the work we are doing in the AI sector and the steps we are taking in the Government. The AI office will have statutory independence, reporting annually to the Oireachtas and the AI committee. It will also co-ordinate regulators under a clear governance structure. Ireland has a long track record with regard to regulation and the integrity of the system we implement in many sectors, not only in technology but also in life science and medtech. We are a very attractive place to do business due to our regulations and our principles on integrity, justice and transparency. This is very important from an EU perspective as it gives us a competitive advantage. We want to ensure that participation in the AI Act allows us to have this openness and equal access to treatment among member states.
Company Closures
5. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment the supports his Department is providing to companies impacted by the receivership announcement of a company (details supplied) to prevent further closures and job losses; the steps his Department is taking to ensure the packages held by the company are delivered to their owners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [62267/25]
I want to speak further about Fastway because there is so much to be spoken about. The Minister knows that Fastway is built on a network of local franchisees and subcontractors, many of whom have been the backbone of parcel delivery in rural and regional Ireland. These are small family-run operations which have invested heavily, some of them up to €70,000 in recent months, in vehicles, equipment and staff. That has been based on trust in the system. They worked hard during the pandemic to deliver items to homes in lockdown. Many of them are owed significant sums of money, with no clarity on whether they will ever see it. They are left in limbo too.
I thank the Deputy for this very important question. It relates to a matter which is very close to my heart due to the fact that there is a depot in Mullingar. I very much understand the business model and the pressures that employees and their families face as a result of what happened.
Receivership is a long-standing legal mechanism for the enforcement of a security. Usually in Ireland, a receiver is an individual appointed by a lender, such as a bank, to take control of company assets that were used as security for a loan. In general, a receiver’s primary function is to secure the assets of the company, which have been mortgaged or charged in favour of the security holder who appointed him or her, and realise those assets in order that the secured creditor’s debt is repaid as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Creditors, including other businesses and self-employed contractors impacted by the receivership, should contact the receivers to submit proof of debt and file a claim regarding unpaid moneys and invoices. Revenue has confirmed that it will work with individual couriers and businesses and will be pragmatic in its approach where businesses experience cash-flow difficulties as a result of the loss of business or payments. Businesses experiencing cash-flow issues as a result of these developments may wish to also contact the national enterprise hub in our Department, which provides a wide range of supports and is a central, all-of-government service to assist businesses.
The Department of Social Protection provides a number of welfare supports and is also on hand to assist. If a person is self-employed as a franchise holder or contractor, they may qualify for the self-employed jobseeker’s benefit if they satisfy PRSI contribution conditions. They can also apply for basic supplementary welfare allowance as an interim payment while their application is being processed, subject to normal eligibility criteria. An employee of a franchise holder or a self-employed contractor who is impacted by the receivership, for example, by being put on temporary lay-off, may apply for jobseeker’s pay-related benefit or jobseeker’s allowance, depending on their PRSI record and means.
Neither I nor my Department have any responsibility in the treatment of packages held by the Nuvion group. Such transactions are a matter between the parties under contract law. I reiterate that any affected businesses should engage with the receivers.
Some of that information is useful. I thank the Minister for it. I commend my colleagues Senator Maria McCormack and Councillor Claire Murray who are working in the Laois area and who pulled together all the agencies last week to try to get as much information as possible for people. This is not just a commercial issue; it is about jobs and livelihoods. Every unpaid franchisee and subcontractor struggling to keep afloat represents a potential job loss and another business at risk.
I want to ask the Minister about the packages. He stated that they are not his responsibility, but many small retailers and online sellers have valuable stock that is tied up and that cannot be delivered to their customers. For some, this could represent a critical portion of their Christmas trade. We need to do something to protect those people's jobs. Some of these businesses went to An Post but it stated that it cannot manage the deliveries they need. We are coming into a critical period during which small businesses make a lot of their money.
I am fully aware of the gravity of the situation, particularly for franchisees and small self-employed contractors. The delivery of parcels is a matter of contract law. Delivery timelines relating to orders and the position regarding refunds are very much set out in consumer legislation and, from the point of view of the businesses involved, contract law. I have mentioned this matter to my colleague the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, from a transport perspective. An Post has absorbed some of the capacity, but there are also other providers in the marketplace. This is a challenge, but, critically, the matter is governed by contract law.
There are a number of other opportunities with existing providers for self-employed people and those who are involved in the franchise part of the business. A number of companies have taken some workers on, which is very important. It is key for workers and self-employed people to know that once they do not resign, their entitlement to redundancy, accrued wages and accrued holiday pay - this is important in the context of the consultation period - will not be affected.
This incident once again highlights the vulnerability of small operators when large logistic firms collapse. We need to examine the environment in which some companies are allowed to operate. Employees and those who are dependent on them, like subcontractors, need to be notified about what is happening at a very early stage. Earlier, the Minister referred to the fact that we need better corporate law and the ability to investigate, particularly where companies are owned by foreign investment funds. We need to have some way of ensuring that businesses that operate in this State do so in a responsible manner to their employees, the environment and the State. I urge the Minister to treat this not just as a single case of corporate insolvency but also as a wider economic risk and one that could hit hundreds of workers, drivers and small enterprises across the country.
There are huge challenges in our economy in respect of the turnover of jobs, which I, as Minister, can see. There is huge opportunity, but there is also a turnover of jobs every week. The Government is acutely aware of this and is supporting employees through it.
It is clear that the Corporate Enforcement Authority is responsible for policing company law. If there are any issues, they should be reported. We have a very strong statutory context that underpins the operation of companies in this State. An Garda Síochána has responsibility in respect of other matters that have been raised and that should be reported. There have been reports in the media about this issue as well.
Critically, we are here to support the workers, the contractors and franchisees. We will do everything we can to ensure that they are paid. This is a particularly important period for families. It can be very challenging. We will be there to support them with urgent payments. I am aware of the challenges many families face because I meet them at my clinics every week. The Government will not be found wanting in the context of supporting them at this difficult time. I assure those involved that training will be provided as well and that they are living in an economy of opportunity. There are opportunities, so they should not lose hope.
Pension Provisions
71. Deputy Louise O'Reilly asked the Minister for Social Protection the provisions that have been made to ensure that agencies, organisations, charities and service providers funded by his Department will be able to meet their obligations under the new auto-enrolment scheme. [62181/25]
My question, as is often the case, is very straightforward. I am looking for information about the provisions that have been made concerning agencies and organisations which deliver services on behalf of the State, are funded by the State and have workers who want to be part of the auto-enrolment scheme but are concerned they are not funded to be able to do that. The Minister will well know the last time there was a cut to the budget of these agencies, they were told to find the savings from within their own envelope. That really did not work out well.
Gabhaim buíochas as an gceist. The auto-enrolment savings system, known as My Future Fund, will commence on 1 January 2026. My Department has had extensive engagement with employers, including those in the community and voluntary sector, and with Government Departments, since the release of the automatic enrolment strawman public consultation in 2018. Its impending implementation has been well flagged to all those groups since the enactment of the auto-enrolment Act in 2024 and extensively throughout this year. Therefore, employers have been given a substantial lead-in period to budget appropriately for its introduction, including through budget negotiation with sponsors where appropriate.
It is worth mentioning that, in response to feedback from that consultation, the design of the auto-enrolment system provides for phasing in of contribution rates over a decade. Employees will be required to make initial contributions of 1.5% of gross earnings, rising by 1.5% every three years until they reach a maximum contribution rate of 6% in year ten. These contributions will be matched on a one-for-one basis and on the same timeline by employer contributions and topped up by the State at a rate of €1 for every €3 contributed by the employee. That phased approach has arisen as a consequence of the consultations the Department has undertaken in the design of the system. For community and voluntary groups and employers generally, this approach gives clear certainty on the rates that will be applicable so as to facilitate the gradual absorption of labour costs.
My Department has been very proactive throughout this year - and indeed previously - in advising other Departments, including the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation, about this issue.
I will be taking the opportunity again to remind my Cabinet colleagues in coming days. Automatic enrolment is starting on 1 January and no worker should be disadvantaged as a consequence.
However, they are going to be disadvantaged if the Government does not fund them. Bearing in mind the hands-off approach that the Government takes to these agencies, we should remember that although it caused the homelessness crisis with its policies, it has asked people to come in to shore it up. Some of the agencies are funded only by the State, and if they do not have additional funding – I have checked in the budget and I do not see that there is any – it will simply mean they will have to try to find it from within their existing budgets, which means either pay cuts or cutting back on services. Neither of those options is viable.
I would like to hear from the Minister confirmation that he believes all those funded by the State will be in the desired position. As the Minister said, the contributions from the worker have to be matched by employer contributions. They have no capacity to raise money on their own. Therefore, is the State going to fund it, and can the Minister confirm that this morning?
The position is that automatic enrolment is a legal requirement. Therefore, the employers will have to give access to My Future Fund to employees aged between 23 and 60 and earning over €20,000 who do not have an existing payroll-connected pension.
We have made it very clear in the Department that this is happening. The point has been made at official level, including to the Department of public expenditure, that this is happening on 1 January and that people need to make provision. We have also made the point to all employers across the State.
We have worked closely with groups such as ICTU in relation to this. I attended a really good seminar with ICTU a few weeks ago, on 23 October. ICTU is fully behind this and is very aware of it. In fact, it was very frustrated that we did not introduce this in September. It has been engaging with its members across the country to get ready for it.
I want to make it very clear that this is not an opt-in for employers, regardless of who they are. If there is an employee who fulfils the criteria and who is not linked through payroll to a pension at the moment, he or she will be covered.
The Minister and I know they are covered, but my question is on whether they are funded. The Minister of State says he has had extensive engagement, and I absolutely do not doubt that for a moment. I would say his engagement was exceedingly extensive; however, as a result of his engagement, have his Department and other Departments confirmed that the agencies they fund to deliver services will be in a position to meet their obligations to all of their workers without having to cut back on services or wages? If they have not been given extra money and do not have the capacity to generate money, we are back to where we were at the time the Minister’s party crashed the economy, when it gave the instruction to people that they did not necessarily have to cut pay but had to cut back. The Government told them not to cut services, so in the end they did cut pay.
We can imagine that people who were burned before are very anxious to know if they are going to be in a capacity to join the scheme. The employers are anxious to know if they are going to be funded. My fear is that they are not funded at the moment and that we are going to end up in a situation where some people may be excluded or some agencies may have to make decisions that we do not want them to have to make.
All employers have had seven years to get ready for and get used to this. We listened to their feedback on stepping the contributions and not introducing big contributions from the beginning.
I confirm that in the Department of Social Protection, the Estimates in respect of payments to the organisations do include costs for, say, community employment and Tús where they arise. We have engaged at senior official level and with the Secretaries General of other Departments advising them that automatic enrolment was coming in on 1 January and that they needed to ensure provision. I cannot account for every other Department, but, on the back of this discussion, I will be reminding all my colleagues this afternoon that this is happening.
It is a huge event for 750,000 to 800,000 workers who currently have no pension provision. This is not a silver bullet. I want to be very clear that My Future Fund is not going to be the answer to everybody’s problems, but it is happening on 1 January.
Fuel Poverty
72. Deputy Mark Wall asked the Minister for Social Protection if he will consider granting a fuel allowance to those that have had an application refused or revoked due to an adult child or family member moving back home. [62019/25]
This is a case of déjà vu in that we mentioned this yesterday, but I want to ask the Minister of State once again if he will consider granting a fuel allowance to those who have had an application refused or revoked due to another child or family member moving back home.
I thank the Deputy. The criteria for the fuel allowance are framed in order to direct the limited resources that are available to my Department in as targeted a manner as possible.
To qualify for the fuel allowance payment, a person must satisfy all of the qualifying criteria, including a household composition test. This ensures that the payment is targeted at those who are more vulnerable to fuel poverty, including those reliant on social protection payments for longer periods and who are unlikely to have additional resources of their own.
Disregarding an adult household member who is not reliant on a long-term social protection payment and who is in employment would change the targeted nature of the scheme. In practice, it would not be feasible to distinguish between households where adult children have moved back home and households where other adults have always lived.
I understand exceptional needs will arise, and this is the reason we provide additional needs payments as part of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. Anyone who considers they may have an entitlement to an additional needs payment is encouraged to contact their local community welfare services.
Under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme, a special heating supplement may in certain circumstances be paid to assist people who have special heating needs, such as in cases of ill health, infirmity or a medical condition.
We have extended fuel allowance eligibility to working family payment recipients this year, and it is to be paid in March and backdated to January. Once again, it is targeted at people on low incomes who are working, to support them. If there are specific cases that do not meet the criteria – I see the Deputy nodding – I will be more than happy to discuss them.
I am nodding. The Minister mentioned household composition tests and people working, but the problem I have is where a person who returns to a house is not working and is getting a social welfare payment. These are low-income households and these are the people who must be targeted. I mentioned last night that I have come across three or four cases of this in the past two weeks alone. I asked last night whether we have targeted these people. Today, the Government will announce with triumph a new housing plan, the fourth in recent years. There is a housing emergency. There are parents taking back their loved ones – their sons or daughters – under their roofs again because they have either fallen out with a partner or cannot afford rent, yet the Government is taking €38 from the fuel allowance. Many of those affected are older people who need the €38 to heat their homes. What is happening is wrong, as I have said several times. Particularly where the person coming back under the roof is in receipt of a social welfare payment and is not working, we should be considering targeting. This is the kind of targeting the Government should be employing.
I will be raising the issue the Deputy raised last night. I do not believe there is any targeting of any group. There will always be controlled measures, but I do not believe there is any specific targeting. Once again, I point out that in relation to any particular case, additional supports are available, particularly where there is an illness or disability.
We have extended fuel allowance eligibility to working family payment recipients, and that is a big change. Over 50,000 families will now become eligible for fuel allowances who currently are not. We have a commitment within the programme for Government to enhance supports for lone parents. Two thirds of the recipients of the working family payment are in single adult households. I am constantly focusing on the rate of the fuel allowance and seeking to ensure it is relevant. The changes we have made in this budget will be permanent; they do not comprise a year-to-year measure, so people will be able to plan in relation to that. If there is a specific issue, I will certainly discuss the case. We do not want anybody to be cold or without fuel as a consequence of somebody in receipt of social protection coming back into their household.
I take the Minister’s reply. I acknowledge the fact that the fuel allowance has been extended to working family payment recipients, because they are in low-income families who need all the help they can get in what are housing and cost-of-living crises. I hope that if I can give the Minister three or four examples of what has been happening over the past two weeks in Kildare South, he will examine the matter again. I am sure it is not just happening in Kildare South. Maybe we are just targeting Kildare South. The affected families are genuine families. In many cases, a loved one, a son or daughter, will have left home to make a life for himself or herself but, for whatever reason, has come back under the roof again. They are in a housing emergency. Who is going to turn away their son or daughter? By putting a roof over the head of their son or daughter again, they are losing the payment.
It is causing a lot of strife and concern in families and it is hitting the lowest income families in my area. I hope the Minister, when I bring some examples to him, can look at this further.
I will certainly engage with the Deputy in that regard. We also have a commitment in the programme for Government to examine key benefits such as the fuel allowance, households benefits and the living alone allowance. That is an ongoing activity to make sure they are as relevant and targeted as possible.
The household benefits package is specifically targeted at older people. It is paid at a rate of €35 per month for 12 months of the year. I wish to ensure it is as effective as possible and people get the benefit of it.
We are also looking at how much in carbon tax revenues we can use to fund and expand measures such as this. In expanding them, however, I want to keep them targeted and focused on those who need it the most. We will work with other Departments on energy efficiency awareness, investing in the energy efficiency of housing stock and giving people a chance to do that, as well as expanding the warmer home scheme so that we can reduce long-term fuel expenditure. I have asked for an update on any control measures around fuel allowance. I am surprised at the issue raised but I will engage with the Deputy on it.
Social Welfare Benefits
73. Deputy Louise O'Reilly asked the Minister for Social Protection for an estimate of the number of new people who will be eligible to receive carer’s allowance following budget 2026; if he will explain to carers who are currently excluded by the means test exactly when they will be made aware of when they will become eligible; the amount his Department is prepared to spend on the relaxation of the carer’s means test, given that this was not made clear in the budget 2026; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [62427/25]
This relates to the commitment given in the programme for Government to phase out the means test for the carer’s allowance. I am genuinely struggling to understand the timeline the Minister has in his head. He told me, via a parliamentary question, that it will cost more than €600 million. He has only budgeted €10 million for next year, which is a partial year, so it works out at €20 million. By that logic, it would take 30 years to get to €600 million. I am interested in finding out how many additional people will benefit from the 2026 measures so that we can have an idea of how it is going to work going forward.
The programme for Government, as the Deputy knows, commits to increasing the carer’s allowance disregard, with a view to phasing it out over the lifetime of the Government, which is another four years. Removing the means test is a significant shift in policy direction and, therefore, this is a prudent and sustainable approach for us to take.
I announced further improvements in budget 2026 to the carer’s allowance means test. They will be introduced in July 2026. For carers who work, the weekly income disregard will increase by 60% from €625 to €1,000 for a single person and from €1,250 to €2,000 for carers who are part of a couple. This means, for example, that a carer in a two-adult household with an income of approximately €110,000 will still retain their full carer’s payment. Even those with an income of €138,000 will gain a partial payment.
There have been a number of changes to the scheme in recent years that have resulted in significant growth. The number of carers on the scheme has increased by 65% in the past ten years and the expenditure on the scheme has doubled to over €1.2 billion. The scheme is demand led and it is also likely that many people who are currently outside the means threshold may not have previously applied for the carer’s allowance. On that basis, it is difficult to estimate potential inflow from this measure. I assure Deputy O’Reilly and other Deputies that the number of payments being made under the scheme is not budget capped. We are looking at a range of figures, including census figures and other declarations as to who is a carer, to monitor the potential inflow into the scheme. We will consistently publish data on take-up in quarterly statistical releases.
As in previous years, when there has been an increase to the disregard, if people are on a reduced rate of carer's allowance due to their means, they are due an increase in their weekly payment. Their rate of payment will be automatically increased.
The change of the disregard will come into effect in July 2026. This gives my Department ample time to raise awareness of the changes and give the kind of detail ahead of the changes the Deputy is looking for.
Forgive me but I am still none the wiser. Following on from the budget announcement, I submitted a parliamentary question to the Department. It told me that the budgeted €10 million only covers existing recipients. By implication, the 3,000 people the Department estimates will benefit from the measure are people who are already in receipt of carer’s allowance. Am I right on that?
Presumably, the 53,000 people the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation says could potentially be eligible will all have to be brought into the system when the means test is abolished. How many of them will come into the net? How is the Minister going to do that over the next four years? Has he set a target? What the Minister is telling me is that the €10 million is not a fixed amount and, somehow, it can be expanded upon. That is not budgeted for, however. Can he explain, given that the 3,000 people coming in as part of this tranche are already in receipt of carer’s allowance, how many of the 53,000 who are not in receipt of it, will come in and in what year will they do so, from now until the end of the Government’s term?
I cannot give the Deputy that breakdown immediately but I will try to get it to her. I think she is just looking for a breakdown. It is hard to know because many people, who are not currently in receipt of carer’s allowance and never submitted an application because they did not qualify, will now apply. As I said, expanding the threshold to include couples with an income of €104,000 means there will be a lot of people, who never engaged with my Department before, engaging with it for the first time. We will give the Deputy an estimate of the number we expect to come from that.
We will also be able to give the Deputy an estimate towards the end of this year as to how many extra people have come in as a consequence of the changes introduced in July 2025. It is difficult to estimate potential inflow with precision, but we will give the Deputy the figures based on the changes to date. I will try to give the Deputy as much information as I can regarding that figure. I am not fully sure where she is getting that figure of 53,000. I did not hear it.
It is from the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation.
I will engage with the Deputy in that regard. I want to abolish the means test over the course of this Government and during my time in this Department. I am also focused on those existing payments and ensuring those who are existing carers are properly rewarded for their extraordinary work. I am trying to reach a balance. If I have four years in this Department, I will abolish it, but I am also trying to work with the carers’ organisation on those existing carers.
I know the Minister’s ambition is to abolish the means test. I am not disputing that but if he cannot tell me how he is going to do it, he will forgive me for being somewhat sceptical about the commitment. It is a little bit like the however many thousand houses the Government was going to build. That was an ambition as well. Ambition is not going to put money in the bank account of carers or bring those carers who are not currently eligible into the net.
I welcome the fact that the Minister has said he will provide me with some of the information. The figure of 53,000 comes from the Department of public expenditure and reform. The question those 53,000 people currently not in receipt of carer’s allowance, who may potentially benefit, would like me to ask is when they will be included. They are currently not getting compensation for the care and work they do. I know the ambition is to abolish the means test by the end of the Government’s term, but there has to be a plan. It cannot simply be the case that everyone suddenly comes into the net five minutes before midnight on the day before the Government ends. There is a need for a plan, targets and figures. I am asking for them to be shared with me and the House.
This is not just words and ambition. There was a 60% increase in the budget for the carer’s allowance income disregard. That has never been seen before. That means that households with an income of €110,000, and up to €138,000, become eligible for a social protection payment. That is actually happening. It will happen from 1 July next year. That is real and I want to continue with those kinds of levels of increases.
As I said, I also have an eye to existing carers. I wish to ensure they are properly regarded. That is why we work closely with the carers’ organisation in relation to this and other issues. That is why we have a carer’s forum every year well in advance of the budget process. First, it helps alert people to the fact these changes have happened because we want to ensure people have the information. Second, it allows us to work with the carers’ organisations in a partnership way as to how we get this done.
An increase of 60%, combined with the fact that people with an income of €138,000 are now eligible for a payment under the Department of Social Protection, shows my seriousness and intent. It is not just ambition; this is actually happening.
Pension Provisions
74. Deputy Eoin Hayes asked the Minister for Social Protection when his Department will establish, and make publicly available, the administration fees and charges being imposed as a part of auto-enrolment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [62261/25]
My question is about administration fees and charges being imposed as part of auto-enrolment. My understanding is that these fees have not been agreed or released publicly. I have some reservations more widely about whether it is still the case today that the Department and Government are sufficiently prepared when this scheme goes live, which is just a few short weeks away, as the Minister said yesterday.
I thank the Deputy. I take this opportunity to wish him well. I look forward to working with him. This is his first time attending parliamentary questions as his party's spokesperson for social protection.
We will introduce automatic enrolment, My Future Fund, from 1 January 2026.
The aim is to address the pension coverage gap that exists in our country and to provide workers with greater comfort and security regarding their retirement income.
There will be two separate fee elements. First, there will be an administration fee, which will cover the collection of contributions, the allocation to the investment plans and the provision of account management services. Second, there will be a separate fee for investment management services. The administration fees associated with automatic enrolment are under active consideration as we speak and will be finalised following consultation with the new chief executive of the National Auto-Enrolment Retirement Savings Authority, NAERSA, and the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation. I have written to the Minister this week in relation to this issue.
As previously announced, the administration fee will take the form of a flat weekly fee rather than a commission based on a percentage of funds under management. In this way, the administration fee will reflect the actual costs of administration, which do not vary with fund size. They will be the same for all participants regardless of their income or the size of their retirement fund and will, ultimately, provide much better value for money for the participant over the course of a standard retirement planning horizon.
In addition to administration fees, there will be some fees for investment management services. These services have been procured through a competitive procurement process conducted under EU rules. That tendering process required fees to be less than 0.1% of assets under management. In this regard, I can confirm that the prices attached to the bids were significantly below the maximum ceiling and represent very good value for participants.
I am committed to ensuring that the fees in My Future Fund are kept low and that they are transparent, accessible and understandable, especially as the prospective participants in the system will be lower- and medium-income earners.
I thank the Minister. I very much hope the fees will be under 0.1% of assets under management. It would be extremely concerning if they were anywhere near that. My understanding from the Minister’s answer is that the fees have not been detailed, and this goes to the heart of the question of whether the State is adequately prepared to introduce auto-enrolment on 1 January as the Minister said today he would be doing.
As it stands, about €100 billion of pensions are in private occupational pension schemes. The Minister is planning on the State mandating a significant increase to that without there being any clarity on the fees for those affected. Importantly, in the UK, about 75% of the accounts of the national employment savings trust, NEST, scheme are dormant. If these fees are charged on the dormant accounts, it will compound the reduction of the contributions the individuals have made. It would be very concerning if this were to be the case here as well. If the My Future Fund mirrors what is happening with the NEST fund, it would create a huge problem for individuals. The fund in the UK currently has a deficit of £1 billion and we have lower economies of scale here. Does the Minister have any comparison with the UK experience and does he understand whether the fees will be applied to the dormant accounts?
Ireland is the last country in the OECD to introduce auto-enrolment. This is not a good thing. The only good thing about it is we can learn from other products and countries and look at what we need to change here to make sure we do not end up with their problems. We have looked closely at NEST, given its proximity to us. We will observe it and ensure, through NAERSA, which will be independent of the Department and the Minister of the day, that it keeps us relevant. Most importantly, it is necessary to ensure it is as efficient and as accessible as possible.
It is not the State's money but each individual’s money. It is money belonging to each of the 750,000 people who are a part of this scheme. They will have access to information through the My Future Fund app online to see where their money is going and its investment. They will also have the choice to make whatever investment suits their stage in life, be that high-risk, medium-risk or low-risk investment. Through all that, we will ensure the fees associated with this are understood and transparent. Many people do not have that accessibility or availability in existing pension arrangements.
That goes to the heart of the question here, which is around the digital literacy of the individuals we are putting into this scheme. I am very concerned there is no plan for what we are going to guide people with in terms of the lump sum they will get at the end of the scheme. For those people in their 50s or 60s approaching retirement age who will get that lump sum, there seems to be no pathway to how they would account for the pension provision or ensure they are not taking risky decisions or making inappropriate use of those funds.
There is also a question around the overall structure of the fund and I want to keep an eye on that over the course of its implementation. I completely accept the NTMA could not handle 750,000 individuated pension scheme accounts. There is a question, however, around the pooling of risk. How will it be possible to ensure those 750,000 individuated accounts would be treated as a larger pension scheme guided by the State so it will be possible to ensure there will be lower volatility for investment returns for those individuals and the pension provision is secure for the future?
That is exactly why we have established the structure of NAERSA, which is independent of the Department, with a very successful and experienced team of staff that we are building up now. It has an independent board that represents the interests of workers, employers and the public. Those kinds of operational decisions will be made by NAERSA. In relation to people exiting the scheme, it will be some years before that happens. NAERSA will take full operational control of the scheme and be able to provide that level of information. My focus now is getting it up and running. It is about trying to get an understanding that this is happening and this is why we have information resources available on gov.ie/autoenrolment.
I share the Deputy’s concerns and I will be discussing these with NAERSA, including around digital literacy and ensuring that people who do have digital challenges and do not have that access to digital will be able access their information. This is something I try to do right across the Department. The establishment of an independent authority separate from the Government is in the best interests of those 750,000 people to make the best possible return for their future. I am confident it will make those decisions in the best interest of the citizens.
Social Welfare Payments
75. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Social Protection if he will reintroduce a cost-of-disability lump sum payment before Christmas to reduce the negative impact of budget 2025 on disabled people; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [62432/25]
The programme for Government promises a permanent, annual cost-of-disability support payment, with a view to incrementally increasing this payment. Instead of doing that, we have just had a budget in one of the richest countries in the world, with a substantial budget surplus, that did not introduce this payment. Instead, it made disabled people poorer to the tune of more than €1,000. This question is an appeal to the Government to introduce an emergency winter payment to offset the extra cost of disability.
I thank the Deputy. As he said, the programme for Government commits to introducing a permanent annual cost-of-disability support payment. We will introduce and incrementally increase this payment. These commitments will be advanced over the lifetime of the Government, having regard to the policy and budgetary context.
In budget 2026, I provided for a €1.15 billion package of new social protection measures. We were clear from early this year that there would be no one-off measures in this budget. Not everything, however, in terms of our programme for Government commitments will be done in the first budget. The budget package contained significant targeted measures to support disabled people. These measures include: a €10 increase in the weekly rates of payment, bringing the personal rates of payment to €254 per week from January; a Christmas bonus double payment to all persons getting a long-term disability payment, to be paid in December 2025; a €20 increase in the rate of domiciliary care allowance, bringing the rate to €380 per month; and a €5 increase in the fuel allowance, bringing it to €38 per week. Those moving from disability allowance or the blind pension to take up work will now be able to retain their fuel allowance payment for five years. The back to work family dividend is also being extended to this group, where they have children.
From January, we are extending the wage subsidy scheme to people who acquire a disability while in employment and increasing the rates paid from April. As I said, we are increasing the earnings disregard for carer’s allowance by record levels. Across the disability allowance, invalidity pension, blind pension and domiciliary care allowance, over €250 million in additional funding has been made available when comparing the Revised Estimates for these schemes between 2025 and 2026. In addition, the recently published National Human Rights Strategy for Disabled People 2025-2030 takes a whole-of-government approach and includes a commitment to establish a strategic focus network on the cost of disability, led by my Department. My officials have already held meetings with a number of organisations to discuss the possible structure and content of this network. I will be meeting those organisations during December and I have asked my officials to ensure that I will have a proposal to bring to Government next year in relation to the cost of disability payment ahead of the budget process.
I presume the Minister is not disputing the fact that the budget made disabled people poorer, despite the measures he is announcing. The disability support grant was cut by €400. In respect of the living alone allowance, the lump sum of €200 was cut. That is another €200 gone. The fuel allowance was reduced for disabled people, resulting in a net loss of €160. The October double payment of €254 was cut. The electricity credits of €250 were cut. The total value of one-off supports taken away from disabled people is €1,404. Even when you take into account the small increases the Minister announced, disabled people will still be worse off to the tune of over €1,000. That is in nominal terms as opposed to real terms. In real terms, namely in the context of inflation and the cost-of-living crisis, it is even worse. We know that the cost of having a disability in this country back in 2021 was over €10,000. Today, it is around €15,000.
What we have already done and what we are going to do over the course of Government is turn those one-off payments into permanent supports in a way that people can plan on a year-to-year basis. This year, as I have said, as a result of the weekly increase in the rate of payment relating to the domiciliary care allowance and the fuel allowance and other changes, there will be an extra €250 million going into permanent supports that will not have to be reviewed every year. That will continue in the next series of budgets. That is why I have started the work on what a permanent cost-of-disability payment will look like. I want it to be annual and incremental, but I am not going to impose a model without consulting with the various disability groups. I look forward to consulting with the Oireachtas committees on social protection and disability matters as to what that might look like, who should qualify for it and how it should be paid. That is a commitment we have under the national human rights strategy for disabled people, which was published on 3 December last.
I have begun the work already in relation to the strategic focus network. In December, we will begin the work to engage on what the payment will look like. We are very focused on introducing that payment. It will be a key priority as we come into the next budget sequence.
The cost-of-living crisis is now. The cost-of-disability crisis is now. One in four households with a disabled person experiences deprivation. That is going to be worse next year as a result of the budget. Again, we live in one of the richest countries in the world that has record national surpluses. The Government has made repeated commitments to equality and inclusion, but it has introduced a budget that will make disabled people poorer. They cannot wait until next year. As already stated, the Department of Finance report from 2021 referred to the average annual cost of disability at that stage of more than €10,000. It is €15,000 now. Disabled people are appealing to the Minister and the Government to introduce an emergency winter payment to offset the cost of disability. The Minister can continue the process of consultation, but they need this payment now, particularly if the Government is not going to force more disabled people into poverty and deprivation over the coming months.
That is happening. As I said, from next year, €4 million per week extra will be going into permanent payments in various support and payment schemes for those with disabilities. The means test for the disability allowance has one of the highest capital disregards. A recipient can have up to €50,000 in savings and still receive the full rate of payment.
During the debate on the social protection Bill yesterday, the Deputy's colleague Deputy Boyd Barrett mentioned a cliff edge in this area. That is something I want to work with the Deputies on separately in the context of the annual cost-of-disability payment. I am also trying to work with various groups with regard to encouraging businesses with regard to employing people with disabilities. That is why there will be €250 million extra next year, or €4 million per week. These are permanent payments. They will not have to be renewed every year. Next year, I look forward to expanding those, expanding the eligibility criteria and, most importantly, working on an agreed model, as far as we can, of what a cost-of-disability payment may or may not look like.
Social Welfare Eligibility
76. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Minister for Social Protection if he will consider reviewing the income disregards for carers and people with disabilities in light of the increased cost of living to ensure that social protection supports do not act as a disincentive to work or education; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [62187/25]
Bhí an tAire ag rá rud éigin ansin faoi bheith ag caint faoi dhaoine le míchumais, or people with disabilities. One of the things we could definitely do in this House would be to allow the wage subsidy scheme to be taken on by Deputies and Senators, in a sense that it would give people with disabilities easier access to policymakers. My parliamentary assistant, Michael Reynolds, has a disability. We tried to get the wage subsidy scheme but were told "No". If we could allow people in this House to employ people with disabilities in an easier way, we would have them closer to policymakers. That does not relate to my question, but the Minister mentioned the cost of living and ensuring that social protections do not act as a disincentive for people with disabilities to work.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta. Is tuairim shuimiúil é sin agus b’fhéidir go mbeimis in ann é a phlé. That is certainly an interesting idea. I commend the Ceann Comhairle's predecessor, Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl, who did a huge amount of work to introduce people with disabilities into employment roles within the Oireachtas.
On the question the Deputy asked, the Government recognises the challenges faced by disabled people and family carers and is committed to supporting them. For example, with regard to carer’s allowance, the programme for Government contains a commitment to increasing the disregard with a view to phasing out the means test over the lifetime of this Government. As I discussed with Deputy O'Reilly earlier, that process is well under way.
In budget 2026, I announced further improvements to the carer’s allowance means test that will be introduced next July. For carers who work, the weekly income disregard will increase by 60%, from €625 to €1,000, for a single person and from €1,250 to €2,000 for carers who are part of a couple. This means a carer in a two-adult household with an income of approximately €110,000 will still retain their full carer’s payment. Even with an income of €138,000, they would retain a partial payment. Those changes have been generally acknowledged as very positive.
As we just discussed with Deputy Murphy, the targeted measures to support disabled people include a €10 increase in weekly rates, the Christmas bonus and a €20 increase in the monthly rate of the domiciliary care allowance. Across the disability allowance, invalidity pension, blind pension and domiciliary care allowance, over €250 million in additional funding has been made available when you compare the Revised Estimates for these schemes between 2025 and 2026. Sin €4 mhilliúin gach seachtain don chéad bhliain eile.
The Department’s disability-related schemes and employment supports are structured to support recipients to pursue employment opportunities. I will come back to discussing that in the next round.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire agus gabhaim leithscéal leis, bhí orm sin a rá tar eis an comhrá sin. The reason I posed my second question is because many families and people with disabilities in my constituency have been telling me that even a small amount of work or training can push them over the threshold, which creates a barrier rather than an incentive to work. Saoirse Smith, who I have met multiple times, is considering not working because she thinks she will be better off. She is currently planning her wedding and is worried about losing her medical card or travel pass because of the amount of work she is doing. Will the Minister consider a review of the income disregards in order that people will be supported rather than penalised? I appreciate the update he gave. I know there will be some coming in over the coming year, but in relation to what Deputy O'Reilly said, it is not being felt on the ground. I understand the body of work the Minister has ahead of him, but this matter needs to be dealt with urgently. The winter months are coming. Inflation and the cost of living are all there for people with disabilities, and it is being felt on the ground.
We are very focused on that. As stated, there will be €4 million per week extra in payments and supports to the various schemes for people with disabilities.
As discussed with Deputy Murphy, we are beginning the work on introducing a permanent cost-of-disability payment, as committed to in the programme for Government and I have begun the consultation process on doing that. I have asked my officials to ensure we have that process completed with a proposal ready for the Government well in advance of next year's budget.
In relation to the issues the Deputy raised regarding the person he mentioned, I have started the work. For instance, in this budget, we have brought in a change whereby somebody who is moving from disability allowance or a blind pension who wants to take up work will be allowed to keep their fuel allowance for up to five years after they enter employment.
I have asked my Department to ensure that for somebody who moves into a work situation from disability allowance and, for whatever reason, it does not work out, there should be no time lag in getting them back on their payment. I am really anxious that people can take the leap and, though for lots of reasons it does not work out, they know they have the security of accessing that payment quickly and they do not have to go through the forms again. We will be formalising that approach as well.
I appreciate the update on the work the Minister is doing and the meetings we have had. The issue is that the existing threshold does not reflect the hidden cost of disability, which has been mentioned by Deputies across the House this morning, or the medical, transport and energy costs people face. I welcome the fact that the Minister has been carrying out a consultation. We need to modernise the system but we also need to give people confidence that taking up work will not leave them worse off. I would welcome the provision of any clarity on that matter as soon as possible.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the increases to electricity and gas prices since 2017 have been fixed at €35 per calendar year. It would be really welcome if the old rate of 300 units per month for the four winter months could be increased. The Minister has been speaking to representatives of EnergyCloud. With the amount of renewable energy we have in this country, there will be a huge surplus. That is being used for households experiencing poverty, but it would be great if people with disabilities could be added to that. I hope my Bill on private wires will enable the Government to use that surplus energy to power households and give people free gas boilers full of such energy. This is something the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, has been working on. I urge the Minister opposite to work with his colleague.
Our focus in this year's budget was on the fuel allowance, in terms of energy support, and on making permanent changes to it and extending it to people on the working family payment. There are 55,000 families on that payment. We have also made changes in order that those on disability allowance who move from that to work will keep their fuel allowance for five years. That addresses some of the cliff-edge concerns to which the Deputy referred.
I will certainly discuss Deputy Heneghan's proposals around EnergyCloud and energy costs with the Minister, Deputy O'Brien. The exact costs he referred to are going to be the focus of how we ensure the cost-of-disability payment will be permanent. It also has to be relevant in the context of the costs people incur as a consequence of their disability in order to ensure they will have the support they need. I want to make sure we get it right and that we get some sort of agreement around what it might look like in terms of the level of the payment, but also who should be eligible for it. There is a lot of work to be done, and I am very focused on getting it done in advance of next year's budget.