85. Deputy Louise O'Reilly asked the Minister for Social Protection if he is aware of the groups excluded from the jobseeker’s pay-related benefit, in particular the seasonal, casual, short-time or part-time workers such as school caretakers and secretaries who could benefit considerably from receiving the jobseeker’s pay-related benefit in lieu of the jobseeker’s benefit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33101/25]

Sentiment score: 0.30

Maidin mhaith do gach duine. As is often the case, my question is very simple and straightforward. It gives the Minister the chance to explain why a category of workers, particularly those in seasonal, casual, short-term or part-time employment, such as school caretakers and secretaries but not exclusively, are excluded from the Government’s new pay-related jobseeker's benefit.

Sentiment score: 0.27

I will hold the Minister to that. I will be back here in September to check against delivery, as the Government often states regarding its statements. The Minister has not advanced any satisfactory justification for why the group has been excluded. He states they can predict they are going to be unemployed, but even if you know you are going to be broke or are surprised by being broke in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, you are still broke. At the committee meeting last week, the Minister spoke at length about his commitment to make some efforts with regard to child poverty, which I do not doubt for a moment, but what about the children of school secretaries, school caretakers, seasonal workers and those on very low incomes? Just because they know they are going to be struggling does not mean they will be struggling any less. Will the Minister reconsider his decision and examine the group I have mentioned, in particular, perhaps in the context of the cost-of-living crisis or commitments on child poverty? The Minister should do whatever it takes and consider again the groups who are excluded.

Sentiment score: -0.48

I ask the Minister to charge the people doing the review with the responsibility of looking at seasonal workers. To be frank, that is possibly the least that the Minister could do but I ask that he do that. There should be some engagement about the people who are excluded with the trade union, Fórsa, because it represents the bulk of the secretaries and caretakers. It is not just them but all seasonal workers. There is a more favourable rate of jobseeker's benefit available and a group of low-income workers is excluded from it. Does the Minister see where I am going with this? These are not people who are on big money. When people are on jobseeker's, they are broke. It does not matter if they have known for a couple of weeks that they are going to be on jobseeker's. If there is a more favourable rate available, I am sure the Minister can imagine how those excluded from that rate feel for the weeks of the year when they do not get any payment. These are the only people in the school who will not be paid over the summer. I am not saying they are treated as second-class citizens. I am saying they have possibly every right to feel like they are, then they look at the jobseeker's benefit and see the same treatment applied. I ask that the Minister look at this group in particular.

Sentiment score: 0.04

87. Deputy Louise O'Reilly asked the Minister for Social Protection if he is aware of the considerable financial burden the cost of school tablets imposes on parents; if he will consider expanding the back-to-school payment or introducing a device allowance for children attending schools that require tablets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33102/25]

Sentiment score: -0.16

The issue of having to purchase devices is coming into my office a lot. It is probably coming into everyone's office at this stage. While obviously there is a benefit to parents of not having to buy schoolbooks, that benefit is entirely undermined if they then have to spend the equivalent amount or more. I welcome the Minister's recent announcement of the extension of the back-to-school clothing and footwear allowance to foster families, but they will be means tested for it, which will exclude a lot. I know I am tacking that onto the end of my question but I am sure the Minister will not mind and that the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will indulge me.

Sentiment score: 0.17

I understand the need to get the money to where it needs to be. With the greatest of respect, the Minister does not need to do a review to understand that kids who are in foster care are among the most likely to be experiencing deprivation. They are effectively in the care of the State. I urge the Minister to look at that again because the means test is unfair. We are not talking in the context of a large budget. We are not talking about a large amount of money. I understand that big budgets are made up of many small asks. In the last couple of days, I read in the newspaper that some of the Minister's colleagues are saying that the cost-of-living crisis is over. Good luck with that project as they go out to their clinics because it is not. Families are being put to the pin of their collar. I know of organisations and companies that are offering buy now and pay later terms. That is families having to get themselves into debt just so their kids can go to school. This goes completely against the principle of the back-to-school allowance. It has now been superseded by the need to purchase devices. I urge the Minister to have a discussion with the Minister, Deputy McEntee, but the money will come from the Minister, Deputy Calleary's Department. It will be the extent to which that the Minister can champion this that it will be done.

Sentiment score: 0.08