Business Supports
7. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment for an update on the cost of business forum, which was announced in the programme for Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21680/25]
Will the Minister provide an update on the cost of business forum, in particular why so many grants have not been drawn down by small and medium businesses at a time where they are struggling with costs in terms of VAT, rates - including water rates - energy costs, rent and refuse collection costs? The Minister's favourite word is "evidence". There is evidence that at the close of applications for his Department's power up grant in November last year, €12 million was left unclaimed by hospitality and retail businesses. Can he explain why that was the case?
My Department’s report on the assessment of the cumulative impact of proposed measures to improve working conditions in Ireland published last year highlighted that many of the recent cost increases for business were related to Government imposed regulatory changes. Business groups have also recently highlighted the impact of the overall regulatory burden and the administrative burden on business.
The programme for Government calls for the establishment of a cost of business advisory forum that will focus, in particular, on the regulatory burden as well as other costs highlighted by business. The recent memorandum for Government on the action plan on competitiveness and productivity also stated that in order to address costs, and so as not to duplicate existing structures, the forum should be established as a sub-group of the enterprise forum.
It is proposed that the cost of business advisory forum will comprise officials from key regulatory agencies, as well as representatives from the enterprise sector and social partners. The aim would be to convene its first meeting before the end of May. It is envisaged that the forum should be output-orientated and not be just a discussion group. This approach would see a finite number of meetings, possibly no more than eight meetings, focusing on individual key themes of concern to the business community. It is proposed that the outcome of the forum will be a report for consideration by the full enterprise forum, written by its chair, outlining a set of policy and administrative changes to improve the cost burden for businesses, particularly small enterprises in Ireland.
I thank the Minister of State. When he speaks of simplicity and reducing regulation, I want him to look inside Government at the bureaucracy that is stopping businesses which desperately need support from accessing the supports that have been advertised. The increased cost of business, ICOB, and power up grants have been plagued with anomalies in their terms and conditions making it impossible for businesses to access the schemes. Will the cost of business forum, cited in the programme for Government, engage with business representatives to provide accessible schemes which would be of use to businesses?
Rather than an over-concentration in terms of the remuneration of workers' rights, the Government should look in the other direction in terms of why businesses cannot access what has been announced for them. Across our cities, towns and villages, many in our constituency of Mayo, businesses have pulled down the shutters. Businesses are really struggling right now and there is much the Government can do that it is not doing.
From having spoken to many businesses that have applied for ICOB grants 1 and 2 and the power up grant, I am aware they were essential grants and have been hugely beneficial across all sectors. The Department approved an overall budget of €257 million as part of the ICOB scheme. Some €246 million of that was expended on the scheme in 2024. On ICOB, this week my colleague, the Minister, Deputy Burke, brought a memo to Cabinet on the appeals process. We understand there were challenges around the misclassification of certain sectors across retail, hospitality and beauty. We have engaged with the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform on how we can ensure that those businesses which were misclassified and found to be ineligible for the scheme can reapply. We will take a number of steps over the coming weeks in order to address that.
We need to learn lessons from the design of a lot of these schemes. I recently met the Alliance for Insurance Reform. Its members are extremely concerned by the recommendations of the Judicial Council that awards be increased by 17%. Could the Minister of State confirm whether the Minister for Justice will enable the Dáil to discuss this?
I also want to raise with the Minister of State the issue of Enterprise Ireland being precluded from working with businesses with fewer than ten employees. Many smaller businesses work on a contract basis and, therefore, work on a different model. Modern work practices mean that businesses often contract in services such as graphic design, photography or social media support. Such employees are not staff of businesses, nor do they want to be. They are freelance workers. Will the Minister of State examine their status with Enterprise Ireland in order that they can support a greater number of businesses? We need systems that support the models that are being used in businesses in the here and now in order to ensure the sustainability of businesses into the future. We have to have practical and pragmatic support and interventions for businesses.
I acknowledge some of the matters raised by the Deputy. The Government has made significant progress on the national enterprise hub, which has been established with a key focus on supporting business around training and grant applications.
More than 250 supports are available online and are readily accessible for many SMEs and businesses. The hub covers more than 29 Departments and agencies. It is a vital support for many of these businesses. I compliment the local enterprise offices and all the local authorities on the administration of the ICOB and power up schemes. They are the people on the ground who engage with the businesses and have the knowledge of how businesses are classified and in which sector. It was the first scheme of its kind to be deployed at the scale required to cover all 31 local authorities. We want to establish a future platform that the Department can administer. Our officials are working on that at the moment.
Official Engagements
8. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the interactions he or his Department have had with the owner of a business (details supplied) since taking office; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21247/25]
The last couple of weeks have seen the Minister abandon a series of promises to workers. He abandoned the promises to extend sick leave and introduce a living wage. Incredibly, he is refusing to scrap sub-minimum wages. People watching this performance might ask if the Minister is following the lead of the most anti-trade union boss in Ireland, Michael O'Leary, who launched the Minister's election campaign last November. Has the Minister had any more meetings with Mr. O'Leary since he took office? How has his relationship with the latter influenced the Minister's decisions?
I have had no meetings, interactions or correspondence with the business owner in question since my appointment as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment last year in connection with any of my work, and nor has my Department.
At the Minister's campaign launch, Michael O'Leary stated:
We need a government that delivers for enterprise ... it’s vital that we elect a government that gets shit done ... I can think of nobody here, certainly in the current government, who demonstrates more action, more energy ... than Peter Burke.
That is more action and more energy for enterprise. Is that why the Minister is doing what he is doing? Is he following the lead of Michael O'Leary, an anti-trade union and anti-worker boss, in reneging on previous commitments to extend sick leave, introduce a living wage and honour the vote of the previous Dáil to abolish sub-minimum wage rates and the legalised discrimination against and super-exploitation of young workers which allows them to be paid even less than the minimum wage? The Minister talks about employment rights and says he is in favour of them. His actions demonstrate the opposite. The fact that he had the most famously anti-worker, anti-union boss in the country launch his election campaign suggests that opposite is the case.
My actions demonstrate that we have supported employment and workers throughout our economy. We are committed to achieving a living wage. We are about 3.5% away from it under one metric, which is the survey data for the labour force. Second, we are on it in the CSO data relating to the structure of earnings. I pointed out clearly the number of improvements we have made. We are committed to auto-enrolment, which will come in on 1 January, to protect the futures of workers.
Delayed.
We have banned zero-hour contracts. We have worked to bring in tips and gratuities legislation to protect the most vulnerable workers. We have introduced a sick pay scheme that is ever-present. We were clear in our manifesto before we went into government that, at this point in time, we did not feel we could extend it any further. We have commissioned a review of employment legislation. We have committed to an action plan for collective bargaining in respect of which public consultation is now underway. In all those areas, as well as in the context of additional rights such as that to request remote working, supporting workers and significant increases in the minimum wage over the past number of years, no Government has done more for workers' rights than this Administration and those that preceded it. That is a fact.
Saying that is a fact does not make it a fact. The Government has been in power for three or four months. It has not progressed workers' rights at all. It has taken a series of negative steps and reneged on the commitments to extend sick leave and establish a living wage and on the vote of the previous Dáil to abolish sub-minimum wages. I will focus on the latter. The Dáil voted two years ago to abolish sub-minimum wages. There was then a delay of a year because the Low Pay Commission was charged with looking at the matter. The commission looked at and unanimously recommended the abolition of sub-minimum wages. The Government then wanted to kick the can down the road again and said that an economic impact assessment was needed. I got a reply from the Minister two days ago to a parliamentary question in which I asked how this was progressing. He indicated that it is due to be finalised in June or July, but he has already made the decision. In advance of the economic impact assessment, he is also going to suspend the decision on that. I presume that is for three years. I am referring here to a legalised situation whereby young people are paid less than the minimum wage. That is scandalous, and the Minister has the cheek to say that it is a fact that he is working for workers' rights.
It is a fact that the Government committed to an action plan on collective bargaining in its first three months in office. It is a fact that we are commencing auto-enrolment on 1 January.
That is a delay.
It is a fact that we have commenced a review of all employment legislation. It is a fact that the Government has worked to protect the most vulnerable workers.
No, it is not.
It is a fact that we have significantly increased the minimum wage in the years since the establishment of the Low Pay Commission.
It is not-----
It absolutely is. I have quoted the figure of an increase of 29% since 2022. That is a fact. Of people who are 15 to 19 who are entitled and legally able to work, only a quarter are earning sub-minimum rates. It is a very small number of people. Critically, we have to look at barriers of entry to education, which is very important. The evidence I have behind that has not been available to allow that decision to be taken. The Low Pay Commission was clear that this is a complex issue. It said that in its report. I am going to examine the matter further. In connection with the work, the Cabinet has decided to make a decision in 2029, which is final.
In 2029.
Question No. 9 taken with Written Answers.
Small and Medium Enterprises
10. Deputy Paul McAuliffe asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the steps his Department is taking to promote the participation of Irish SMEs in EU important projects of common European interest; whether a new outreach strategy is planned; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21736/25]
What steps does the Department intend to take regarding participation of SMEs in EU important projects of common European interest, IPCEI? Ireland has some fantastic, world-leading companies, but we also have a vibrant SME sector that often does not have the participation it should have, both in the context of domestic public tendering process and also, in this instance, in projects of common interest. I would appreciate if the Minister would update the House on the matter.
I thank Deputy McAuliffe for this important question. It is a matter that will pave the way for a significant future in Ireland for semiconductors and other areas. Important projects of common European interest are becoming increasingly important as a means to enhance the competitiveness of the EU and its member states. The new programme for Government contains a commitment to "Boost participation in Important Projects of Common European Interest (IPCEI) to increase competitiveness and productivity for Irish companies and create more jobs". Ireland needs to significantly step up its involvement in the important projects of common European interest, subject to available funding, and I see SMEs and start-ups as being central to this. We have a great opportunity for our SMEs through the funding of breakthrough research and development, and first industrial deployment projects, to enable scaling up. In other words, we have an opportunity to help to make our most important technologies ready for mass production and we want SMEs rightly involved at the heart of it.
I fully support the integration of SMEs into future investments in important projects of common European interest. Officials in my Department are working with their counterparts in enterprise agencies to identify Ireland's priorities for the future. This ensures that the priorities from across industry, including our SMEs, are identified and proposed for consideration at the EU level in the selection of these new important projects of common European interest technologies. My Department is also fully engaged with the joint European forum for important projects of common European interest, JEF-IPCEI, and is a member of working groups on national best practices and facilitation of SME participation.
My Department will implement recommendations from these groups and will aim to make more important projects of common European interest accessible for SMEs and support SMEs through the process. In addition to these working groups, my Department is also participating in the JEF working groups, which are tasked with designing new important projects of common European interest in the strategic sectors of advanced semiconductor technologies and Al. Ireland's representation on these groups includes both Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland to help promote the interests of Irish industry as part of the scope of this development.
Some of what the Minister outlined is really important. I want to underscore the more micro-level interventions that need to be made. The Minister mentioned Enterprise Ireland. It is a fantastic organisation that is particularly focused on SMEs and Irish businesses which export abroad. These projects of common European interest are known. They are ready-made targets for our industries.
I hope, and would have every expectation, that Enterprise Ireland will be taking the information that is publicly available, identifying companies in Ireland likely to participate and providing both training and support for those organisations in order for them to be successful in bidding for contracts.
Ireland has fantastic companies but we have seen in the past that with additional support from organisations like Enterprise Ireland, they are able to access new markets. Given the scale of some of these projects - and they are vast - this is one area Enterprise Ireland in particular, really needs to focus on. The Minister might bring this back to the organisation concerned.
I thank Deputy McAuliffe and I absolutely agree with him. We are doing that through our new semiconductor strategy, which clearly calls out the role Enterprise Ireland will have in advice and financing access to these projects.
One thing I will say is one of the big projects we have had is from Analog Devices which has approximately a €630 million investment through the projects of common European interest. I was looking at one of these semiconductor companies quite recently, which had 814 SMEs on its books that it was working on. This was a large-scale company with services from Banagher to Longford. It was incredible to see so many SMEs linked in. That is why, as part of the review of the national development plan, it will be critical to get more support into our enterprise development agencies to enable companies to access these incredible projects. We know renewables and semiconductors are areas the European Union is focusing on and since the competitive compass that has come on foot of the Draghi report, we will see many areas of opportunity on behalf of the Irish Government. We are fighting very hard for additional funding in this area through the NDP envelope which will be negotiated in the coming weeks.
The Minister predicted where I was going with my reply. The sub-supply chain within Ireland is increasingly important. We saw when organisations like IBM, for example, opened first in west Dublin and the huge number of Irish small SMEs which then became sub-suppliers, not because of a lower quality of their product but because of the quality of the product, their proximity to the location and their ability to provide top-class services.
As well as SMEs participating at the level of common European projects as direct suppliers, there is also a whole chain of small SMEs that could supply those companies in return. There is a huge ecosystem here in Ireland, particularly on the engineering side, which I have some experience of with regard to materials, metals, plastics and so on. I really believe there is much potential there. There is a drive here to bring manufacturing back to the European Union which will benefit Irish companies if we equip them correctly.
I thank the Deputy who is quite right; it is an area of huge opportunity. As a country, in the past we have not done enough in this area and having only one project speaks volumes. That is why we are reframing the narrative in connection with this and working with Enterprise Ireland and the IDA to try to ensure companies have the capacity to access these very significant projects. We know renewables and semiconductors are going to be important for the future of Ireland. As I said in my earlier contribution, when you see chips turning up in fridges, phones, electric vehicles, Ireland has one of the best landscapes for this. More than 80 semiconductor companies are linked in with SMEs in our landscape, with more than 20,000 people, and KPMG has been clear we have the capacity to go to 40,000 in the next decade and beyond. When we see we are dwindling in Europe - we have only 8% of the chip market while Asia is manufacturing 80% - we have the building blocks here and products like this to drill down, as the Deputy quite rightly pointed out, other components in our SME supply chain. I would push this as part of the NDP review because this is how you sustain really good employment and enhance our SME sector right across the economy.
Business Supports
11. Deputy Barry Ward asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if his attention has been drawn to cases whereby businesses that qualify for the increased cost of business grant and power up grant were misclassified in the wrong category; if an appeals system has been established to ensure they can draw this funding down; if this appeal system has been communicated to all local authorities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21733/25]
16. Deputy Noel McCarthy asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if his Department is considering the reintroduction of the increased cost of business and power up grant schemes for small business rate payers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21610/25]
20. Deputy Séamus McGrath asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to outline the number of applicants for the power up grant who were disqualified because they did not indicate an eligible category of business; the number of applicants that appealed the disqualification decision in total; the number that appealed on the basis of mistakenly indicating the incorrect business category; and if he is still reviewing these appeals and when will they be finally addressed. [20773/25]
24. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment for an update regarding the implementation of an appeals system for the power up scheme; when it is likely that businesses will be able to lodge appeals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21730/25]
I wish to first acknowledge the huge supports the Government has put in place for businesses to deal with the increase the cost of doing business, energy and other factors.
I have been contacted by several businesses that have been miscategorised for these grants and, as such, have been denied grants they could have otherwise got. Is the Minister aware of this and if so, is there a proper appeals mechanism in place to allow them to appeal against any decision that has been wrongfully made?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 11, 16, 20 and 24 together.
I thank the Deputy for submitting his question. It is probably the most topical one on the Question Paper. The increased cost of business scheme was introduced back in March 2024 and the power up grant was introduced in October of the same year. Both schemes are now closed but, in total, more than €400 million in grant aid was successfully paid to SMEs right across the country in 2024 under these grants. The schemes were designed by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and administered by local authorities with the aim of helping businesses with the increased costs associated with running a business.
The power up grant was announced as part of budget 2025 and paid out €158 million in grants to over 39,000 businesses. The increased cost of business scheme made €242 million in grant payments to over 75,000 businesses, including a double payment for businesses in the retail, hospitality and beauty sectors. This is a significant direct support that has been specifically targeted at SMEs and has benefitted thousands of small and family-run businesses. I again thank local authorities all over the country for their hard work in administering both schemes and getting this vital support to businesses in a most effective and timely manner.
Following the launch of power up, the Department and local authorities around the country received a substantial amount of correspondence from businesses that could not avail of the power up grant. The most common issue raised was from businesses who believed they were in the hospitality, retail or beauty sectors, but incorrectly categorised themselves during the ICOB registration process, which was the basis for the power up grant. The number of applicants that were deemed ineligible due to misclassification is not yet clear. In order to get money to businesses before the end of 2024, the power up grant was aligned with the ICOB grant. Therefore, priority was to get power up funding to businesses that had been approved for the second ICOB grant. The extent of the issue of incorrect classifications only emerged after the power up grant was launched.
Businesses that had not classified themselves as operating in the hospitality, retail or beauty sectors were ineligible for the second ICOB and power up grants. This is because one of the main criteria for the power up grant was that a business must have received the second ICOB payment. While delivery of the power up grant was concluding, the Department began a review which involved detailed engagement with local authorities to assess the issue. The Department also engaged with the Department of public expenditure in order to set out the proposed solution. In order to address this, this week the Government approved an appeals process that will give those businesses in the retail, hospitality and beauty sectors that were not eligible for ICOB and the power up grant because of the misclassification issue, an opportunity to register for those grants. This is not a reopening of those grant schemes, rather it is designed to allow those who originally misclassified their business sector an opportunity to register for the grants.
The Department will now engage with the Department of public expenditure, infrastructure, public service reform and digitalisation and with the local authorities to agree on the details of the reclassification process. Subject to agreement with the local authorities, it is intended to open the appeals process as soon as possible and engage with local authorities to ensure eligible businesses have been informed with the necessary steps to reapply. Both businesses and local authorities will be given guidance to assist in this process. Once potentially eligible businesses have been notified and the reclassification process opens, I expect grant payments will be paid to businesses where their information is submitted and has been reviewed and verified.
I am very pleased to hear the Government has approved that appeal process. It is obviously very important. The kind of businesses denied these facilities are quite vulnerable. They are small businesses that need these supports, so I welcome that. I note it was promised some time ago, so when the Minister of State says it will be available soon, how soon might that be and could significant pressure be put on to make that happen?
Can the Minister of State also confirm that in circumstances where schemes are closed and businesses have been denied grants, if they are granted a successful appeal, that they will not be denied in any way the full grant they would have received had that mistake not been made? I also acknowledge, as the Minister of State has, the work of local authorities in this regard. Mistakes happen - I am not criticising that fact - but we must have fair procedures that mean when a mistake happens, a business is not left in a vulnerable position and that it is entitled to appeal and get the money it should have got in the first place.
Is the Department considering the reintroduction of the increased cost of business and power up grant schemes for small businesses and ratepayers, and will he make a statement on the matter?
Will the Minister of State outline the number of applicants for the power up grant who were disqualified because they did not indicate an eligible category of business, the number of applicants that appealed the disqualification decision in total, the number that appealed on the basis of mistakenly indicating the incorrect business category, whether the matter is still being reviewed and whether there will be an appeals mechanism?
Regarding the Deputies' supplementary questions, we can go back and forth. To answer Deputy Ward's questions on the steps that are now required, it was important that the Government this week approved the appeals process. We will now engage with the local authorities to map out the extent of those businesses that were eligible for ICOB 1 and, therefore, applied for ICOB 2 but were unsuccessful. ICOB 2 is the important one, as those who are eligible for ICOB 2 also get the power up grant. We obtained legal advice on those, not just on getting the power up grant, but also getting ICOB 2. It is important to emphasise that.
Regarding the number of those who were misclassified, the determination during the implementation of the original system was that the classification of sector, be it retail, hospitality or beauty, was insignificant when they applied initially. However, it became apparent that, when applying for ICOB 2, having the correct classification was critical in order to get both. When we implemented the power up grant in October 2024, it was on the basis that the applicant had previously been in receipt of ICOB 2. That is where the challenge is. We are scoping out the matter. While there is not a clear determination on the number, it is in the region of 6,000 businesses. We are engaging with the Department of public expenditure on the overall cost that will be involved, which is potentially in the region of €40 million. That still has to be determined.
On the timeline, we want to see this done as swiftly as possible, preferably before the end of the year. We will be directed in that engagement from local authorities with businesses that applied for ICOB 1.
I acknowledge what the Government has done. These supports are important. We are talking about small businesses that employ an enormous number of people throughout the country but are not massively profitable and, therefore, are vulnerable when these grants are not given to them. The grants are important to ensure their viability.
Will the Minister of State do two things in particular? I acknowledge what he said about the appeal process coming along and we have spoken about this before. I welcome that. It is timely, and the more timely it is, the better. I hear what the Minister of State has said about the timeline, but if we could speed that up and have it in place by the autumn for businesses, it would make a considerable difference to local economies around the country. These businesses are the lifeblood of our economy. They need our support. The Government wants to support them, but I would like to see them getting what they are entitled to sooner rather than later.
If there is a circumstance where a business got ICOB 1 and was denied ICOB 2 or did not get ICOB 1 and, therefore, was not entitled to ICOB 2, that needs to be rectified. We cannot leave any business in the lurch because of a simple clerical error that was made at local level. Let us try to fix this.
I thank the Minister of State for his response. I would also like to thank him and his departmental staff for the significant amount of work that has been put into the development and roll-out of the increased cost of business grant and the power up grant scheme. It is fair to say that these schemes were an enormous success and were greatly appreciated by eligible business owners. In fact, it is because of their success that I ask that a reintroduction be further explored.
I welcome the Minister's announcement this morning on the appeals mechanism that is being worked through. As outlined by the other Deputies, this will give hope to some businesses that for some reason were categorised incorrectly in their applications for the power up grant. To make a brief wider point, the alignment with the ICOB grant has presented difficulties for many businesses. This is going back to the 2023 rate payment. There are many businesses that entered into business since that time, so they have not received any support.
Another point is that, in the case of many businesses, their landlords pay the rates on their behalf and the businesses pay an amount to their landlords that includes rent and rates. Unfortunately, those businesses did not qualify for any grant, neither the ICOB nor the power up grant. The alignment with the ICOB grant has continued that problem for many businesses. I am not sure if there is scope in the appeals mechanism to look at the issue now, but can it be examined for future grants? Many businesses are doing their best creating employment but are not eligible on that basis.
We have a supplementary question from Deputy Conway-Walsh.
I am glad that the Department is seeing sense with this because it obviously needed to be addressed. We have been doing grants for long enough and should not be in a situation where these anomalies arise. It concerns me that the Minister of State says he is engaging with the Department of public expenditure, as that can take a long time. I heard it mentioned that we would have the appeals process by autumn but it needs to be much sooner than that. I would contrast this situation with that of businesses that are trying to deal with Revenue, in that there is an inflexibility, particularly where there has been an accumulation of what is owed to Revenue. There needs to be flexibility for businesses, particularly those caught in this trap. It is significant that businesses that are no longer in operation be considered as well.
This matter needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency. I am glad there has been a rowing back on it. It should not have happened in the first place. We recognise that businesses are struggling as it is. The turnaround needs to be immediate.
I thank the Deputies for their contributions as regards the announcement this morning.
Regarding the scheme and Deputy McGrath's point, the scheme was not perfect. There is an acknowledgement that it was reflective of the 2023 rates. Many businesses had to engage with local authorities about up-to-date rates and a rates repayment plan to bring them up to speed. We want to enhance potential further schemes down the road and ensure that the learnings from this process are implemented in them. However, we know the importance of the cash injection that many businesses received to deal with labour costs and energy costs over the past 12 months, which have been significant for their viability.
On the process, the Minister, Deputy Peter Burke, and I are determined to ensure that we have an accelerated and ambitious programme in terms of trying to get this done. The local authorities will engage with many businesses that were ineligible for ICOB 2. More than 75,000 businesses were in receipt of the first payment. They need to be engaged with to see who did not qualify and what sectors specifically did not qualify for ICOB 2. We want this to come to a conclusion and to ensure that these learnings are implemented in any future schemes.
Before we move on, I will briefly welcome a group of fifth year students to the Public Gallery. They are peer mentors from Enfield Community College in Enfield, County Meath. They are doing incredible work. We can see them up there and we look forward to seeing some of them down here in the coming years. I congratulate them and thank their principal, Shane, and teacher, Gráinne, for doing that. You are all very welcome this morning.
Work Permits
12. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to provide an update on the process being put in place to fulfil the programme for Government commitment to "Examine ways to facilitate people who are on work permits to move jobs more easily and legally, while protecting the integrity of the immigration system"; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21619/25]
I am asking for an update on the commitment in the programme for Government to examine ways to make it easier and more transparent for people on work permits to change jobs legally. Last week, I visited the Migrant Rights Centre. I had a great discussion with it and met many people who had come to this country with the intention to work. There is a matter of basic fairness and of upholding our international reputation as a country that respects the rights of workers.
I thank the Deputy. A well-functioning labour market and good working conditions are essential components of sustainable and inclusive growth. As part of the efforts to maintain this, the Government operates an employment permits system that is highly responsive to the labour market. I recognise the valuable role migrant workers play in Irish society, particularly in critical areas such as healthcare and ICT. The year 2024 saw significant progress in the implementation of changes to the employment permits system to address the commitments now set out in the programme for Government.
The Employment Permits Act 2024 introduced several improvements to the employment permits system, making it more flexible. This includes the provision of new change-of-employer processes, facilitating permit holders to move jobs more easily. Permit holders on the two main permit types can change to a new employer under their existing permit after a period of nine months has passed since commencing their first employment permit in the State. This has made it significantly easier for permit holders to seek more favourable working conditions and to ensure employers provide the required conditions.
I welcome the fact there is movement on this, but at the heart of the issue is a simple question of fairness. Workers who come to Ireland on employment permits are legally present in the country, paying taxes and contributing to our essential sectors, such as those mentioned by the Minister of State, but once they arrive, they find themselves tied to a single employer under rigid rules that limit their ability to change jobs. I spoke to one of these migrants who was a mushroom picker about the conditions the workers were working in and how they felt they were stuck with the job. It is not acceptable.
If we go back to where Ireland was, we are a proud nation and we emigrated and worked in these types of job. When we look at the people who left this country, we should be fighting for the people who are coming to this country to have the same rights.
We have heard countless stories, one of which I just mentioned. In some cases, migrants are left waiting for too long for decisions and feel as if they are trapped. In the worst cases, people are left vulnerable to abuse by employers because the employers know these people do not have another option.
I understand the issues about migrants the Deputy is raising. We have heard some of the stories and I have engaged also with the migrant refugee representative body to ensure their members are listened to and are front and centre in any enhancements we can make to the scheme. We have looked at how the granting of reactivation permits is in one sense supported. We want to work with the Department of Justice in that regard and ensure that we help to support non-EU workers who are in difficult circumstances while also highlighting these changes.
We have implemented a new online workers' employment permit system. That will have an additional benefit in terms of user interaction and real-time data on how permits are being processed. We will continue to engage with the Deputy and with any further suggestions he may have to support this.
I welcome the fact the Minister of State is engaging with these industries and he should continue to do that. I would also like his Department to examine the fee migrant workers are paying. Off the top of my head, it costs €200 yearly. It is an unfair fee and should be reduced because these people are struggling. They are coming here to work. Workers should not have to choose between leaving a bad situation and risking their legal status. We can and must do better and I welcome that the Minister of State's Department is doing that and I thank him.
The real question is, will we see legislative reform in this area in 2025? Will the Department commit to a clear set of reforms that put mobility, workers' rights and transparency at the centre of the work permit system?
I thank the Deputy for his input. We are open to any suggestions or proposals and will work through any enhancements needed within the system. I do not think it should be a rigid system. It should be agile and flexible to meet the needs of our current labour market. If the general work permits or critical skill work permits are required, we actively update the needs analysis regarding which sectors do or do not require an increased quota. We need to put workers front and centre in terms of any inappropriate conditions they may be subjected to.
The Deputy is right that mobility in the sector is important. We have made additions to the nine-month eligibility requirement to move. We also need to ensure migrants are not moving from one sector to the same sector and facing challenges around where that employment is. If they are based in Dublin, the west or the south, there might be barriers to mobility, for example, family, schools, etc. I will work with the Deputy and the migrant community on that.
Business Supports
13. Deputy Grace Boland asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment his views on the recently launched business energy upgrade scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21239/25]
In light of recent utility price volatility, global economic uncertainty, trade wars and the threat of tariffs, it was really good to see the business energy upgrade scheme launched in November. Now that it has been under way for five months, will the Minister of State give us an update on the uptake of the scheme, how it is working and whether public bodies are utilising it?
I thank the Deputy. As she will be aware, I, as the Minister of State at the Department for Enterprise, Trade and Employment with responsibility for small business and retail, have responsibility for ensuring that emissions in the commercial built environment are reduced in line with climate action targets. Achieving these targets will mean that many owners of commercial properties will have to carry out energy upgrade works to their buildings. Such works can include installing smart meters and replacing gas and oil heating with a heat pump system. Doing so will come at a cost, though, and it is for this reason that I welcomed the introduction of the business energy upgrades scheme, which is run by the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI. The scheme is designed to meet some of the upfront costs of these upgrade works and provide rapid grants and options for businesses at varying grant rates. They can get up to 30% support for a range of energy upgrade measures and up to 50% support to optimise existing systems and support retrofit design costs. I am pleased that there has been a strong uptake of the scheme since it opened for applications. There are over 200 draft applications in progress and 78 offers have been made to date, to an approximate value of €1.8 million.
The scheme is funded from the climate action fund and offers up to €120,000 for a range of common building upgrade measures, including pumps, solar thermal, automatic controls, heat pumps, ventilation and wall insulation. The applications received are for all the potential measures currently offered under the scheme.
I thank the Minister of State. As someone who has spent my recent years advising SMEs, it is important to remember that a lot of them do not have the capacity to be continually checking what grants are open for application and navigating difficult processes, so it is important that we have a streamlined, efficient process. Will the Minister of State tell me how long it is taking to finalise and confirm draft applications? In the Department's view, is the scheme working or is there anything we can do to improve it? What can we do to improve the uptake of the scheme? While it is great that there are 200 applications, there are a lot more than 200 SMEs in this country. Are we appropriately advertising the scheme to make sure we are encouraging uptake to help support these SMEs with their energy costs at a time when they are particularly suffering with them?
A key priority for the Government within our competitiveness plan is to engage with the Department of energy, climate and environment to ensure we can drive down the cost of energy, not just for residential consumers, but for businesses to ensure they remain viable.
It is probably one of the most important areas we can focus on and currently are focused on. We are providing grants to small businesses around emissions and ensuring that they have access to grants to support their transition to more carbon-efficient and green initiatives.
This is an important energy grant scheme. The 200 applications demonstrate there is a confidence and commitment from businesses to engage in this process. We have also previously seen many businesses invest in new refrigeration units, and I know that was supported through our Department. We will continue on that trajectory. A timeline regarding the applications is with the SEAI, which administers the scheme. I can get that to the Deputy.
I thank the Minister of State. As he said, it is important that we support our SMEs with their energy costs, and it is great that we have this scheme. It is important that we have a periodic review of the uptake of the scheme to make sure it was working. If the uptake is not increasing substantially, we need to look at how we are advertising that scheme and encouraging SMEs to take it up, as well as making sure that it is quick and efficient and that the timeline to approve the grant applications is actually appropriate.
The Minister, Deputy O'Brien, is working with the SEAI to try to streamline the grant applications, not just for businesses, but for homes under the warmer homes scheme. Where businesses or customers successfully make an application to get onto the scheme, the scheme takes into consideration the likelihood of trying to procure a contractor. That extends out the timeline so, in effect, the timeline could be 18 months before an actual contractor is available to do it. However, I think the SEAI should measure when the actual grant is processed and approved, and then it is up to the business itself to find out when the works commence. It is a vital support, and there is a commitment to enhance this scheme into the future, with approximately €1.8 million already committed. We want to go even further in future to support business.
Company Registration
14. Deputy Roderic O'Gorman asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the primary operational difficulties that have arisen due to failures in the IT system at the Companies Registration Office, CRO, related to the strike-off process; how these difficulties have affected the CRO's management of its obligations to monitor and enforce compliance with statutory filing obligations under the Companies Act 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21290/25]
25. Deputy Roderic O'Gorman asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the total expenditure to date in 2025 on resolving IT system failures for the Companies Registration Office, including the operational and staffing costs of carrying out the company strike-off process manually since the issue was identified; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21291/25]
We will have time to introduce the question and for one supplementary before the end of this session, if that is okay.
I thank the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach. I wish to ask the Minister about the primary operational difficulties that have arisen due to failures in the IT system in the Companies Registration Office, CRO, related to the strike-off process, and how these difficulties have impacted the CRO's management of its statutory obligations to monitor and enforce that strike-off process.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 14 and 25 together.
I thank the Deputy for his questions. Companies can be struck off the companies register on either a voluntary or involuntary basis. Voluntary strike-off is proceeding as normal, with companies meeting the criteria being struck off on an ongoing basis by the Companies Registration Office. Involuntary strike-off by the CRO arises when companies are not meeting the requirements of the Companies Act 2014 with respect to registered directors and the annual filing of returns.
Due to difficulties with the enforcement module of the CRO’s IT system, the CRO suspended its involuntary strike-off programme early in 2024. Involuntary strike-off has since recommenced on a curtailed basis, as the underlying IT issues have still not been fully resolved. The primary operational issues that have arisen as a result of the IT problem are that the involuntary strike-off process currently needs more manual checks put in place than with a fully automated process, and as a result, fewer companies have been struck off.
The CRO continues to monitor companies for compliance with their statutory filing obligations and to enforce filing obligations under the Companies Act 2014. All annual returns filed late are subject to a late filing fee of €100 for the first day and €3 per day thereafter. Where appropriate, a company filing a late annual return also automatically loses its audit exemption. The late filing fee regime is operating as normal and the CRO received a total of €9.7 million in late filing fees during 2024.
The current involuntary strike-off programme is focusing on companies that have no registered directors, which is a breach of the Companies Act. When the programme has been completed, the focus will move to companies that have failed to file annual returns and those that have failed to register beneficial ownership information with the registrar.
The CRO has spent a total of €313,567 to date in 2025 on support and maintenance for its IT system. The sum is in respect of the total cost of support and maintenance for the first quarter of the year for the CRO and also the offices of the Registry of Friendly Societies and the Central Register of Beneficial Ownership of Companies and Industrial and Provident Societies, and includes the cost of fixing bugs that arise.
I thank the Minister. I am asking about the operational breakdown at the Companies Registration Office and specifically how the failure in the CRO's IT system has undermined the functioning of the company strike-off. We know, and it was confirmed by reporting earlier this year, that the CRO has been forced, due to persistent failures in its IT systems, to resort to manually striking companies off. The Minister has confirmed that, while there is some non-manual processing taking place, manual processing is still taking place, which is not satisfactory. That regression to manual processing is not only inefficient; it is an admission that the system that was put in place at public expense is not delivering on its core function. This has reportedly created a backlog in enforcement actions but it is also eroding legal certainty for businesses trying to comply with their filing obligations.
The CRO currently has a statutory obligation to monitor compliance and initiate strike-offs where companies fail to meet their obligations but that power has to be exercised transparently, fairly and predictably.
I wish to clarify that legal obligations still remain on the part of companies. We received approximately 560,000 submissions last year, so any company that is not complying with the Companies Act will be prosecuted. I want to be very clear on that; their obligations still remain.
Regarding how it happened, as far as I understand, it was noted when the CRO was going through an involuntary strike-off methodology that two or three rounds of strike-offs did not appear in the CRO gazette, which they are obviously obliged to do. That was noticed by the CRO, and then it had to go through them manually, which caused a significant issue and a delay with strike-offs.
I agree with the Deputy. We need to be efficient in this area. I have asked to meet the Companies Registration Office to get more information on the issues at hand but I assure the Deputy we will get to the bottom of it.
Critically, the number of submissions we are receiving through the CRO is at record levels and all obligations and legislative requirements still remain on company directors and their companies, across all the offices of the CRO.
Social Welfare Payments
88. Deputy Malcolm Byrne asked the Minister for Social Protection the number of enterprises in receipt of the wage subsidy scheme to support employment of those with disabilities; the number of individuals so supported; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21537/25]
This question is similar to Question No. 80. I am surprised they were not grouped because they are very similar. I want to ask the Minister about the number of employers who are employing people with the support of the wage subsidy scheme. There are three strands to the scheme. I asked about strand 1 and strand 2 and I am not sure why I left out strand 3 but if the Minister has that information, it would be welcome as well.
On a point of order, there was a lot of consternation and an awful lot of Dáil time was given over to Deputies in the Lowry group who insisted on having recognition. They got it and now they have a question on the Order Paper but they have not turned up to take it. I want that to be recorded because there was a lot of chat and consternation in the House, as the Minister knows. At the end of it, we see that after all of their kicking up and kicking off, they have not turned up to take their slots. This is worth recording.
I put my question.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta as an cheist seo. On the wage subsidy scheme, employers face a risk when hiring any new worker, including in the context of whether the worker has the ability to do the job. Many employers perceive the risk as greater when a person under consideration has a disability, even where that person is highly qualified and able to do the job. It is important that we seek to neutralise this perceived risk to level the playing field faced by a person with a disability when he or she is competing for employment against other jobseekers. That is what the wage subsidy scheme seeks to do - to assist to level this playing field.
To do this, the scheme incentivises and supports employers to hire people with a disability by providing a subsidy to reduce ongoing salary costs. The rate of subsidy varies with the number of people with disabilities employed under the scheme, from €6.30 per hour when an employer hires one worker with a disability, increasing by 10% when the number employed is three or more and reaching a maximum of €9.45 per hour, when the number of people with a disability in employment with the employer exceeds 22. Employers who employ 25 or more people with a disability will also benefit from a €30,000 per year grant towards the cost of employing an employment assistance officer. Employers can also avail of a range of supports under the work and access scheme, including support with the cost of workplace adaptations.
As of March 2025, 1,501 employers partaking of the wage subsidy scheme and 2,464 people with disabilities were supported through the scheme. In August 2024, my Department published a review of the wage subsidy scheme. The review made six recommendations, including to reduce the minimum required hours of the scheme, to regularly review the subsidy rate and to expand the scheme to employers outside of the private sector. These recommended changes have been made to the scheme. It is hoped they will make the scheme more accessible and flexible for people with disabilities and their employers. We will launch an information campaign this month to highlight the expanded scope of the scheme and to promote a greater level of awareness and take-up among employers.
The review is very welcome, because those figures are quite low. I thought there might have been greater uptake of the scheme by companies. There is great capacity in the scheme to increase employment opportunities for people with disabilities and enhance the workplace by increasing diversity and making it more accessible. I welcome the review and the fact it has suggested changes that, hopefully, will increase awareness of the scheme and bring in new companies that might be inclined to enter the scheme and hire people with disabilities.
I will also mention the employability projects throughout the country. There is a very active one in Galway, which works with a lot of different companies making sure they are aware that they can avail of the scheme and helping people with disabilities to find employment. I welcome the review. I note there has been no increase in the level of subsidy available to companies since January 2022. I ask for that to be looked at in light of budgets 2025 and 2026.
I endorse the Deputy's remarks on employability and Work West. A number of groups in this space are doing very important work. We will launch the reviewed and renewed scheme next week. We will seek to work with employers' organisations and various groups throughout the country to promote the scheme and the benefits for an employer in having somebody with a disability, who will bring that life experience, on his or her team. I recommend colleagues on all sides look at our Department's promotional work and videos on this, which highlight some of the companies throughout the country that do this and its value both to the employer and, most importantly, the person with a disability.
I commend groups such as Open Doors that are working very hard to promote the scheme, to encourage employers to address what, in many cases, are genuine concerns but in other cases are issues that can be deal with, and to encourage a greater take-up of the scheme. I am not happy with the take-up of the scheme and want to see it expanded.
The subsidy rate is a budgetary issue. We will engage with the Minister for public expenditure on that in the context of budget 2026.
I thank the Minister for his response and his openness to looking at the subsidy that is available. Perhaps there will be an opportunity in the next budget to increase the subsidy. I look forward to the information campaign around the scheme. I am sure the Minister will share that with all his colleagues in the House. We will be available. I agree with him that the opportunity for employers to employ people with a disability increases diversity in the workplace, which is beneficial for companies and employees alike. I compliment the Minister on the work in this area. It is to be hoped it will lead to an increased number of companies taking up the scheme and people with disabilities entering the workplace.
I will go back to Deputy James O'Connor for his question.
Social Welfare Schemes
87. Deputy James O'Connor asked the Minister for Social Protection if he will remove inconsistencies and anomalies in the current jobseeker's allowance scheme which discourage people from taking up employment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21699/25]
Will the Department of Social Protection remove the inconsistencies and anomalies in the current jobseeker's allowance scheme that discourage people from taking up employment. Will he give some further information on that? It is an important issue. It is something we have previously discussed. I would appreciate it if the Minister could advise the House on whether his Department plans any moves on this.
I thank the Deputy for his question. The programme for Government contains a commitment to introduce a new working-age payment to simplify and address those inconsistencies in payment arrangements, which face people who return to work from a jobseeker's payment. An outline of the proposed approach was published as part of the consultation process on the introduction of a new pay-related benefit. I am particularly pleased to say that was introduced at the start of April. I acknowledge the considerable work of the Department of Social Protection in getting that over the line.
We are proceeding to develop a more detailed consultation process on the working-age payment model. I will launch this consultation later this year. In the meantime, a number of arrangements are in place to incentivise and encourage people in receipt of the jobseeker's allowance scheme to take up work or to engage in training and development programmes to prepare for work. First, a person in receipt of jobseeker's allowance is allowed to work for up to three days per week and continue to receive a partial payment. The first €20 of earnings per day is disregarded with the balance of income assessed at 60%. A person can also retain secondary benefits, such as fuel allowance, subject to meeting the relevant means test. Second, under the back to work family dividend scheme, people taking up full-time employment retain the child support element of their payment for two years. The first year is paid at the full rate and the second year is paid at 50%, which means that they receive an in-work welfare payment to supplement employment earnings. Third, people in receipt of jobseeker's allowance can opt to return to education and training, or to move into self-employment, and continue to receive a welfare payment. For the full duration of their training or education course, they receive the full rate of payment. If they take up self-employment, they receive a full payment rate for the first year and 75% for the second year.
Jobseekers who take up a work placement programme, community employment or Tús placements, also receive an increase in their payment rate and can continue to receive any secondary benefits. In addition, the Department supports employment transitions through the part-time job incentive scheme, which facilitates part-time employment for up to 24 hours per week, and through the working family payment.
I appreciate the response. This is an important issue that has been raised by the Citizens Information Board. It was highlighted that the working-age payments scheme should be based on the working family payment model, whereby a person receives a payment based on a percentage of the difference between his or her income and the specified threshold for his or her family type. However, the board also pointed out how crucial and important the administration of the working-age payment is, given the difficulties regularly reported by CIS clients. I appreciate the information the Minister brought before the House. It is important that clarification is brought. It is a matter we discussed previously. This comes up in conversations in my constituency office, as it does for other Deputies. I look forward to working with the Minister on issues around this and other employment matters that may come up before the relevant Oireachtas committees, including the employment committee. If he can give further information in his supplementary response, I would appreciate it.
Certain groups of people, including seasonal workers and school caretakers, in particular, are excluded from pay-related jobseeker's benefits and allowances. Seasonal workers are every bit as unemployed when they are not working; it is just that they are unemployed for a specific period. Will the Minister give some consideration to including those people, who we rely on and lean on in the seasons when they work? It is not their fault they do not have work. The Minister knows that well. They are available for work but it is very tough to find work. School principals and teachers will tell you these workers are very much necessary and needed. They like that continuity of service but these workers feel very aggrieved, and rightly so, that they have been excluded from the programme.
If Deputy O'Reilly would like to drop me a line on that, I will follow up on it. I know more than most the value of school caretakers, particularly to the teachers.
I congratulate Deputy O'Connor on his appointment as Chairman of the employment and enterprise committee. I look forward to working with him. In that context, we need to ensure that the social protection system can be worker friendly. Welfare traps which are inhibiting people from taking up work need to be removed. For instance, if a person on jobseeker's allowance receives an offer of part-time work, they can end up worse off financially if their hours are spread over the entire week rather than concentrated over three days or less. That is an anomaly I want to address.
As stated, we will be introducing a working-age payment to remove inconsistencies and anomalies in the current jobseeker's payments that are discouraging people from taking up employment. One of the proposed models is to change the basis of the current payment structure in order that a person's payment will be based on a percentage of the difference between their income and a specified threshold for the family type. The purpose of that change would be to take advantage of real-time PAYE information and to move from the days-of-work approach to an income-based approach. That would mean that a person should always be better off by taking up employment. However, I will be publishing draft proposals for full consultation with stakeholders and Oireachtas committees before we agree any final design of what a working-age payment might look like.
The programme for Government states that we must ensure the social protection system is work friendly and that welfare traps which inhibit people from taking up work are removed. At present, a person on jobseeker's allowance who receives an offer of part-time work may actually end up worse off financially if their hours are spread across the whole working week rather than being concentrated over three days or less. This could easily be addressed with some focus, and I appreciate the comments the Minister has made. I hope we can work on it together. I just wanted to raise the issue because I thought it was important. I appreciate the Department's response that this will be worked on in the coming weeks and months.
We will absolutely engage across the House on proposals in this space. People are being disincentivised from moving from the welfare system into work because of anomalies that should no longer exist. With everybody's input, we can do that, hopefully by the end of this year.
89. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Social Protection the transitional supports being put in place for the 380 people whose one-parent family payment and half-rate carer’s allowance are both due to end this year; and whether he accepts that the sudden loss of these payments risks plunging vulnerable families into financial hardship and uncertainty. [21009/25]
I welcome the Minister's comments on the nutritional review of the school meals programme. I acknowledge and commend the great work of the companies right across the country, including in Mayo, in delivering school meals. Companies like Steak Out catering, for example, are delivering high-quality nutritional meals to hundreds of children across east and south Mayo, in particular.
My question concerns the one-parent family payment and a half-rate carer's allowance. There are many concerns over these very vulnerable families. Given that this payment is due to end at the end of the year, are there any plans for a transitional payment to protect these families during what will be very difficult time?
I thank the Deputy for his question. I take it that it concerns people in receipt of the one-parent family allowance, domiciliary care allowance and the half-rate carer's allowance in respect of a child who is turning 16 this year. Of the approximately 10,200 people currently in receipt of both the one-parent family payment and half-rate carer's allowance, approximately 390 will cease being in this position during 2025 due to the age of their youngest child. However, it is important to note that at age 16, the person for whom the half-rate carer's allowance or domiciliary care allowance was being paid becomes eligible to apply for the disability allowance in their own right. This payment rate is €244 per week compared with €360 per month for domiciliary care allowance, meaning that payments into the household will increase by over €8,400 a year. The person formerly in receipt of the one-parent family payment can move to the jobseeker’s allowance payment, which is paid at the same rate as the one-parent family payment, or, alternatively, where such a person is providing full-time care, they can apply for full-rate carer's allowance. In the latter case, the person can work 18.5 hours a week and retain the payment.
It is not necessarily the case that the family of a child who has an ongoing disability which requires their parent to provide full-time care will inevitably experience a reduction in payment. However, if there are cases where that is happening, I will certainly work with the Deputy to address that.
I should also highlight a number of changes that have been made to assist lone-parent families in recent budgets. Within the context of the programme for Government, we are looking at a range of reviews of supports for lone-parent families. We are currently preparing a work plan to implement that commitment.
I am sure the Minister will acknowledge that lone parents are vulnerable and have a difficult time. According to the ESRI, there is a huge risk of economic vulnerability. We should do everything we can. I will certainly work with him on any of those families who may be at risk and who fall in that gap in terms of the payment. I welcome what the Minister said to Deputy O'Reilly on child maintenance and the means test. The programme for Government commits to supporting lone parents and I look forward to working with the Minister to ensure that supports continue. I hope we can work with the Minister to ensure that no family will be taken off the lone parents support at the end of the year.
I have already met with a number of groups in this space pointing out many anomalies in the system we need to address to assist lone parents. As the Deputy said, it is a very challenging role. I have engaged with the groups and unfortunately it seems there are systems that are not helping them. I am determined to address those anomalies to make sure that there is support in place for lone parents who do such an important job right throughout the country.
Question No. 90 taken with Written Answers.
91. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Minister for Social Protection when the means test for carer’s allowance will be abolished; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20503/25]
Tá fhios againn go mothaíonn na cúramóirí baile nach bhfuil mórán tacaíocht á fháil acu ach amháin an liúntas cúramóra, agus fiú ansin tá means test i gceist. Cén uair a bheidh an Aire ag fáil réidh leis an tástáil achmhainne? Tá riachtanas ann fáil réidh leis.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta as an gceist a chur. Táimid ag iarraidh obair i dteannta cúramóirí chun iad a sheoladh. Tá brón orm nach bhfuil freagra agam as Gaeilge.
Tá sé ceart go leor, fuair mé an cheist i mBéarla.
In future, I will make sure we have the answers as Gaeilge for the Deputy.
We are very aware of the key role that family carers play. The main income supports to carers provided by my Department are carer’s allowance, carer’s benefit, domiciliary care allowance and the carer’s support grant, which will account for over €1.9 billion of my Department's budget in 2025. 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, which accounts for €1.24 billion of my Department's budget.
In common with other social welfare payments, the primary objective of the carer’s allowance payment is to provide an income support to people who experience a contingency that means that their capacity to earn an income from employment is significantly reduced. Carer’s allowance is means-tested and does not require any social insurance contributions. Means tests are used within the social welfare system to target the support to those most in need in a manner that is progressive in terms of income distribution.
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 further 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. We will significantly increase the income disregards for carer’s allowance in each budget with a view to ultimately phasing out the means test during the lifetime of the Government.
I thank the Minister. It is more than a year since the carer's referendum was overwhelmingly rejected. Almost 74% of those who voted said "No". The big issue that came up was the abolition of the means test on foot of the figure the Minister referred to of more than 99,000. Of course, many other carers get absolutely nothing. There are some suggestions that the figure in this regard is as high as 500,000. Considering this as an income support is the completely wrong way to look at it. We should look at it in terms of the fact that society cannot function without carers. We need to put an economic value, as well as a psychological and carer's value, on that work because we cannot talk about a thriving economy if we do not have carers.
I am a little disappointed that a year on from the referendum, the Minister has indicated that he will work towards the abolition of the means test during the lifetime of the Government. That could be almost five years from now. He is failing utterly to recognise the value of the work done by carers.
I assure the Deputy that we absolutely value the work of carers. That has been shown by the work done on the income disregards, which will take effect this July, in recent years and the introduction of the long-term carer's contribution scheme in January 2024. Under that scheme, a person who has been a full-time carer for an incapacitated dependent for at least 20 years, or 1,040 weeks, can get long-term carer's contributions to cover gaps in their contribution record. This will allow them to qualify for a contributory State pension. That is the first time this has happened.
The carer's benefit payment has been extended to the self-employed. We have also introduced and increased the carer's support grant to €2,000, the highest rate that payment has ever been. I have already gone through the income disregards which will increase from €450 to €625 for a single person and from €900 to €1250 for a carer with a spouse or partner. Since June 2022, a cumulative increase in the disregard is €292.50 for a single carer and €585 for a carer who is part of a couple. That shows a direction of travel on this. I am determined to continue the work of my predecessor, Heather Humphreys, in this regard.
I do not doubt the bona fides of the Minister, but the referendum was overwhelmingly rejected because of the false narrative that was played out, hypocrisy and a failure to recognise that we cannot function as a society without carers, the vast majority of whom are women and are not paid. We need to recognise that. While I welcome the changes that have been made, which are positive, it is an utter and abject failure to recognise that we need to value the work of carers in a manner that is realistic and put a value on it.
I understand that an interdepartmental committee was established and was supposed to report to the Minister. The Minister for Social Protection was to receive a report from the working group by quarter 3 of last year. As of 27 February, the Minister had not received the report. Has that work been concluded? Is the report somewhere? Have I missed it?
The report on----
An interdepartmental committee was set up on this.
On carers?
On this.
On carers.
I ask the Minister to clarify the position for me.
I will clarify it for the Deputy after the debate. We are looking at everything. I will not accept the contention that we do not value carers. We absolutely do value them. We have shown through a number of initiatives in recent years that we do so. There have been initiatives in successive budgets and contributions around income disregards and the carer's support payment. We have introduced insurable credits. That shows that people who have cared over many years can now get a contributory State pension, something they could not do before the introduction of that measure.
I will revert to the Deputy on the report. We had engagement with carers' organisations yesterday on their agendas, not just in the social protection space but across other Departments. We will work with colleagues across Government on carers to improve their lives. I value each and every one of them, not just for the what they are doing for the State but for communities around the country, their families and the people they care for. While I have the privilege of being a Minister for Social Protection, I will work to ensure that our Department does everything it can to protect and engage with carers. We will have direct engagement with carers from all over the country in the carers forum during May.
I understand there was a review of the carer's allowance.
I will come back to the Deputy on that.
My concern in regard to carer's allowance is the fact that the population is aging. Thankfully, people are living longer. The last census showed 832,000 people aged over 65 living in the country. Within the next four years, that figure will reach 1 million. The cost of nursing home care is at least €1,100 per person per week. Regarding long-term planning for the carer's allowance, it is important that we plan not just for today or tomorrow but for the next five to ten years. How proactive is the Department in looking at that plan and the number of people who will require care? The figure will increase dramatically over the next five to ten years.
The Deputy raises a very important point. My Department's focus is on improving the income supports that are being made available to carers and improving the support that we as a Department can give to them. In terms of our aging population, we have to work with our colleagues in the Department of Health to ensure that we align all of our plans in this space. That is something I am more than happy to work on with the Minister for Health, Deputy Carroll MacNeill, in terms of a shared approach by both Departments. That would be a very worthy endeavour.
In our Department, we have carer's information. The Department of Health has information on needs, as the Deputy will know from his time in that Department, in terms of the health needs of the aging population and what will need. It would be very beneficial for both of us to work together in this space.
Question No. 92 taken with Written Answers.
Employment Support Services
93. Deputy Tony McCormack asked the Minister for Social Protection if he will outline the range of back-to-work supports available to jobseekers in County Offaly; the measures being taken to improve uptake and access to schemes such as the back to work enterprise allowance and the part-time job incentive; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20774/25]
Will the Minister outline the range of back-to-work supports available for jobseekers in County Offaly and the measures that are being taken to improve the uptake of and access to schemes such as the back-to-work enterprise allowance and the part-time job incentive?
I thank Deputy McCormack. Our national employment strategy, Pathways to Work, sets out the Government’s approach to supporting jobseekers to prepare for, access and take up employment opportunities. In line with this strategy, my Department’s Intreo employment services throughout the country engage with jobseekers to support them to find work. The Government has provided in excess of €657 million for employment supports in 2025.
A total of 2,930 people in Offaly were on the live register in March 2025. Intreo staff in Tullamore and Edenderry, together with the Department's service partners, Intreo partners, offer an individualised employment service to these customers. The externally contracted employment service provision provides the Department with additional support capacity to meet current and future needs. These externally contracted services are provided through offices in Tullamore, Edenderry and Birr. As the Deputy will be aware, one of the largest Intreo partner providers is headquartered just across the county border in Roscrea.
Employment personal advisors engage with jobseekers on a one-to-one basis to develop a personal progression plan, which will identify steps the jobseeker must take to support them to progress to sustainable employment. There is a range of supports on offer, including further education, training and upskilling options, financial support such as the training and support grant and programmes like the work placement experience programme, community employment and Tús.
The Department works closely with employers to help them fill vacancies and to place unemployed jobseekers and other welfare recipients, including people with disabilities, into these vacancies. In Offaly, 14 jobseeker events took place during 2024, ranging from recruitment events to information sessions and to date in 2025, five events have taken place, including two recruitment events for healthcare and construction. The Intreo teams in Tullamore and Edenderry are available to assist customers in their transition to employment and will assess the appropriate support having regard to the individual’s skills, education and employment opportunities. I want to take this opportunity to thank the staff in my Department for their ongoing work in Offaly. I trust this clarifies the position for the Deputy.
I thank the Minister for his response. While the supports outlined are welcome, we need to recognise that getting back to work is about more than just income. Employment plays a vital role in improving mental health, giving people a sense of identity, routine and purpose.
It also sets a powerful example for children and others in the community, showing that work pays, that ambition is valued and that the opportunity is real. For many in County Offaly and beyond, the move from welfare into employment still seems like a risk. The poverty trap is real. When people feel it will cost them more to take up a job than to stay on social supports, something is fundamentally wrong. We need to create genuine incentives to work, with supports that are accessible, clearly communicated and designed to reward effort rather than punish transition. Will the Minister confirm whether his Department is reviewing the income thresholds and tapering of supports to ensure that work always pays and that the move from welfare to wages is a step up and not a step back?
Absolutely. We had a discussion on a previous question, asked by Deputy James O'Connor, about the introduction of the commitment in the programme for Government to introducing a working age payment. That is important to ensure that people who transition from a welfare support payment to work are not worse off. I will be focused on that. As I said, we will publish a number of potential models and look for feedback over the coming months. Regarding the transition, working through the Intreo offices and our Intreo partners, we want people to get the services of an employment personal adviser or a job coach. That person will work with a jobseeker on a one-to-one, confidential basis to encourage, support and assist him or her in securing employment and to develop an agreed personal progression plan which is based on a person's needs and skills that he or she has or may need to adjust or improve to become job ready. It will support jobseekers with curriculum vitae and interview preparation. It provides access routes to work experience and employment opportunities. Our Intreo partners provide a service to employers by promoting the Department's schemes and supports and assist employers with filling vacancies. They also provide access routes to education and training where skill gaps which have been identified can be fulfilled locally within Offaly or in the region.
I thank the Minister for his constructive response and his clear understanding of the challenges people face in making that transition into employment. It is encouraging to hear that the Department is actively reviewing how supports can be better structured. We know that work brings more than just a wage. It brings confidence, self-worth and a sense of purpose for families and communities in Offaly and elsewhere. That matters deeply. The Minister is right to focus on ensuring that supports do not fall off a cliff when someone takes up work. A well-managed, tapering system and clear communication are key to giving people confidence to take that next step. I ask the Minister to consider how pilot programmes or enhanced outreach in rural counties might support that transition, further making sure that every person who wants the work feels that the system is behind them.
Absolutely. As I said to Deputy O'Connor earlier, we want to ensure that the social protection system is work-friendly and the welfare traps which inhibit people from taking up work are removed. I highlighted earlier that if a person on jobseeker's payment receives an offer of part-time work, he or she can end up worse off financially if his or her hours are spread over the whole working week rather than concentrated in three days or less. That is an anomaly I want to address. A proposed potential model of a working age payment would change the basis of the current payment structure so that a person's payment would be based on a percentage of the difference between their income and a specified threshold for the family type. The purpose of that proposed change would be to take advantage of real-time PAYE information, to move away from the days of a work approach to an income-based approach. That will ensure that a person will always be better off taking up employment. As I said, I want to publish draft proposals which will allow for a full consultation with all stakeholders, including the Oireachtas. I congratulate the Deputy on his appointment to the Oireachtas committee on social protection, rural and community development in advance of any final agreement on the working age payment.
Question No. 94 taken with Written Answers.
Social Welfare Payments
95. Deputy Naoise Ó Muirí asked the Minister for Social Protection to confirm that his Department will be the lead on the introduction of a permanent annual cost of disability support payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21596/25]
I ask the Minister for Social Protection to confirm that his Department will be the lead for the introduction of a permanent annual cost of disability support payment and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta as an cheist. The Indecon report on the cost of disability, commissioned and funded by my Department, found that the extra costs of disability are due to a number of factors, including higher costs of healthcare, transport, education, housing and other services that arise because of a higher level of dependence on these services by people with disabilities. In that context, the report noted that addressing these costs was not simply a matter of a higher welfare payment but would need to incorporate improvements in the delivery of and access to these services and others.
The Government, under the Minister, Deputy Foley, has prioritised the development of a new national disability strategy, a cross-governmental strategy that will have a focus on improving access to services and bringing down the extra costs I referred to. Alongside this, in the programme for Government, we have committed to introducing a permanent annual cost of disability support payment. That annual cost of disability support payment will build on progress made over the last number of years, where we took steps to recognise the additional costs associated with disability. In the last three budgets, we brought forward an extensive range of cost-of-living support measures to support people with disabilities and their families. Building on that, progress my Department will now lead on the introduction of an annual cost-of-disability payment, as committed to in the programme for Government. We are currently examining the best way of delivering on this commitment within the overall budgetary context. The Deputy can be assured that we will prioritise this payment in budget discussions with our colleague, the Minister for public expenditure, Deputy Jack Chambers.
I am delighted to hear that. It is a welcome commitment in the programme for Government. Those who are living with a disability, as the Minister rightly says, have many additional challenges, including healthcare, transport costs and other challenges. The least we can do is to look to support them where we can. Those living with a disability and their representative organisations will be happy with progress in this area. I look forward to hearing of further progress in due course on negotiations about the annual budget. I am more than happy to support the Minister in any way I can.
I thank the Deputy. Since the Government was elected, we have prioritised the Cabinet committee on disability, which is chaired by the Taoiseach and meets monthly. It is addressing a range of issues, including income, but also services and supports. We had a discussion with Deputy John Connolly earlier about the wage subsidy scheme to assist employers and encourage them to employ people with a disability. We will be relaunching the reformed wage subsidy scheme next week and giving people information. In our Department, we are in the early stages of the early engagement process, which proactively seeks to assist disabled people who wish to return to work and to give them supports through specially trained Intreo staff. All engagement on this is on a voluntary basis. Some 3,000 referrals have been made through the early engagement process for further education or employment supports. We have also, as referred to earlier, launched the WorkAbility programme, which is co-financed with the EU employment, inclusion, skills and training programme. In 2024, more than 1,400 people engaged in projects supported by WorkAbility. That gives a sense of the work under way across the country. However, we have much more to do. I have determined that my Department will do its part. Other Departments need to do so too. That is why the Government is focused on a new national disability strategy.
Question No. 96 taken with Written Answers.
Social Welfare Benefits
97. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Minister for Social Protection if an examination of improvements to key ancillary benefits such as the fuel allowance, household benefits package and living alone allowance to support vulnerable groups has occurred as per the programme for Government; if not, when this examination is to occur; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21297/25]
I ask the Minister if an examination of improvements to key ancillary benefits, such as the fuel allowance, household benefits package and living alone allowance, to support vulnerable groups has occurred as part of the programme for Government. If not, when is this examination to occur? Will the Minister make a statement on the better?
I thank the Deputy for his question. As he knows and referred to, the programme for Government has committed to protect core welfare rates while ensuring that available resources are targeted at vulnerable groups. The programme for Government includes a commitment to examine key ancillary benefits such as the fuel allowance, household benefits package and living alone allowance to support vulnerable groups. This is an ongoing activity as part of my Department's budget planning each year. For example, there have been a number of expansions under recent budgets to the fuel allowance payment which will make it more available to vulnerable cohorts. In January 2023, enhanced fuel allowance measures for people aged 70 and over were introduced. In budget 2025, these enhanced fuel measures were extended to all those aged 66 or older. These measures include a new means threshold of €524 for a single person and €1,048 for a couple.
In addition, the amount of capital disregarded in the means test for fuel allowance was increased from €20,000 to €50,000. Savings of more than €50,000 are assessed on a proportionate basis only.
Other measures include the weekly means threshold for those aged under 70 has increased by €80 to €200 above the appropriate rate of contributory State pension. Disablement benefit and half-rate carer's allowance payments are now disregarded when assessing means for fuel allowance purposes. Disablement benefit no longer disbars a household from receiving the fuel allowance payment. Budget 2025 has also allowed for carer's allowance to be considered a qualifying payment for fuel allowance since last January.
As part of the budget planning process, I will continue to consider any improvements that can be made to ensure these benefits are continued in a targeted manner so that the vulnerable people who need them are getting the support. As the Deputy will be more than aware, any future decisions will have to take account of the availability of financial resources.
I mentioned the growing population and people living longer, but there is the additional problem of people living alone, especially in rural areas. As the Minister will know, having come from a rural constituency, transport costs for someone living alone in a rural area is a matter we have not focused enough on and we need to look at. The cost of getting from A to B, be it ten miles, 15 miles or 20 miles, in a rural area is more expensive. This is one matter we should be considering in terms of the living alone allowance.
Where people look after themselves at home, there is less demand on the State compared to them being in nursing home care. Therefore, it is important that we ensure people can stay in their own homes for the longest possible time and we provide the additional supports they need. With the rising costs in various areas for the household, it is important that that review would continue annually. The one subject we need to look at, especially for people living in rural areas, is that of people living alone and the living alone allowance.
I endorse the Deputy's comments, particularly regarding rural poverty. I will keep a laser-like focus on it during my time in the Department. I commend the work done by organisations such as Local Link, which is expanding its footprint to address the exact kind of loneliness the Deputy has just referred to.
The living alone allowance, or the living alone increase as it is formerly known, is available to those who are in receipt of the qualifying payments. It is a living alone allowance, not a scheme or stand-alone payment. It is a supplement to a primary social protection payment of €22 per week made to people aged 66 or over who are in receipt of certain social welfare payments and who are living alone. For the record of the House, the eligible payments are the State pension, the widow's, widower's or surviving civil partner's pension, the widow's, widower's or surviving civil partner's pension under the occupational injuries benefits scheme, the incapacity supplement and the deserted wives benefit. The living alone increase is also paid to people aged under 66 who live alone and are in receipt of the disability allowance, invalidity pension, incapacity supplement or blind pension.
There are no circumstances where the living alone allowance can be paid to people who are not in receipt of a primary qualifying payment from my Department or who do not meet the living alone eligibility criteria. That is on the basis and data we have available from a number of resources, including the CSO and the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice, which shows the cost of living for a single person is slightly more than the individualised costs of two people living together.
In rural and urban areas, support groups provide an important service, particularly for those living alone or who are elderly and need support. It is important that, in reviewing those supports, there is work done across the Departments of Health and Social Protection to ensure that those groups get support to help those who need care and assistance, be they in urban or rural areas. It is something that needs to be co-ordinated to a far greater scale that it has before. Much work was done, particularly during Covid, and it is important that we continue and ensure that does not in slip in any way. We should not just take it that everyone is well able to look after himself or herself. That is not the case and is why we need to have those supports in place.
I am glad this is being discussed in terms of rural poverty. The Minister will completely understand this. I commend Irish Rural Link on the great work it has done in Mayo. It needs to be resourced to do an awful lot more. I will give the Minister an example of a woman I spoke to in Castlebar the other day. She has an appointment in Galway hospital next week. All of her income and benefit for the week will be wiped out because she has to pay for that taxi. She cannot get public transport. We discussed the ins and outs of it, but she just cannot. That is all of her benefit for the week. This is how people are being plunged into poverty. What is she to do for her food, fuel and everything else for that week? It is okay centralising health services and we all need the centres of excellence in certain disciplines, but asking somebody, without any help, to get from Castlebar - never mind from Blacksod - to Galway is impossible. I want the Minister to examine transport, specifically transport from Mayo to Galway hospital.
I agree with Deputy Burke and we will try to do that. Not just during Covid, but during Storm Éowyn we saw the real value of local groups, hubs and services. With my other hat of rural and community development, I am working within the Department on supporting those local hubs and services.
The timing of hospital appointments frustrates me. Even if a person was able to use public transport, the timing of a hospital appointment in Galway or any regional centre does not often reflect where that person has to travel from. More work can be done in facilitating people who are in a position to use public transport to use it, or even those with their own transport not to have to come in during rush hour, adding to the stress of the appointment.
Regarding the specific case, I am happy to work with Deputy Conway-Walsh's office. We may be able to look at an additional needs payment or some sort of support because nobody should have to make a choice like that between protecting her health and getting essential healthcare and having the food that is essential to that health. If the Deputy gives me the details, we will be more than happy to work with her on this.
Question No. 98 taken with Written Answers.
Pension Provisions
103. Deputy Mark Wall asked the Minister for Social Protection the number of people that have been added to the family carer register under the long-term carers contribution scheme; the number awarded the full-rate State pension under the scheme; the number of whom have been awarded a reduced rate, in tabular form; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21715/25]
I wish to ask the Minister the number of people who have been added to the family carers register under the long-term carers contribution scheme, the number that have been awarded the full-rate State pension, and the number that have been awarded a reduced rate.
We have had this discussion a few times today and the Government acknowledges the important role that carers are playing and we will continue to support them in that role. The enhanced State pension provision for people who have been caring for an incapacitated dependant for 20 years or more was introduced on 1 January 2024. If a person had more than 20 years of caring for an incapacitated person, long-term carers contributions are included in his or her pension calculations. An online application for long-term carers contribution is available through mywelfare.ie.
My Department continues to review State pension contributory applications where customers are awarded long-term carers contributions for 20 years or more and are in receipt of a reduced rate or payment. Application forms for the contributory State pension issue to people who have not applied for their pensions.
Details of people who were awarded 20 years or more long-term carers contributions and the numbers being awarded a full rate and reduced rate State pension are included in the table going to the Deputy.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
I thank the Minister. We have spoken about this already today, as the Minister rightly said. It is encouraging to see the number of people who have been rewarded. We have spoke about women and their contribution. That is reflected in the numbers the Minister has presented. They are the ones that unfortunately had to stay at home in many cases to look after children. They get their due reward through this 20-year contribution that the Government has made. It is worthwhile and positive that we have the figures now so that we can encourage more people to apply for it. I look forward to more people availing of this contribution, and rightly so, for the work they have done in the home over so many years.
I agree with the Deputy. In our preparation for responding to his question, I have asked that we do more work in terms of reaching out to people who may qualify but who may not know. Those figures strike me as low. The Department has been doing a lot of work in this space in terms of trying to bring the scheme to people's attention. Maybe with the support of colleagues across the House, we can do that by way of newsletters and so on. We will be doing more work this year to draw people's attention. Many carers may not realise that they can now qualify for a contributory pension or may not have had the chance to actually see that they do. We will be proactive in trying to bring people's attention to it.
The Minister is 100% right. One of the main questions I get in my clinics when people come in to fill out applications for a State pension is about the qualifying contributions and so on. It is important that we all broadcast this and put it on our social media and everywhere else we can, as the figures are low. It is a start but we need to encourage more people to avail of it and to get their just reward for what they have done over those 20 years. I look forward to working with the Minister on that promotion and ensuring that people get their reward over the coming period of time.
Rural Schemes
99. Deputy Michael Cahill asked the Minister for Social Protection his plans to provide increased flexibility in the rural social scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21421/25]
The question is to ask the Minister for Social Protection his plans to provide increased flexibility in the rural social scheme and if he will make a statement on the matter. The rural social scheme was introduced in the first instance by former Minister Éamon Ó Cuív in 2004. I pay tribute to him for that. Of course, he was the first ever full Cabinet Minister with a specific brief for rural Ireland. I wish to thank all the participants and their supervisors in County Kerry for the tremendous work they have carried out for a number of years and for making our county an even better place to live. Last year, a report on the review of the RSS was published. This review was to look at the role of the RSS and its ongoing relevance in the changing landscape, the funding and resourcing required, along with the appropriate governance and management arrangements. The key findings from the RSS report include that the RSS provides an important social inclusion and income support function for low-income farmers and fisherpersons.
I thank Deputy Cahill for his question. As he said, the rural social scheme plays an important role in the life of rural communities. I wish to highlight and thank every participant, supervisor and sponsoring company for their work in this space. The RSS provides an income support and part-time employment opportunities for farmers and fishers who are in receipt of certain social welfare payments and who may be underemployed in their primary occupations.
A review of the RSS was published in July 2024 in Newport, County Mayo, with 19 key recommendations to address the sustainability of the rural social scheme to further add to its flexibility. I am happy to report that a number of the recommendations are being implemented, including from this year replacing annual contracts with the provision of three-year contracts to existing RSS participants. Instead of the current annual review process, the renewal process will now be undertaken at three-yearly intervals for those under 60 years of age while existing RSS participants who reach the age of 60 will not be subject to any further review of means or circumstances until they exit the scheme at the age of 66. The implementing bodies have also been asked to explore options with people who are exiting the rural social scheme to encourage them to participate as volunteers within the company, in particular those who have reached 66 years.
I am continuing to explore options to implementing the remaining recommendations. Officials are engaging with other relevant Departments and agencies as part of this process. Some of the recommendations we are exploring in this process include the recommendation to extend the RSS on a pilot basis, with 250 places to be made available to rural dwellers who, although not engaged in farming or fishing, are over 50 and are on a relevant social welfare payment. I have asked my officials to expedite that particular work. The other recommendations are to allow a couple engaged in farming or fishing to both access the scheme and to extend the scheme to those engaged in farming or fishing who may not be the holders of a herd number or a fishing license but who have what is termed a defined connection to the farming or fishing enterprise.
I am very aware of the extraordinary contribution the RSS makes. Once again, I highlight and thank RSS participants, supervisors and implementing companies throughout the country. I intend to work hard on this.
Finally, I endorse the remarks of Deputy Cahill in respect of former Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív and his work in this space.
I thank the Minister. I welcome the proposed increase in age limits. That is welcome. The scheme should now be made more flexible to include all people living in rural Ireland on low incomes. The RSS delivers to rural communities key community services including the maintenance of sporting facilities, community recreation areas and waymarked walking routes. Declining participation since 2019 is causing a concern that rural communities may be left without key community services.
The report includes 19 recommendations to address the sustainability of the RSS to continue providing income support. Will the Minister provide an update on the implementation of the recommendations on income support? The review also recommended an extension of the RSS to environmental initiatives and that consideration be given to the feasibility of establishing a grant fund that would be available for work on biodiversity initiatives. Is that happening?
I wish to avail of this opportunity to call for better pay and conditions for he supervisors who run these important schemes and without whom the RSS would not be the great success story that it is today.
I welcome the opportunity to say a couple of words on the rural social scheme. I welcome the flexibility the Minister has introduced. I want him to look in particular at meals on wheels. Yesterday, Lorraine from Claremorris, Martina and Peter from Louisburgh and Deirdre from Castlebar were in Leinster House. One of the issues that were raised regarding the RSS was the need to allow two people to get onto the scheme rather than just the herd owner. It is vital. They find that they cannot continue their meals on wheels service without having some flexibility. They want generators as well. As the Minister knows, in Storm Éowyn they were a vital lifeline. If he will give them the flexibility under the RSS to meet the needs of particular rural areas and continue providing these vital services, it would be welcome. I will work with the Minister in trying to get this done.
I thank Deputies Cahill and Conway-Walsh for their remarks. Regarding the review, we have fully implemented five recommendations. Actually, I had a meeting yesterday with officials on the remaining ones, including extending eligibility to people not directly engaged in farming or fishing but who have a connection to a rural community and the issue of two people accessing it. I have asked them to come back to me on those issues.
Regarding Deputy Cahill's comments on biodiversity, we are committed to exploring opportunities with key stakeholders that will provide options for grant funding for green initiatives and to further explore options for those who wish to volunteer their time to local services. My Department is engaging with officials in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and in my other Department of Rural and Community Development as well as local authorities, which are important in this space, to allow us to deliver collectively on the recommendations in the RSS review. Most importantly, we will continue to engage with the farming and rural development organisations.
I am aware that, despite the fantastic work of the scheme and its supervisors and so-called implementing bodies, there are vacancies in schemes all over the country. I know those can be filled if we have the right flexibility.
There are vacancies and schemes all over the country that I know can be filled if we have the flexibility. One feature relating to all of these schemes - RSS, Tús and CE - is that I want there to be a greater understanding within my Department that they are no longer just labour market activation schemes; they are far greater than that. Something we want to see is that these schemes have a social employment value but also are of social value to participants on the scheme and provide services to communities, as referred to by the Deputy, that otherwise would not be available. We would be a far poorer country without the work done by RSS, CE and Tús schemes.
Questions Nos. 100 to 102, inclusive, taken with Written Answers.
School Meals Programme
104. Deputy Thomas Gould asked the Minister for Social Protection for details of the review into the hot school meals programme. [21369/25]
I ask the Minister for details of and a review into the hot school meals programme.
As I said in reply to Deputy O'Reilly, the hot school meals review was announced when we expanded programme just ahead of the Easter school holidays. With regard to nutrition, the specific standard was set under the nutritional standards for school meals and nutritional standards for hot school meals. A technical nutrition subgroup comprised of dietitians from the Irish Nutrition and Dietetic Institute of Ireland, the HSE, Safefood, and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland came together and developed the standards, which are available on gov.ie.
Nutritional standards are a priority. I have asked for a review of the scheme’s nutritional standards, and this will be conducted by a dietician who will be supervised by the Department of Health and in co-ordination with the interdepartmental group on school meals. I have asked for a report on the nutritional standards be submitted to me by the end of this calendar year.
In the meantime, food that is high in saturated fat, sugar and salt will be removed from the school menus by September 2025. Up to now this food had been permitted once a week at most and only when selected by childrens' parents. I trust this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
Perhaps the Minister will elaborate on this but from my understanding is that of the 2,220 schools participating in the programme, only 14 will be assessed this year. That is fewer than one in five schools. The review has been announced but we need to know the terms of reference as well. Will the Minister come back on that? How long will the review take? He said he hopes to have the review on his desk by the end of the year but is that the review of just the portion of schools that will be reviewed this year or is that an overall review of all schools? The Minister mentioned nutrition and a dietician and the standards he is looking for and that is what we all support. The one thing we can say about the free hot school meals programme is it is a really good initiative for a lot of children. It ensures that we know every child has at least one hot meal per day. This is what we can get behind and can work together on because at the end of the day we want children to eat hot food that is nutritious at the same time. I am not here to criticise. I am here to support getting the hot school meals programme right. This is for all children and something we all want to work for.
I agree with the Deputy entirely. We want this scheme to work. We will do the final roll-out in September so that every primary school pupil in the country will have had the opportunity to have hot school meals within their school. At that time I intend to stand back and examine at the scheme to see where it has been working and where it has not. I will be very focused on DEIS secondary schools during the lifetime of this Government as well.
The review that is under way is on nutritional standards. I will have the final report of that review by the end of December and will act on that because there are concerns contained within it. There will be 400 inspections conducted by my Department this year relating to the contracts between schools and school meal providers. That is a process I am also looking at to make sure it is more in-depth. The nutritional review is being led by a dietician under the supervision of the Department of Health. This ensures they are the expert person to look at the nutritional side and then the operational side of the programme will be reviewed once the final roll-out into the remaining primary schools has been completed.
I agree with the Minister that we need the highest standards of nutrition, especially when dealing with young children so I support that. I have a couple of concerns. The same funding of €3.20 per meal and portion size is given to children ranging from junior infants to sixth class, that i,s from children as young as four to the age of 12. I am not sure if the Minister has kids but I have two girls and I recall when they were at that age. I have coached teams and seen that boys and girls of 12 years of age cannot have the same portion size as a four-yea- old so that needs to be examined. It needs to be amended and I ask the Minister to look at that.
A report by the Irish Farmers Journal found that some rural schools find it difficult to get local suppliers. The Irish country living section found that the traceability of the food can be poor. One example was where an ingredient was listed as "pasta sauce". That is not an ingredient so we need to work on that to ensure proper ingredients are supplied.
Last, I have concerns the programme is all being subcontracted out. I would like, where possible, for these workers to work in our schools and be part of our education system from a food point of view and a provider point of view. We see more and more privatisation. That has always been the Government's agenda. I do not want to argue with it but I would like to bring the programme back into the schools and see people employed full time to do it.
I totally agree with the Deputy that a five-year-old should not receive the same portion as a 13-year-old and we get that feedback a lot. I suspect there are Members who have seen food come home with schoolbags and probably found it a few days later.
Every school has the flexibility, within procurement rules, to choose the provider of the food. There is not some massive corporate monolith. There are a lot of locally-based companies providing services, local employment and the highest standard of locally sourced food. Yes, there are anomalies and it is always the anomalies that are highlighted In my own and Deputy Conway-Walsh's county there are small, owner managed companies working hard and that is replicated across the country so we do not want to lose that model. I had a good discussion with Deputy O'Reilly about the potential involvement of the meals on wheels network in delivering school meals and we will look into doing that if the capacity is there.
The review on nutrition will consider all the other issues raised by the Deputy. Pasta sauce is not that bad for you.
I have no doubt about that. I am not saying it is, either.
The review will absolutely capture all of that. It is very important. There are a lot of local companies involved in this that otherwise would not be providing quality employment and service without this programme.
Is féidir teacht ar Cheisteanna Scríofa ar
www.oireachtas.ie
.
Written Answers are published on the Oireachtas website.