The Estimates for 2004 make grim reading for anyone with a social conscience. The Coalition Government is presiding over an outrageous assault on the living standards of the most vulnerable and impoverished sections of our society, as an alternative to higher income tax or more extensive borrowing.
Those unfortunate people who saw the fruits of the so-called Celtic Tiger pass them by will be forced into even greater poverty. But those citizens with surplus cash in special savings accounts will still benefit from Government generosity.
Reductions in lone parent allowance, rent allowance and supplement, the back-to-education allowance and child dependant allowance were amongst the 16 cuts announced by the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Ms Mary Coughlan, last Thursday. At a time when salaries and expenses within her Department were rising by 8 per cent, she was given 2 per cent to hold existing services together.
It has resonances of the exercise conducted by Mr McCreevy when, as minister for social welfare in 1992, he introduced a series of cuts known as the "Dirty Dozen". Further money will be made available at Budget time. But the great bulk of that will go towards increases in social welfare payments and old age pensions. There will be no relief for those trying to escape poverty traps.
A pre-Budget submission from the Society of St Vincent de Paul spelled out the financial realities for many poor families and single parents in unambiguous terms. Requests for help had dramatically increased in the past year. And Prof John Monaghan, vice-president of the Society, described the Government cuts as "mean, petty and extremely discouraging". Other voluntary organisations involved with the welfare of children and the provision of housing were equally critical.
The Government was accused of not tackling child poverty and of having no real policy on social housing. The most depressing aspect of the cuts is that they fly in the face of Government policy on crime prevention, education and economic development. Short-term fiscal rectitude is taking precedence over long-term social planning. Few would disagree that crime and social deprivation can walk hand-in-hand. Yet greater social dysfunction is being encouraged.
An allowance designed to encourage single parent families take up work is being cut, making their children more vulnerable to poverty and to social alienation. Rent supplement will be refused, unless the applicant has been in accommodation for six months. That is a classic "Catch 22" situation where a person who desperately needs the allowance, because of the high cost of accommodation, cannot qualify for it. And, in spite of the Government's lip-service to adult education and continuous learning, a person will have to be unemployed for at least 15 months before they can qualify for a back-to-education allowance. These are all socially regressive measures. They are a shame on the Government in harder times.