Lousie Bayliss, of SPARK
This afternoon , SPARK (Single Parents Acting for the Rights of Kids) are delivering a post-budget submission to Oireachtas members and a petition to Minister for Social Protection Leo Varadkar.
Louise Bayliss writes:
Many people believe that losing One Parent Family Allowance when a child turns 7 is a good thing and point to international norms where parents can lose this support when a child turn 3 or 5.
However, the reality is that the changes only had a financial impact on lone parents in work or education and this is completely in contrast to international practice.
In the UK for example, a lone parent working 12 hours per week is entitled to working credits, they can breach the benefits cap and are also entitled to higher housing benefit to reward them for working. In Ireland, the changes cut the income of a parent working 19 hours on minimum wage by 18%.
Lone parents in receipt of rent supplement can only keep first €75 of wages and 25% of anything above this, regardless of the cost of childcare or transport Many lone parents are actually financially worse off now by working.
The policy is trapping lone parents into long-term social welfare dependency. This is something SPARK always predicted and which has now been validated by the recent report from NUIG.
We’re also out of step internationally by ignoring a parents care role once a child turns 14. In the UK, a lone parent is recognised until the child turns 16 or 19, if they are in full time education.
The new Single Affordable Childcare Scheme means the ending of capped schemes for lone parents in training and while lone parents may be entitled to the full subsidy of €8,000 pa , there is no cap on how much crèches can cost and we fear lone parents will not be able to top up the difference, especially if creches increase their costs as expected.
One of the greatest anomalies of the changes however is in relation to maintenance.
Under One Parent Family payment, the ‘other parent’ has a legal obligation to the Department of Social Protection to pay maintenance.
This now stops when a child turns 7 and the Department writes out telling the “liable relative’ they have no further obligation to the Department.
This resulted in 28% drop on the number of parents in receipt of maintenance. Worse than that, lone parents are now being told that unless they seek maintenance (from the person who received a letter saying they were no longer obliged to pay!) they will face financial sanctions.
This is worrying, as although the Department have stated they do not expect domestic abuse survivors to contact their abusers, they have confirmed they have no guidelines to know who is at potential risk.
So, after our presentation we will be handing in a petition to either reinstate the obligation on the ‘liable relative’ or remove the condition to receive maintenance. Women’s Aid and the NWCI are joining us along with some members of the Oireachtas Committee on Social Protection.
Petition here
Earlier Michael Taft on The Childcare Conundrum
Previously: The Joan Parent Allowance
Rollingnews
What’s all this, “In the UK, this, in the UK that.”, tripe? How about we start measuring ourselves up to the Spanish, Italians or French for a change? For far too often being a single parent was a lifestyle choice. You left school, got knocked up and the gov paid you until the kid was 18 while the rest of us went out and earned a living. Those days are gone, get used to it.
Want an abortion? NO, SLUT!
Want financial help to raise a kid on your own? NO, SLUT!
“This resulted in 28% drop on the number of parents in receipt of maintenance.”
Jail the bastards. There’s nothing lower.
Single mothers have always been treated like dirt in this country.
Women are sinners!!
“However, the reality is that the changes only had a financial impact on lone parents in work or education and this is completely in contrast to international practice.”
This stuff is complex to understand. Can someone provide me with a worked example of how working lone partents were financially worse off as a result of the 2013 changes? I am not doubting, I just don’t understand how it would work in practice.
Here’s the link to the spreadsheet. And on October 6th the Dept of Social Protection confirmed to Oireachtas Committee on Social Protection that the figures we produced are correct. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iK5NdMkZZTFTGhCBZXznZxsWHiHS4vh4dF03KqS_600/edit?usp=sharing
Thanks for that SPARK, really great to have worked examples for everyone to see. Keep up the good work.
Thanks for this. The spreadsheet could do with a bit of further explanation though.
How sensitive are the results to (say) longer hours and higher wages?
Also, why don’t you use the new NMW figure of €9.15 per hour?
We did and the differences were marginal.
It would be useful to see them shown.What about someone working 40 hours a week on €11 for example? This would not be an unusual situation for someone in retail.
For your baseline I still don’t know why you’re using an out-of-date NMW. For your baseline it would reduce the “loss” suffered by someone on 35 hours by €7 a week if I have done my FIS calculations properly.
Yet not a word from Single Parents Understanding Nonchalant Kids
S.P.U.N.K before profit
and fathers can go fornicate themselves because they’ve no rights at all
Or responsibilities after age 7 it seems.
Louise Bayliss who unsuccessfully stood for People Before Profit in the 2014 Local Elections.
1. Lone parents are eligible for HAP so her point on rent allowance is not relevant.
However the ending of capped childcare scheme is however a major concern, pathways to training and to work are the only way forward, it was particularly lame to close down a scheme like that which gave lone parents the opportunity to progress and provide a role model in the household, when the only reason to do so was to cover up the fact that a €32m childcare allocation is woefully inadequate to introduce a universal childcare support for children between 6 months and 30 months, the cost of which with 30% participation and 50% subsidy run to €243m per year. That there are no provisions for increases in the 2018 or 2019 estimates is a major concern.
HAP is not available in Dublin, and many other ares. so the point around rent supplement is very valid.
that’s a nonsense. South Dublin County Council piloted HAP in 2013 before it was rolled out nationally in 2015 and now includes all of Dublin. If you’re on the housing list now, you are HAP eligible, full stop. If you were homeless from 2013 it was available as a homeless preventative measure as part of the pilot scheme.
Exactly, it is a nonsense argument. Parents with childcare assistance needs to focus on where they have a genuine grievance and not put on their political hats.
That is not tru. It is only available for majority of Dubliners if they have been confirmed homeless. Also, very difficult to get a landlord to sign up to HAP as they have to submit tax clearance certificate before payment. In a sellers market, landlords are choosing tenants where they don’t need to wait for approval and can get rent immediately.
I worked for the housing section of a Dublin local authority and I’m telling you that since January 2015 if you have your housing need confirmed (ie on the housing list) then you are HAP eligible.
http://www.housing.gov.ie/housing/social-housing/housing-assistance-payment/housing-assistance-payment
your information regarding HAP as a homeless pilot scheme is 2 years out of date.
oh, and most local authorities have the discretion to front the first month’s rent and deposit for a HAP tenancy on production of an invoice from the landlord. this can be paid within a week.
Does someone not getting elected invalidate their voice?
Have you even stood for election? If not, do we just pretend we can’t hear you at all?
I would hope Water Boy meant to say that it’s only fair (and common practice) for relevant associations or political history to be included at the end of an article as newspapers do.
Full disclosure, etc
Exactly that.
I respect anyone who stands for election, but where you are making representations that are political through a pressure group then you have to set out your other linkages for readers to be informed of your political affiliations.
Is it ‘pshaw to capital letters’?
I haven’t the time to read this piece, but I’m assuming that the solution advocated by the far-left Ms. Bayliss involves the taxpayer having to be squeezed even more?
No. Refreshingly she’s suggested gassing the parents and putting the children to work on building sites.
Those tykes better not use pyrite!
It’ll all UHU and Legs bricks from here on in so.
Finally!
Fuppin’ typo correcto fuppo fupp fuppin’ thing of a fupp!
“However, the reality is that the changes only had a financial impact on lone parents in work or education” so basically this only hurts the layabouts and do nothings, no issue with that.
So you’re definition of a ‘layabout’ is someone working or in education. That’s interesting…
” Hello taxpayer!. More money please.”
Oy Trump, shouldn’t you be off losing an election somewhere instead of weighing in on forums?
Fora.
“S’cuse me Dame Hird, I fink Jake38’s bin lookin’ for ya”
“Fora and forums are plurals of forum. The former conforms to the original Latin, which some people prefer, while others like the Anglicized form. Neither is right or wrong, and choosing between them is mostly a matter of preference. Be aware, however, that forums is by far the more common form in most types of writing throughout the English-speaking world. Fora still has the edge in scientific and scholarly contexts, though. This is not surprising, as Latin forms are typically more common in these types of writing. Outside these contexts, fora can be distracting and even confusing to readers who are used to seeing the English word.
http://grammarist.com/usage/fora-forums/
Another distinction is, if you hear someone say something like
‘Maybe I’ll hop on the internet and check out a few fora to see if I can get an answer’
….chances are they are a tw*t. I’m just saying.
On maintenance, parents can still get a maintenance order at family court.
What is stopping people taking that route?
Really, just not understanding that bit. A family member of mine had to do it. .
What costs are involved?
I wonder if some mothers would be worried the child would never see the father again. “Bring me to court and I’ll never see the kid again”.
I’m sure family law court cases get messier than most people could imagine.
You have no idea…….I’ve been paying mine since my son was four. He’s 21 now. She makes a substantial amount of money and has told me my money is for holidays for her. My son went to college for about two weeks, dropped out, that’s me paying for another four years, And I will shut my mouth and do it, cos the alternative is court. Again. I know single moms where help is needed, but don’t for a second think they’re all angels in distress. Far from it.
‘This now stops when a child turns 7 and the Department writes out telling the “liable relative’ they have no further obligation to the Department.’
Someone should check into whether there’s a plethora of separated ministers who have 6 year olds with upcoming birthdays.
Wow, the hostility here towards single mothers is disgusting. You want to hear from an single mother, well here I am. I was made redundant from my well paid job during the recession and then the hard times split myself and my partner up. I had no choice for myself and my children but to seek help from the welfare and after 19 years of paying taxes I thought well why shouldn’t I. I then went out to full time education and worked part time to help keep above water but the welfare deducted such a ridiculous amount it was hardly worth my while. Hence the “trap”. My income working full time as a single parent still wouldn’t keep us above water due to rent increases etc. For my second year going back to full time education and looked into HAP for the simple reason of stability in knowing I would not have to move AGAIN after being basically evicted from my home due to a major rent increase, so I could continue my studies, but it was NOT available in Dublin North side, so no, it is not easily available to everyone, despite what some people may think. Not all single mothers want to layabout. We do try to better ourselves, but unfortunately, it takes time to get back out there and simply be able to afford the extortionate rates of rent, fuel, insurance, utility bills and all other daily costs. So before you all jump on the hating single mother band wagon. Please imagine how hard it is for ONE parent alone to simply afford week to week costs and outgoings. Put yourself in our shoes. Could you do it??? We don’t all want everything handed to us. We are trying, but the point SPARK is making is the welfare are making it very hard for us to excell with the percentage the welfare deduct from any income a loan parent may receive. I.E the trap!
Tina, loan parent.
If this is a genuine post, keep strong. I have no doubt that the effort you are making and strength you are showing in the face of adversity is an incredible example to your children.
Take no heed of the negative comments, it’s just human nature on anonymous sites. If you met most of the actual humans behind the keyboards there’s no way there views would not be, for the most part, empathetic.
And for sure, anyone who has children knows how hard it can be even with two parents sharing the load, I’m in utter awe of people like yourself who do all the things it takes to keep small humans alive and happy while also single handedly running the logistics and finances. Be proud of yourself, I really mean that.