asked the Minister for Social Welfare if the 5p per week increase for dependent children of certain social welfare recipients covers the cost of living increase since 21 July 1981.

The only social welfare recipients to receive an increase of 5p per week for dependent children were persons receiving a supplementary blind pension allowance and I assume this is what the Deputy is referring to in his question. This allowance, however, is payable as a supplement to persons who also receive the normal blind pension with which increases in respect of dependent children are also paid. The amount of the combined increases payable with both the supplementary allowance and the basic blind pension in respect of dependent children amounts to 35p a week for each of the first two children and 30p a week for each additional child. In no case, therefore, did a beneficiary receive an increase of only 5p a week for a dependent child.

The Minister was at the poverty conference in Kilkenny last Sunday and she is well aware of the complaints made there about budget No.1 of 21 July and budget No.2 of 1 September when VAT was increased by 50 per cent. She is well aware that the 5p, or the total social welfare increases in the Budget of 21 July——

A question, Deputy.

——which were 5 per cent and 3 per cent, in no way compensated the social welfare recipients for the total cost of living increase. Will the Minister, as Fianna Fáil did, give an increase in the region of 20 per cent or 25 per cent and not a miserable 3 per cent or 5 per cent?

The point made by the Deputy about the 5p a week does not stand because in no case did any beneficiary receive an increase of 5p a week. The lowest was 35p a week. In some cases that increase involved 5 per cent and in some cases 3 per cent. In the preparation of the July budget, the Department of Finance estimated that the cost of living would increase by 3 per cent as a direct result of the proposals. For those who received the increase of 3 per cent this would at least maintain their living standard and in the case of those who received 5 per cent it meant an effective increase. There were price increases other than those directly resulting from the budget. A figure of 5 per cent in the period which we are talking about would be the equivalent over the year of a much higher increase, on top of the increases which had already been received. We are committed in the next budget to giving a very sizeable increase which will cover the rate of inflation and give a significant increase in real incomes to all social welfare recipients.

Does the Minister agree that the 5 per cent and 3 per cent increases given in the budget of July 21 were not sufficient to cover the cost of living increases since then?

They were estimated to cover the cost of living increases as a direct result of our budget. I accept that the general rise in inflation which has been a feature of our finances for the past number of years has had a very serious effect. The trend towards that inflationary situation existed long before we took office. I accept that all involved are affected by that.

Would the Minister agree that in the International Year of Disabled Persons, to offer a blind pensioner a 5p increase for dependent children is an insult? Would she further agree that such a ridiculous increase arose only because the Coalition Government in their package gave no thought to the real effect of a 5 per cent increase on these beneficiaries? I cannot see how an increase of 5 per cent would purchase anything more that a few sweets. You would be lucky to purchase a lollipop with 5p. Can the Minister say that her Taoiseach really believes an increase of 5p a week for the dependants of a blind pensioner is anything but derisory and an insult in this International Year of Disabled Persons?

No beneficiary received an increase of 5p only. The 5p increase was on top of a further increase in dependants' allowances on the basic pension. It was an increase as a supplement. If the Deputy is so outraged at 5p being 5 per cent of a basic allowance, how could he have been a member of the Government who established the basic allowance at that level? We are scoring cheap points.

Would the Minister agree that in our two last budgets those allowances were increased by 25 per cent notwithstanding very difficult economic circumstances? It has yet to be seen what this Government will do in the circumstances which will prevail under their increased inflation. Will the Minister agree that a 5p increase in this allowance does not indicate very much for disabled people?

There was no 5p increase only for any beneficiary. I would be glad if the Deputy could refrain from repeating that point which is an erroneous point. There was a very welcome 25 per cent increase in the benefits last year and I hope that kind of progress will be continued. There is need for great development in this area.

5.