asked the Minister for Social Welfare if the Government intend to provide the double payment to pensioners and other social welfare recipients at Christmas time as has been the practice in recent years.

The cost of a double payment next Christmas to recipients of long-term social welfare payments would be about £18 million. Provision for such a payment was not made in the Estimates for 1983 which were based on those drawn up by the previous Government and published in November last. The question of providing a double payment would depend on financial constraints and the availability of funds to meet the cost at the appropriate time.

It was difficult to hear the Minister, but may I take it that he is saying that it is not intended to make this double payment? Surely he would know at this stage whether or not he intends to do so?

I can assure the Deputy that at this stage I have no money at all to make that payment of £18 million. In fact, on the ordinary unemployment payments I am short of money so that, come next Christmas, it will be a matter of paying our ordinary month's payment of unemployment benefit and pensions. At present we do not have £18 million nor are we likely to have it in December.

Can the Minister tell us how many years this scheme has been in operation whereby a double payment was made at Christmas?

1980 was the first time since 1955 that double payments were made at Christmas. In 1980 it was done in accordance with the provisions of the Second National Understanding for Economic and Social Development. In 1980 the cost was £8.8 million, in 1981 £12.5 million, then in 1982 there was a double payment for child dependants only of £4.2 million and a double payment generally of £15.3 million. The cost is approximately £18 million.

Would the Minister not accept that it is insufficient to come into the House and say that money is not available to provide for the needs of those on social welfare benefits?

I might put it to the Deputy that last year the payment was made but there was no money available and the Government borrowed £18 million. The only reason it was paid last year was the election. There was no provision in the 1982 Estimates for the money and then, as the Deputy well remembers, the then Minister for Social Welfare announced some weeks prior to the election that it was intended to pay it. This year our Estimates are on a different footing. If I can get the £18 million I will most willingly pay it, but as of now probably I will be short £10 million to £15 million on the ordinary social welfare side, because we have 193,000 unemployed, we have 10,000 on short time, our PRSI receipts have inevitably dipped somewhat, and their is no money.

Deputy Gregory, with a final supplementary.

Could I ask the Minister if his decision not to make a double payment is in line with Labour Party policy?

That is a separate question.

6.