Would the Minister agree that one of the fundamental arrangements of the report of the Social Welfare Commission was the provision of a basic income to people on social welfare. They reckoned that in order to live a decent and dignified life, the basic income, could be anything between £50 and £60 per week. Would the Minister indicate what steps he has taken to raise the social welfare payments to those levels, and if he intends to use the income from the extension of the PRSI system to do that, as was recommended in the report?

I have had various suggestions calculated and updated. It was suggested that the basic payment should be raised to £45. The 1987 equivalent of that is £48.30 a week — without getting into the £50 to £60 a week level — and the cost of that for a year to the Department of Sociial Welfare would be £167 million. To raise the assistance level from £50 to £53.70 and benefit from £55 to £59 — to raise it to the 1987 level — would cost £443 million. The Deputy will realise that the kind of adjustments and savings that would be required to meet that additional cost would be very substantial.

I asked the Minister what steps he had taken to move in that direction. I do not expect this to be done overnight.

That matter falls to be considered in each budget.

Does the Minister not agree that PRSI should be extended to sectors which are not paying it at present in order to defray the costs of the increase about which we are talking? The Government have already decided to do that but I am asking if the increased revenue from extending PRSI will be used to raise the levels of social welfare benefits and assistance?

That is a matter for decision by the Government in the context of the budget.

The Minister's purpose seems to be to exaggerate the cost of helping the least well off categories in the social welfare system. He has given global figures but I should like him to tell me what it would cost to bring those living alone on unemployment assistance on £35 per week to £45 per week?

I would have to get that figure separately for the Deputy. In reply to a parliamentary question answered recently, estimates were given in that regard.

It was given to include dependants.

The Deputy will have to put down a separate question. I do not disagree with the Deputy but I am talking about the commission's recommendation and the Deputy is talking about the greatest priorities at this stage.

The time has come to deal with questions nominated for priority.