On 11 November, in response to questions in this House on the Cabinet sub-committee, the Taoiseach told me he would continue to hold regional meetings with the Cabinet. It is the Taoiseach's business if he decides to hold a meeting in Nenagh.

In the course of his reply, the Taoiseach said that the Society of the St. Vincent de Paul would be given an opportunity to make its case in respect of persons for whom it cares. Subsequently, the Taoiseach disputed its report that some 300,000 children were in families living on incomes of less than €175 per week by saying: "There are not those kind of figures. The official figures of what people actually get in money terms do not show that." The figures produced by the Society of the St. Vincent de Paul are contained in the Combat Poverty Agency's official report which states that the most recent data indicates one quarter of all children, almost 300,000, live in families with an income of, not €175 per week, but €156 per week which is even worse.

Will the Taoiseach clarify his remarks in respect of the clear and cogent case made by the Society of the St. Vincent de Paul that there are 300,000 children living in families whose incomes are less than €175 per week? What does he propose to do about that?

I made those remarks during the weekend when assisting the Society of the St. Vincent de Paul in its Christmas campaign as I have done for many years.

Deputy Kenny said the figures presented by the Society of the St. Vincent de Paul on the extent of child poverty, that 300,000 children are in families with incomes of less than €175, are derived from the published results of the Living in Ireland survey in the pre-budget submission from the Combat Poverty Agency. Those figures are based on risk of poverty indicators and the percentage of persons below 60% of median income. The figures differ substantially from the consistent poverty measurement in the national anti-poverty strategy. The current figure for children in consistent poverty is 6.5%, or 74,000. There is a major difference between 300,000 and 74,000.

The measure of poverty used in the national anti-poverty strategy, or NAPS, and more recently in the national action plan against poverty and social exclusion is that of consistent poverty, which measures a combination of low income and enforced deprivation, that is, below 50% to 60% of average disposable income and lacking at least one of a set of eight basic deprivation indicators as set out in the SRI report. The consistent poverty measure was adopted in the NAPS because the inclusion of deprivation as well as income gives a far better guide than income alone to changes in the extent and nature of poverty.

The second part of the Deputy's question asked what measures we are taking to deal with the problem. We are already acting on child benefit. We also have measures to tackle child poverty. The lower social welfare rates have risen by 50% over the past five to six years, which is 24% above the rise in the cost of living over the same period from 1997 to 2003. Child benefit has more than trebled, from €38.10 per month to €125.60. We also intend to meet the NAPS income target.

When?

By 2007 under the programme. We have also provided almost €17 million for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance. A range of services introduced in recent years has benefited children in low-income families. We have also introduced several other initiatives on health, pre-schooling and primary schools, which are all helping children.

That seems to represent the Killarney speech that I heard the Taoiseach make some time ago. It reflects a different world from the reality. All I can do is quote from the official report of the Combat Poverty agency which says that 300,000 children live in income-poor families. That was reiterated by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, whose figures the Taoiseach castigated. If he was helping the society last week, for which I commend him, I hope he listened to Professor John Monaghan, its vice-president, who said: "Government needs to take steps urgently to ensure that those who benefited least during the so-called Celtic Tiger are not further penalised now that things are much tougher for them."

The Taoiseach read out a list of instances where he feels that benefits have been brought about. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs has introduced cuts of €58 million.

The Deputy's two minutes are concluded.

Those dependent on long-term medication have had to pay a 50% increase since the general election, those attending hospitals pay 40% more, those who depend on rent supplement pay 70% more, and those who send their children to college, if they can, pay 90% more. These increases in stealth charges have a direct downward pressure on those who are most marginalised and victimised by society and Government.

The Taoiseach, more than anyone else, should not castigate official figures from his own Government's national Combat Poverty Agency, whose truth is reflected by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. There will be hungry children this Christmas and families seriously under pressure. The type of activity introduced in the Estimates last week does not help them.

I did not castigate the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, of which I am a long-standing supporter and which I was supporting last Sunday. I agree with Professor Monaghan that there will be children at risk this year who will require our help. That is the reason my Government is so supportive, not only of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul but of many of the agencies, and funds them year after year with large sums to assist them in their excellent work. I do not accept what was said about the risk of poverty. There is a difference between being at risk of poverty and poverty itself. The figures are based on the risk of poverty. I was making the point that 300,000 children are not in poverty, and the figures exist to support this.

I know what the Society of St. Vincent de Paul bases its figures on, but the risk of poverty indicator is not the one to consider. I obtained my figures from the anti-poverty agency. My only comment was that the society's figures are not in line with our own for people in this category. The figure for those in consistent poverty is 6.5%, or 74,000 children. That has fallen in the past eight or nine years from about 15% to about 5%, which is an enormous drop. We must continue with important measures to target and assist children, especially those at risk. For that reason, the Government supports the efforts of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul in trying to help those at risk this Christmas.

If the Taoiseach asserts that he has always helped the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, no one in the House will challenge that. However, the matter is not about charity but justice. Deputy Bertie Ahern is the Taoiseach, and his Government has cut €58 million from spending on the most defenceless section of society. He dismissed the impact on the weakest in society of those €58 million of cuts which the Minister for Social and Family Affairs put through in the Book of Estimates.

If the Taoiseach wishes to dismiss the case I made last week, does he also dismiss the same case advanced by these 13 organisations? They are Threshold, the Simon Community of Ireland, Focus Ireland, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, the Jesuit Centre for Faith and Justice, the Irish Refugee Council, the National Youth Council of Ireland, the Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed, Age Action Ireland, the Children's Rights Alliance, Women's Aid, OPEN and Cherish. All these organisations point out that what the Taoiseach has done will have a serious impact on the poorest and weakest in the community.

The Taoiseach is obfuscating in his reply to Deputy Kenny about the figures. He knows the difference between consistent poverty and relative poverty. He knows that the former was agreed between the Government and those organisations in the NAPS to mean children who cannot be sure of a hot meal during the day or a warm coat. That figure is 70,000 children. However, the figure for relative poverty takes in people—

The Deputy's two minutes are concluded.

—on less than 60% of median income. The total for that figure is 300,000. That is what the Society of St. Vincent de Paul put to him. Does it matter whether the figure is 300,000 or 275,000? Why did the Government decide to cut €58 million from spending on the weakest and most defenceless section of society, as corroborated by the 13 organisations for which he has expressed his regard?

We can continue the argument because, as long as there is someone in poverty, we should endeavour to assist the effort to help them.

It is not a charity.

No, social welfare is not a charity. However, what I was involved in a few days ago is a charity. We were asking people with goods and products to give them to assist people over the Christmas period, and that is what I was involved in.

The Taoiseach should tax the stallions with the hundreds of millions.

Deputy Higgins, this is the Labour leader's question.

Obviously, there has been tightening, even of a budget of €10.5 billion, but we must take into account that it comes at a time when unemployment has moved down from over 10% to 4.4%, lower than anywhere in Europe, and when we have had an increase of €355 million in the Book of Estimates. That is not intended to detract from the fact that there were areas in the Estimates that tightened regulations to the sum of €51 million. However, it was €51 million of €10.65 billion. That is what we are talking about.

I will run through some of the main areas. We have increased expenditure on child benefit by more than €70 million.

The social welfare increase was just €4.

Allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption.

Old age contributory pensions have been increased by €51 million and widow's and contributory pensions by €23 million.

That is correct.

Hanly is in the House.

The Deputy must be afraid of something.

Disability allowances are €40 million and supplementary welfare allowances are €72 million. These facts, which many hundreds of organisations have welcomed, are in the Book of Estimates.

What is the point of quoting global figures of €10.5 billion as the total social welfare budget, with an increase of €375 million this year, to a young woman who cannot get rent supplement to put a roof over her head, to someone reliant on the dietary supplement to enjoy a relatively healthy lifestyle or to the single parent trapped in poverty for whom the transitional half payment was a way back to education and work?

It was not.

It was. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Coughlan does not know the difference between capping rent allowance and capping rents.

She knows the difference between a €10 increase and a £1.75 increase in social welfare and she has proved it.

The Minister should allow Deputy Rabbitte to speak without interruption.

You have found your voice. The defender of Nenagh has found his voice again.

I ask Deputy Rabbitte to address his remarks through the Chair.

I do not need to address the Deputy to find my voice.

The Minister for Defence did not seem to get much of a slap on the wrist. Was the whole thing a ready-up? Is the Government contriving to bury the Hanly report? Why is the Minister still here? He was lucky to be there in the first place. He should mind his own business and stay out of this.

The comparison between the €10 increase and the £1.75 increase hurt the Deputy.

Deputy Rabbitte's minute has concluded.

The fact of the matter—

It hurt the Deputy.

The Minister should allow Deputy Rabbitte speak without interruption. Deputy Rabbitte is entitled to ask a question about one matter only on Leaders' Questions and his time has now long since concluded.

Deputy Hoctor and many other Fianna Fáil backbenchers agree with me, including the 40—

That does not arise in regard to this question and the Deputy's time has concluded. He is entitled to one minute and he has now taken more.

The Ceann Comhairle is excessively sensitive when it comes to my addressing Fianna Fáil backbenchers. I wish to refer to the fact that 40 Fianna Fáil backbenchers have signed a motion to stop the cuts in community employment after the cuts have been implemented.

The Deputy's time has concluded and I ask him to give way to the Taoiseach.

That is the kind of thing which Fianna Fáil members are good at when they go back to their constituencies.

It is not appropriate for the Deputy to move on to another question. He may raise one topic under Leaders' Questions, not two.

The one topic is this. Some €58 million in cuts—

The Deputy's time has concluded. He has had almost three minutes.

The Ceann Comhairle heckled me for about two minutes.

Injury time.

Allow the Taoiseach to reply.

Does the Taoiseach agree with the Minister for Finance that the cuts of €58 million will not be reversed and does he agree with the Tánaiste who on Sunday night said that their purpose was to disincentivise certain things?

Sorry, Deputy, the Taoiseach must reply.

Is that now the philosophy which dominates the Government led by this most left of centre of all Taoisigh?

I am glad the Deputy has made those points, with which I agree—

I have many points.

If every time I stand up, the Deputy gives me two seconds to reply, there is not much point in my trying to answer. I will answer if the Deputy wants to listen. The Deputy can listen to an answer or he can heckle but we can play it that way on this side of the House too.

The Deputy said there was not much point in my giving individual figures. However, the point I made was that, even though we have reduced unemployment by about 7% and long-term unemployment by about 10%, the social welfare budget year on year, including this year, has increased by a massive amount. This year, some 970,000 people make up those figures.

Deputy Rabbitte's point in regard to global figures not being a good idea is a fair one. Therefore we will look at individual ones. The average rise in the lowest social welfare rates under the rainbow coalition was €2.74 compared with €6.69 under this Government.

My God.

The rainbow coalition implemented a meagre pension increase of €2.29.

How many years ago was that?

When we look at the individual figures, we can see just how meagre the increases were.

Why does the Taoiseach want to insult the poor like this?

Why does the Taoiseach not refer back to the war – to 1944?

The Deputy party was in power then too and it took a shilling off the pension. It will still try to do so any time it gets the chance.

Deputy Smith got the skull.

Deputy Ring, this is Leaders' Questions. You are not the leader of the Labour Party.

On the community employment schemes, the Tánaiste has already stated there will be 25,000 participants and more than €380 million provided this year, which is an enormous figure.

That is incorrect.

Some 20,000 plus in the categories are included in it.

That involves two schemes.

On the eve of the Assembly elections in the North of Ireland, will the Taoiseach join with me in appealing to people to exercise their franchise tomorrow, turn out and record their support for the progress achieved to date which I hope will be built upon in the coming weeks and months, thereby guaranteeing a better future for all citizens on the island?

Against the backdrop of the election, does the Taoiseach agree that, during the course of the summer, many leaders in communities and political parties, including Sinn Féin, the Ulster Unionist Party and others, played an heroic role in helping to defuse difficult situations which arose in what are sometimes termed "interface communities" and ensuring that many problems which could have arisen around contentious Orange marches did not take place? We had an important summer in terms of showing what can be achieved through collective and concerted efforts.

Does the Taoiseach also agree that there is great concern at the growing incidence of sectarian attacks in the North of Ireland? Only last Thursday, we saw the brutal murder of 21 year old James McMahon and the previous week, a man was subjected to an horrific machete attack. Does the Taoiseach agree that all these attacks deserve to be roundly condemned and the only way in which they can be properly addressed is through the same efforts being employed by community leaders and political parties as was demonstrated during the summer?

The Taoiseach is meeting the British Prime Minister later this week. In following on from these terrible events we witnessed, including the tragic death of Mr. McMahon, will the Taoiseach raise these ongoing sectarian attacks with the British Prime Minister?

As always, I utterly condemn all sectarian attacks. Those engaged in carrying them out do an injustice to the huge number of people who want to see progress and peace in Northern Ireland. I condemn the tragic circumstances of the death of James McMahon last week. The PSNI has already given its view on where it believes responsibility for that murder and events surrounding it lies. It has been quite categorical in that.

There is no doubt the pro-Agreement parties and many community organisations worked extremely hard and co-operated well during the summer. I had the opportunity before, during and after the summer of discussing this issue with all the groups, including, for the first time, the loyalist commission. Everyone worked extremely hard to deal with the issues. However, as the Deputy pointed out, there have recently been a number of signs which are a cause for concern.

As I said over the weekend, I hope people turn out for the Assembly elections tomorrow. It is the first time since 22 May 1998 that people have had an opportunity to vote for the Assembly. It is important that there is strong commitment to and support for the Good Friday Agreement, the Assembly, the Executive and the North-South bodies. Every report published in recent years has shown the benefits which have accrued to the people of Northern Ireland because of the Agreement. I hope politicians will receive a good mandate to continue the institutions and the Government remains ready to continue the effort to get full implementation of the Agreement after the elections.

Is the Taoiseach aware that, in the period from July to the end of last month, there were at least 160 such sectarian attacks, including over 50 pipe and petrol bomb attacks, a stabbing, the beating of a pregnant woman who lost her child and several attempted abductions? We have also seen many attacks on Catholic homes and schools. We have already indicated, and I have no doubt it is the shared view of all opinion in the House, that sectarianism in all its manifestations must be rejected and condemned. Will the Taoiseach join me in so doing? There is only one way in which this can be addressed, as demonstrated in other parts of the North of Ireland, the Border counties and elsewhere. It is only through concerted leadership, good example and the collective efforts of community and political leaders that the scourge of sectarianism can be rooted out of Irish society.

I reiterate that there have been many attacks, examples of intimidation and other events. There is no need to discuss the detail of these, regardless of who originated or was involved in them, but I reject them all. We must hope that after the election we will be in a position to move on, to try to have the Agreement implemented, to get the institutions functioning, to encourage cross-party co-operation and to deal with issues such as policing. Respect must be fostered and progress made on these issues in order to deal with the type of occurrences to which the Deputy refers. It is clear that there are acts outside the law which are dangerous and undermine everything we are trying to achieve. I look forward, after the election, to joining the parties to try to deal with these matters as quickly as possible.