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.