I watched the Minister for Social and Family Affairs on the monitor yesterday as she giggled her way through Question Time. It was endearing unless one is a victim of her social welfare cuts. I understand her defence now is that she is making these cuts because there is abuse in the system. There are many abuses in our society. The one she posited of EU nationals coming here for what she called the "craic" for six months and then going into education at our expense is far fetched.

I want to raise the question of the budget supplement. It is a payment brokered by the Money Advice and Budgeting Service when repayments to a creditor leave a person with insufficient money for food, fuel or the other essentials of life. The cost is minuscule, but a person in despair because of debts which have accrued due to alcoholism in the home, other dysfunctional reasons or dire poverty was enabled through the services of MABS, which acted as a broker with a credit union or the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, to make a payment to the creditor over a period of time and to get them out of poverty. The merits of the budget supplement are listed in a document from the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, which Deputy Howlin gave me. They include the following: the supplement breaks the cycle of poverty; it is a targeted, short-term payment reviewed and revised regularly and hence it does not become part of the income; it is a planned method of debt payment in partnership with the person who is in debt; and the expenditure is minuscule.

The effect of what the Minister has done is to drive these people into the arms of money lenders and further into debt and to undermine the Money Advice and Budgeting Service. No amount of shaking of heads will change that.

We built up the Money Advice and Budgeting Service.

Allow Deputy Rabbitte to conclude without interruption.

The Deputy did not fund it. We funded it.

The Minister should allow Deputy Rabbitte to conclude.

It is the meanest, lowest and pettiest cut and there is no justification for it.

I also heard part of what the Minister for Social and Family Affairs said yesterday. She explained the various issues which arose. Anyone with a fair mind would have heard her identify areas within her Department out of €10.65 billion. Whatever additional funding is announced today in the budget, the social welfare budget will be at least close to €11 billion. That is an enormous amount of resources. The Minister has a responsibility not just to give away money, but to ensure that taxpayers' money is spent, managed and targeted correctly into schemes for which it was originally intended. The Minister has an obligation to do that. Out of the €10.65 billion, the Minister received an additional pre-budget amount of €355 million and she identified four or five areas where the schemes must be better dealt with.

Sixteen.

The Deputy mentioned the MABS supplement. A supplementary welfare allowance is given to recipients who have been supported by the Money Advice and Budgeting Service in brokering a deal with creditors.

I know what it is. Why did the Government stop it?

The Minister stated that she believed parts of that should be discontinued. The supplement has been a subsidy for creditors, mainly banks and lending institutions.

That is a disgrace.

That is outrageous.

Allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption.

What about ESB bills?

The Taoiseach is out of touch.

The repayment schedule agreed with creditors in the future will be more realistic and not as onerous on the person with insufficient money to pay. It is currently reducted and the normal support services, such as the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, will not be affected by this measure. The Minister said yesterday that those who have a problem – the Department can easily identify them – will get an exceptional needs payment and that all those in receipt of that will not be affected.

One would be lucky to get one of those.

I do not know to what category Deputy Rabbitte is referring, but there is €9.9 million for the MABS payments this year. I do not know how the Deputy can say the scheme has been abolished when the Minister informed us yesterday that €9.9 million is available for payments. That seems to be a contradiction, but I believe the Minister.

I am in disbelief that the Taoiseach would try to defend what has happened. It has not been reducted, as the Taoiseach put it. It has been cut. What is the point in saying to a woman who is in despair because she cannot pay the ESB bill, the rent or a utility payment for an essential item in the home that there is €10.65 billion in social welfare? What is the point of using such global figures? The reason the Money Advice and Budgeting Service was established was to act as a broker for people in despair because of poverty or circumstances in the home to allow them to get assistance to arrange the management of their budget and to negotiate with the Society of St. Vincent de Paul or the credit union.

We know that. We set it up and funded it.

The Minister should allow Deputy Rabbitte to speak.

When the Minister was in London looking for Joseph Murphy, Proinsias De Rossa set it up. The Minister did not find him.

I will be interested when the Deputy winds his way to the Mahon tribunal.

I ask the Minister to resume his seat.

When is the tribunal going to call the Deputy? I never took a penny, unlike some.

The Minister should resume his seat. Deputy Rabbitte, under Standing Orders only one subject may be raised. You cannot raise another topic and your minute of time has long since concluded. You must give way to the Taoiseach.

The Deputy was out of time before he was interrupted.

When will they call Deputy Rabbitte?

Deputy Stagg should resume his seat. The Chair has already dealt with disorder on the Government side.

To give an example—

Your time has long since concluded.

I was interrupted. I was not permitted to speak.

The Deputy had concluded before the interruptions started.

I was not permitted to speak. We were up trees again with Deputy Dermot Ahern.

We were not taking money.

Nor was I.

Will the Minister please desist? The Chair does not want to take more serious disciplinary action.

I want to give the Taoiseach the example. On the €500—

The Deputy has gone over his time.

May I finish my sentence? I am being interrupted.

The Chair is obliged to implement the Standing Order.

On the example of the €500, if the person had gone to a legal moneylender the repayments would be €750. If they had gone to the credit union, the repayments would be €521. That is the difference between a person being assisted through MABS and a person who has to go through a moneylender.

The Deputy has made his point. I ask him to conclude.

That is on a figure of €500. Will the Taoiseach reverse that particular cut for people at the bottom rung of the ladder who are in dire circumstances and despair because of the poverty they are in through no fault of their own? That is why MABS was established by the then Minister, Proinsias De Rossa. It has been welcomed by backbenchers on all sides of the House who deal with this phenomenon. Why this Government wants to cut it is beyond belief.

The Deputy must give way to the Taoiseach. He cannot go on all morning. We cannot have a special Standing Order just for him.

He will not mention the trees again.

The Minister should allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption.

I will answer the two questions raised. Deputy Rabbitte says he does not know what I am talking about. The scheme and the supplement are currently not used by utilities; they are used by lending institutions. I am not making up that information, it has been supplied by the people who run the scheme.

It is not true.

Perhaps the people who run the scheme do not know how it works.

The Taoiseach, without interruption.

They do know.

These are the people.

Allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption.

I have a whole note on it here. I have already used the note and given the Deputies the facts, which are that the normal support service of the Money Advice and Budgeting Service will not be affected by the measure.

That is wrong.

They are twisting in the wind.

The Minister stated yesterday that the resources are there and are not used for utilities but are used for money lending organisations. The scheme is still there. If the Deputy has made any valid points about those who are on the end of the scale, the Minister has already clearly stated in the House that it will not affect those people, that there will be no problem and that there will be an exceptional needs payment at the end for those in receipt of it.

Do not mention special needs, as it would take a miracle.

They started this morning by saying it was abolished, even though I told them there was a budget of €9.9 million. Then I told them the scheme was not used for what they said, and they say that Deputy De Rossa set it up. I know what Deputy De Rossa did when he was the Minister. He gave the meanest, scroungiest, increase in the old age pension that was ever given.