I refer to the Taoiseach's announcement ten days ago, when he said out of the blue that the Government proposes to have a referendum on the rights of the child. We are no clearer ten days later on whether the Government thought this through or what is intended. The Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, has given half a dozen interviews, diplomatically pouring treacle on our heads but we still do not know the intention of the amendment.

Does the Taoiseach agree there are many things the Government can do without a referendum? I refer him to today's report by the End Child Poverty Coalition, which points out that child poverty rates in Ireland are among the highest in Europe, with no fewer than 60,000 children living in consistent poverty, that one third of children in lone parent households live in consistent poverty and that deprivation is highest in households with children.

The Government target to eliminate child poverty by 2007 in the national anti-poverty strategy has not just no realistic prospect of being achieved but the inequality in our society is widening. We all know poverty in Ireland is spatially diffuse but we also know there are geographic areas where multiple disadvantage is clustered. How can the Taoiseach's Government justify such private affluence living cheek by jowl with public squalor? Does he accept that social welfare increases alone will not address this issue? Specifically, does the Taoiseach agree with the Labour Party proposal that 5% of the national development plan be allocated to these areas of concentrated deprivation? These areas of poverty have been well mapped out, all of the literature exists. A Marshall Plan is needed to transfer resources to these areas of concentrated disadvantage. What is the Government's position?

Indicators that have been well analysed, with the UN figures only recently coming out, show that we have lifted 250,000 from consistent poverty, including 100,000 children, over the last few years. The figures used internationally show 6% suffer from consistent poverty and we continue under the national anti-poverty strategy to put resources in place. Social welfare expenditure has doubled in the last six years. Improvement in social welfare rates have led to substantial increased spending on families: one in every three euro spent in the State goes on welfare. Every week 1 million people receive welfare payments, helping them all to one extent or another. The UN human development report, which we must submit figures to annually, states we have continued to increase social transfers substantially, resulting in real improvements in the living standards of those in poverty. The latest EU survey shows that increased resources devoted to social welfare and other services are having a significant impact and mentions the initiatives we have taken in recent years to tackle disadvantage.

If Deputy Rabbitte is asking if I agree with the measures implemented in recent years, taking into account the welfare, health and housing budgets to deal with marginalisation and deprivation, I do. We must continue to do that. The large increases in child benefit we have introduced in recent years have also helped. All of this is necessary, desirable and must continue. The Cabinet committee on social inclusion is dealing with these measures and implementing decisions.

Does Deputy Rabbitte agree that we have made substantial impacts in these areas? I agree with him that we must continue this. We must remove the causes, reduce pupil-teacher ratios and continue renovating accommodation or building more desirable and family-friendly homes. All of these issues are massively costly but we are doing them.

If Deputy Rabbitte is asking how do we equalise wealth so everyone is equally wealthy, I do not have a ready solution and it is no good trying to answer that question.

That is like something the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform would say.

The huge social spending we have undertaken should be acknowledged and it is having a major effect, as has been calculated by every local and international body that has looked at the issue.

I agree with the Taoiseach that the last 12 years of prosperity have had some trickle down effect in the geographic areas I referred to. I am disappointed, however, to see the Taoiseach follow his Minister for Social and Family Affairs in attacking the statistics as distinct from attacking poverty. The fact remains that 60,000 live in consistent poverty. I never raised any question about us all being equally wealthy, as the Taoiseach put it. How can he use such a term when we are talking about 60,000 children living in poverty, about thousands of children going to school who would not have a meal in the morning if it were not for breakfast clubs, about areas I do not need to name where we can physically see the different strands of deprivation concentrated together?

I did not ask any of the questions the Taoiseach sought to answer. I asked if he accepts there is a necessity to declare war on poverty in the relatively small number of geographic areas where multiple disadvantage is concentrated and if the upcoming national development plan offers the obvious opportunity to do that.

Perhaps the failed RAPID experiment could be resurrected. The Government ran up a 23% increase in public spending in advance of the last general election and as soon as the election was won, the savage 16 cuts in social welfare were introduced. The cruellest cut of all was pulling the rug from under the RAPID programme, with the €1.9 billion promised to underpin the plans prepared in these areas gone as soon as the plans were submitted. That was the cruellest cut by the Government and the former Minister for Finance.

I am asking the Taoiseach if, in the new national development plan, the political will exists on the Government side to address this issue. Some of the Taoiseach's Ministers believe inequality is necessary to drive our society. We do not believe that on these benches. Tackling inequality ought to be a political priority now in a country of our prosperity. Yet there are people living in areas where unemployment is five times the national average.

I ask the Deputy to give way to the Taoiseach.

Children are going to school depending on that school laying on a warm breakfast for them. Some 60,000 children are living in consistent poverty. These are the statistics, which are well-established. There is no point in us arguing about EU or United Nations measurements or anything else. The most recent EU measurement I have states that 21%——

I ask the Deputy to give way to the Taoiseach, please.

——are at risk from poverty.

I gave the figures at the outset. Deputy Rabbitte has asked me if I agree we must continue these policies of assisting areas that are marginalised and disadvantaged. Of course I do.

The point I must make is that we have had significant success because of the formation of the budgets we have introduced in the last number of years, where the less well-off people have got huge increases under the Department of Social and Family Affairs. These include child benefit, tackling disadvantage, increases in social welfare or income support. Over 80% of child income support is accounted for in child benefit. A decade ago it was less than 30%. This is enormously helpful.

We have made significant changes to family income supplement in the past number of years, all the time focusing on working families on low incomes or those who have no employment. That has had a significant effect. The amount of claims we now have for family income supplement shows we are targeting the correct people and families.

We have relaxed the means test for various payments, giving disregards in people's income so they can receive benefits. For those working, people on the national minimum wage are not taxed. We have brought in the back to school allowances, and the Minister, Deputy Brennan, has made significant increases in that and the footwear allowances.

School meals were very limited even five years ago. We are now spending over €10 million on that programme, and I do not think the figure was €1 million five years ago. They are very important for people who would not get meals, and we see this in school attendance reports. People in disadvantaged areas now come to school early in the morning because it is the only way they will get a meal. Clearly there is a problem, and that is the reason we put resources in place to deal with that. We have put in place significant assistance for one-parent families. The biggest act we have carried out is to try to give dignity to people who are less well-off and give them work.

With regard to the RAPID programme, we are allocating literally hundreds of millions of euro to the refurbishment and rebuilding of social housing and facilities. We are spending €2 billion on social housing, and a large proportion of the money from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is going into pulling down old flat blocks and renewing other flat blocks. The programme set out ten years ago that would have gone on for the next 40 years is now effectively done. Areas like Ballymun and Cherry Orchard have been rebuilt.

I agree with Deputy Rabbitte that we must keep doing this. I would like to hear people recognising in this House that it takes the UN body, the EU body and the OECD to acknowledge what we have done here in five years would not have happened in 50 years if it was not for this Government.

Hear, hear.