Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

Restrictions for Dublin city and county were announced on Friday, including restrictions on bars and restaurants banning indoor dining. This particular measure came as a shock. People did not see it coming. According to the Restaurants Association of Ireland it has resulted in tens of thousands of workers being laid off.

It is now clear that the Government’s strategy to deal with this pandemic will involve periods of intensifying restrictions and then relaxing them. For this to be a successful approach we need very clear communication and to understand that it means no surprises at the eleventh hour. Above all the Taoiseach needs to ensure that the State and his Government provide the necessary supports for families, for workers and for individuals who find themselves out of work at very short notice because of public health measures.

Last week the Government went ahead with a very mean cut to the pandemic unemployment payment and now more than 156,000 people who were in receipt of €350 a week will see a reduction in their payment of between €50 and €100. This cut happened precisely 24 hours before the Taoiseach announced these further restrictions on Dublin.

I am also absolutely astounded and gobsmacked at media reports that his Government approved this morning the hiring of ten special advisers for junior Ministers, this being done at a time when he is cutting payments to people in real difficulty who have lost their jobs. If this is the case it is outrageous and I ask him to clarify this matter.

At a time when sectors of the economy are still closed down or are vulnerable to being closed down again, when thousands of people are out of work, this is not a time to be cutting the very payment upon which they rely to pay their bills and look after their families. This decision needs to be reviewed immediately and reversed.

The Taoiseach also scrapped the eviction ban in August.

He replaced it with very weak legislation that provides nothing like the kinds of protections of the original ban and, consequently, has left thousands of renters exposed. He needs to revisit this decision also and reintroduce the original ban on evictions as a matter of urgency.

There are also some 37,000 households whose mortgage payment break is due to end in the coming days and many thousands of businesses are in the same boat. This will undoubtedly cause huge hardship for families and businesses up and down the land. If a further extension of these payment breaks is not granted before 30 September, these families and businesses will fall into default unless they are in a position to meet their full mortgage repayment. Banks and lending institutions need to act now to ensure that these 37,000 families, and businesses, are not plunged into further financial hardship. Deputy Martin is the Taoiseach and he needs to act on this matter because the real danger we face now is that people become more terrified of losing their job, their home and not being able to provide for their family than they are of the virus. That would be the worst possible situation we could walk into.

In terms of my asks, I want a reverse to the cut in the pandemic unemployment payment, PUP, a reinstatement of the ban on evictions and the extension of mortgage breaks without interest. The Taoiseach said correctly that we all have to play our part. I agree with him but the State has to lead from the front.

First, it has to be said that the measures taken and announced last Friday were necessary in the public health interest to save lives and to protect people. The vast majority of people accept the premise upon which those measures were taken and announced, on the advice of our public health doctors and NPHET. They are necessary to get the numbers down and stabilise the number of cases in Dublin in particular, which had risen too high in recent times. The same principle applies across the country. We need to get the numbers down and stabilise numbers across the country. That can be done by people adhering to the basic public health guidance. It is important that that happens because, ultimately, we want to keep our schools open, maintain health services and keep as many people as possible at work. Level 3 is not equivalent to the lockdown we experienced earlier this year in that many sectors of the economy are still working. It is an important objective of Government to keep as many people working as we possibly can while keeping the numbers down. The hospitality-tourism sector in particular, along with arts and culture, is bearing the brunt of Covid-19 because it is a disease that in many ways undermines the very nature of tourism and hospitality. That is a key point.

The PUP originally came in, as the Deputy will be aware, as a 12-week scheme. We are now looking at a much longer horizon for the payment and one of the decisions we took in July was to extend it out to April of next year. This Government has put €3.5 billion into the payment; that is what it has cost. This year alone, Government will spend €28 billion on social protection. That is an unprecedented intervention by the State and by Government in supporting incomes. Rates have come down in line with the decision in July but they are still very closely approximated to what people would have been earning prior to coming onto the Covid payment. The Deputy knows that is the situation.

We now have to look beyond April and realise that the impact of Covid, particularly economically and financially, could be felt right through the entirety of 2021. The fiscal planning and the planning around social protection budgets, therefore, has to, and will, take that into consideration. We are very anxious to support people in every way possible. That is why a multimillion euro initiative was taken to dramatically increase the number of places available in retraining in terms of education to enable people to take up employment in different areas and where investment is going such as retrofitting and other areas in the economy.

On evictions, the Deputy is wrong in her assertions. The Government legislation is not weak. It is more robust than what was in place because what was in place could not be extended without breaching the Constitution. Those are the facts. Nonetheless, what we have put in place in its stead was a provision whereby any renter in difficulty because of Covid will not have his or her rent increased and will not be evicted. That is unlike what has happened in Northern Ireland, for example. The measures we have taken here could be adopted by the Government in the North. Our protections are stronger than in the North and other jurisdictions. That should be acknowledged. No rent increase or eviction for renters affected by the virus will happen because of the legislation we introduced. That legislation applies nationwide.

The facts are these: we are now living with an ongoing crisis, there are tens of thousands of people who have not worked since March and there are thousands across the city and county of Dublin who got laid off on Friday. The very idea of reducing the payment for these workers at a time when interventions for public health are being made is absolutely extraordinary. The payment of €350 is not a fortune. There is nobody sitting in this Chamber who is on €350 per week. I dare say that the ten special advisers for the Taoiseach's junior Ministers will be paid an awful lot more than €350 per week. Therefore, I am asking him to play his part as Head of Government and for the State to lead from the front. I want him to revisit the decision to cut the pandemic unemployment payment. I want him to reinstate it to its original rate in recognition of the fact that people may well be in and out of employment for quite an extended period.

The Taoiseach claimed he cannot reinstate the ban on evictions because of some constitutional complication.

We have.

"Some constitutional complication" is now null and void, as demonstrated from Friday when emergency provisions were reinstated in the city. The Taoiseach knows full well he can reinstate the full ban on evictions and notices to quit.

The Deputy is way over time.

If he has read the evidence, he will know the initiative had a huge effect on dampening down homelessness numbers at the time in question. The Taoiseach should support working families and do the right thing.

The Deputy is wrong in what she has just said. It is not the first time that she has been wrong in her understanding of the law in that regard. Level 3 is nowhere near where it was. The point is that the legislation is robust and strong in that people affected by Covid will not face rent increases or evictions. That is what the legislation does. There is an extension of the provision right out until January. That is particularly important.

I take the Deputy's point that €350 is not a considerable amount of money. Of course, it is not; that is accepted. The Deputy speaks of special advisers. The special advisers her party employs, including in the Executive in the North, are also earning much more than that.

There are 14 of them.

The Deputy has been one of the original enthusiasts for special advisers and always has been. She has been a long-term advocate of special advisers in politics. She has never shown any disdain for them to date, and her party has not either, so she should stop the hypocrisy on that issue.

There are 14 in the entire-----

Our objective is to support people.

No, it is not.

It is true that Covid-19 and its impact will be with us for much longer than anticipated. We must also recall there are 213,000 people on jobseeker's payments right now and a range of others on social welfare payments and in various schemes who also need support. Therefore, there is a much broader picture here than is being painted by the Deputy.

In the context of the budget and of planning right through 2021, there will be a significant impact on our budget and on the overall resources.

For most of those who were laid off last Friday, it will be their second experience of Covid-related unemployment this year and within a short period. The further reductions in terms of the unemployment supports will be a double blow for many. Most will worry about how they will survive, put food on the table and pay their bills and, of course, about when they might get back to work, if they get back to work at all. As most will have little or anything in reserve, it adds to the very obvious sense of panic and distress. At a point when it is hitting home that Covid-19 will be here for some considerable time, the reductions could hardly have come at a worse time. For that reason, the reduction of these supports urgently needs to be reconsidered and reversed.

A further group of people who are finding themselves with little or no financial supports are parents who have been informed by schools that their children must self-isolate. The acting Chief Medical Officer, CMO, was upfront in advising parents there would be outbreaks in schools and he was correct. Parents are not necessarily required to self-isolate if their children are sent home but those children must be cared for. If a parent is not sick, he or she is not entitled to claim sick pay. It must be understood that the impact is not isolated to the child. As a consequence, there is an urgent need to include parents who are in such situations in the enhanced illness payment scheme. There cannot be any differentiation between a parent whose child has got a diagnosis and children who were sent home to isolate for 14 days because they are part of a pod. Not everyone can work from home and it is not acceptable that these parents can find themselves in the situation whereby they have no income at all.

There also needs to be consistency of approach in schools. The Irish Primary Principals Network, IPPN, has looked for a dedicated telephone line for out-of-hours calls and that should be supported. In my constituency, at present there are three schools that have had a recent or current Covid-19 experience. In one school, the public health doctor confirmed a case in a pupil and no restrictions ultimately were required. A sibling of a student in the second school was diagnosed with Covid-19 and 22 students were asked to self-isolate for 14 days. The parents are looking for explanations as to why there is a difference. That simply needs to be done in order that they understand the rationale. The third is a big school which had a large outbreak and which is closed. Understandably, that is under review.

If we are to live with this virus for the foreseeable future, temporary supports are needed that are responsive to changing needs. I have three questions. Will the Taoiseach review and reverse the reduction in the Covid-19 unemployment supports as a matter of urgency? Will he extend the enhanced illness payment to parents whose children are sent home from school due to the virus? Will he do as the IPPN is seeking and provide a dedicated phone line with the HSE where a medical professional would be on hand out-of-hours to ensure there is advice and consistency across the schools?

I thank the Deputy for raising the issues. As I said earlier, the changes to the pandemic unemployment payment, PUP, last July were designed to give sustainability to it. It was originally designed as a 12-week scheme when it was rushed into the House and introduced as an emergency to underpin incomes. The new rates approximate closely to what people would have been earning prior to being rendered unemployed because of Covid-19. That is still the situation and the figures show that. In other words, people will be in receipt, certainly above, on average approximately 105% of their prior income. Some will be lower; some will be higher and some will be very close to 100% of what they would have been earning when they were laid off as a result of Covid-19. We have extended it out to April and the Government is conscious now that we must plan longer-term in terms of the financial and economic impact of Covid-19 on certain sectors and on individuals and their incomes. That will be challenging. As I said, €28 billion will be spent this year, as opposed to an original €20 billion, for the social protection budget alone.

Originally the social protection budget represented 25% of overall allocation of resources this year. These are very challenging situations facing the Government and the Oireachtas. However, we provide support through the extraordinary measures we have taken with the PUP and the wage subsidy scheme which has also been extended out to April. We also have other schemes such as restart grants, tax relief and other measures designed to facilitate employers and assist people to retain jobs. We will also need to consider giving additional supports to specific sectors that are losing out more than most.

The Deputy raised the issue of a parent who has to stay at home because a child has to self-isolate. Looking at the national figures for that, there has been some mass testing and the figures for those testing positive are quite low. For example, for children aged up to ten, it is as low as 0.5% testing positive. When more than 3,000 teachers and students were mass tested, about 73 tested positive. We need to keep a perspective about that. Given the low numbers, I will inquire with the relevant Minister to see what can be done to help in that situation. At this stage I cannot commit to any broad scheme on that because the implications could be significant. A precedent could be set and it may not fit into any particular social protection scheme. I understand the point the Deputy is raising, and I will pursue it further and come back to her.

On her third point, I will also engage with the HSE and public health officials on having a dedicated phone line she feels principals may require to provide certainty on decisions that have been taken.

I agree with the Taoiseach. That is all the more reason such an initiative would be so important. In one school in my area, 400 pupils are at home today. It can have a big impact. If we are to get the numbers down, people need to feel a degree of certainty about how they will survive it if they are to go two weeks without any income, for example.

Earlier the Taoiseach said the amount of money is unprecedented, but, of course, Covid is unprecedented. Certain sectors have not had a chance, and probably will not have a chance, to get back to work, including people working in the arts, travel and tourism, and the hospitality sector, which has been badly impacted. I saw that in my area where we recently had a high level of restrictions. Those areas need support for longer and, as the ones most impacted by the most recent cuts in the PUP, they need to be looked at from that point of view.

The Taoiseach is getting the same kinds of contacts as I am with people crying on the phone, wondering how they will survive. We are all getting that. There was no lead-in time for this. There is no reserve for people. They are panicking about how they will survive. I ask the Taoiseach to look at those sectors from the point of view of the pandemic payments.

As I said earlier, originally 600,000-odd people were on various pandemic-related schemes but that is now down to 200,000. Many people got back to work as the economy reopened during the summer. In addition, 213,000 people are on the basic jobseeker's allowance. A range of others are getting different social protection payments. One must be fair to all concerned as the horizon lengthens regarding the impact of Covid. We need to think beyond April because the financial impacts of Covid will stretch beyond April. That relates to people's incomes. I take the Deputy's point that, of course, it is very distressing for people to lose work owing to the restrictions that need to be put in place to protect public health as a result of Covid-19. I understand that and certain sectors are faring worse than others.

The August returns show that normality almost came back in many different sectors of the economy. Clearly, hospitality, tourism, travel and all of those areas are the hardest hit. We have to see what we can do to underpin supports for that sector over the coming months, in addition to the very significant suite of measures that have already been introduced for that sector to try to maintain employment in it.