In a statement following its Social Policy Forum in Prague, Caritas Europa has identified four key principles that should be followed in addressing the current crisis:

• The eradication of poverty and social exclusion must be the goal of a modern, inclusive society.
• Fighting against poverty and social exclusion must be a concern and a duty for everybody: individual citizens, organised civil society and public authorities.
• Solidarity and social responsibility must be human values having equal importance as individual freedom.
• Social justice must be the key objective for all political action.

The Caritas Europa statement goes on to state:

The crisis is the result of injustice

The present crisis is the result of injustice – it is the result of wrong decisions and weak politics over the last 20 years. As a consequence more people will be affected by poverty and deprived of the means to a decent life. This is a man-made crisis, not a natural disaster, and it is just as much a crisis of values as it is an economic crisis.

It would be a scandal if the expenses of the ‘extravagant party’ of the past decades are now to be paid by those who were never invited to attend it. Yet this is what is happening: many governments are responding to the crisis by cutting spending on social protection.

Caritas calls upon governments to reinforce social protection systems and to improve their effectiveness as instruments to prevent poverty.

Caritas calls for social cohesion.

Some politicians are calling for more consumption, while others are calling for less. All are desperately calling for more ‘confidence in the system’. In the meantime, on the streets of some countries people are clearly demonstrating that they have lost confidence in ‘the system’ and in their own politicians. We may witness increasing political instability. Democracy itself may be at risk.

Caritas is convinced that this ‘crisis’ can become a kairos, a moment of opportunity, if those caught by it understand that they are actors and not simply victims. We do not allow others to fix our minds and our hearts on a financial or economic crisis – something that is nothing new for the poor of this world. They have lived their own “economic crisis” for decades. Today however poverty and social exclusion are becoming threats for even more people. Social justice must once again take its appropriate place on the political stage.

Community building at grass roots level has always been a priority for Caritas. We are experts in organising community life in Europe and across the world. Community building must now become a key priority for politics as well. In recent decades we have lived through an era of individualism, where people tended to focus more on their own fulfilment than on the development of their communities. Now is the time for a renaissance of communities. Organising communities is not simply a matter of political expediency; it is both a necessity and an opportunity to reinstate solidarity.

Social cohesion must be promoted, shifting from an individual-oriented society to a community-based society where solidarity between people and between nations is a central and consistently practiced value.

Caritas calls for renewed attention to social services

Social services of general interest have been subject to over-regulation, in stark contrast to economic activities which have been de-regulated to the point of triggering the current crisis. Now more than ever, new and innovative approaches are needed with regard to social services, taking into account the new socio-economic environment. New types of services are necessary not only to care for the poorest of the poor, but also for the new poor. In an interdependent and inclusive society, services must be designed in a way that ensures cohesion and solidarity, not segregation. These social services must be organised within the cradle of local communities, using the skills and personal commitment of both professionals and volunteers.

Investment in social services and in social economy must be boosted, both to alleviate the effects of the crisis and to foster new growth.

Caritas calls for a new ‘ethos’ in financial and economic behaviour

Financial services such as solidarity funds and ethical/social banks must be provided with more favourable operating conditions, because their activities directly support the poor and most excluded people, thereby promoting financial inclusion. These financial service providers, who base their business model on ethics and social responsibility, certainly deserve the same - if not better – conditions than all other financial institutions. More broadly, we call for a redesign of the international financial system and for all economic activities to be based on ethical considerations.

Caritas calls for direct dialogue with civil society

National governments and multilateral organisations have a specific shared responsibility. They have to work together and help society rebuild itself as a sustainable one. We – Caritas and other civil society organisations – need their help and support. Solutions are already emerging from the grassroots and being articulated through networks like Caritas.

We call upon national governments and multilateral organisations to enable civil society to fully participate in the policy decisions of today.

Without a strong and active civil society, governments and multilateral organisations will be at risk themselves.

Multilateralism is also at risk. We call upon multilateral organisations to make all possible efforts to avoid governmental tendencies towards protectionism. International fora provide good opportunities for transnational cooperation beyond nationalistic or continental perspectives, and for fostering a sense of solidarity, not only between individuals but also between nations and continents.

Caritas, acting together with people affected by poverty, is committed to contribute to a ‘civilisation of love’ (Paul VI) which in today’s political language translates into a cohesive and inclusive society.

Caritas Europa is one of the seven regions of Caritas Internationalis, the worldwide

Caritas Europa is the umbrella organisation of the European network of 48 Caritas member organisations, working in 44 European countries. It is one of the seven regions of Caritas Internationalis which is a worldwide confederation of 162 Catholic relief, development and social service organisations working to build a better world, especially for the poor and oppressed, in over 200 countries and territories.

Caritas Europa focuses its activities on policy issues related to poverty and social inequality, migration and asylum within all countries of Europe, and issues of emergency humanitarian assistance, international development and peace throughout the world. With regard to all these issues, the organisation develops policies for political advocacy and lobbying at European level as well as at national level.

CORI Justice works with Caritas Europa on a wide range of issues focusing particularly on poverty, inequality and social exclusion.

The full text of the Caritas Europa Statement can be accessed here.

CORI Justice has concluded that the 'Renewed Social Agenda' announced by the European Commission falls far short of what is desired if the European Union is to act effectively on a wide range of social issues that need to be addressed if Europe is to be an effective generator of social inclusion. Of particular concern is the failure at EU Commission level to recognise that economic development and social development are two sides of the one coin. Economic development is required if social services are to be adequately resourced. On the other hand good social services are required if economic development is to be sustained. An obvious illustration of the accuracy of this claim can be found in the area of education. If education services are not adequate then economic development will suffer.

CORI Justice welcomes the fact that the European Commission recognises the need for a renewed social agenda to address the changing social realities of recent times. The scale of this renewed agenda, however, is not nearly sufficient to address the problems that need to be addressed.

Recent developments in Ireland have highlighted the need to ensure that social inclusion is at the heart of policy development at both a national and an EU level. At present the emphasis on 'Growth and Jobs' is not sufficient to build a Europe that secures what is required for every person to live life with dignity while also protecting the environment. A much broader policy approach is required; an approach that would secure that was sustainable, economically, environmentally and socially.

According to the Commission its new social proposals seek to boost access, opportunities and social justice. Discrimination is also tackled under a wide EU package on coping with social change in a global economy. The main aspects can be checked under the following headings:

The European Social Agenda launched on July 2, 2008

Combating Poverty

This contains a series of documents and links to:

• Social Services of General Interest - Commission Report
• Social Inclusion
• Social Protection

Children and Youth

This contains links to:

• Schools for the 21st Century
• Boosting cross-border volunteering in Europe
• Green Paper on 'Migration and Mobility'
• Youth in Action programme

Investing in People

This contains a series of documents and links to:

• European Works Councils - Citizens; summary
• European Works Councils - Draft Directive
• European Globalisation Adjustment Fund - Citizens' Summary
• The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) Communication
• Restructuring and employment - the contribution of the EU
• Company-based transnational agreements - Working document
• Telework - Framework Agreement.

Longer and Healthier Lives

This contains a series of documents and links to:

• The European Health strategy 2008-2013
• Community strategy for 2007-2012 on health and safety at work
• Cross-border Health Care

Strengthening Instruments

This contains a series of reports and links to:

• Open Method of Coordination in the Social Domain - Communication
• Open Method of Coordination in the Social Domain - Impact assessment (summary)
• Open method of Coordination in the Social Domain - Citizen's summary
• Proposal for a directive on maritime standards
• Social Protection
• Social Inclusion
• European Commission'[s Health DG
• European Commission's Economic and Financial Affairs DG
• European commission's Education and Culture DG

Fighting discrimination

This section contains a series of documents and links to:

• Communication on the Fight agains Discrimination
• The fight Against Discriminatin - Citizen's summary
• The Fight Against Discrimination - Directives
• The Fight Against Discrimination - Impct Assessment (summary)
• Equal Treatment Directive
• Community Instruments and Policies for Roma Inclusion

The International Agenda

This section contains a series of documents and links to:

• Decent work for all
• Proposal for a directive on maritime standards

CORI Justice welcomes the reconfirmation by the European Council of the importance of the social dimension of the EU as an integral part of the Lisbon Strategy. We also welcome the emphasis given by the Council to the need to integrate economic, employment and social policies. However, we have heard these commitments before and in the recent past in particular there has been a failure by the European Commission to give sufficient expression in its programmes to similar commitments from the European Council.
We trust that on this occasion the Council’s decision will be followed by appropriate action by the Commission to ensure the social dimension of European policy is given equal priority with its economic dimension.

Ireland’s national agreement between Government and Social Partners, Towards 2016, emphasises the complementarity of economic and social policy. Good economic development is essential to ensure adequate resources exist to fund social development. At the same time, good social development is required if the economy is to thrive.

CORI Justice also notes the Council’s statement that: “The European Council looks forward to the Commission's proposal for a renewed Social Agenda which should play a key role in strengthening the social dimension of the Lisbon Strategy by taking account of Europe's new social and labour realities and also covering issues such as youth, education, migration and demography as well as intercultural dialogue. In this context combating poverty and social exclusion, promoting active inclusion and increasing employment opportunities for those furthest from the labour market are all of major importance. To this end all the appropriate instruments and tools available at Community level should be used.” (paragraph 14 of the EU Council’s final statement).

If these words are to be credible then CORI Justice believes it is crucial that:

• Concrete initiatives are put in place at both EU and national levels immediately to strengthen substantially the social dimension of the Lisbon Strategy.
• Significant action is taken to reduce dramatically the number of people at risk of poverty in the EU from its current level of 78 million.
• The value of all work done by people is fully recognised – not just paid employment but also work done in the home, in the community and beyond which is not currently recognised as being of value but which is essential for families, communities and society to function.
• Significant action is taken to tackle the issue of the ‘working poor’ given that 18.9 million people in the EU who have a job are also at risk of poverty.

Given Ireland’s target on adult literacy (which would leave between half and three quarters of a million people in the labour force having serious literacy difficulties in 2016) the European Council made some very significant calls to Member States to take concrete action to:

• “Substantially reduce the number of young people who cannot read properly and the number of early school leavers, and improve the achievement levels of learners with a migrant background or from disadvantaged groups;
• Attract more adults, particularly low-skilled and older workers into education and training and further facilitate geographic and occupational mobility;
• Improve policy consistency and coordination of economic, employment and social policies in order to enhance social cohesion.” (paragraph 15 of final statement).

CORI Justice calls on the Irish Government to act immediately to give far greater priority to reducing the level of serious literacy difficulties among Ireland’s working age population.

EU – Key documents on Growth and Jobs

EU Member States' autumn 2007 reports on the implementation of their National Reform Programmes.

National Reform Programmes (Lisbon Agenda) - Member States' autumn 2007 reports on the implementation of their National Reform Programmes

Poverty and Exclusion - Eurobarometer publication September 2007.

Trends, Recent Developments, Active Inclusion and Minimum Resources - First Semester report 2006

Sustainable Development – History – Key links

Sustainable Development – European Portal – Links to key information

Sustainable Development – Progress Report on the EU Sustainable Development Strategy October 22, 2007

Reports on the monitoring and evaluation of the National Action Plans for Social Inclusion (2004)

Reports on implementation of National Action Plans for Social Inclusion (2003-2005)

Reports on implementation of National Action Plans for Social Inclusion (2001-2003)

The second half of 2010 will see Belgium take over the Presidency of the EU. What this will mean for Europe’s Social Agenda however remains unclear. It is very important that Belgium argues for social protection expenditure to be protected as so many austerity budgets have been introduced across the EU.

 Belgium has traditionally been one of the EU's more vocal member states in highlighting social issues. However, Belgian politicians are currently in negotiations to form a new government which is likely to bring in tough austerity measures. Consequently, it may prove difficult for them to push an ambitious social package at EU level if they are acting in a different manner at home.

• The push for a framework directive on minimum income,
• Conferences on the themes of homelessness and child poverty.
• Working out the details of how the 'Europe 2020' targets on poverty and social inclusion are to be implemented in practice. Under the terms of the final agreement on Europe 2020, EU countries have three options for measuring the percentage of their population living in poverty or social exclusion

The EPSCO Council of the European Union is meeting on March 7 to discuss their response to new developments on a range of issues. The EPSCO Council is the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council and is composed of employment, social protection, consumer protection, health and equal opportunities ministers, who meet around four times a year.

The European Social Protection and Social Inclusion Process

- Access to key reports and information on processes

Taking Forward the EU Social Inclusion Process – Independent Report prepared for the EU Presidency, July 31, 2005.

Implementation Report for Ireland on the NAP/Inclusion 2003-2005.

National strategy reports on adequate and sustainable pension systems (2005) – submitted by individual member countries to the EU.

EU Social Agenda - EU Commission's Communication - February 9, 2005

Download Pdf

EU Sustainable Development Strategy: Initial Stocktaking and Future Orientations - EU Commission's Communication - February 9, 2005

Download Pdf

Submission to Office of Social Inclusion Consultation on preparation of Ireland’s National Action Plan against Poverty and Social Exclusion 2006-08

Download Pdf

October 2005

Context of this Submission

Despite the advances in employment and economic growth achieved over the last few years, the phenomena of poverty and social exclusion remain large. Their sustained existence remains as one of this country’s major failures.

CORI Justice Commission believes that the new National Action Plan should contain clear objectives and priorities, set specific targets which it is possible to monitor, be integrated in to playing a central role in national decision making and commit Government to providing the necessary resources to make a substantial impact on eliminating poverty and social exclusion. Furthermore, the strategies and measures it adopts should conform to the following five principles: human dignity; non-discrimination; social justice; universal and structural social policy; and human rights.

Poverty in Ireland

The most up-to-date data available on poverty in Ireland comes from the 2003 EU-SILC survey, conducted by the CSO. Table 1 presents their key findings showing poverty levels among the Irish population. Using the EU poverty line set at 60 per cent of median income, the findings reveal that in 2003 more than one in every five of those living in Ireland were living in poverty. The table also indicates that there has been a sustained growth in the proportion of the population living below these lines. Data for 1998, 2000, 2001 and 2003 show that the proportion of the population in poverty has risen from 19.8 per cent in 1998 to 22.7 per cent in 2003. These are the only years for which comparable data has been provided.

Source: CSO (2005a:5), using national equivalence scale

As it is sometimes easy to overlook the sheer scale of Ireland’s poverty problem it is useful to translate the poverty percentages into numbers of people. Using the percentages for the 60 per cent poverty line above and population statistics from the CSO (2003:48) we can calculate the numbers of people in Ireland who have been in poverty for the years 1998, 2000, 2001 and 2003. These calculations are presented in table 2 below. The results give a better insight into how large the phenomenon of poverty is.

Source: Calculated using CSO (2005a: 5), national equivalence scale and CSO (2003:48)

The fact that there are now more than 900,000 people in Ireland living life on a level of income that is this low must be a major concern. As we have shown in our Socio-Economic Review (Pathways to Inclusion p21) these levels of income are not unreasonable and those below them clearly face difficulty in achieving what the NAPS described as “a standard of living that is regarded as acceptable by Irish society generally”.

Ireland’s Poor

The results of the EU-SULC survey provided a breakdown of those who are poor. Table 3 presents figures for the risk of poverty facing people when they are classified by their principal economic status. These risk figures represent the proportion of each group that are found to be in receipt of a disposable income that is less than the 60 per cent median income poverty line.

Source: CSO (2005a:9), using national equivalence scale
Note: * no recorded figure as sample occurrences were too small for estimation

As such, the group of the Irish population that are at highest risk of poverty are the ill and people with a disability. More than one in every two people who are classified as ill/disabled live in poverty. Apart from those classified as others, the next biggest group at risk of poverty are the unemployed. 42 per cent of this group live in poverty and when broken down by gender the table shows that the risk levels are much greater for unemployed males. More that one in three of those on home duties (primarily women) live with incomes below the poverty line while a similar figure (31 per cent) is recorded among those who are retired. A closer assessment of the risk levels of poverty among the retired reveals that their risk of poverty rate has climbed to its current level from a rate of 8.2 per cent in 1994 (see Whelan et al, 2003:24). Students, whether living in poor families while completing their secondary education or while attending post-secondary education also have a high poverty rate at 30.3 per cent. The lowest poverty risk figure is recorded for those at work (employees, self-employed, farmers) with just under one in every ten of this group living below the poverty line.

One obvious conclusion to draw from table 3 is that the highest risk of poverty levels is concentrated among those dependent on the social welfare system. As CORI Justice Commission has pointed out for some time, it is essential that adequate welfare payments are provided for these groups so that their poverty is addressed and reduced.

Key Groups:

(i) Poverty and Social Welfare Recipients

CORI Justice Commission has always pointed out the very important role that social welfare plays in addressing poverty. Our continued campaign to increase the rates of social welfare reflects this belief. As part of the EU-SILC results the CSO have provided an interesting insight into the role that social welfare payments play in tackling Ireland’s poverty levels. They have calculated what the levels of poverty are before and after the payment of social welfare benefits. Table 4 presents these results and shows that without the social welfare system Ireland’s poverty rate in 2003 would have been 38.4 per cent. The actual poverty figure of 22.7 per cent reflects the fact that social welfare payments reduced poverty by 15.7 per cent. The small increases in social welfare in 2000 and 2001 are reflected in the smaller effects achieved in those years. As the government commits more money to social welfare payments, as agreed under the NAPS and Sustaining Progress, these figures measuring the role of social welfare in reducing poverty will increase.

Source: CSO (2005a:8), using national equivalence scale.

As social welfare payments do not flow to everybody in the population it is interesting to examine the impact they have on alleviating poverty among certain groups such as the elderly. Without any social welfare payments 82.5 per cent of all those aged over 65 years in Ireland would be living in poverty. Benefit entitlements reduce the poverty level among this group to 36.4 per cent. While this poverty rate is still very high, the fact that more than eight out of every ten of the elderly would be in poverty without benefits underscores the importance of these payments to the elderly.

Many of the groups in Irish society who have experienced increases in their poverty levels over the last decade have been dependent on social welfare payments. These include pensioners, the unemployed, lone parents and those who are ill or people with a disability. Table 5 presents the results of an analysis of five key welfare recipient groups performed by the ESRI using poverty data for five of the years between 1994 and 2001. These are the years that the Irish economy grew fastest and the core years of the famed ‘Celtic Tiger’ boom. Between 1994 and 2001 all categories experienced large growth in their poverty risk. For example, in 1994 only 5 in every 100 old age pension recipients were in poverty; in 2001 this had increased ten-fold to almost 50 in every 100. The experience of widow’s pension recipients is similar.

Source: Whelan et al (2003: 31).

The lesson to be learnt from table 5 centres on the inadequacy of social welfare payments. Throughout the last decade CORI Justice Commission has repeatedly pointed out how these have failed to rise in proportion to earnings elsewhere in society. The primary consequence of this is that recipients have slipped further and further back and as a consequence more and more have fallen into poverty. It is clear that adequate levels of social welfare need to be delivered and we outline our proposals for this below.

(ii) Child poverty

One of the most vulnerable groups in any society are children and consequently the issue of child poverty is one that deserves particular attention. In 2003 there were approximately 895,022 children aged between 0 and 15 years living in Ireland. (1) Of these table 6 indicates that one in four were living in poverty. This amounts to 223,756 children. The scale of this statistic is shocking. Given that our children are our future, this finding is not acceptable. Furthermore, the fact that such a large proportion of our children are living in poverty has obvious implications for the education system and the success of these children within it. The new National plan must consider the scale of this problem.

Source: CSO (2005a:9), using national equivalence scale.

(iii) Older people

According to Census 2002 there are 392,836 people aged over 65 living in Ireland and of these 113,826 live alone. When poverty is analysed across the age groups dramatic differences between the young, middle aged and old are visible. The 2003 figures show that 20.1 per cent of all those aged between 15-64 live in relative income poverty while 36.4 per cent of those aged 65 and over are in this situation.

Over time the risk of being in poverty has increased sharply for the elderly. Table 7 shows how the proportion of older people who are in poverty changed between 1994 and 2003. In 1994 this stood at 5.9 per cent, by 1998 it had risen to 32.9 per cent and in 2001 it peaked at 44.1 per cent. The most recent set of figures for 2003 suggest that this has decreased slightly to a position where over one in three of Ireland’s elderly are living in poverty. While this recent decrease is to be welcomed, it remains a concern that so many of this countries senior citizens are living on so little.

(iv) The Ill /Disabled

As table 3 showed the ill and people with disabilities are the group with the highest risk of poverty with 54 per cent of this group living in poverty. Over time the situation of this group has visibly deteriorated with previous poverty studies by the ESRI showing that this group's risk of poverty has increased rapidly over the last decade, climbing from 29.5 per cent in 1994 (Whelan et al, 2003:24). This dramatic increase in the risk of poverty is an issue of concern. It implies that in 1994 approximately three out of every ten persons who are ill or people with a disability were in poverty and that by 2003 this had increased to over five out of every ten. Consequently, although the ill and people with a disability only account for a small proportion of those in poverty, among themselves their experience of poverty is worryingly high. CORI Justice Commission believes there is a clear need to initiate targeted policies to assist this group. These include job creation, retraining (see section on work) and increases in social welfare supports. There is also a very strong case to be made for introducing a non-means tested cost of disability allowance.

(v) The working poor

The growth in jobs over recent years has been dramatic and many have benefited from the rapid rise in the number of jobs available. However, it is important to realise that having a job is not, of itself, a guarantee that one lives in a poverty-free household. As table 3 indicates 9.2 per cent of those in employment are living at risk of poverty. Translating this into numbers of people suggests among the 1.74 million in employment in Ireland in 2003, almost 160,000 were living at risk of poverty. (2) This is a remarkable statistic. Action is urgently required to address this problem.

Poverty and Gender

Consistently, the results of income surveys indicate that among all adults, women in Ireland experience a greater risk of poverty than men. Table 8 presents the picture for 2003.

Across all adults, women are at a higher risk of poverty than men. The difference is particularly pronounced in the age group over 65. In that group, 40.7 per cent of women are at risk of experiencing poverty, compared to 30.6 per cent of men. The greater dependency of elderly women on social welfare payments and pensions, whose growth has lagged behind average income growth, is a central part of the reason behind this trend.

As noted earlier in table 3, the 2003 data record that 37 per cent of those working full time in the home were living in poverty. Since 1994 this figure has almost doubled, from 20.9 per cent (see Whelan et al, 2003:24). The 2003 EU-SILC results also indicate that 44.9 per cent of all single-adult households and 42.3 per cent of single-parent households were in poverty (CSO, 2005a:9). All these classifications are households primarily headed by women and help to further explain the growth and scale of female poverty risk.

Source: CSO (2005a:5), using national equivalence scale.

Poverty in Ireland: The European Context

In framing this report, it is important that we recognise Ireland’s experience of poverty in the context of the other 24 EU member states.

Sources: CSO, 2005a:5; CSO, 2005b:40, Eurostat, Statistics in Focus 12/2004: 3 and 16/2004: 10
Note: Greece, Italy, Belgium and Denmark data from 2001; Malta data from 2000.

Irish people experience the highest risk of poverty when compared to the other 24 member states of the EU. Table 9 uses data published by the CSO and Eurostat reporting the ‘at risk of poverty’ rates calculated using the 60 per cent of median income poverty line in each country. The risk of poverty which Irish people face is 3.3 per cent higher than that in the UK, 11 per cent higher than in Luxembourg, Hungary, Slovenia, Denmark and Malta. The lowest poverty risk levels are in the Czech Republic (8 per cent) and the second highest are in Slovakia. (3)

The average risk of poverty in the EU-25 is 14.6 per cent. Chart 1 develops the findings in table 9 further and calculates the difference between national poverty risk levels and the EU-25 average. It reflects the fact that Ireland’s poverty problem is large and exceptional by European standards. It also underscores the need for Ireland and the new National Plan to address this issue with greater vigour.

Chart 1: Percentage difference in National Poverty risk from EU-25 average

Source: Calculated from CSO, 2005a:5; CSO, 2005b:40, Eurostat, Statistics in Focus 12/2004: 3 and 16/2004: 10
Notes: EU-25 average poverty risk is 14.6 per cent
See data source notes attached to table 9 above

Key Policy Initiatives for the National Action Plan

In the context of the above, and with regard to the objectives identified in the consultation document, CORI Justice Commission believe that the following are key policy initiatives required in the new National Plan.

1. Achieving an Adequate Level of Social Welfare

In 2002, the NAPS review set the following as key targets:

To achieve a rate of €150 per week in 2002 terms for the lowest rates of social welfare to be met by 2007 and the appropriate equivalence level of basic child income support (i.e. child Benefit and Child Dependent Allowances combined) to be set at 33 per cent - 35 per cent of the minimum adult social welfare payment rate.

CORI Justice Commission welcomed this target. It is a major breakthrough in social, economic and philosophical terms. We also welcomed the reaffirmation of this target in Sustaining Progress. The target of €150 a week is equivalent to 30 per cent of Gross Average Industrial Earnings (GAIE) in 2002. This means that social welfare rates will be benchmarked to increases in average industrial wages from now on. If this commitment is delivered upon it will mean that the gap between the present level of the lowest social welfare payments and 30 per cent of GAIE will be bridged during the next National Plan.

CORI Justice Commission has calculated the projected growth in €150 between 2002 and 2007 when it is indexed to the estimated growth in GAIE. Table 10 presents the expected growth rates and calculates that the lowest social welfare rates for single people should reach €185.80 by 2007.

Source: GAIE growth rates from CSO Industrial Earnings and Hours Worked (September 2004:2) and ESRI Medium Term Review (Bergin et al, 2003:49).

Following Budget 2005 the current minimum level of social welfare is €148.80 a week. Consequently, the gap to be bridged in the next two budgets (2006 & 2007) is €37. To fulfil the NAPS commitment the average increase in the minimum level of unemployment assistance across the next two budgets must be €18.50 a year. Table 11 proposes the updated scale of increase for social welfare for 2005 to 2007.

CORI Justice Commission has strongly urged government to honour its commitment in this area and to provide these increases in the years ahead. The earlier poverty figures underscore the inadequacy of social welfare payments throughout the last few years and make clear the need for increasing social welfare payments to an adequate level.

An important element of the NAPS commitment to increasing social welfare rates is the acknowledgement that the years from 2002-2007 marks a period of ‘catch-up’ for those in receipt of welfare payments. Once the existing gap has been bridged the increases necessary to keep social welfare payments at a level equivalent to 30 per cent of GAIE become much smaller. To make this point, CORI Justice Commission has calculated the increases necessary from Budget 2008 (delivered in December 2007) onwards to 2010 needed to maintain the link with 30 per cent of GAIE. Table 12 shows that the increases over these periods only need to correspond to the growth of GAIE in that year. Using projections from the ESRI these suggest an average increase of approximately €10 a year from 2008.

2. Recognising All Work

A major question being raised by the current labour-market situation concerns assumptions underpinning culture and policy making in this area. One such assumption concerns the priority given to paid employment over other forms of work. Most people recognise that a person can work very hard even though he or she does not have a conventional job. Much of the work done in the community and in the voluntary sector fits under this heading. So too does much of the work done in the home.

The need to recognise voluntary work has been acknowledged in the government’s White Paper, Supporting Voluntary Activity and by the Taoiseach who has stated that: “voluntary activity forms the very core of all vibrant and inclusive societies”. A recent report presented to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Arts, Sport, Tourism, Community Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs provided one small insight into this issue. It establishing that the cost to the state of replacing the 475,000 volunteers working for charitable organisations would be a minimum of €205m and could cost up to €485m per year.

The report of the National Committee on Volunteering entitled Tipping the Balance (October 2002) stands as a welcome acknowledgement of this role. The report was prepared to mark the UN International Year of the Volunteer 2001 by representatives of numerous voluntary organisations in Ireland, including CORI’s Justice Commission. The report suggested a series of recommendations to assist in the future development and recognition of voluntary activity throughout Ireland. In the light of the commitment to ‘promote social capital’ in the Programme for Government (2002). CORI Justice Commission is hopeful that the recommendations of this report will be implemented by government. In addressing issues of participation in employment, the new National Plan should incorporate these proposals and in doing so recognise the many different form that ‘work’ takes.

3. Addressing Long-term Unemployment and Youth Unemployment

While the employment situation in Ireland has dramatically improved over the last number of years, the issues of long-term unemployment and youth unemployment remain a concern.

Of the 85,600 people unemployed in November 2004, 56,700 were unemployed for less than one year, while 28,900 were long-term unemployed. This figure marked a substantial increase of over 4,000 individuals in long-term unemployment since 2002. However, the 2004 long-term unemployment rate of 1.5 per cent is considerably smaller than the 10.4 per cent recorded in 1988 and marks a major decrease in the level of structural unemployment. It also illustrates the extent to which Irish unemployment levels are now dominated by frictional factors. However, the return of cyclical unemployment in late 2001, and throughout both 2002 and 2003, underscores the necessity to maintain a focus on ensuring that the long-term unemployment problem is not allowed to return.

The new National plan should therefore address this issue. This is particularly important given that the NAPS Review (2002) set down as a key target: “to eliminate long-term unemployment as soon as circumstances permit but in any event not later than 2007”. Consequently it is of concern that the numbers classified as long-term unemployed increased so significantly in the last two years. To date, little progress has been made towards achieving this target.

An examination of the age structure of the unemployed indicates a growing problem of youth unemployment. As table 13 shows, this is particularly of concern among those aged 15-19. During 2004 their unemployment rates have increased from 12.2 per cent to 13.4 per cent. For those aged 20-24 their unemployment rate has remained very high at 7.1 per cent in 2004. In the context of an overall unemployment rate of 4.3 per cent these figures are of concern. Furthermore, the rate of increase in unemployment among this group remains a major issue. Given the projections for further increases in unemployment in the years ahead, the fate of any low-skilled individuals who have become unemployed is a concern. Depending on the extent of the economic slowdown, the potential for these individuals to become long-term unemployed must be monitored.

Source: CSO, QNHS March 2005:16

Another factor relevant to any assessment of youth unemployment is its association with other societal problems and in particular suicide. The results of an eight-year study of suicides in County Kildare (1995-2002) was recently published in the Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine by McGovern and Cusack (2004). One of their key findings was that unemployed males under the age of 30 were the most likely group to commit suicide.

4. Increasing the Supply of Social Housing

During the last decade improved levels of economic growth combined with low interest rates resulted in high levels of housing inflation. This in turn resulted in a crisis in housing provision in both the public and the private sectors. In the private sector this crisis is evident from the rapid increase in house prices and from the severe difficulties experienced by first-time buyers seeking affordable houses. In the public sector the demand (waiting lists) for public housing has increased substantially in the past five years at a time when house building in the public sector has been at a very low level.

At the end of 2004 the National Economic and Social Council (NESC) published a major report on housing. In particular, the report makes important suggestions for policy initiatives focused on social housing (see table 14). Overall, NESC concluded that it was particularly concerned about two issues. These are:

• the quality of the neighbourhoods, villages, towns and cities being constructed in Ireland, and
• the provision of social and affordable housing

They also stressed that adequately addressing these two issues will not be easy and that “the magnitude and significance of this challenge needs to be recognised”.

A central conclusion of the NESC housing report is that the supply of social housing will have to rise dramatically if the needs of Irish society are to be addressed in the years ahead. The main recommendation of the Council on the issue of social housing is outlined in table 14 and saw it call on Government to “create an expanded and more flexible stock of social housing - adding in the order of 73,000 permanent social housing units to bring the stock to 200,000 dwellings by 2012 - in a manner that is consistent with other public investment needs and sound public finances” (2004:221).

The figure of 200,000 social housing units has been calculated based on the projected increases in the Irish population over that period and in the context of limited responses to existing social housing needs (e.g. homelessness, community based accommodation for people with a disability and elderly persons). The scale of the challenge facing Irish society can be gauged from the fact that at the end of 2004 the total stock of social housing (including units managed by both local authorities and the voluntary and cooperative housing sector) stood at about 127,000.

NESC concluded that to achieve the target of 200,000 units over the eight year period between 2005 and 2012, an annual increase of in excess of 9,000 units is necessary. They also pointed out that an estimated capital investment of €1.4bn a year would be required to achieve a net increase of 73,000 units by 2012. Given the present level of capital expenditure this would mean an additional investment per annum of the scale of €500m to €600m on what is already projected.

CORI Justice Commission believes that reaching the NESC target for social housing in 2012 is essential if Ireland is to achieve the goal of ensuring that everyone in the country has appropriate accommodation. The new National Plan should endorse this NESC target.

5. Adopting a Rights-Based Approach

CORI Justice Commission believes strongly in the importance of developing a rights-based approach to social, economic and cultural issues. The need to develop these rights is becoming ever more urgent for Ireland and the EU.

Social, economic and cultural rights should be acknowledged and recognised just as the civil and political rights have been. Among others, we believe that seven basic rights that are of fundamental concern to people who are socially excluded and/or living in poverty should be acknowledged and recognised. These are the rights to: sufficient income to live life with dignity; meaningful work; appropriate accommodation; relevant education; essential healthcare; cultural respect; and real participation. Until these rights are effectively recognised then Ireland and the EU will continue to have a major credibility problem, as they will be failing to match their commitment to civil and political rights with an equal commitment to social, economic and cultural rights.

To ensure that the recognition of social, economic and cultural rights goes beyond words, however, it is essential to address the question: how can such rights be made justiciable (capable of being vindicated in law)? In particular, how can this be done in a way that respects the political process and does not destroy the balance of power between the judicial and the governmental dimensions of society while also respecting the social, economic and cultural rights of people?

CORI Justice Commission suggests the following as a viable way forward that would respect concerns expressed particularly by politicians while also respecting the need for people's rights to be justiciable. Our proposal has a number of components.

First, these social, economic and cultural rights should be recognised in the Irish Constitution. Following on this recognition there would be a requirement to have legislation ensuring these rights could be vindicated. We suggest the following might achieve this without producing a non-viable situation that would see every individual pursuing, for example, access to appropriate accommodation, all the way up to the Supreme Court.

Second, there would be a legal requirement on each incoming Government to set out concrete targets on each of the range of social, economic and cultural rights recognised in the Constitution. The specific list of rights would already be set out in legislation and should cover the listing outlined above or some similar range of rights.

Finally, the targets set out in such legislation would have to be for specific periods of time e.g. two and four years (these particular time-frames would also be set out in the legislation). Failure to achieve these targets would be justiciable on a class-action or similar basis but not on the basis of every individual bringing their particular case to court.

We believe a mechanism along these lines should be developed and put in place in all EU states. It would mean that social, economic and cultural rights were placed on the same level as civil and political rights. It would also mean that the EU’s over-concentration on the economic dimension would be re-balanced in part at least by a growing recognition of the importance of the social dimension to citizens in all EU member states. (4)

References

Bergin, A., J. Cullen, D. Duffy, J. Fitzgerald, I. Kearney and D. McCoy (2003), Medium-Term Review: 2003-2010, Dublin, ESRI.

Central Statistics Office (2003), Census 2002: Principal Socio-economic Results, Dublin, Stationery Office.

Central Statistics Office (2004), Population and Labour Force Projections 2006-2036, Dublin, Stationery Office.

Central Statistics Office (2005a), EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions, Dublin, Stationery Office.

Central Statistics Office (2005b), Measuring Ireland’s Progress 2004, Dublin, Stationery Office.

Central Statistics Office (various), Industrial Earnings and Hours Worked, Dublin, Stationery Office.

Central Statistics Office (various), Quarterly National Household Survey, Dublin.

CORI Justice Commission (2005). Pathways to Inclusion: policies to ensure economic development, social equity and sustainability. Dublin, CORI Justice Commission.

Department of Finance (2004), Budget 2005, Dublin, Stationery Office.

Department of the Taoiseach (2003) Sustaining Progress - Social Partnership Agreement 2003-2005, Dublin, Stationery Office.

Eurostat (various editions), Statistics in Focus, Luxembourg.

Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats (2002), Programme for Government, Dublin.

Healy, S. and B. Reynolds (2003), “Ireland and the Future of Europe – a social perspective” in in Reynolds B. and S. Healy (eds.) Ireland and the Future of Europe: leading the way towards inclusion?, Dublin, CORI.

McGovern, C. and D.A. Cusack (2004) “A Study of Suicides in Kildare, 1995-2002”, Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, Vol.11 issue 6 p289-298.

National Anti-Poverty Strategy Review (2002), Building an Inclusive Society Dublin, Stationery Office.

National Committee on Volunteering (2002), Tipping the Balance, Dublin, Stationery Office.

National Economic and Social Council (2004), Housing in Ireland: performance and policy, Dublin, NESC.

Whelan, C.T., R. Layte, B. Maitre, B. Gannon, B. Nolan, W. Watson, J. Williams (2003) Monitoring Poverty Trends in Ireland: Results from the 2001 Living in Ireland Survey. ESRI Dublin, Policy Research Series No. 51, December.

Notes:

1: This figure is calculated from a combination of data from the CSO (2003:48) and results from Census 2002 (2003, volume 2: 27).

2: Figures calculated using the risk of poverty figures in table 3.4 and results from the Quarterly National Household Survey (CSO, December 2004: 20).

3: Data are comparable across all countries and calculated in accordance with the methodology outlined in the Laeken indicators.

4: For a further discussion of this issue see Healy and Reynolds (2003).

ICTU General Secretary raises major questions concerning EU Commission's Communication on Lisbon Strategy, 7th February

Download Pdf

EU Commission's Communication to the Spring Council meeting on the Lisbon Strategy - February 2, 2005.

Download Pdf

Report of High Level Group, chaired by Wim Kok, on the Mid-Term Review of the Lisbon Agenda - published November 2004

Download Pdf

Irish Government's Submission to the EU Commission on the Mid-Term Review of the Lisbon Agenda - November 2004.

Download Pdf

2003 May 1st: CORI Justice Commission asks the Convention on the Future of Europe to make the elimination of poverty an objective of the EU.

The Social Agenda and the Next EU Treaty

Input to National Forum on Europe debate by Fr Sean Healy, s.m.a. CORI Justice Commission

1. If the European Union's social agenda is to be credible there are two key issues that should be included in any new EU Treaty. These are:

• The elimination of poverty should be made an objective of the Union.
• Social, economic and cultural rights should be made justiciable.

In this presentation I will address the 'why' and the 'how' of these two issues.

2. Since its inception the European project has focused principally on the economic dimension and given far less consideration and prominence to the Union's social aspects than was required.

3. It is important to acknowledge that there has been much progress on a range of social issues within the EU context.

4. However, the social dimension is very much the Cinderella component of the EU's activity. To see how true this is, all one has to do is contrast the vast array of directives etc. on economic issues with the dearth of such directives etc. on social issues. There are, for example, directives on issues as detailed as the presentation of duck eggs while there is nothing comparable concerning, for example, the need to ensure that every man, woman and child has sufficient income to live life with dignity.

5. This imbalance MUST be rectified if the EU is to maintain/regain/improve its credibility among the peoples of Europe who see the Union as ignoring many of the issues that are of major concern to them while paying detailed attention to economic development and the interests of business.

6. I welcome the publication of the report on Social Europe from Working Group XI of the Convention. While there are aspects of the report with which I disagree, it is refreshing to see that a revolt of the excluded (both inside and outside the Convention) led to the establishment of this Working Group and to the publication of this report.

7. The conclusions of the working group that the Union's objectives should be expanded to include issues such as social justice, sustainable development, social inclusion and so on, is most welcome. However, the elimination of poverty should also be included as an objective of the Union. Otherwise the EU will have very little credibility in its claims to represent and articulate the interests and concerns of its citizens.

8. A major issue for any new EU treaty is the issue of social, economic and cultural rights and their justiciability.

9. The inclusion of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Convention's draft text is very welcome. I welcome the Taoiseach's statement in a letter to the CORI Justice Commission that he would favour incorporation of the Charter into the Treaty.

10. It should be noted that the Charter is a flawed document that does not pay sufficient attention to the most fundamental cause of people's poverty i.e. their lack of sufficient income to live life with dignity. I believe that the EU needs to recognise, among others, seven basic rights that are of fundamental concern to people who are socially excluded and/or living in poverty. These are the rights to:

10.1. Sufficient income to live life with dignity.
10.2. Meaningful work.
10.3. Appropriate accommodation.
10.4. Relevant education.
10.5. Essential healthcare.
10.6. Cultural respect
10.7. Real participation.

Until these rights are incorporated into EU treaties the Union will continue to have a major credibility problem with a large proportion of its citizens.

11. The issue of justiciability of social, economic and cultural rights has been a major sticking point in progressing their recognition. The reasons for this resistance can be put under three main headings i.e.

• these rights are not to be seen in the same context as civil and political rights which are justiciable.
• there should not be a situation where a person can appeal to the Supreme Court, for example, if they do not have appropriate accommodation; and
• these issues should be addressed in the political and not the judicial arena.

I believe each of these objections can be overcome.

12. The issue of whether or not social, economic and cultural rights are on an equal footing with civil and political rights is an issue on which much has been written. There is not sufficient time to discuss the issue here today but I believe the question is a crucial one. Social, economic and cultural rights are human rights in the same way that civil and political rights are and they should be capable of being vindicated when they are not honoured by the Government of the day. I disagree with the Minister for Justice, Mr Michael McDowell, T.D., on this issue. I believe his articulated position is flawed and should not be acceptable as Government policy in any forward-looking democracy in the twenty-first century. I would be glad to engage in a discussion on that issue at an appropriate time.

13. Of greater urgency to today's agenda is to address the question: how can social, economic and cultural rights be made justiciable in a way that respects the political process and does not destroy the balance of power between the judicial and the governmental dimensions of society?

I suggest the following as a viable way forward that would respect concerns expressed particularly by politicians while also respecting people's rights. My proposal has a number of components.

• There would be a legal requirement on each incoming Government to set out concrete targets on each of a range of social, economic and cultural rights. The specific rights would be already set out in legislation and should cover the listing outlined above or some similar range of rights.
• The targets should be for specific periods of time e.g. two and four years (these would also be set out in the legislation).
• Failure to achieve these targets would be justiciable.

Let me outline an example. The present Government has already set a target (in the National Anti-Poverty Strategy) for the lowest social welfare payment for a single person to reach 30 per cent of gross average industrial earnings by 2007. To achieve this it has also agreed in the new national agreement, Sustaining Progress, to take the necessary steps during the coming three years to ensure this target is met by 2007. Consequently, if the Government is serious about the commitments it has already made it could set a two and four-year target for income adequacy that would satisfy my proposal as outlined already.

This proposal respects the political process and ensures it maintains it's primary role. However, it also ensures that a person's rights are respected if, for example, a Government decides deliberately to ignore them. It would have the additional benefit that General Elections would be fought in part at least on the basis of real proposals and commitments in areas that were of real concern to people. It would also ensure that politicians were more easily held accountable for the commitments they made.

Other issues arising from Working Group XI's report on Social Europe

I list these in a summary way, as I do not have time to address them in any detail.

14. On the Open Method of Co-ordination: Its inclusion in the Treaties would be a positive step towards improving the transparency and democratic character of the method. However, it should specify the need to involve civil society in its processes.

15. On the relationship between the co-ordination of economic and social policy: I strongly support the EAPN in its claim that the inclusion of all aspects of social policy to which the OMC is applied, alongside the Employment Guidelines and the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines, in the preparation for the Spring European Council, is vital, if we are to achieve a balanced European project.

16. On the issue of who/what constitutes a social partner: The role of employees' and employers' federations is stressed in the report and I welcome this. I also support the report's proposals that their role should be recognised, facilitated and enhanced in the Treaties. At the same time the report states that the role of civil society organisations should also be recognised in the Treaties and this would be a very welcome development. However, there are two issues of concern I wish to highlight:

• While recognising the specific contribution made by employees' and employers' organisations I do not accept that they should be the only recognised social partners. I acknowledge that there is a range of issues that are specific to their concerns and in which they are the appropriate bodies to be involved and recognised. However, I also believe there is a range of issues on which they are currently involved and consulted but which should also involve organised civil society. The Irish social partnership process provides a model for how this could be organised at a European level and I would strongly urge that this approach be followed.
• Not all social partners (in the Irish understanding) are provided with the resources (either from the EU or national level) to organise themselves on a trans-European basis even though they do have counterpart organisations in a range of EU member countries. To ensure fairness and to strengthen participation across the board there should be an acceptance of the need to recognise civil society organisations at both a national and EU level.

17. The recommendations contained in the working group report should be included in Part Two of the Constitutional Treaty so as to protect and give concrete expression to the values that will underpin the European Social Model.

18. I support the Working Group's recommendation that there should be a reference to social justice in the list of basic values in the European Union.

19. There should be a reference to equal treatment for all persons protected by the current Treaty Article 13.

20. An example of the failure to balance the economic and the social dimensions of the Union is clearly seen in the competencies currently conferred on the Union/Community in respect of social matters. These are listed in paragraphs 24 and 25 of the Working Group. Eleven areas are identified. Nine of these have to do with the situation of 'workers' meaning people in paid employment. The remaining two concern 'combating of social exclusion' and the 'modernisation of social protection systems'. At present, minimum requirements may be adopted only in the cases of the first nine, by means of a Directive. Yet we are urged to believe that social exclusion and related matters are of major concern to the Union. Clearly, the issues of people in paid employment are of major concern. But they should not be the only social issues addressed at this level of importance.

21. I strongly believe that the European Union will have serious credibility and legitimacy problems until it addresses the issue of Social Europe in a much more positive and comprehensive manner. I trust that any new Treaty or Constitution will give equal priority to the social and the economic dimensions of the Union.