TSG 16/07
Social Protection Package –Budget 2017 Issues
Introduction
1.
At end May 2016, there were over 1,366,000 persons in receipt of a weekly welfare
payment in respect of 2,087,000 beneficiaries. Of these weekly welfare recipients, over
582,300 were in receipt of pensions, 280,900 were in receipt of jobseeker’s payments,
176,600 received a disability allowance or an invalidity pension, and 64,800 were in
receipt of carer’s allowance. In addition, a further 625,000 families received a monthly
child benefit payment in respect of 1.2 million children. The scale of these numbers means
that the payments and services operated by the Department of Social Protection (DSP)
impact, either directly or indirectly, on the lives of everybody in the State in one way or
another.
This paper begins by examining the general role of social transfers1 and details progress
towards the national social target for poverty reduction. Trends in poverty rates over time
and the poverty alleviation effects of social transfers are briefly discussed.
The paper presents overall DSP expenditure by its various programmes. Budget 2017 is
discussed in the context of the Programme for Partnership Government commitments and
the 2017 expenditure ceiling.
The paper concludes with presenting a range of illustrative welfare Budget measures and
provides, in Appendix 1, the distributive and poverty impact of these measures, in order to
better inform understanding of the social impact of welfare budgetary policy.
Role of Social Transfers
2. Social transfers play a pivotal role in alleviating poverty, cushioning people from the worst
effects of reduced incomes as a result of contingencies such as unemployment or disability.
They are essential in supporting well-being and reducing inequalities through the
redistribution of income, therefore helping to promote social solidarity and cohesion. In
addition to income adequacy, social transfers are critical to the social determinants of
health2, crime prevention and access to education.
3. Furthermore, welfare expenditure contributes, directly or indirectly, to the wider economy,
as people spend their benefits and pensions each week, thereby adding to domestic
1
Social transfers include unemployment related payments, old-age social welfare payments, occupational
pensions, family / child related allowances, housing allowances and other social transfers such as disability
benefits.
2
See, for example: http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/health-policy/health-2020-the-european-policyfor-health-and-well-being/publications/2013/review-of-social-determinants-and-the-health-divide-in-the-whoeuropean-region.-final-report
Page 1 of 18
employment and economic activity. The importance of welfare as a key tool for stabilising
demand is recognised here and abroad3.
4. Finally, social transfers also provide support across the life-course, from helping to protect
children from the risks of inter-generational poverty and disadvantage to ensuring an
adequate standard of living across all life-cycle groups.
Meeting the national social target for a reduction in consistent poverty
5. Following a review in 2012, the Government agreed a revised and enhanced national social
target for poverty reduction, which is to:
“reduce consistent poverty (overlap of at-risk-of-poverty and basic deprivation) to 4% by
2016 (interim target) and to 2% or less by 2020, from the 2010 baseline rate of 6.3%.”
The target is supported by a wide range of actions across diverse policy areas in the
National Action Plan for Social Inclusion 2007-20164. The Plan was recently updated for
the period 2015 - 2017 to reflect the current issues and interventions to tackle poverty. More
recent measures to stimulate social recovery on active inclusion principles are set out in the
annual updates of the National Reform Programme5.
6. The latest poverty data, from the CSO Survey on Income and Living Conditions (SILC),
suggests that 2014 may be a turning point in terms of the poverty impact of the recession.
Key poverty rates have stabilised, with marginal progress noted on the national social target
for poverty reduction.
7. The national social target includes the Irish contribution to meeting the Europe 2020
poverty target, which is to reduce by a minimum of 200,000 the population in combined
poverty i.e. consistent poverty or at-risk-of-poverty or basic deprivation. The population
affected by ‘combined poverty’ was 37.3% in 2014, compared to 37.5% in 2013.
Nominally, this equated to 1.7 million people and is 307,000 people over the 2010 baseline
figure.
8. In recognition of the higher risks and life-long consequences of child poverty, a new childspecific poverty target is set in Better Outcomes: Brighter Futures – the National Policy
Framework for Children and Young People 2014-20206. The target is to lift at least 70,000
children (aged 0-17 years) out of consistent poverty, based on the 2011 baseline rate7.
In 2014, there were 134,000 children in consistent poverty, a decrease of 4,000 children on
2013. This means that 97,000 children will have to be lifted out of consistent poverty to
meet the target by 2020.
3
www.iza.org/en/webcontent/publications/reports/report_pdfs/iza_report_31.pdf
http://www.socialinclusion.ie/documents/NAPinclusionReportPDF.pdf
5
http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Work_Of_The_Department/Economic_International_Northern_Ireland/Econo
mic/NRP/NRP.html
6
http://www.dcya.gov.ie/documents/cypp_framework/BetterOutcomesBetterFutureReport.pdf
7
Equivalent to 101,000 in 2013
4
Page 2 of 18
Trends in poverty and associated indicators from 2004 to 2014
9. The increases in various poverty indicators from 2009/2010 peaked in 2013 and began to
decline marginally in 2014 (see Figure 1). The full impact of the recovery is not reflected
in these 2014 figures. The unemployment rate in 2014 was 11.3%, down from a peak of
15% in 2012. Since then, it has fallen further to 7.8% in May 2016. The recovery in the
labour market is broad based with virtually all sectors in the economy experiencing
employment growth. As unemployment is strongly linked to poverty, we can expect to see
further decreases in deprivation and consistent poverty when the data for 2015 and 2016
become available.
Figure 1: Trends in poverty using supporting indicators, 2004-2014
Consistent poverty
Basic deprivation
At-risk-of-poverty
Vulnerable to consistent poverty
35%
29.0%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
19.4%
16.3%
14.4%
8.0%
6.6%
3.9%
2.7%
0%
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Source: CSO SILC 2004 to 2013
i.
The at-risk-of-poverty was 19.4% in 2004 and 6.3% in 2014. Changes in the at-risk-ofpoverty rate in 2014 reflect different dynamics: one, the rise in the 60% median income
threshold as household incomes have increased with the emerging economic recovery;
and, two, the cushioning effect (poverty reduction effectiveness) of social transfers, in
reducing pre-social transfer at-risk-of-poverty rates.
ii.
Consistent poverty, the indicator used to set the national social target for poverty
reduction, fell from 6.6% in 2004 to a low of 4.2% in 2008, before rising to 8.0% in
2014.
iii.
Basic deprivation fell from 14.4% in 2004 to 11.8% in 2007, before increasing to 30.5%
in 2013. In 2014, the pattern reversed for the first time since 2007, with basic
deprivation falling by 1.5 percentage points to 29%.
iv.
The risk of being deprived has spread to groups that are not income poor, reflecting the
social impact of the recession broader social impact of economic changes for the Irish
population as a whole.
Page 3 of 18
The impact of poverty has varied across different groups. While the rate of consistent
poverty was 8.0% in 2014, the groups with the highest rates of consistent poverty (2123%) were individuals who were unemployed and those living in lone parent families
or social housing. Those in employment, older people, and people living in owner
occupier housing were least affected by consistent poverty.
Impact of social transfers on the at-risk-of-poverty rate
10. Throughout the recession social transfers performed strongly in reducing the at-risk-ofpoverty rate. In 2014, social transfers (excluding pensions) reduced the at-risk-of poverty
rate from 37.4% to 16.3%, or 21.1 percentage points in absolute terms. This represents a
poverty reduction effect of 56.4%. The comparable figure in 2013 was 60.4%.8 The 2014
figure compares very favourably with the 2005 rate of 42.6%, an improvement of 14
percentage points. The Irish rate is the highest in the EU, above the EU-28 average and the
rates achieved in the other member states worst affected by the crisis.
Budgets 2009 to 2014
11. Welfare savings contributed significantly to the fiscal consolidation effort over the crisis.
A very wide range of savings measures were introduced over Budgets 2009 to 2014
inclusive by the previous two Governments. The main measures can be summarised as
follows:
i.
Reductions in the weekly rates of payments for persons under 66 – mainly €16.30 per
week or 8%;
ii.
Significant reductions in child benefit and back to school clothing and footwear
allowance;
iii.
Reductions in the duration of certain social insurance benefits e.g. jobseeker’s benefit
and illness benefit;
iv.
Abolition of the Christmas Bonus (partially reintroduced in 2014);
v.
Abolition of certain schemes;
vi.
Significant reductions for the rates of payment for younger jobseekers, and
vii.
Reduction or abolition in the payment levels of certain supplementary schemes e.g.
household benefits.
In general, while pensioners were mainly affected by reductions in supplementary
entitlements over the period, the rate reductions (including child benefit) and reductions in
supplementary payments (where entitled) experienced by persons of working age as well
8
The reduction including pensions was from 49.3% (before social transfers) to 16.3% (after social transfers), a
‘poverty reduction effect’ of 66.9%.
Page 4 of 18
as increases in the minimum rent contribution under the Rent Supplement scheme have
meant that the scale of the overall reduction has been greater for non-pensioners.
12. The ESRI have conducted a social impact assessment of Budgets 2009 to 2016 inclusive9
using their SWITCH model. The analysis was “undertaken relative to a distributionally
neutral budget, implemented via indexation of tax and welfare parameters in line with
expected wage growth”. The paper concluded that: “Analysis at family unit level reveals
that the greatest losses imposed by Budgets 2009 to 2016 were for single unemployed
people, while the lowest losses were for pensioners. This reflects the substantial cuts in
welfare payment rates for the young unemployed in particular, and the fact that pension
payment rates, unlike working-age payment rates, were increased by Budgets 2009 and
2016.”
Budgets 2015 and 2016
13. Budget 2015 was the first Budget in recent years where there was scope to make some
improvements for welfare recipients, and further positive measures were announced in
Budget 2016. Budget 2015 introduced the Back to Work Family Dividend scheme,
increased the number of employees supported through JobsPlus and increased Child
Benefit payments. The main measures announced in Budget 2016 included rate increases
for pensions, Child Benefit, the Respite Care Grant and the Fuel Allowance as well as the
introduction of a new Paternity Benefit scheme. In addition, the Christmas Bonus was
increased to a 75% bonus in December 2015.
DSP Expenditure in 2016
14. Overall, €19.625 billion was allocated to DSP in 2016. This is equivalent to 38% of
Gross Current Government expenditure.
Table 1: Total Department expenditure by programme, 2013 to 2016
2013
2014
2015
Outturn Outturn Outturn
Administration
Pensions
Working Age Income Supports
Working Age Employment Supports
Illness, Disability and Carers
Children
Supplementary Payments,
Miscellaneous Services and agencies
Total expenditure
Change
9
2016
REV
€'m
564
6,451
5,504
994
3,405
2,269
€'m
575
6,507
4,883
1,078
3,334
2,301
€'m
583
6,879
4,469
1,079
3,546
2,462
€'m
613
6,974
3,963
1,087
3,535
2,587
1,051
20,238
-491
926
19,604
-634
887
19,904
+300
866
19,625
-279
% of
2016
REV
total
%
3%
36%
20%
6%
18%
13%
4%
-
https://www.esri.ie/pubs/QEC2015WIN_SA_Callan.pdf
Page 5 of 18
15. To enable an appropriate year on year expenditure comparison to be made, it should be
noted that two exceptional items are included in 2015 expenditure; as follows:
i.
Nearly €135 million to enable pensioners and other recipients, who were due to be paid
on Bank Holiday Friday, 1st January 2016 to have their payments brought forward to
Thursday, 31st December 2015, and
ii.
Around €197 million to pay the Christmas Bonus in 2015.
When these two items are excluded, the 2016 allocation is over €52 million higher than the
net outturn. As was the case in 2014 and 2015, there is no provision in the Revised
Estimates for the payment (at any rate) of a Christmas Bonus in 2016.
Expenditure Ceiling 2017
16. The 2017 expenditure ceiling for the Department is €19,721 million. This is €96 million
greater than the ceiling for 2016. The 2017 ceiling allows for an increase in expenditure on
pensions and a reduction of for jobseekers’ payments. However, there are a number of
further pressures in 2017, including the recent Government decision, in line with the
Programme for Partnership Government commitment, to raise Rent Supplement rent limits
from July 2016. This will involve additional costs in 2017 and later years and it essential
that any such costs are incorporated into the ceiling for these years.
17. The Programme for Partnership Government contains a number of spending commitments
in relation to social protection, such as:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
We will increase the State Pension and the Living Alone Allowance above the rate of
inflation;
We support an increase in the Disability Benefit and Allowance, Carer’s Benefit and
Allowance, and Blind Person’s Pension;
We will seek to introduce a PRSI scheme for the self-employed;
We will also extend the Dental Treatment Benefit scheme under the Social Insurance
Fund to reimburse the cost of some routine dental treatments;
Introduce a Working Family Payment that promotes work over welfare by
supplementing, on a graduated basis, the income of a household, while at the same
time incentivising more hours and full-time work;
We will fully protect the Free Travel Pass for all pensioners and work with private and
public operators to keep services operating on as many routes as possible;
The Summer Economic Statement (SES), in outlining its economic strategy, also refers to
the PRSI scheme for the self-employed, the Working Family Payment and the forthcoming
publication of the Pathways to Work for Jobless Households strategy “to address the fact
that Ireland has one of the highest rates of jobless households in Europe”.
Page 6 of 18
PRSI cover for the self-employed is dealt with in the PRSI TSG paper. A new Working
Family payment is a matter for progression in Budget 2018 given the complexities
involved. Jobless households arise for a variety of reasons such as unemployment,
illness/disability, and home duties, and accordingly, a multifaceted approach is taken by
the Department, such as the extension of Intreo services, the implementation of the
Comprehensive Employment Strategy for people with disabilities, and recent reforms of
the one-parent family payment scheme. In this regard, the proportion of the working-age
population living in jobless households has decreased over time as employment has
increased, and now stands at just over 12%.
Social Impact Assessment
18. The Social Protection Package - Budget 201610 paper to the Tax Strategy Group last year
contained analysis of the distributive impact of a range of illustrative social protection
budget measures. This was in line with the 2014 Government commitment that
“…a social impact assessment of the main taxation and welfare measures will be
carried out by a cross-Departmental body led by the Departments of Finance, Social
Protection and Public Expenditure and Reform before the publishing of budgets.”
The Programme for Partnership Government commits to “develop the process of budget
and policy proofing as a means of advancing equality, reducing poverty and strengthening
economic and social rights”. This paper lists a range of illustrative welfare Budget
measures and provides, in Appendix 1, the distributive and poverty impact of these possible
measures, in order to better inform understanding of the social impact of budgetary
policy.11 The measures include the main measures contained in the Programme for
Partnership Government, which are possible to analyse using the ESRI SWITCH model.
Table 2: Illustrative Social Protection Budget options.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Full Year
Illustrative Social Protection Budget Options
Estimated
Cost €m
€5 weekly rate increase for pensioners with a proportionate increase for
154
qualified adults.
€2 increase in the Living Alone Allowance, from €9 to €11 per week.
60
€5 weekly rate increase for all working-age welfare recipients with a
proportionate increase for qualified adults.
€5 weekly rate increase for people with disabilities and carers with a
proportionate increase for qualified adults where applicable.
€3.20 increase in the Increase for a Qualified Child, from €29.80 to €33
per week.
Increase Family Income Supplement thresholds by €10 per child per
week.
213
66
63
43
10
http://finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/TSG%2015%2011%20Social%20Protection%20Package.pdf
The Department has published post Budget integrated social impact assessments of the main tax and social
welfare measures for Budgets 2013 to 2016 inclusive, using the ESRI SWITCH model.
11
Page 7 of 18
7.
8.
Double the Back to School Clothing and Footwear Allowance (from
€100 to €200 for 4-11 year olds, and €200 to €400 for 12-17 year olds).
Payment of a Christmas Bonus (75%).
Note: This would be a 2016 expenditure measure.
35
200
19. Welfare improvements, in general, are progressive and benefit those in the bottom half of
the income distribution most given that welfare income forms a greater proportion of the
total incomes of these groups. However, as demonstrated in the analysis included in this
document, the impact of individual welfare measures does vary with some having little
impact on the bottom quintile and some measures having a broader impact across all
income groups. Most changes to direct taxation have little or no impact on households in
the bottom half of the income distribution (although the impact varies depending on the
measures chosen). The Government will need, in the light of its commitment on carrying
out social impact assessments, to give consideration to the overall impact of both its
expenditure and taxation measures on an ex-ante basis.
20. The TSG is invited to consider this paper.
___________________________
Department of Social Protection
Page 8 of 18
Appendix 1 - Social Impact Assessment of Illustrative Welfare Measures
This note presents the results of analysis undertaken in June 2016. It uses the ESRI SWITCH
tax / benefit model to assess the social impact of illustrative welfare measures. The SWITCH
model simulates the effects using a representative sample of households based on the CSO
survey on Income and Living Conditions (SILC).
The analysis reports on the distributive and poverty impact of each option. Distributive impact
is measured using ten equally sized equivalised income deciles. The deciles range from one
(the poorest) to ten (the richest) and the impact in each sub-group is shown in cash and
percentage terms. The unit of analysis is ‘income sharing’ unit, which is similar to tax unit but
includes students.
The distributive impact is also analysed among family types. Families are grouped according
to employed or unemployed, retired or working, single or couple with and without children.
By doing this we can see the effect on each specific family unit. The abbreviations are as
follows:









NE - unemployed
E - employed
SE - single earner family
DE- dual earner family
C - children
NC - no children
R - retired
RA - relative assisting
Other - includes a mix of people in education, ill/disabled (single, and in couples if
male is disabled) and single people on home duties.
The poverty impact is measured using the change in percentage of the population at-risk-ofpoverty. The population at risk is considered to be those below 60% of the median income. The
poverty impact is expressed in absolute terms (i.e. percentage point change).
Page 9 of 18
1. €5 weekly rate increase for pensioners aged 66 and over with a proportionate increase
for qualified adults
 The average gain in disposable income is 0.1 per cent (€0.90 per week). The third
decile gains most (0.6 per cent or €2.30 per week).
 Retired singles and couples are mainly impacted by the measure with a gain of 0.6
per cent (€3.40 and €5.15 per week respectively).
 The impact on the population at-risk-of-poverty is minimal – there is a fall of about
0.1 percentage points in the at-risk-of-poverty rate for older people.
Distributional impact
(% and cash change in weekly disposable income)
% gain
Cash gain
2.0%
€4.00
1.8%
€3.50
1.6%
€3.00
1.4%
1.2%
€2.50
1.0%
€2.00
0.8%
€1.50
0.6%
€1.00
0.4%
€0.50
0.2%
0.0%
€0.00
<€189 <€242 <€292 <€354 >€406 <€453 <€527 <€612 <€756 >€756
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Impact by family type
(% change in income by different family types)
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Page 10 of 18
2. €5 weekly rate increase for working-age welfare recipients with a proportionate
increase for qualified adults (€3.40)
 The average gain in disposable income is 0.2 per cent (€1.20 per week). The bottom
two deciles gain most at 1.7 and 1.0 per cent (€3.10 and €3.40 per week) respectively.
 Unemployed singles gain most (2.7 per cent or €4.40 per week), followed by nonearning couples without children (2.3 per cent or €7.60 per week).
 The impact on the population at-risk-of-poverty is minimal with a fall of about 0.2
percentage points.
Distributional impact
(% and cash change in weekly disposable income)
% gain
Cash gain
2.0%
€4.00
1.8%
€3.50
1.6%
€3.00
1.4%
1.2%
€2.50
1.0%
€2.00
0.8%
€1.50
0.6%
€1.00
0.4%
€0.50
0.2%
0.0%
€0.00
<€189 <€242 <€292 <€354 >€406 <€453 <€527 <€612 <€756 >€756
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Impact by family type
(% change in income by different family types)
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Page 11 of 18
3. €5 weekly rate increase in the personal rate for disability and carers payments
 The average gain in disposable income is 0.1 per cent (€0.45 per week). The bottom
two deciles gain most at 0.6 and 0.3 per cent (€1.05 and €1 per week) respectively.
 The average gain in disposable income for households affected by the measure (10.1
per cent of all households) is 0.8 per cent (€4.50 per week).
 Other family type is impacted most with a gain of 1.1 per cent (€2 per week), followed
by non-earning couples without children (0.8 per cent or €2.70 per week).
 The impact on the population at-risk-of-poverty is minimal (fall of 0.04 percentage
points).
Distributional impact
(% and cash change in weekly disposable income)
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Impact by family type
(% change in income by different family types)
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Page 12 of 18
4. €2 increase in the Living Alone Allowance, from €9 to €11 per week
 The average gain in disposable income is 0.02 per cent (€0.10 per week). The third
decile gains most at 0.1 per cent (€0.55 per week).
 The impact by family type graph is not included as this measure largely impacts
retired single people (0.2 per cent or €0.90 per week).
 The impact on the population at-risk-of-poverty is minimal (fall of 0.04 percentage
points).
Distributional impact
(% and cash change in weekly disposable income)
% gain
Cash gain
2.0%
€4.00
1.8%
€3.50
1.6%
€3.00
1.4%
1.2%
€2.50
1.0%
€2.00
0.8%
€1.50
0.6%
€1.00
0.4%
€0.50
0.2%
0.0%
€0.00
<€189 <€242 <€292 <€354 >€406 <€453 <€527 <€612 <€756 >€756
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Page 13 of 18
5. €3.20 increase in the Qualified Child Increase, from €29.80 to €33 per week
 The average gain in disposable income is 0.05 per cent (€0.30 per week). The bottom
two deciles gain most at 0.5 and 0.4 per cent (€0.90 and €1.30 per week) respectively.
 Non-earning couples with children gain most (1.7 per cent or €8.60 per week), followed
by non-earning lone parents (1 per cent or €3.30 per week).
 The impact on the population at-risk-of-poverty is minimal (fall of 0.07 percentage
points).
Distributional impact
(% and cash change in weekly disposable income)
% gain
Cash gain
2.0%
€4.00
1.8%
€3.50
1.6%
€3.00
1.4%
1.2%
€2.50
1.0%
€2.00
0.8%
€1.50
0.6%
€1.00
0.4%
€0.50
0.2%
0.0%
€0.00
<€189 <€242 <€292 <€354 >€406 <€453 <€527 <€612 <€756 >€756
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Impact by family type
(% change in income by different family types)
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Page 14 of 18
6. Increase Family Income Supplement thresholds by €10 per child.
 The average gain in disposable income is 0.05 per cent (€0.30 per week). The third
decile gains the most at 0.3 per cent (€1.05 per week).
 The average gain in disposable income for households with children eligible for FIS
(2.2 per cent of all households) is 2 per cent (€14.15 per week).
 Earning lone parents and single earning couples with children gain most (c. 0.25 per
cent).
 The impact on the population at-risk-of-poverty is minimal – the overall at-risk-ofpoverty rate falls by 0.3 percentage points while the child at-risk-of-poverty rate
declines by 0.1 percentage points.
Distributional impact
(% and cash change in weekly disposable income)
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Impact by family type
(% change in income by different family types)
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Page 15 of 18
7. Double the Back to School Clothing and Footwear Allowance (from €100 to €200 for
4-11 year olds, and €200 to €400 for 12-17 year olds)




The average gain in disposable income is 0.04 per cent (€0.25 per week). The bottom
two deciles gain most (c. 0.4 per cent). The cash gain for the bottom decile is €0.60 per
week, while the second decile gains €1.25 per week.
The average gain in disposable income for households with children eligible for
BSCFA (5.2 per cent of all households) is 1 per cent (€5.10 per week).
Non-earning couples with children gain most (1 per cent or €5.25 per week), followed
by non-earning lone parents (0.9 per cent or €3.15 per week).
The impact on the population at-risk-of-poverty is minimal (fall of 0.1 percentage
points).
Distributional impact
(% and cash change in weekly disposable income)
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Impact by family type
(% change in income by different family types)
Source: SWITCH (2016 weighting) ESRI
Page 16 of 18
Appendix 2: DSP Ready Reckoner – June 2016
Cost of €1 Increase - Weekly Schemes
Total
€m
Pensioners - Aged 66 years and over
State Pension (Contributory), Widow/er's or Surviving Civil Partner's
Contributory Pension, Deserted Wife's Benefit, State Pension (Non-Con),
Carer's Allowance, Half Rate Carer's Allowance
€ 30.77
Working Age - Aged under 66 years
People With Disabilities
Invalidity Pension, Disability Allowance, Blind Pension, Incapacity
Supplement, Disablement Pension
€
10.66
Carers
Carer's Allowance, Half Rate Carer's Allowance, Carer's Benefit
€
2.56
All Other Rates*
Widow/er's Pension or Surviving Civil Partner's (Contributory), Deserted
Wife's Benefit, Death Benefit Pension, Jobseeker's Benefit, Illness
Benefit, Health & Safety Benefit, Injury Benefit, Guardian's Payment
(Contributory), Jobseeker's Allowance, Pre-Retirement Allowance,
Widow/er's or Surviving Civil Partner's Pension (Non-Con), Deserted
Wife's Allowance, Farm Assist, One Parent Family Payment, SWA,
Guardian's Payment (Non-Con), Part Time Job Incentive
€ 24.64
Employment Supports/Internships
Back To Work Allowance, Back To Education Allowance, Community
Employment Programme, TÚS, Rural Social Scheme, JobBridge, Jobs
Initiative
€
Sub-total
€ 72.40
Maternity/Adoptive Benefit
€
Overall Total - including Pensioners
€ 73.56
3.77
1.16
Page 17 of 18
Increases to other Schemes/Payments
Total
€m
€1 increase in the monthly rate of Child Benefit
€ 14.65
€1 increase in the rate of Fuel Allowance
€
10.38
Increase to the duration of the Fuel Allowance - cost of an
additional week
€
8.98
€1 increase in the rate of Qualified Child Increase
€ 19.75
€1 increase in the rate of Living Alone Allowance (for everyone)
€ 10.24
- Pensioners only
- Other schemes (Invalidity Pension, Disability Allowance, Blind
Pension and Widow's/Widower's or Surviving Civil Partner's NonContributory Pension)
€ 8.27
€ 1.97
Note: These costings are subject to change over the coming months in the
context of emerging trends and associated revision of the estimated
numbers of recipients for 2017.
ENDS
Page 18 of 18