Irish Examiner view: Abolish means test for carer’s allowance
Nearly two thirds of all carers are aged between 40 and 64, while some 15% are aged 65 and over. Stock picture: Alamy
We recently experienced another unsettling example of one of those vexatious “known unknowns” which carry the potential to have a profound impact on everyday life.
In this instance, it refers to our studied ignorance of the size of the “latent pool” of carers who might qualify for an official allowance if the means test was abolished.
Apparently “no direct data on this population exists”.
This means there is a mismatch between the €600m which the Government maintains such an act of generosity might cost, and the €266m which the independent Parliamentary Budget Office says would be the annual net exposure of relaxing the current policy.
This is a wide variation and, while it would be foolish to suggest that €334m is spare change, it should be viewed in the overall context of the total size of Ireland’s GDP — some €560bn.
We might then contemplate the importance of this taskforce of helpers and contributors to the nation’s social fabric and cohesion and acknowledge that they fulfil a role which will become increasingly important in the future.
Our most recent census figures show that 299,128 people — about 6% of the population — provide regular unpaid care to someone with a long-term illness, disability or who are of older age.
Some advocacy groups suggest that this number could expand to more than 600,000 citizens who provide assistance in a differing range of informal circumstances, and may not even identify as carers.
While one of the eye-catching headlines from the CSO identified that 4,800 care givers were aged under 15, there is an even more significant data set which should command our attention.
Nearly two thirds of all carers are aged between 40 and 64, while some 15% are aged 65 and over.
In other words, it is people who are already ageing themselves who are doing much of the heavy lifting.
The implications of this should not be underestimated as we plan for the future.
Political opposition to high rates of immigration — driven predominantly by a critical shortfall in housing provision — means that we cannot rely with any certainty on job vacancies in the care sector being filled from overseas.
The Department of Employment has already warned that Ireland could be short of 62,000 healthcare assistant roles in the next dozen years.
Then there is the changing nature of the “old-age dependency ratio”.
While we have traditionally been blessed with a young population due to historic fertility figures, changes in societal expectations are now making themselves apparent. Three years ago, there were 23 older people to 100 adults of working age. In the next three decades, the most modest estimates say this will increase to 46 older people per 100 working adults. Some calculations place the figure at 56:100.
By mid-century, the number of older dependents to workers could more than double. Instead of four working adults per older person the ratio could switch to 2:1.
The implications for homecare services, respite care and the cost of those carer allowances — €260 per week if you are under 66 and caring for one person rising to €447 per week if you are aged 66 or over and caring for two or more people — are obvious.
The proportion of people within our population providing what might be classified as “informal” services must rise inexorably.
If we are not to fill these demands by recruiting from beyond our shores, then the work must be taken up by the native and resident population. More and more of us will be moving into this role. Voters and politicians must be prepared to bite the bullet and ensure that the overall economy is not damaged by a necessary change of responsibilities.
The Government, and other parties, campaigned during the election for the abolition of the carer’s allowance means test during the lifetime of this parliament. It is an important commitment and we need to get on with it.
Cavilling over fine detail is something actuaries enjoy. But it merely delays the inevitable.
One of the supermarket advertising campaigns this year enlists Roald Dahl’s Big Friendly Giant to remind us that there should be room for everyone at the festive table and that having something good to eat is an essential element of the spirit of the season.
And that’s one of the reasons we were happy to showcase the contribution of the many who work long hours to bring Christmas dinner to those in hospitals around the country.
For Catriona Murphy, a catering manager at University Hospital Kerry, it’s the camaraderie between staff and the response from patients that makes Christmas Day memorable, as 1,500 meals are served.
David Roddy, deputy head chef of Temple Street Children’s Hospital in Dublin, says it’s a “privilege” to play a part in making memories for youngsters and families who can’t be at home.
Chef Abina Forde reckons that she has worked “25 Christmas Days, give or take” at Cork University Hospital over the past four decades and enjoys being with her “second family” of colleagues, while Jennifer Crowley works in the kitchen with her 21-year-old son helping to serve 1,000 meals and reflects on the special poignancy of those who might be spending their last Christmas together.
Modest testimonies all.
But, to everyone who gives up their Christmas to bring comfort and joy to others, you deserve a big, and well-merited, salute from us all.
If you are thinking of big numbers, they don’t come much larger than those which have been under the stewardship of the National Assets Management Agency (Nama) since its inception in 2009.
Nama was the vehicle established by Fianna Fáil, with Brian Cowen as taoiseach, to stabilise our crumbling banking system and to “acquire” property-related loans and assets which had collapsed in value following the heady and reckless days of the Celtic Tiger.
The portfolio that Nama took over had a face value of about €74bn, but, as anyone knows, things are only worth what someone else is willing to pay. That usually depends on the level of confidence in the market. Nama paid just under €32bn.
There have been many plaudits and backslapping about the way Nama has conducted its business, and some of it has been deserved. It has generated nearly €50bn in cash from disposals and other income.
Remarkably, this has been under the long-serving direction of its only CEO, the Kerry man Brendan McDonagh, who has proven to be a safe pair of hands since he was appointed 16 years ago by then finance minister Brian Lenihan.
To stick to his last while working for seven different governments is a significant achievement, and one which has been achieved while generally maintaining a careful public profile.
Where they have been mis-steps, they have related to a backlash over suggestions that he might become Ireland’s housing tsar; arguments over discounts on packages of property debt; and whether Nama maximised the potential rate of return on its assets.
Certainly, Mr McDonagh might consider that he has done well to avoid the Procrustean bed that housing policy represents. The other criticisms reflect matters of policy judgement and it is worth remembering that there was no stampede of public servants wanting to sort out the dire mess into which Ireland’s finances had descended.
In marking the completion of the wind-down programme, which paves the way for formal dissolution next year, Mr McDonagh was correct to describe it as a “landmark day” signalling the end of “an unprecedented intervention by the State in response to an unprecedented banking and economic crisis”.
Nama was called into being because of a failure among the country’s financial and political elite, and the “let the good times roll” gullibility of us all in the electorate.
Or. to put it in Mr McDonagh’s words, “preventable problems created by the poor lending practices and poor regulation of the 2000s”.
We hope we have learned that lesson but it might repay us all to place a little carved sign at the head of our beds carrying the words attributed to Mark Twain: “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”
Whether he actually said that is doubtful, but movie buffs will recognise it as a quote which opens financial drama The Big Short. And take care to recall it.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
