Richard Boyd Barrett Urges No Cut to 350 Pandemic Payment
Richard Boyd Barrett criticised government plans to cut or taper the 350 pandemic payment and launched an online petition with People Before Profit and Solidarity TDs calling for the payment to be retained until the pandemic has passed. He demanded the payment be extended to groups excluded from it and called for a review of the 350 figure.
Petition and demands
Mr Boyd Barrett said People Before Profit and Solidarity TDs launched an online petition urging the government to abandon plans to cut or taper the 350 pandemic payment until the pandemic has passed and the employment losses and economic impacts have been overcome.
Excluded groups named
He called for the payment to be extended to those unfairly excluded, most notably people over 66, those under 18 and people in the gig economy and precarious work, and requested a review of the 350 figure as a living-cost benchmark.
Government response
The Taoiseach replied that the payment is unprecedented and cannot go on forever but also cannot be removed until people can return to their jobs. He said many will not have the opportunity to return by mid-June and that an extension may be necessary, noting the timing might be a decision for this government or the next.
Rationale for the 350 payment
The Taoiseach explained the 350 figure was chosen because it is roughly 70% of the average income in the sectors most affected - retail, hospitality, construction, accommodation and food - and because a simpler round figure was needed for faster administration. He acknowledged an anomaly where maybe 25% of recipients now receive more under the pandemic payment than in their prior work, largely part-time workers.
Debenhams and job protection
Mr Boyd Barrett also raised concerns for Debenhams workers and warned against employers exploiting the COVID-19 emergency to discard staff, asking the Taoiseach to intervene to protect jobs.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Taoiseach, today People Before Profit and Solidarity TD's launched an online petition calling on your government to abandon plans to cut or taper the 350 pandemic payment at least until the pandemic has passed and all the employment losses and economic impacts of the pandemic have been overcome and we further call in that petition for the payment to be extended to groups who have been unfairly excluded from it, most notably those over 66, those under 18 and people in the gig economy and precarious work who have been unfairly excluded and we further call for a review because we believe the 350 payment figure which the government was forced to increase to was an admission that it really is impossible for people to live any kind of dignified existence below that and a social justice Ireland have pointed out huge numbers of pensioners, job seekers, people on disability are living effectively on poverty payments. So I'm looking for that commitment particularly in response to the clear hints that have been coming from yourself from Pascal Donoghue and Regina Doherty about cuts or tapering in the COVID payment. Wouldn't it be completely unjust Taoiseach to further cut the income of workers who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own before this pandemic has been overcome and the full economic impact of job losses have been overcome and will you agree that there will be no cuts or no tapering until we've overcome this pandemic? I think I answered that question in response to Deputy MacDonald earlier. We acknowledge that this payment is unprecedented, one of the highest in the world, cannot go on forever, that would not be affordable for our taxpayers, but we also acknowledge that it cannot be removed until people have the opportunity to return to their jobs. And lots of people will not have that opportunity this side of the middle of June. So it will be necessary to extend it. That might be a decision for this government. It might be a decision for the next one. We'll have to see how things develop in the next couple of weeks. In relation to people who are in the gig economy, they're self-employed, they can qualify. And lots of people who are self-employed have qualified for this payment. The amount of 350 was not chosen for the reasons the deputy contends. The amount of 350 was chosen because that's roughly 70% of the average income of people working in the sectors most affected. That is retail, hospitality and construction and accommodation and food. So that's how we came up with that figure of 70%. What we originally wanted to do was to give people 70% of what they earned before. It wasn't possible to administer that. People would have waited weeks and weeks and weeks for any payment at all. So we decided on a round figure. That has created an anomaly. There are a lot of people, maybe 25% of people in receipt of that payment are actually getting paid more now in their pandemic employment payment than they were in their working. They're mainly part-time workers. It's not a bad thing. I'm not embarrassed about that. I'm happy we did it. But it is an anomaly that will have to be dealt with in due course. And of course, there's the issue of the over-60s that you mentioned. First of all, you haven't given a clear commitment that there will be no cuts or tapering until the pandemic is over and until all the employment lost as a result of the pandemic has been restored. You should give a commitment and I'm asking for the commitment that the over-60s and the under-18s who are being unfairly discriminated against get the payment also and that many workers in the gig economy who didn't happen to be working at the time but might have been working a week or two later would also get the payment. And can I add, in addition to that, could you also give some sort of serious response to the plight of the Debenhams workers and indeed other workers who could face cynical exploitation by their employers of trying to throw them on the scrap heap using the COVID-19 emergency as a cover and actually intervene and protect their jobs? Thanks, Deputy. Thanks, Deputy. Again, I think everyone in the House knows that these are rhetorical questions. The Deputy asked me, can I give a commitment that this payment won't be ended until the pandemic will end? Does the Deputy know when the pandemic will end? No, you don't. Exactly. So, of course, it's impossible to give a commitment about the pandemic ending when nobody knows when the pandemic will end. It's a rhetorical question, not a serious one designed to get press coverage and not to get a serious answer. Thank you, Deputy Barry. Thank you, Barry.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
