Labour has threatened a campaign of parliamentary obstruction to delay the passage of the social welfare bill.
Labour Party Whip Emmet Stagg described the measure as a nasty and vindictive piece of legislation.
He said the government intended to force it through with its numerical majority and the only way the bill could be delayed was by parliamentary tactics.
Mr Stagg disrupted the start of the second stage of the bill this evening by claiming the ministers’ speaking time had expired and subsequently calling a quorum, a device to force Government backbenchers into the chamber.
However, Taoiseach Brian Cowen earlier insisted that the Government and its supporters in the Dáil are 'four square' behind the measures announced in yesterday's Budget.
Mr Cowen was speaking in the Dáil after Opposition parties objected to plans to have legislation cutting social welfare passed before the weekend.
New legislation which will cut social welfare payments, apart from pensions, by 4% is due to pass all stages in the Dáil by 6.30pm tomorrow evening.
Labour leader Eamon Gilmore claimed the timing was designed to ensure that none of the Government TDs 'wobble over the weekend when they meet constituents'.
He urged the six TDs supporting the Government but not covered by a party whip - Jackie Healy Rae, Michael Lowry, Noel Grealish, Jim McDaid, Jimmy Devins and Eamon Scanlon - to vote against the measure.
Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny described the Social Welfare Bill as one of gross, unwarranted unfairness which he said should not be 'bulldozed' through the House, while Sinn Féin's Caoimghín Ó Caoláin said it was a recipe for emigration.
But the Taoiseach said there had to be a contribution from the social welfare sector.
Minister for Social and Family Affairs Mary Hanafin said that families with children dependent on social welfare will be fully compensated for the reduction in child benefit by getting extra money in other welfare payments, and in family income supplement.
She said that the payment will still be very generous compared with other countries and that the Government is also providing a free pre-school year for children in 2010.
The minister pointed out that unprecedented increases in social welfare rates of between 129% and 147% have been given over the last 12 years, while the cost of living increased by 40%.
On jobseekers allowance for 18 to 24-year-olds Ms Hanafin said that changes are being made to help young people avail of education and training opportunities.
The changes will affect new entrants only.
She said receiving the full adult rate of jobseekers payment at a young age without financial incentive to engage in education or training can lead to welfare dependency.
Meanwhile, Finance Minister Brian Lenihan has defended his Budget, saying it was not an easy Budget for anyone, but that it would pave the way for growth in the second half of next year.
On RTE's Today with Pat Kenny programme, he was criticised by a number of callers, particularly for cuts in social welfare.
ICTU flags decision on protests
Speaking at ICTU's Budget analysis, Irish Congress of Trade Unions President Jack O'Connor said that over the coming days unions would decide how to resist what they view as unfair and inequitable measures.
He said the basic choice lay between picking a day in January for a strike, or formulating a more targeted strategy.
Public sector unions are currently liaising on a sector by sector basis to try to agree strategies appropriate for their areas.
ICTU General Secretary David Begg said that he believed that pressure would increase to lower the minimum wage as part of a drive to push wages down across the economy.
He warned that if that happened, there would be further pressure to cut social welfare to ensure that the incentive to go to work remained.
He said that anyone, of any age, on a jobseekers allowance who was offered a job would have to take it or have their benefits reduced.
He said this would trigger a scramble for jobs at the lower end of the labour market between those with jobs and those on welfare.
He said it would achieve a race to the bottom, and give an enormous advantage to employers in bringing down wages.
