asked the Minister for Social Welfare if there is any provision in the Social Welfare Acts that enables the payment of the various benefits under the Acts where contributions have not been paid by employers, who have become bankrupt or insolvent or who are in liquidation; and, if there is no such provision, if he will consider providing a fund for the purpose.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.
18.
There is no provision in the Social Welfare Acts that enables benefit to be paid where the contribution conditions are not satisfied for the reason that contributions have not been paid by employers who have become bankrupt, insolvent or who are in liquidation. However, as I stated in reply to recent previous questions in this matter I intend at the first opportunity to amend the existing legislation to ensure that no insured person who is himself blameless in the matter will lose benefit solely by reason of an employer's failure or neglect to pay insurance contributions due. In the meantime I have amended the Statutory Regulations governing the payment and crediting of social insurance contributions to provide, so far as is possible to do so under existing legislation, against loss of benefit by insured persons in the circumstances mentioned by the Deputy. These amending regulations, while not covering every situation in which loss of benefit could occur in the circumstances mentioned by the Deputy, will have the effect of greatly reducing the number of such cases.
Does the Minister mean that, when cards are not stamped in time, or not returned in time, and a claim is made, if the card is subsequently returned stamped there will be no penalty imposed?
Yes.
The Minister says he changed the regulation. Does this mean the 28-day penalty for late surrender has now gone?
In certain cases, yes.
(Cavan): Does this mean that in cases where employees' contributions have been deducted but not paid, the Minister will see to it that the employees do not suffer any loss?
That would appear to be one type of case that would genuinely be covered.
(Cavan): Did the Minister see the report of a case in County Monaghan recently where quite a number of employees had their contributions deducted, the firm closed down, the employers left the country, and the employees are now at a loss? Will the Minister see to it that their loss is made good?
Would the Minister see any administrative difficulty in having his Department send a receipt for a card to the respective employee because there are tens of thousands of employees who have not seen their cards for the last 17, 18, 20 or 25 years? The employer is supposed to send in the cards. Sometimes employers do not send in the cards and the unfortunate employees assume the cards have gone in. Could the Department issue a receipt from the local employment exchange to the effect that a card was or cards were received?
(Cavan): In this particular case in Monaghan cards were a year overdue and the Department should have known about it.
What controls has the Department to ensure that cards are stamped?
Cards may be inspected at any time. The attitude of the Department has been to cause as little inconvenience as possible to decent firms that are looking after their employees' cards properly and, mark you, that is the great majority of firms.
Would the Minister not agree that if in 1969 three years cards had to be collected for employees in a particular firm and in 1971 someone becomes ill it is unfair to say that his cards have not been stamped and sent in? The Department of Social Welfare were responsible, in my opinion, for ensuring in this case that the employer did not get away with it a second time, but that is exactly what they allowed him to do. The Minister says he has cleared that up now. I hope that means that the employee will be paid.
The Minister was not allowed to answer my supplementary question, or at least I did not hear the end of it. Is the Minister telling the House that his Department have weekly control, monthly control or annual control over the stamping of cards?
It is not possible——
Would the Minister agree that normally the people who default are firms who have to take calculated risks in the running of their business and if they guess wrongly they are in trouble, and surely the Department by a process of elimination could figure out the firms who might go bankrupt through no fault of their own? By ensuring that cards were stamped people who should normally be in receipt of benefits would not be deprived of benefit if the Department carried out the regulations properly.
The Department are entitled to carry out spot checks but it is not possible to have regular investigations.
(Cavan): Surely a delay of 12 months is too much?