Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 14 May 1958

Vol. 168 No. 2

Committee on Finance. - Vote 61—Office of the Minister for Social Welfare (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

That a sum not exceeding £313,900 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1959, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Social Welfare.—(Minister for Justice.)

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Welfare (Mr. Kennedy)

I was referring last night to the fact that Deputy Larking spoke about home assistance. No direction good, bad or indifferent, indirect or otherwise, has been given by my Department, by myself or by the Minister, in relation to the administration of home assistance. Home assistance is administered by the local authority and the amount they pay and practically everything else connected with it is their own concern. In this connection it may be said that the amount paid out in home assistance in the latest year for which we have the information, the net amount apart from administration costs, was £633,570. If one takes into account our contribution to other matters such as the fuel scheme and the footwear scheme, the net expenditure for the year was in the vicinity of £1,250,000. Local authorities supplement many of the schemes for social welfare and the amount they spend on these matters is a question purely for the local authorities.

There is no special investigation of the cases of recipients of unemployment assistance. The normal reinvestigation goes on year after year. Officials of the Department are obliged to question whether a recipient, whether of unemployment assistance or unemployment benefit is genuinely out of work. This applies especially in the case of persons who have had no employment over a protracted period and who have a very poor employment record. That has been the practice of the Department and it will continue.

Deputy Moloney said that social welfare officers hold inquiries into claims only when they have a cadre of recipients in a particular area. That is not so. Officials have special instructions to deal with every case as soon as possible. Claimants or employers are frequently not available when the officer calls. All claims for unemployment benefit or assistance or old age pensions are dealt with objectively by the officials and I commend the Deputy for his statement that a Deputy should not set himself up as judge and jury in every case. The social welfare code is there, the means test is laid down and the officers of the Department act in an unbiased fashion in administering the code.

Deputies have no trouble where the applicant for an old age pension, widows' and orphans' pensions or for unemployment assistance has a genuine case, but what Deputies do is to apply themselves to getting borderline cases decided in favour of the applicant. I knows that myself, having been a long time a Deputy, and I have done it myself. Deputies fight the borderline cases and the proof of that, as stated by one Deputy during the debate, is that the percentage of those over 70 from the time the State was established up to the present day has risen from approximately 63 per cent. or 64 per cent. to 78.8 per cent. That is the latest figure we have. If there is a doubt, the official leans over all the time in favour of the applicant and the agitation is directed towards getting him to lean over still more in favour of the applicant.

Deputy Gogan referred to the recruitment of assistance officers. He wants appointments made by the Local Appointments Commission. That problem has occupied the minds of some of the Minister's predecessors and is engaging the careful attention of the Department. The administration of home assistance is a very involved matter and we have stood for the principle that those administering home assistance should be whole-time officers and not Jacks-of-all-traders, rate collectors with occupations of their own and various other occupations, people who spend only part of their time on the administration of home assistance. We have urged strongly that what obtains in Dublin and some other places should be the universal practices, that the officer should be a whole-time employee of the local authority and devote his full time to the administration of home assistance.

Mr. Corish

That is not a strict rule now in the country.

Mr. Kennedy

No; we never try to make a rule or force people's hands but we have suggested it to local authorities again and again. Where the suggestion has been carried out the administration of home assistance is on a much better footing than elsewhere.

Mr. Corish

I assume the Parliamentary Secretary is considering taking steps to ensure that the home assistance officer will not be a farmer or a shopkeeper or have some other occupation?

Mr. Kennedy

As far as we can. The power of appointment rests with the local authority.

Mr. Corish

But the conditions of appointment rest with the Minister.

Mr. Kennedy

One of the conditions of appointments is a good, sound education and now, that vocational education is available to the poor man's son in practically every district, we are considering prescribing a better standard of education for those appointed than that which obtained up to the present. Deputy Gogan referred to the social welfare courses for the working-man obtainable in Dublin and Cork and I am recommending to the Minister that should be taken into account in future appointments.

Mr. Palmer

Would the Parliamentary Secretary state that if the position of home assistance officer were made whole time it would require a higher salary because the salaries at present are pretty low?

Mr. Kennedy

I should like to point out that, where there are whole-time officers, they have a far better salary than part-time men. They are pensionable and they are far better paid.

Mr. Palmer

As far as I know in Kerry, they are supposed to be whole-time, but their salaries are small.

Mr. Kennedy

A point was made about medical referees. Wherever possible, when a second examination of an insured person takes place on an appeal, a different referee is sent, but, in certain areas, it is not always possible to do this and the urgency of deciding a case is the deciding factor in having the same referee on the matter again.

Mr. Corish

I hate to be interrupting the Parliamentary Secretary, but it is not in any spirit of criticism I do it. I hope it is not disturbing him in his speech. In certain areas in my constitutency, the same man has been sent down all the time and the Parliamentary Secretary has admitted that is undesirable.

Mr. Kennedy

I will make a note of what the Deputy has said and we will try to correct that. Deputy Larkin said that we spent more on the alleviation of suffering in animals, and on looking after animals, than we do on looking after human beings. On reflection, I believe the Deputy will see that is a misstatement. We are dealing here with £25,250,000, out of a Budget for capital expenditure and ordinary expenditure of £110,000,000. The total Vote for Agriculture is £9,500,000 and £2,750,000 of that is devoted to moving rocks and making land arable to produce food. A large portion of it is devoted to agricultural education, and the sum devoted to the eradication of bovine tuberculosis is necessary for the health of our people.

The people of this part of Ireland are the biggest customers for our agricultural produce. It is very necessary that milk and its by-products come from healthy herds and it is money well spent. We who give out free milk and other things should see that the food we supply to country homes and other institutions should come from healthy animals. I think, on reflection, Deputy Larkin would not repeat that statement. I do not wish to anticipate the Minister for Agriculture, beyond making the point—coming as I do from a rural area—that we will have to spend more than the £1,600,000 we are spending primarily for the health of our people.

Deputy Sherwin referred to social services in Britain and compared them with what we have here. Deputy Sherwin is a new Deputy and he has a good national background. I want to bring it home to him that the people of India, Pakistan, Egypt and Ghana who have got out from under the cloak of the British Empire, do not point to the fact that there are far better services in Britain, that they would be far better off under the Union Jack. I would ask him to think on these things because these people valued freedom better than we. As a nation, we have to cut our cloth according to our measure and we have not an empire to work and toil for us and give us big dividends. We are a small nation and we are doing very well in the health services we give, both directly and through the local authorities. I believe, and I am sure the Deputy believes, that the less the burden bears on the taxpayers, the more progress we will make. We can come to a point where the last straw will break the camel's back and we are getting very near that point. It is a point that has been taken into consideration by the Government.

Deputy Corish asked for a statement on the scheme for the welfare of the blind. The Board for the Employment of the Blind was set up by the Minister on 25th April, 1957. It will operate a central workshop for the blind as a joint body on behalf of the local authorities, as provided for in the Blind Persons Act, 1920. It is a permanent institution which will provide employment for blind workers from any part of the country. The members of the board are: Mr. Archibald J. Robinson, who was chairman of the Richmond National Institution; Rev. C. Cottrell, O.C., Rector, St. Joseph's School and Home; Councillor D. Larkin, T.D.; Alexander O'D Shiel; Mr. R.B. Eaton; Mr. Patrick L. Burke; Councillor J. Bermingham; Councillor William Walsh; Councillor Martin Quinn; Councillor William Ryan; Councillor Mrs. K. Nix; and Senator Gerald L'Estrange, for the general council of county council. Mr. Robinson and Senator L'Estrange, together with Mr. Patrick L. Burke, have been appointed as trustees of the board.

The Richmond National Institution closed down as from the end of December, 1957, and the Board commenced operations as from 1st January, 1958, when it took over the former Richmond workers. The board carried on temporarily in the premises of the Richmond Institution, but has now acquired larger and more suitable permanent premises at Upper Baggot Street, Dublin. The board transferred its operations to these new premises as from 1st April last and on the same date, took over the out-resident blind workers formerly employed at the St. Joseph's School and Home for the Blind, Drumcondra. The board now employs a total of 60 blind workers. A grant of £15,000 was made from the Exchequer in the year 1957-58 towards the initial working capital of the board and Dublin Corporation advanced the sum of £5,500 on account of its liability to the board in future years.

It is intended that the existing workshop capitation grants of £40 a year will continue to be paid by the State and the appropriate local authorities in respect of existing and future out-resident workers, and the net annual expenses of the working of the board thereafter will be met by a contribution from each county council and county borough council in proportion to the rateable value of its area, subject to a limit of the product of a rate of one halfpenny in the pound. That rate will yield a total of £25,600 per year and it is considered very unlikely that the working expenses will normally approach that amount. Of the 31 local authorities, 27 have already agreed to this arrangement, some with minor reservations. It is hoped to secure the agreement of the outstanding local authorities and to dispose of the reservations shortly. That is as far as I can give information about it.

Mr. Corish

It is pretty good.

Mr. Kennedy

A tribute should be paid to the work of this board who take over responsibility. I stated last night, and I want to repeat now, that it is the duty of an employer when he employs a man, let it be for a day, a week or a year, to demand that man's insurance card. It is the duty of the employee, when he goes to work, to surrender his card. If we had that principle accepted, we would have less trouble in the Department.

I remember in the early 1930s, when the comprehensive social welfare code came in we had people crowding the labour exchanges registering for unemployment benefits of one kind or another who were not entitled to them. It took a long time to weed out the genuine cases from those who were claiming wrongly. All the time we are up against the problem that we are human beings and the likelihood is that we may not always do the right thing. That being so, there is this fraud about which so much was said in the debate.

I was hauled over the coals here a couple of times. It was repeated here the other day. I am not going into any more explanations about it, beyond saying that it exists. The figures are there. Normally when we get a case of fraud and where money has not been taken out of the Exchequer and we detect it in time, we do not prosecute; and when there is a genuine pay back of what has been wrongly taken, we often do not prosecute. We have no desire to pursue people. Let me give some figures. It consists on a scale which we cannot view with pleasure. The number of cases in 1955 was 676; in 1956, 1,706 and in 1957, 2,966.

Mr. Casey

Could the Parliamentary Secretary say what percentage these figures would be of the total?

Mr. Kennedy

It would be a very small percentage, but it is enough to cause us a bit of a worry. Let us take the approximately figure of 3,000. That represents detected cases. We do not say they occur in Cork City or in Dublin. When I used the word "widespread", I meant my own parish and my own county, as well as Cork.

Mr. Sherwin

Could the Parliamentary Secretary give us an example of the kind of fraud practised?

Mr. Kennedy

I will tell you the most common case of fraud. A man in a rural area buys 13 stamps at a post office for an expenditure of about £2 and he never works a day for the 13 weeks or works for himself. He then proceeds to draw £80 out of the public funds until his benefits are exhausted. That is the type of fraud which I refer to as being the most prevalent.

Mr. Sherwin

That is in the rural areas.

Mr. Kennedy

That happens in Dublin, too. You are not all saints in Dublin.

Mr. Sherwin

Let us take the case of the fellow who sells a few newspapers. Is he considered a fraud? How would you classify him?

Mr. Kennedy

That is the position we want to end. Deputy Corish says that fraud can occur in every other Department. It does, but when fraud occurs in other Departments, let the Labour Party, the Fine Gael Party or the Independents expose it and we all say: "Hear, hear! It is time to end that." There is unanimity in the House in putting down fraud, except when it comes to the Department of Social Welfare. We want to create a public opinion which will cry down a condition of fraud in Social Welfare to the same extent as it is cried down in other Departments.

Mr. Corish

But the poorest should not be taken.

Mr. Kennedy

It is not the really poor man who does it. It is the clever man who goes out, puts 13 stamps on his card and has the money to do it. It is not the really poor man who does it. I will not go beyond that. Everybody knows that what I am saying is the truth.

Deputy Palmer referred to the economy with which the Department was run. We are grateful for his co-operation in that. The first time I spoke since I had the honour of being appointed Parliamentary Secretary again, I paid tribute to the integrity, honesty and hard work of the Civil Service, 99 per cent. or more of whom will care, but then there is, like every other section of the community, a percentage of idlers who want two men to carry a file where one could do it. They are not going to rule the roost. If we have 2,800,000 people, it is not to their benefit to increase the Civil Service, because, when we increase the Civil Service and put a bigger burden on their shoulders, more have to take to the emigrant ship. The cheaper we can run the Civil Service the better.

When we deal with social welfare and social insurance, we are not like a limited liability company going out spending money on advertising, paying canvassers and competing in business with rival companies. We are sustained by the State and are obliged by law to do certain things. The cost is not, or should not be, comparable with that of a commercial company. It is all the better for the nation the more economically we run it. If we have the co-operation of the people, the employers, the employees and the public representatives in running this honestly and above-board, without injuring any man in his occupation, then we will get ahead and we may be able to do better for the genuine applicants for social benefits. I repeat that we have given no direction to anybody in the local authorities to be severe in regard to home assistance or anything else.

Mr. Corish

Does the Parliamentary Secretary remember the big social welfare advertisements for the three famous by-elections in 1952?

Mr. Kennedy

That was to explain the 1952 Act and its benefits.

Mr. Corish

They were in every provincial newspaper.

Mr. Kennedy

They do not appear every month of the year.

Mr. Corish

They did their job well.

Mr. Allen

The Deputy voted the money for it. The Deputy will vote against it. When it is for politics, he always does it.

Mr. Corish

The Deputy will not vote for much home assistance.

Mr. Kennedy

Deputy Moloney referred to oral hearings in regard to every case. That is not possible. There have been complaints about delays, but if we are to have oral bearings in every case, complaints will be much more numerous. With regard to the delays mentioned by Deputy Brennan, I can assure him we will investigate them as quickly as possible. Deputy Corish made a point about the free footwear scheme. He made a useful suggestion last year and we passed it on to the local authority. Our information is that many of them have acted on it. We intend to see, as far as we can, that they will all act on it in the coming year. There will be a particular date by which all applications shall be in. These will be examined. The most deserving cases will be picked out and there will be a reserve for anything that might crop up in the hard winter.

Deputy Larkin referred to children —that is how he described them and perhaps it is the right term for the members of a family who are mentally defective. Our Department does not deal with that matter. I have great sympathy for such people. I hope I am human enough to have the same approach to the undergo as Deputy Larkin has. However, it is not a matter for our Department.

Sin a bhfuil le rá agam ar an Meastachán seo.

Vote put and agreed to.