asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he has proof that a person (name supplied) is in fact the owner of her home; if so, what this proof is; and on what evidence his Department base their findings in this case and in similar cases.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Social Welfare Applicant: Ownership of House.
85.
The person referred to in the Question informed my Department's local officer on two separate occasions that she was the owner of her home and that she paid neither rent nor ground rent for it. At his request, she produced for inspection the rates demand note which is in her name.
Where ownership of property is in dispute in cases of this kind, documentary proof of ownership is usually required but where ownership is admitted by an applicant, no further action is called for on the part of my Department.
I am quite sure that if the Minister's inspector had made proper inquiries a schoolchild could have told him that the lady in question does not own this house which the Department claims she does. Is the Minister aware that a person in Raphoe — I have spoken with the man's son — holds the deeds of this property? He abandoned the property ten years ago because he sold the roof for £2 and the man who bought it did not think it value to take away. Surely the Minister will have this case re-examined and have this payment made to the applicant from the date when it came into force?
I have done that a fortnight ago.
Which?
I have granted the lady the increase.
I wish to put on record my appreciation of the Minister's action in this case. I hope this spotlights the mistakes made in other cases by the Minister's officials. It was a disgrace that this matter had to be brought before the Dáil before the lady in question could get the 5/- increase.
The Deputy is asking a question about ownership of the house.
And the position of many other similar cases.
The official concerned can only go and ask the applicant. He does not go around asking the neighbours.
It is the neighbours whom they do ask.
Next question, please.
I want to ask the Minister about this matter as I feel sore and strongly about it. This is one case I have got in which the Department have been found out. It has come to my notice that numerous people have been refused their 5/- increase. This is one instance which I have been able to pinpoint. How many other similar cases are there? How many more applicants will have to be embarrassed by having their names put on the records of this House to show that they have no means so that they may get the increase?
Next question.
I want to reply to the Deputy because all this appears on the front page of the provincial papers at home.
Before a person will be given a 5/- increase, we must embarrass the family and spotlight the case in order to ensure that the applicant will get what he or she is justly entitled to.
The Deputy is making a speech.
I would point out that Deputy Harte extracts portions which are suitable in order to strengthen his case and omits what is not suitable for his purpose.
That is a disgraceful statement. An unfortunate lady is entitled to the 5/- and the Minister says here that I am taking advantage of that.
I want to put on record, in reply to this, because this is done for the provincial press rather than for any genuine reason——
I resent that. It is a disgrace that I have to do this, having tried every other avenue.
Congratulations to the provincial press.
I am left with no option but to come to the House and ventilate it and then the Minister tells me——
Will the Deputy allow me to reply? He is afraid to hear the genuine, truthful reply which I want to put on the record.
I gave the Minister an opportunity a fortnight ago, and he declined to do anything until pressure was put on him.
Thank you for your opportunities. If I want to go to East Donegal, I can go any time I want to.
It is a pity the Minister did not.
I want to make it quite plain again that when the investigation officer investigates a case he has only to go on the word of the person to whom he is talking, the claimant or applicant as the case may be, and gives the facts directly to the Department as he gets them and as he did in this case and it is open to the person in question to appeal. This was a case which was very obviously one for appeal and in which an appeal should have been lodged.
An appeal was lodged. I had to come into this House to have it ventilated before action was taken.
There was no appeal lodged.
There was. I dispute that.
I had to extend the time in order to have an appeal accepted.
Any official who comes into this household and takes the word of the lady that she owns the premises and holds that against her to deprive her of her 5/- deserves to be dismissed from the service. It was a disgrace and a monument to the broken promises of the Fianna Fáil Party.
Will Deputy Harte either leave the House or cease interrupting?
It is becoming a monument to hypocrisy. We never took a shilling from them.
The old age pension was the same from 1926 to 1948.
You cannot talk about social services. Any social services granted by this House were given by us. You have no right to talk about them. You sicken me with this hypocrisy. I am getting sick listening to you. You never gave anything to the poor.
We got you to give them 5/-.
I give it where I think it is right, not on anything done by you. This is hypocrisy, playing to the gallery.
You have driven them out of the country.
It is a damnable situation when a Deputy must come into the House to protect his constituents.
Hypocrisy.
That is what you call it; we call it justice. It is only because it embarrassed the Department that you agreed to give the 5/-.
There is plenty of copy for the provincial newspapers next week.
It will be provided only with what I said extracted.
Telefís Éireann are doing that for your Ministers. Do not talk about that here.
What Deputy Harte said will be put in.
That is an unfair accusation. What was said was printed in a weekly newspaper in Donegal which has Fianna Fáil tendencies, and their representative was in the gallery during the discussion.
You have got good value out of that case.
The Minister should not let me off the hook.