asked the Minister for Social Welfare the number of single women who have been granted the special allowance in accordance with the provision in the budget of this year.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Single Women's Allowance.
15.
As the Deputy is aware, the social assistance allowance for single women was introduced on 4th July, 1974, in the legislation which gave effect to last year's budget proposals. The number of allowances granted since then is 3,172. All recipients had their allowances increased from 3rd April, 1975, following this year's budget, and in addition the means limit for receipt of an allowance has been increased from £6.50 to £8 a week.
Has the Parliamentary Secretary's Department any proposals to lower the qualifying age for the allowance?
There are no proposals at present for doing so.
That would be a separate question. Question No. 16.
The figure given by the Parliamentary Secretary seems quite small. Could the Parliamentary Secretary give us any indication of the relationship of the number of allowances actually granted to the number that his Department estimate would be eligible if everybody applied and had their applications approved?
I have not that information.
Has the Parliamentary Secretary any information about applications refused in relation to the number granted?
No. I have not that information either.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary tell us if the number granted falls in any way short of what his Department estimated would be granted when the scheme was introduced?
No. I think the introduction of the scheme was a very progressive action.
I agree.
As the Deputy will appreciate, I am sure, from his experience of previous schemes of a similar nature, the initial intake is not always a clear indication of the eventual uptake under the scheme. I agree with what I consider to be an implication in the Deputy's question, that there is a need to make the people, not only in respect of this particular allowance but in respect of their rights and entitlements to social welfare benefits in general, more aware of their existence and of their right to them. I would hope that something positive in this direction would be undertaken in the relatively near future.
I am grateful for that undertaking by the Parliamentary Secretary to make the general public more aware of what is available under the different headings. That is very important. Could we be assured that when such information is being publicised in future it will be done in a strictly factual, objective manner and that all element of Coalition political propaganda will be taken out of it and that taxpayers' money will not in future be used for this unworthy purpose?
We are getting away from the question.
In reply to that, I reject totally the suggestion or the accusation by the Deputy——
Statement.
——that such misuse has been made of any advertising with regard to people's entitlement under the Social Welfare Acts. I do accept that there is a marked contrast between the reluctance of the previous Administration to let people know what they were entitled to and the present Administration's insistence that people know that these things are made available as a matter of right.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary suggest that the booklets made available by officers of his Department were less informative then than they are now?
No, I am not suggesting that. What I am suggesting is that the books made available by the Department of Social Welfare now are far more easily understood by the general public because of their general layout, and I did not take the implication with regard to the book in Deputy Haughey's supplementary question, or statement, or accusation, whatever he cares to describe it as. I think he was referring to——
Full-page advertisements paid by the taxpayer.
——public advertisements in the public Press paid by the taxpayer for the benefit of the public.
Notwithstanding that booklets are available.
Which are slanted.
No slant whatever.
We cannot debate this. It is a separate matter.
They contain a very high element of propaganda matter.
We want the people to know that these things are their right and not the favour of any political party or Administration.
No. 16.
I raised the matter on the Adjournment——
Sorry, Deputy. I have called the next question.
It seems extraordinary that he uses this method to propagandise entitlements.
They have with-drawn these advertisements now. The public are entitled to know that too, I would say.
16.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why a single woman's allowance has not been paid to a person (name supplied) in County Offaly.
A claim for a single woman's allowance received from the person concerned on 7th February, 1975, was referred to a social welfare officer for investigation. The necessary enquiries have not yet been completed but the officer has been requested to expedite his investigations. On receipt of his report, which is expected within the next few days, a decision on the claim will be given without delay.
17.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will indicate the categories of women social welfare recipients who do not have the same scale of entitlements as men; and the action, if any, he intends to take to deal with the problem as a matter of urgency.
Some of the wide range of social security schemes administered by my Department apply only to women, others extend to men and women on an equal basis and in other instances men and women are treated differently.
In the case of disability benefit, invalidity pension, unemployment benefit and unemployment assistance a single man or a widower may be paid a housekeeper's allowance if he has a dependent child and is wholly or mainly maintaining a woman to take care of the child. This allowance is not yet payable to single women or widows.
A married woman claimant who is being wholly or mainly maintained by her husband is paid unemployment benefit, disability benefit and invalidity pension at a rate lower than that payable to a single man or a single woman. The duration of unemployment benefit for such a married woman is limited to 156 days as compared to the 312 days duration applying to single women and men between 18 and 65 years of age.
In the case of unemployment assistance, there are qualifying conditions applying to women applicants which do not apply to men. A single woman or a widow must either have a dependant or 52 employment contributions in the four contribution years preceding that in which unemployment assistance is claimed. A married woman applicant must not be dependent on her husband and must have at least one dependant.
I am conscious of the need to eliminate all instances of what might be regarded as discrimination against women in my Department's schemes. Many of the improvements in that regard recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women have already been made and ways of effecting further improvements are under examination.
I appreciate that the Parliamentary Secretary like those of us on this side of the House is conscious of the discrimination and the anomalies which exist in the social welfare code as applied to women. Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell the House when he intends abandoning these anomalies and bringing in legislation which will do away with them once and for all?
As the Deputy may be aware, in the Report on the Status of Women there were 15 recommendations made regarding the administration of social welfare benefits. Of those 15 recommendations, eight have been fully implemented; three have been partially implemented; three are under examination. One, in fact, was not implemented because the effect of implementing it would have worsened the position of women. I think the Deputy will agree that considerable progress has been made in two years in eradicating a very large number of anomalies which had existed over a long period of years. In fact, I am glad to say that recognition for the progress that has been made in this area was expressed by Dr. Thekla Beere and we are hoping, as I said in the reply, to eliminate all discrimination in full where it does exist, and the remaining recommendations which have not yet been dealt with are under examination.
Of course, we do not accept for one moment that the Parliamentary Secretary is discharging his functions in this respect—to some degree, yes. I wonder would the Parliamentary Secretary, for the benefit of myself and the House generally, place on the record of the House the 15 areas of recommendations which were made by the Commission. The Parliamentary Secretary has told the House that eight of the recommendations have been dealt with fully, a number have been partially dealt with and some remain to be dealt with. The Parliamentary Secretary, in common with a number of his comrades or brothers in Government, thinks that if the public are told something often enough and long enough they will believe it——
The Deputy is deviating from the question.
I would appreciate if the Parliamentary Secretary would make that information available to me.
I regard all my colleagues in Coalition as comrades and all my fellow human beings as brothers. I have not the detailed information regarding the recommendations of the Commission on the Status of Women. The Deputy has shown an interest in this matter and undoubtedly he has read the report——
From cover to cover.
The 15 recommendations are embodied in the report and, therefore, they are readily available.
I appreciate that.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary at least acknowledge that it was I who established the commission and appointed Dr. Thekla Beere as chairman?
I congratulate Deputy Haughey on his choice.
Surely the House is entitled to know which of the eight recommendations have been dealt with? Would the Parliamentary Secretary be good enough to let me know which areas have been dealt with?
We cannot debate this question all afternoon. We must make some progress.
I have asked the Parliamentary Secretary to let me have some information.
The Deputy must allow the Chair to deal with Question Time in his own fashion without any interference.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary please let me have a note regarding the eight areas that have been dealt with? Is that too much to ask?
Perhaps the Deputy would give me an opportunity to answer the question. He did not request this information in his question and I have not the details immediately available. I am sure the Deputy has read the report of the Commission on the Status of Women. There is a section in that report listing the 15 recommendations made. I would be only too happy to communicate to the Deputy the eight recommendations that have been fully implemented, the three that have been partially implemented, the one recommendation it would not be in the best interests of the recipients to implement and the three that are under examination.
Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell us why an advertisement that appeared in yesterday's papers differentiated between men and women in relation to State employment?
As far as I know, there were no advertisements on behalf of the Department of Social Welfare in yesterday's papers.
It was not relating to social welfare matters.
I am calling Question No. 18.