Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 2 Jun 1976

Vol. 291 No. 5

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.

8.

asked the Minister for Social Welfare if it is his intention to reduce the qualifying age for old age pensions; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The payment of old age pensions at an earlier age was one of the aims listed in the statement of intent published in February, 1973. Since then the qualifying age for contributory and non-contributory old age pensions has been progressively reduced from 70 to 67 years. These reductions were implemented as part of the general budget provisions so that the necessary financial arrangements could be made to meet the cost involved. The question of further reductions will similarly be considered in the budgetary context.

The qualifying age for retirement pension is 65 years for both men and women.

In view of the reference by the Minister to aims set out in 1973 and the use of the same word "aim" recently by the Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Bruton, are we to take it that the 14-point programme contained no promises and only aims in the Minister's view?

Those aims have been achieved to the extent that the pension age has been reduced to 67 years and the aim is to reduce it to 65 years.

So there are aims and no promises.

There were promises in respect of this.

As distinct from aims, or does the Minister regard them as the same?

It is a promise and a commitment.

9.

asked the Minister for Social Welfare if (a) social assistance allowance and (b) children's allowance are paid to unmarried mothers under 16 years.

Social assistance allowance and children's allowance are paid to unmarried mothers under 16 years. The Minister for Social Welfare has power, however, to nominate a suitable person to receive payment on behalf of an unmarried mother if he considers it desirable to do so in a particular case.

I did not get the answer clearly but I take it that an unmarried mother under 16 years is not automatically entitled to those allowances?

She is entitled to those allowances but a Minister for Social Welfare can nominate some other member of the household to receive the allowance.

If the situation happens to be that there is no other obvious person in the household what would happen?

If she lived in a household it would be the person who is regarded as head of the household, I presume.

If by chance she is living in a flat with her child what is the position?

If she is living on her own she automatically gets the two allowances.

On application?

Yes. She may elect to have the allowance paid to the head of the household if there is such, but if she is living on her own she gets the allowance and, of course, the children's allowance for the baby.

10.

asked the Minister for Social Welfare how the means of a person (details supplied) in County Wicklow were estimated at £10 a week, derived from benefit or privilege of board and lodging in his father's house; and if he will make an early decision on the claimant's appeal.

The means of the person concerned, as assessed by a deciding officer for unemployment assistance purposes, represent the estimated weekly value to him of the benefit or privilege of board and lodging in his father's household and take account of the number of persons in the household, the fact that his father is in permanent employment and the amount of the latter's earnings. The assessment has been upheld by an appeals officer, whose decision is final in the absence of new facts or fresh evidence.

Is the Minister aware of the grave hardship that has occurred in many cases such as this for the reason that, while the householder may apparently have means, the choice is either to keep the person unemployed and have this sort of charge set against their eligibility for assistance or dump them out? It is as simple and as regrettable as that in many cases and I would ask the Minister to have a further look at that. This thing of board and lodgings is not something they have by right, it is only on sufferance and in many cases the householder cannot afford it.

I sympathise with the suggestion made by the Deputy but I am afraid I cannot promise a change in the immediate future. There is a lot of sense in what the Deputy says in relation to this problem. Unfortunately it has been so for many years. I can understand the plight of somebody who has no money whatever and that the fact that he is kept by his household means he is not eligible for unemployment assistance. I am not happy about that situation but I cannot make any promise. I am certainly prepared to have it investigated to see if any other method can be employed.

11.

asked the Minister for Social Welfare the number of old age pensions which carry a prescribed relative allowance element; and the total cost of this allowance for the nearest 12 months for which figures are available.

Some 4,155 persons are receiving prescribed relative allowance. These include 3,628 contributory and non-contributory old age pensioners and a further 527 persons who have reached pension age and who are in receipt of widow's pension, retirement pension or deserted wife's benefit. The allowance is paid as an increase of pension or benefit payments and a separate figure of its yearly cost is not available. On the basis of the number of allowances in payment, however, it is estimated that the cost over a 12-month period will be in the order of £1,232,000.

12.

asked the Minister for Social Welfare the cause of the long delay in paying unemployment assistance to a person (name supplied) in County Kerry who is signing continuously since last December.

Due to his failure to disclose his full means in connection with his original application for unemployment assistance the person concerned received unemployment assistance amounting to £291.70 in excess of that to which he was entitled and this amount was being recovered by withholding payments due to him. Because of an error in calculation at the local office, which is regretted, an excess sum of £103.75 was recovered in this manner and arrangements have been made to have this amount refunded to him by post together with payment of unemployment assistance due for the week ended 18th May, 1976. Further payments will continue as they fall due.

Top
Share