asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason for the delay in the payment of a social welfare allowance to a person (details supplied) in County Waterford.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.
5.
There does not appear to be any outstanding claim for a social welfare payment from the person concerned. He last claimed unemployment benefit during the period 23 December 1980 to 14 February 1981 in respect of which all benefit due was paid to him at the time without any undue delay.
6.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason for the delay in granting a non-contributory pension to a person (details supplied) in County Waterford.
A repeat claim to old age non-contributory pension made by the person concerned in December last was investigated by the social welfare officer in January. Because there was mention of the claimant's holding being transferred, inquiries had to be made to have matters clarified. The inquiries, completed early in February, indicated that the holding had not, in fact, been transferred.
The social welfare officer referred the claim for decision to the local pension committee on 12 February with a recommendation that no pension be awarded, on the grounds that the claimant's means, consisting of the weekly value of a holding, exceeded the statutory limit. If the committee's decision is unfavourable the claimant will, of course, have a right of appeal against it. There has been no undue delay in dealing with this case.
7.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the action he proposes to take to prevent long delays in the payment of social welfare benefits in the Athy area of County Kildare.
I am aware that some difficulties have been encountered in dealing with benefit claims particularly claims for disability benefit, due to the change-over from the system of flat-rate contributions paid by means of stamped cards to the system of pay-related contributions. The pay-related contributions can only be collected in conjunction with the PAYE income tax collection system operated by the Revenue Commissioners.
The change-over came into operation on 5 January 1981 and, since then, in a proportion of cases the claimants are continuing to quote only their old insurance number and, as a result, difficulty is being experienced in identifying their insurance records under the new RSI numbering system. This has led to delay in the payment of benefit and in consequence there was an unavoidable build-up of arrears of payments.
I have issued directions to my Department to concentrate on removing all obstacles to the prompt payment of benefit. There is a full commitment of all resources to this task and the arrears are being steadily reduced. If the Deputy is aware of any cases of delay in payment of social welfare benefits in his constituency. I will arrange to have the cases investigated and payment of benefit issued as quickly as possible.
Is the Minister aware that everyone who sends certificates to his Department from that area has to wait at least seven weeks for any payment no matter what numbers he or she quotes?
I do not accept that there has been a delay in all cases. There have been delays in some cases because of the reasons I have outlined, that is that the correct numbers are not being quoted in many cases. Early in January there was an advertising campaign by the Department of Social Welfare asking claimants to quote both numbers when submitting their claims. In many cases this has not been done and, unfortunately, those cases are delayed.
Is the Minister of State aware of the case I quoted to the Minister in which a man was paid for one week which proved that his claim was in order? He has gone seven weeks without a second payment. I gave the details to the Minister in writing twice.
I am not aware of this case but I doubt very much if the fault lies in the Department. The correct numbers are not being forwarded.
Is the Minister aware that in the case referred to the two numbers were forwarded and only one payment was made after I had made representations? I then made representations again and in seven subsequent weeks not a single payment has been made, though I gave notice to the Minister twice in writing.
Will the Minister accept that what he has stated in regard to the RSI number is only a partial explanation for the terrible situation in the Department? Will he accept that in umpteen cases which I referred to the Department I was told the RSI number had not been given though I had given it? The large number of these cases on the Order Paper again today is an illustration that there is something dramatically wrong in the Department.
I accept there have been delays but they have been due to the reasons I have stated. There is nothing unusual in this. Delays can occur particularly in regard to disability payments and this has been the situation over the years.
(Cavan-Monaghan): I think the Minister said the delays are being caused because the RSI numbers have not been furnished. How is it that if a Deputy puts down a question and does not give any number, the file can be turned up within four days, but when an applicant gives only one number it takes weeks and weeks to get payment?
Deputies themselves are big offenders because when they are making cases for constituents they do not give numbers.
Is the Minister saying this case is not unusual? Everybody believes the Department of Social Welfare has broken down completely. Is the Minister aware of the seriousness of the situation?
That is not the case. There have been delays all along. Every effort is being made to get rid of the backlog.
8.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason for the delay in the payment of disability benefit to a person (details supplied) in County Waterford.
The person concerned claimed disability benefit from 22 January 1981 and has been paid all disability benefit and pay-related benefit due to 25 February 1981, date of the latest medical certificate received. The delay in payment was due to his failure to quote his RSI number on some of the medical certificates forwarded to my Department.
Did the Minister or the Department write to the applicant and ask him for his RSI number?
That is done in all cases where the RSI numbers have not been given.
9.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason for the delay in the payment of disability benefit to a person (details supplied) in County Waterford.
The person concerned claimed disability benefit from 6 February, fourth day of incapacity, to 23 February, date of latest certificate received.
The delay in payment was due mainly to the change-over system of insurance numbers to RSI numbers for the purpose of payment of benefit. The question of his entitlement to pay-related benefit is being investigated and payment, if any, due will be made on completion of inquiries.
Why is it not possible to carry on with the old insurance number so that there can be a cross check?
The whole system being operated now is different from the old stamp system. Now the contributions are being deducted with PAYE; the Revenue Commissioners have a computer and we must have something similar in the Department.
I appreciate the system——
We cannot have a debate on general cases. The questions deal with individual cases.
: I appreciate the system but I cannot understand, and I want the Minister to explain, why the Department cannot cross check from the old insurance numbers. The Department must realise they are dealing with ordinary people who need those payments and the Department should think more of the people than of the system, which is causing hardship and hunger.
Payees are becoming more aware of the requirements.
The attitude in the Department appears to be, "Keep the desk clear and to hell with the people".
10.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason for the delay in the payment of disability benefit to a person (details supplied) in County Waterford; and when payment will be made.
The person concerned has been paid all disability benefit due to 7 March 1981. After that date further payment will be made in advance of medical certification which, in future, will be required at monthly intervals only.
He had been paid benefit on the receipt of medical evidence of incapacity up to the end of December 1980. At that stage the change-over from insurance numbers to RSI numbers became effective for the purposes of payment of benefit. As all the certificates received from him since 5 January 1981 bore only his insurance number there was some delay in associating them with his claim.
When was the money paid and when was the question put down?
Payment was made on receipt of the medical evidence.
The Minister has said that the applicant was paid on 7 March. Can he give the date on which the question was put down?
I have not got that information.
We cannot have a debate on this.
When a person sends in a medical certificate which does not bear the RSI number what happens?
He has to send in the RSI number.
11.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why unemployment benefit has been reduced for a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
There have been a number of reductions in the benefit entitlements of the person concerned during the period of his claim. The rate of unemployment benefit payable was reduced on 8 August 1980, the 157th day of his entitlement as he did not satisfy the contribution conditions to be entitled to full rate of benefit after payment of 156 days of unemployment benefit.
The rates of pay-related benefit reduce from 40 per cent to 20 per cent at various stages of a benefit claim and these changes also resulted in reductions in the person's entitlements.
The rate of pay-related benefit payable was last reduced to 20 per cent of his reckonable earnings on 7 February 1981 when the weekly amount payable was reduced from £10.61 to £8.49. He is currently in receipt of a total of £56.54 combined unemployment benefit and pay-related benefit.
12.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will arrange to include the PRSI number on any correspondence relating to an insured person which is being issued by his Department.
It has always been the practice in my Department to quote the appropriate reference number in correspondence with members of the public. This ensures that replies, if any, to such correspondence can be readily associated with the relevant papers. Since January last it has been the practice to quote both the appropriate insurance number and the RSI number where these are available.
Is the Minister aware that the statement he has made is not correct, that the RSI number is not quoted? Further, is he aware that much of the trouble has been caused because many thousands of insured persons are unaware of their RSI number? Does he know that the doctors' certificates issued to insured persons do not contain a space for the RSI number but contain a space for the insurance number?
I accept that there are problems relating to this new scheme but we hope that those problems will be resolved in the near future. The public are becoming more aware of the requirement to quote the numbers.
I accept that in 12 months' time everybody will know. Is the Minister aware that people who have been insured for up to 40 years have failed to get benefit for periods of up to two months because they did not quote an RSI number of which they were unaware? Does he accept that there is grave hardship, — even hunger, as Deputy Bermingham pointed out — as a result of the stupid action of changing at Christmas from the insurance number to the RSI number? Why was it necessary to take this action in this way?
This was not done overnight. An advertising campaign was carried out by the Department of Social Welfare informing people of the need to submit the numbers. They must comply with the regulations. I accept that it is causing delays and problems for some people——
It is causing hunger.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Did I hear the Minister say that when he is writing to people he refers to the insurance number as well as the RSI number? If he said that, will he not accept that that is inviting people to pick out one of the numbers and quote it in their correspondence?
The Minister does not do that. I got a letter from his Department and I know.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Will the Minister answer my question, please?
I have answered the question. I have said the numbers are quoted in any correspondence from the Department.
Will the Minister not accept that the largest numbers of claims in respect of unemployment, sickness and general social welfare benefits are made in the January-February period? Will he not agree that changing over to computerisation in the middle of winter is absolutely stupid, that it should be done in summer when the numbers of claims are much less?
Although I accept it may have created problems for many people, we had to start on 1 January because that is the start of the insurance year.
By all means keep the books clear but do not give a damn about people.
Many Deputies consider that failure to quote the RSI number has caused a lot of trouble. Will the Minister explain why claims where the RSI number was correctly quoted have not been paid? Is the whole thing in chaos?
They have been paid.
Questions Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 are for written reply.