asked the Minister for Social Welfare the meaning of the beneficial occupier situation; the way in which she can justify a figure of £2 daily as a base line means for the non-payment of unemployment benefits in particular situations, such as beneficial occupier and for landholder; and if she will make a statement on the serious situation.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Unemployment Benefit.
7.
It is a basic condition for the receipt of unemployment benefit that the claimant must be unemployed. In general, a person is not regarded as unemployed on any day on which he is employed. However, section 29 (5) of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1981, empowers the Minister to make regulations as to the days which may or may not be treated as days of unemployment.
Regulations have been made in accordance with this provision which allow a claimant, who is engaged in a subsidiary occupation, to be treated as unemployed providing he satisfies a special condition that the remuneration or profit from this occupation does not exceed £2 per day or that he has at least 78 reckonable employment contributions paid in the three years preceding the date of claim. The purpose of the special condition is to measure the significance and extent of the subsidiary occupation in order to ensure that the claimant can be regarded as genuinely on the labour market. A person who runs a farm would be regarded as following a subsidiary occupation whether or not he owns the farm.
The majority of unemployment benefit claims involving applicants who follow a subsidiary occupation are from landholders. A claimant who runs a holding but does not himself own it is generally referred to as being in beneficial occupation and the question of his availability for work then arises. It was to deal with such cases that the regulations were made.
In the circumstances for which they were intended the regulations are considered to be reasonable.
Can the Minister tell the House how long this base line of £2 per day has been in operation? Will she accept that in modern times nobody, no single individual, could expect even to have breakfast for £2 per day? Will she indicate to the House whether she is prepared to increase this base line to a realistic figure?
The present base line of £2 has been in operation since 1980, I understand. While the limit is kept under continuous review, it is not proposed to revise the figure further for the present. It is important to point out that it is one of two alternatives provided by the regulations and the claimant has two opportunities of qualifying. As I said in my earlier answer, the second condition is that the claimant has had not fewer than 78 pay contributions in the preceding three years. The two conditions taken together are not considered unreasonable.
Would the Minister accept that in the present economic climate there is very high unemployment? Many people are laid off and made redundant and many of these are married with families. They live in their parents' homes, on farms owned by their parents, and have to help to run the farm out of duty to and respect for their parents, even though they get no benefit from their work. Would the Minister accept that her Department officials are presuming that these applicants who may not have 78 stamps are getting income from the farms while in fact they are not? Would she give any undertaking that she would review the situation and request her staff to ease up on their attitude in such cases?
I could not give the Deputy any such undertaking. He will understand that my examination of this question has been brief because of my short duration as Minister for Social Welfare. The answers which have been given to me show that, while trying to ensure that the limited resources of the State are directed as much as possible towards the most needy people, the officers in my Department are taking the correct elements into consideration in arriving at their decisions.
I recognise the Minister's short duration in the Department and I wish her well in her new role. However, it is vital that she should take a very realistic view of this situation. Many are falling victims through no fault of their own. Could the Minister give us any indication that she will investigate the matter and let us know the exact position? Has she any proposals to ease the pressure on applicants who are victims of this unfair system?
This is the final supplementary.
I can assure the Deputy that I intend to take a very realistic view of all the elements relating to the Department of Social Welfare. In the context of the Commission on Social Welfare, which the Deputy may realise will report very shortly, I expect they will be commenting on matters such as this. I can assure the Deputy that I shall be extremely concerned to eliminate unfairness and anomalies where they exist.