asked the Minister for Social Welfare if his attention has been drawn to the fact that those who have worked and paid PRSI contributions for many years and who are obliged to emigrate for two years or more may not be entitled to welfare benefits; whether this may cause hardship; if he has any plans to change this situation; if so, the nature of such plans; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Written Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.
18.
To qualify for short-term benefits under the PRSI system two conditions must be fulfilled. The claimant must have a minimum of 39 contributions paid since entry into insurance and must have a minimum of 39 contributions paid or credited in the governing contribution year. To qualify for maximum rate of benefit a claimant must have at least 48 contributions paid or credited in the governing contribution year. If a worker goes abroad or leaves the workforce for any other reason entitlement to short-term benefits is retained for as long as the contributions paid prior to leaving retain their currency. This can be for up to two years.
The contribution conditions are designed to ensure that claimants of short-term benefits have a recent attachment to the workforce. A change in these conditions to give entitlement to benefits to persons who had left the workforce for long periods would have major financial and other implications for the social insurance system.
A worker returning from abroad in the circumstances as described by the Deputy may, however, be eligible for unemployment assistance or supplementary welfare allowance depending on his circumstances.
Entitlement to long-term benefits and pensions is determined by reference to the yearly average number of PRSI contributions which have been made over the claimant's working career and as such a gap in his record of a number of years while he was working abroad will not necessarily affect his entitlement to pension.
There are special arrangements under EC Regulations on social security for migrant workers under which benefits earned through contributions in one member state can be paid in another and contributions paid in different member states can be aggregated for entitlement to benefits and pensions.
In addition, my Department have embarked on a programme of bilateral agreements with countries which have traditionally been the destination of Irish emigrants. These agreements operate principally on a similar basis to the EC Regulations on social security. An agreement with Austria was signed last September and negotiations are underway with other countries such as Canada and Switzerland. We have also started preliminary discussions with Australia and the USA.
21.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the new entitlements which will apply in cases where spouses are in receipt of separate payments; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
At present a person can be appointed on behalf of a claimant to receive and deal with amounts of benefit payable in respect of adult and child dependants. Regulations under this provision allow the increase in respect of dependants to be paid directly to the dependent spouse of the claimant where the claimant does not provide the spouse with sufficient money for ordinary household expenditure because of personal problems such as gambling, alcoholism or drug addiction. These payments are referred to as separate payments.
I have been concerned for some time about the difficulties experienced in some cases by spouses in receipt of separate payments. I have already indicated to the House that I intend to amend the existing provisions so as to enable the spouse to receive a greater proportion of the overall payment including the increases in respect of the adult and child dependants.
The Social Welfare Bill, 1989, which was circulated on Monday, contains a provision in section 16 which is designed to remove the restriction whereby only the increases in respect of dependants may be paid directly to the spouse. This section will enable regulations to be made which will allow such amount of the social welfare payment as is considered reasonable in the circumstances to be paid directly to the spouse. The detailed provisions to be made in this area are under consideration at present.
22.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if his attention has been drawn to the anomaly under social welfare legislation, whereby the maternity benefit payable to a woman is artificially deflated if she has previously been on maternity leave in the year used for determining reckonable earnings as maternity benefit itself is not considered to be reckonable earnings; if he intends to take any action to deal with this anomaly; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
The rate of payment under the Department's maternity allowance scheme for women in employment is set at 70 per cent of reckonable earnings in the relevant income tax year subject to a minimum payment of £76 per week and a maximum payment of £154 per week. The allowance is normally payable for a period of 14 weeks.
The earnings used in the calculation of the amount of benefit payable under the scheme are the same as those used in the calculation of pay-related benefit payable with unemployment and disability benefits. Payments made in the relevant income tax year by way of social welfare entitlements, including maternity allowance, are not regarded as earnings and accordingly are not taking into account for the purposes of determining entitlements to any earnings related benefits. I consider, however, that the minimum guaranteed payment which I have already mentioned is an important financial safeguard in the circumstances mentioned by the Deputy.
There are no plans at present to change the method of calculating entitlements under these schemes.
27.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the amount of money paid by his Department by way of supplementary welfare allowance for the year 1987-88; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Expenditure on supplementary welfare allowance by the health boards, who administer the scheme, amounted to £31.304 million in 1987 and £33.610 million in 1988. Both figures are provisional as they are subject to audit and final confirmation.
28.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if the appeals section of his Department will review the decision to refuse a prescribed relatives allowance on the old age pension claim of a person (details supplied) in County Offaly.
The prescribed relative allowance scheme is intended to provide additional income maintenance support for households comprising a pensioner and a caring relative. In order to qualify, the pensioner must be so incapacitated as to require care and attention on a full-time basis and the prescribed relative must be living with him or her solely for the purpose of providing such care. The allowance is payable by way of an increase in pension.
The case to which the Deputy refers involves a farmer on a small holding. Following a review of entitlement on 29 February 1988, it emerged that the number of stock held on the farm had been increased significantly since the intitial date of award of the prescribed relative allowance. As a result, it was considered by a deciding officer that the prescribed relative was no longer in a position to provide care and attention for the pensioner on a full-time basis and the allowance was revoked with effect from 26 May 1988. An appeal against the decision was lodged but was disallowed by an appeals officer on 12 August 1988. The case has since been referred again to the appeals officer who concluded that there were no new facts or evidence which would warrant a revision of his decision.
Where a pensioner is residing on a farm, the relative who is looking after the pensioner will, in many cases, also be engaged in running the farm. In these cases the question to be determined is whether the farming activity conflicts with the objective of providing full-time care and attention which is a statutory requirement for receipt of the allowance. Each case is decided on its merits having due regard to the particular circumstances. In this case, it was considered that the number of hours' work required on the farm conflicted with the qualifying condition of the scheme of providing care and attention on a full-time basis.