asked the Minister for Social Welfare the number of recipients of unemployment assistance who are in receipt of a reduced level of assistance as a consequence of the benefit derived from board and lodging at home; the age of such persons; the levels of benefit which they are paid; and if he has any plans to improve this situation.
Ceisteanna — Questions Oral Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.
11
Eric J. Byrne
Question:12 Mr. Byrne asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will consider amending the social welfare code in order that board and lodging is not taken into consideration when assessing eligibility for unemployment assistance of young persons living at home, especially as such a practice can leave young unemployed people with virtually no income, although they may not be maintained by their families and very often they have no option but to emigrate as a result; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Emmet Stagg
Question:20 Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Social Welfare if his attention has been drawn to the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare who has had her means assessed against the income of her landlord; if he will outline the regulations which cover such situations; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Emmet Stagg
Question:57 Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he accepts the recommendation in the Commission on Social Welfare report that single applicants for unemployment assistance aged 18 to 25 years should be entitled to a standard allowance irrespective of household circumstances or parental means; that means assessment for those over 25 years applying for assistance payments should not include any assessment for the general household living standards; and the steps, if any, he is taking to implement this proposal.
Brian O'Shea
Question:63 Mr. O'Shea asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he has any plans to abolish the means test for unemployment assistance in relation to persons over 18 years of age living with their parents, having regard to the fact that these citizens are entitled to vote or join the Defence Forces and that the means test can have the effect of driving young people from home or to emigrate; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 11, 12, 20, 57 and 63 together.
Statistics are not maintained in a form which would enable the information sought in the first question to be provided. The value of free board and lodging enjoyed by claimants living at home with their parents is assessed as means in accordance with specific provisions of the Social Welfare Acts which provide that the means of a person for unemployment assistance purposes must take account of the yearly value of any benefit and privilege enjoyed by him or her. The requirement to take account of board and lodging has been a feature of the unemployment assistance scheme since its inception. Its purpose is to achieve a degree of equity as between applicants in different family circumstances, between applicants whose parents are well-to-do and those whose parents are in poorer circumstances. The criteria are kept under continuous review. Any concessions in this regard would have to be considered within a budgetary context.
The person referred to as living in County Kildare returned from the United Kingdom and went to live with her sister and brother-in-law. She renewed her claim to unemployment assistance on 5 February 1990. Her claim was approved for payment at the short-term weekly rate of £42.00 less means of £20.60 based on an existing qualification certificate. Following reinvestigation her means were assessed at £20.90 per week derived from the value of benefit and privilege of residing in her sister's home. It is open to her to appeal this decision and have her case determined by an appeals officer.
In view of the endemic and long-term nature of unemployment and the particular problem for young people, would the Minister not agree that at a certain age — we suggest 26 — a person should be entitled to social welfare payments in his or her own right? This would remove from adults who are suffering from long-term unemployment the humiliation of still being asessed as dependants of their parents, to whom they have to go cap in hand to get even spending money.
This is a question which will fall to be considered in future years.
In the absence of a minimum income for all, would the Minister not agree that it is unacceptable that teenagers who are not in receipt of any financial support from their parents should be left in the incredible predicament of having to decide that in order to eke out an independent existence they might have to leave the family home and thereby qualify for unemployment assistance? The social welfare code was not designed to break up families in this manner.
The approach to date has been to provide the additional money where it is most needed. There are many other steps which could be taken were the money available. The cost of abolishing board and lodging was examined in detail in 1981 and was put at £21.5 million. The cost at this stage would be very much greater. Progress along those lines can be considered in future budgets.
Does the Minister consider that there should be national guidelines as to the value of board and lodging? The interpretation of social welfare officers varies so much that it is impossible to advise people. I have a case of a deserted wife who has a maintenance order against her husband but the child is being penalised because of the husband's income. There is no redress. Does the Minister agree that a national guideline would help everybody?
There are guidelines but there may be aspects which are not adequately covered. I will look at the question.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Would the Minister not agree that there are some dreadful anomalies in assessments? A parent may have an income of £24,000 but still not be in a position to give pocket money to anyone. Such a parent might be supporting third level students, for example. The value of bed and breakfast is given at varying rates. Does the Minister agree that some kind of stability should be put into the assessment system for board and lodging in respect of teenagers?
The system has been there for some time. The method of calculation is to deduct a parental allowance from the net parental income — the gross income less tax and PRSI — and divide the balance equally between the non-earning family members, including any applying for assistance. The question of the treatment of households generally is being examined by the study group who are coming close to their conclusions. We can then look at the matter further. It is a substantial budgetary question.
In view of the endemic nature of unemployment and the estimates that it will be with us for ten or 15 years, will the Minister undertake to review this matter in the preparation of the next budget with particular reference to the establishment of a minimum payment to which every person would be entitled, with the aim of getting rid of the notion of dependency for a person who may be in the mid-twenties?
It is a question I will keep under review.