Vol. 415 No. 7
237 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason a person (details supplied) in Waterford has been refused disablement benefit under the occupational injuries scheme despite medical evidence to support her claim dated 20 December 1991.
The person concerned claimed disablement benefit under the occupational injuries scheme on 7 August 1991 in respect of a prescribed disease.
Following examination of the claim, it was decided to reject it on the grounds that on the evidence available the disease had not arisen from the employment concerned.
The claim was re-examined following receipt of this question and there is no trace of receipt of the medical evidence dated 20 December said to have been sent to the Department. It has been decided, however, to investigate further the relationship claimed between the disease and the employment concerned and arrangements are being made to refer the person concerned for medical examination by a consultant
The person concerned will be advised as soon as possible of the date, time and venue for the examination. Her entitlement to disablement benefit will be reviewed in the light of the results of the examination.
She is at present in receipt of disability benefit.
238 Mr. S. Barrett asked the Minister for Social Welfare if his attention has been drawn to the hardship being caused to those seeking dental treatment under the PRSI scheme in so far as, because of their dispute with the Minister, dentists are refusing to do extractions for their patients without payment; if he will urgently seek to bring an end to this dispute; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Discussions with the Irish Dental Association in relation to the operation of the dental benefit scheme and the fees paid to dentists operating the scheme have been under way for some time. The dispute with the association in relation to the treatment of dependent spouses of insured people under the scheme is being addresed in that context. I am hopeful that the dispute will be resolved in the near future.
239 Mr. Garland asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will make a statement on the situation where old aged pensioners, who are entitled to free electricity and free telephone rental allowances, have to re-apply for these when they change address; the reason this situation exists; and if his attention has been drawn to the hardship this regulation causes.
One of the conditions for receipt of the free electricity and free telephone rental allowances is that the recipient must live alone or only with certain excepted categories of people.
When a person who is in receipt of these allowances changes address, it means that my Department have to terminate the allowances at the old address and ask the person concerned to re-apply for the allowances after moving to his or her new address.
The reasons for this re-application procedure are to ensure that the living alone condition of the schemes is fulfilled at the new address. Also, given the volume of claims received each week, my Department have to obtain sufficient verifying personal information, together with details of the new ESB and Telecom account numbers, to allow the allowances to be re-awarded to qualified people quickly and accurately.
240 Mr. Aylward asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will have arrangements made to have unemployment assistance paid to a person (details supplied) in County Kilkenny where the applicant has been signing since August 1990, and has lodged an appeal.
The person concerned had his means reviewed on 26 June 1991 and as a result a deciding officer disallowed his claim from 28 August 1991 on the grounds that the applicant failed to disclose details of his means in relation to capital and show that his means did not exceed the statutory limit for receipt of a qualification certificate which would entitle him to apply for payment of unemployment assistance.
He claimed unemployment assistance again on 4 November 1991. Following investigation by the social welfare officer, his claim was again disallowed by the deciding officer on 31 January 1992 from 4 November 1991. This decision was again based on the grounds that he had failed to show that his yearly means did not exceed the statutory limit for receipt of a qualification certificate. In particular he failed to provide the social welfare officer with details of his bank account.
If the person concerned is now willing to disclose his means he should contact his local office with a view to having his case reviewed.
