Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 6 May 1992

Vol. 419 No. 2

Written Answers. - High Court Judgment.

Michael Bell

Question:

23 Mr. Bell asked the Minister for Social Welfare if his attention has been drawn to the outcome of the High Court case of the Drogheda Dockers v. the Department of Social Welfare; when arrears of benefit due from 1988 will be paid; if he will ensure that regulations are issued and directions given to, (1) employment exchanges, (2) deciding officers and (3) appeals officers based on the court's decisions; if he will ensure that, (a) paid for benefits are not subject to means testing by deciding officers and appeals officers, (b) the contract of employment is excluded as a reason for refusing benefit and (c) a day of being unemployed and available for work is clearly defined as per the judgment; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The implications of the judgment for the operation of the unemployment benefit scheme are being assessed at present and any action found necessary will be taken in due course.

Fresh claims by the persons concerned are being processed in accordance with normal precedures, having regard to the judgement. It is expected that the claims, if in order, will be put into payment this week.

The payment of arrears will be addressed when the order of the High Court becomes available.

John Browne

Question:

27 Mr. Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny) asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will outline the progress, if any, which has been made in dealing with the problem for self-employed people who apply for unemployment assistance and whose assessments are based on the previous year's earnings.

Previous year details of earnings provide a reference or starting point for the assessment of means for small-holders and other self-employed persons. I would like to stress the emphasis on starting point and it is a misconception to believe that this is the end of the process.

Investigating officers having examined the previous year position then proceed to update this in the light of the current and expected position over the year ahead. Where the opportunities for self-employment and income are likely to be less an adjustment will be made to reflect this.

It is also open to any claimant to apply for a review of the means assessed against them if at any point their circumstances have seriously deteriorated. If still dissatisfied with an assessment, it is open to a claimant to appeal to the Social Welfare appeal office.

Methods of assessment are kept under review by my Department. I am happy that the method of assessment used in self-employed cases is working satisfactorily and that it has the flexibility to respond to variations in the circumstances of claimants. I have no plans at present to change it.

Emmet Stagg

Question:

31 Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will have the question which is asked of recipients of arrears of disability benefit on standard letters (details supplied) withdrawn; if he agrees that such a question is an unwarranted intrusion into the privacy of the recipients of non-means tested payments; if he further agrees that the way in which such persons maintained themselves while awaiting payment is no concern of his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The Deputy's question refers to a form which issues to clients who have won their appeals against disallowance of disability benefit and who are due to a sizeable amount of arrears of benefit.

In all cases involving arrears, it is the practice to inquire of the local Health board and social welfare offices to determine if the client has been paid by them for the period in question. Where it transpires that the client has been paid in the interim then the amount of such payment is deducted from the arrears and the balance is paid to the client.

Where it appears that no payment has been made, and where the amount of arrears is substantial (£600 or more), then further inquiries are made in that this form is sent to clients asking them how they maintained themselves in the interim.

The purpose of this inquiry is to ensure that the client did not claim another social welfare or health board payment in his or her own right or was not claimed as a dependant on a claim made by another client, e.g. a spouse. This prevents overpayments in cases where such information may come to light after the arrears have issued. The form is also sent in cases where information has come to hand that the client may have been engaged in work during the period in question.

The question of means does not arise in the case of disability benefit as it is not a means tested payment. The Deputy can be assured that in circumstances such as this the Department is only interested in obtaining information which is relevant to the client's claim and which will assist in prompt and correct payment.

However, it is accepted that the form in question may fail to make the exact nature of the inquiry clear and steps have now been taken by my Department to rectify this.

Richard Bruton

Question:

32 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Social Welfare his views on the case of an old age pensioner aged over 80 in need of full-time care but who is being cared for by her daughter, and who is claiming unemployment assistance in order to get over the problem that, (a) the mother does not qualify for a free electricity allowance and other such allowance and (b) the daughter herself does not qualify for any assistance with the cost of caring.

Since the Deputy has not given me the details of the particular case he has in mind, I can only outline the situation that applies generally in such circumstances.

A person who is providing full-time care for a pensioner cannot be regarded as being available for and genuinely seeking work. In the circumstances described the pensioner's daughter would not be eligible for receipt of unemployment assistance. However, she is very likely to be entitled to a carer's allowance instead.

The weekly rate of carer's allowance is £50 per week maximum rising to £53 per week from the end of July next. This is the same as the short term rate of Unemployment Assistance and £5 per week less than the long term rate. This difference will be £4.20 per week after the increase in rates from end of July next.

I have already announced that I intend to review all the various non-contributory social welfare schemes. As part of this process, I will be reviewing the carer's allowance scheme to see how assistance might be directed more effectively at the needs of carers in the community. I will be consulting with my colleague, the Minister for Health, in regard to appropriate provision for carers generally. However, any significant improvements to the carer's allowance scheme would have cost implications which would have to be considered in a budgetary context.

In relation to the free electricity allowance the fact that the pensioner is residing with a recipient of unemployment assistance does not automatically disqualify her for receipt of free electricity allowance. In October 1990 the scope of this free electricity acheme was extended. In most cases the extension ensures that pensioners over 80 years of age may retain their entitlement to this allowance even if they are no longer living alone. The pensioner may also be eligible for certain of the other free scheme entitlements — particularly free TV licence and a weekly fuel allowance during the winter.
I would be pleased to investigate the circumstances of the particular case which the Deputy has in mind if he lets me have more details.
Top
Share