Vol. 431 No. 8
11 Mr. Lowry asked the Minister for Health if he will change the instructions to health boards in respect of the way in which a spouse's earnings of £50 or less are regarded in full from the point of view of an applicant's entitlement to disabled person's maintenance allowance; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
50 Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for Health if he will change the instructions to health boards in respect of the way in which a spouse's earnings of £50 or less are fully included in assessing an applicants entitlement to disabled person's maintenance allowance; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
88 Mr. Timmons asked the Minister for Health if he will change the instructions to health boards in respect of the way in which a spouse's earnings of £50 or less are fully included in assessing an applicants entitlement to disabled person's maintenance allowance; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 11, 50 and 88 together. Under section 69 of the Health Act, 1970, health boards, in assessing eligibility for disabled person's maintenance allowance, are obliged to have regard to the means of both the applicant and his or her spouse. I am aware of differences between the assessment of means for disabled person's maintenance allowance and for social assistance schemes under the Department of Social Welfare. Some of these are more favourable to disabled person's maintenance allowance applicants, most notably in the means assessment of disabled people living at home with their parents where the value of board and lodgings is not taken into account. In contrast, the value of board and lodgings is taken into account in assessing eligibility for unemployment assistance.
I am, however, concerned that assessment of spouse's earnings is less favourable under the disabled person's maintenance allowance scheme. My Department is examining the implications of bringing the method of assessing spouses' earnings under the disabled person's maintenance allowance scheme into line with arrangements that apply to social assistance schemes operated by the Department of Social Welfare.
Does the Minister not accept that someone in receipt of unemployment assistance who has a working spouse receives the full adult dependant allowance but if he or she becomes ill and incapacitated and is transferred to the disabled person's maintenance allowance, every single penny earned by the spouse is taken into consideration and assessed and therefore there is a net loss of up to £50? I accept that he indicated in his reply that he is having the matter examined but it has been ongoing for a considerable period of time. Will he give an indication as to when he will amend the regulation to bring equity into the operation of the scheme?
I accept what the Deputy says and I indicated so in my initial response. It works the other way as well, the value of board and lodging at home is taken into account when determining the assistance payment to the unemployed but in similar circumstances a disabled person gets the full disabled person's maintenance allowance allowance without any deductions for the benefit of board and lodgings. There are pros and cons but I am mindful of the Deputy's point. Indeed this has arisen at my clinics and I have raised it with the Department since I took up office. My personal view — but obviously I need to put it to my Cabinet colleagues — is that schemes such as the disabled person's maintenance allowance are more appropriate to be paid from the Department of Social Welfare rather than the Department of Health.
Does the Minister not accept in short that this is fundamentally unjust and that it needs to be put right as soon as possible.
He is abandoning the low earners.
Does he accept that the people directly hit are women in low earning jobs outside the home who are paid between £45 to £50 per week? The spouse on disabled person's maintenance allowance stands to lose an entitlement similar to what his wife is earning and this is fundamentally anti-women.
At the risk of repeating myself, I am concerned that difficulties have arisen in specific cases. I have instructed my Department to quantify the number of cases so that I can have a view on its implications. Certainly if it is feasible this is something I would like to achieve.
