Ivor Callely
Question:14 Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Social Welfare the number of people in receipt of carer's allowance and costs for each of the years 1990 to 1993; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Carer's Allowance.
Richard Bruton
Question:24 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Social Welfare his estimate of the number of carers who will qualify for carer's allowance following the relaxation in the means test; the proportion of all carers who are now eligible for this allowance; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 14 and 24 together.
The means testing arrangements for the carer's allowance will be significantly improved. From next month an earnings disregard of £100 a week will be introduced in respect of working spouses and the standard initial weekly means disregard of £2 will be increased to £6.
These improvements will mean that an estimated 600 additional carers may now qualify for the carer's allowance where previously no allowance would have been payable. For example, a carer whose spouse had earnings of £160 a week and who has not heretofore been entitled to any allowance will from next month receive a weekly payment of £37.00.
In addition, a further 350 existing carers will get increases in their weekly payments. My Department has already reviewed some 300 cases in payment resulting in an estimated average increase, from next month, of £29.60 where the spouse has earnings. We have also contacted a further 600 carers, who previously did not qualify for payment, inviting them to reapply as they may now benefit under the new improved arrangements.
Carers who will not be affected by this change in the means test will benefit from the general 3 per cent increase in weekly payments from next month which will bring the personal rate of the allowance to £61.00. In addition, a pensioner being cared for by a recipient of a carer's allowance will, in future, retain entitlement to the free telephone rental allowance where previously it would have been discontinued because the living alone condition would no longer have been satisfied.
I should also mention the respite care fund which I launched with £500,000 last year to assist voluntary and community groups who provide respite in a variety of ways for those who week in week out look after the elderly and those with disabilities. The Government later gave me approval for a doubling of that fund from savings that were made available in my Department. During 1993 we supported a total of more than 90 separate initiatives put forward by voluntary organisations.
I am glad to say that the respite care fund is being continued again this year and was advertised in the national newspapers on 27 April last. The closing date for receipt of application was last Friday, 10 June, but there is still time for voluntary groups to get their application in over the next few days.
I introduced the carer's allowance in November 1990, since when the numbers claiming and the costs involved have been increasing steadily. At the end of 1990 the number of allowances in payment was 2,563 at a cost of £0.4 million. At the end of 1991 the corresponding figures were 3,959 allowances in payment at a cost of £7 million. In 1992 and 1993 the figures were 4,437 and 4,748 recipients respectively with corresponding expenditure of £11.3 million and £12.2 million respectively. This year it is estimated that the scheme will cost £14.5 million.
In introducing the carer's allowance nearly four years ago, I took full account of the vital and essential role played by carers in our society. That was the first time a basic income maintenance payment was made directly to the carer. Since its inception, the carer's allowance has been expanded and improved each year. I will continue to improve and develop the scheme as resources permit.
I welcome the Minister's reply and congratulate him on introducing the scheme, the new allowances which have been introduced since November 1990 and those which will be introduced next month.
The elections are over.
We all know the reason for the carer's allowance but a number of people still avail of subvention for nursing home accommodation.
A real con job.
Such subvention involves the payment of up to £120 per week. Have the Ministers for Social Welfare and Health put their heads together——
Not at all.
——to ascertain the potential for more people to avail of the carer's allowance? In other words, have they considered making it possible for more people to continue to reside in the family home with back-up from carers rather than being institutionalised in a nursing home and availing of subvention of £120 per week from the Department of Health?
The Deputy is correct in saying the scheme is worthwhile in so far as it provides for carers. This year it will cost £14.5 million and further improvements would have to be considered in the context of the budget. I will have that matter considered prior to the next budget.
I congratulate the Minister on his initiative in introducing the scheme and the various allowances since November 1990. He referred to an expenditure of £14.5 million in 1994, a huge increase on the initial expenditure of £0.4 million in 1990. I appreciate this matter does not come under his brief, but is he aware of the expenditure on nursing home subventions and grant aids to people who require——
That is beyond the bounds of these two statistical questions.
Will the Minister confirm that he and the Minister for Health will jointly explore the feasibility of the potential that exists for a carer's allowance payment? Given the expenditure of £14.5 million on the scheme will he support my view that there is an even greater potential, which may involve more expenditure for people to avail of a carer's allowance in the family home?
I agree with the Deputy's point about the importance of care at home in family surroundings. I will have that matter examined before the next budget.
I admire Deputy Callely's innocence in putting forward that proposal which was made last year and which the Minister is still considering. Will the Minister indicate how many extra persons will qualify for the carer's allowance this year as a result of the improvements? Does the Minister consider it appropriate to have a co-ordinated approach between his Department and the Department of Health in relation to the carer's allowance, the respite care scheme and the home help scheme operated by health boards? Under such a co-ordinated approach additional expenditure to cover improvements would be self-financing.
These two questions are statistical.
The number of people who will benefit directly from the improvements is approximately 1,000, made up of 600 new applicants and others who will receive a substantial increase because their spouse is working. We will have to wait and see how it works out. The Department has contacted people with a spouse working who may have applied previously. The point about co-ordination was made by Deputy Callely, and I agree with it.
I am glad the Minister stated that he wished to promote care within the family home, as far as possible. There is a flaw in the carer's allowance scheme in that it does not allow a carer to live outside the home of the person being cared for even though, in the case of a family, the carer may live next door. Will the Minister agree that a simple adjustment of the rules to allow the carer to live outside the home of the person being cared for should be made? Will he give an undertaking to consider that proposal sympathetically?
We are going beyond the bounds of the questions.
It is part of the general question of care. The Deputy will appreciate that the scheme for which I have responsibility is a social welfare scheme specifically for people of low means working full time in the home. In any consideration of extension, improvement or co-ordination of schemes with the Department of Health, that aspect should be considered.
I was pleased the Minister acknowledged that 600 new carers only will come into the scheme and that 400 will receive an increased allowance as a result of the budgetary regulations which will come into force next month. What are the Minister's proposals to deal with the other carers — approximately 6,000 — who do not qualify for the carer's allowance despite providing a service 24 hours a day, 365 days a year caring for relatives in their homes. Will he make regulations to enable those people to qualify for the carer's allowance?
The scheme the Government allowed me to introduce in 1990 was for people on low means. Through the scheme we provide payment equivalent to the long term unemployment assistance, which is one of the higher social welfare payments in that area. We have extended the scheme to provide for people whose spouses are working, some of whom may have been eligible previously for a reduced carer's allowance. As a result of changes in the budget, approximately 400 people will benefit from an increase in the scheme and approximately 600 new carers will come into the scheme. Those changes involve extra cost and can be considered only at budget time. Before the next budget I will consider the scheme and the elements that have been discussed. The expenditure on the scheme has been increased from £0.4 million in 1990 to £14.5 million allocated this year, a substantial amount.
Has the Minister taken into account the demographic changes in society, namely our ageing population and whether the increased numbers taking up the carer's allowance are primarily a result of that phenomenon rather than greater numbers qualifying in terms of their income? There is an urgent need to address the absence of residential places for the elderly. Perhaps if a better carer's scheme was introduced pressure on such residential places could be relieved.
That is the responsibility of two other Ministers.
What is the Minister doing about it?
Account must be taken of the approach by the Department of the Environment to housing for the elderly. The fact that the population is ageing will have a considerable effect in the future. In the meantime the improvement in the means test is the main factor which has resulted in the increase in numbers participating in the scheme with approximately 1,000 benefiting from the overmade in the budget, apart from the overall change of the 3 per cent increase which applied to all payments.
I appreciate and thank the Minister for the changes in the carer's allowance.
The Deputy is sucking up to the Minister.
In the light of what has been said it is important to recognise that in excess of 5,500 people will benefit from the expenditure of £14.5 million allocated to the carer's allowance scheme.
Is the Deputy rehearsing for a junior Minister post that may be coming up?
Such grovelling is obscene.
The Deputy is sincerely ambitious.
I earnestly ask the Minister to tap the potential of the carer's allowance scheme and the benefit it brings to many people.
The scheme is good and worth while. It has been welcomed by——
It is very limited. It provides for 5,000 of the 15,000 applicants.
It provides for people on low incomes. The change in the recent budget extends the scheme to people on low incomes whose spouse is working.
It provides for only 600 additional carers.
It will benefit 1,000 extra people.
Only 600 individual people.
This is a considerable step. In addition, the amount of money involved increased from £400,000 in 1990 to £14.5 million in 1994, a considerable increase that the Government has put into this area apart from the work done in respite care and by the Ministers for Health and the Environment. The Government is conscious of the needs and has been doing something practical to meet them. The Government has met those needs effectively and will continue to do so bearing in mind the points made by the Deputies.
That disposes of Questions for today.