Vol. 462 No. 1
4 Mr. J. Walsh asked the Minister for Social Welfare the plans, if any, he has to ensure that social welfare recipients receive payment from the date they become eligible rather than the date of application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4089/96]
12 Ms O'Donnell asked the Minister for Social Welfare if the review of the social welfare regulations relating to the backdating of claims has been completed; if so, the outcome of the review; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3988/96]
38 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Social Welfare the implications, if any, of a recent court case which indicated that arrears of social welfare could be paid for a period greater than three months; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1216/96]
54 Miss Harney asked the Minister for Social Welfare if the review of the social welfare regulations relating to the backdating of claims has, as yet, been completer; if so, the outcome of the review; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1312/96]
60 Mr. Power asked the Minister for Social Welfare the plans, if any, he has to ensure that social welfare claimants receive payment from the date they become eligible rather than the date of application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3903/96]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 4, 12, 38, 54 and 60 together.
Under the provisions of the social welfare code, a person is required to apply for a social welfare payment within a specified time. For example, in the case of pensions, the application must be made not later than three months following the time the person becomes eligible for pension. Where a person fails to apply within the prescribed time, he or she can be disqualified for receiving payment prior to the date of application. However, there are provisions for backdating applications where the person shows that there was a good cause for the delay in making the application. In general, applications for social welfare payments can be backdated for six months.
As I indicated in replies to earlier questions, my Department has been reviewing the existing arrangements for backdating applications for social welfare payments. The issues involved in the review have turned out to be more difficult than originally anticipated. In particular it appears that relaxation of the current legislative requirements could have significant cost implications and would, therefore, have to be considered in the light of other priorities.
My Department is not aware of any court decision which indicated that arrears of social welfare could be paid for a period in excess of six months.
Does the Minister agree it is unfair that people, particularly widows, who, through no fault of their own and perhaps as a result of bad advice, apply for a pension more than six months after they become entitled to it are deemed eligible only from the time of application?
The present system has applied for a number of years, long before I became Minister for Social Welfare. Within months of coming into the Department I undertook to have the matter reviewed and that review has proceeded since then. It has been interrupted to some extent by the fact that the Department is engaged in much new work initiated by me and the Minister of State, Deputy Durkan.
One way of overcoming the problem would be to ensure information is better targeted. It is important that people apply in time for their entitlements and that the level of late claims is reduced. From the review to date the main reason recorded for late applications in the case of retirement pension and old age contributory pension is that claimants are not aware of their entitlements. Some claimants assume they are not entitled to a pension if they are in employment and others do not realise they have reached the qualifying age. Similarly in the case of survivor's pension, the main reason seems to be lack of knowledge about entitlement. For instance, survivors of public servants, particularly teachers, do not claim as they are not aware they can receive survivor's pension in addition to an occupational pension.
The priority for my Department is to seek better ways of targeting the information to those who may be approaching the point where they are eligible, or those sectors of employees who might for various reasons become eligible. That is my intention in the first instance.
Will the Minister agree what is at stake here is equity and fairness? If people are overpaid in error, they are obliged to repay the amount involved which, in some cases, may be deducted from their salaries over a period of several years. However, many people eligible for a survivor's pension may not be aware of their entitlement and do not apply for it on time. Such people should be entitled to that benefit from their date of eligibility. That is only equitable. The Minister should be more sympathetic towards the people concerned and give an undertaking that he will introduce a legislative measure to facilitate this necessary change.
I am sure the Deputy will agree that my undertaking a review of this issue within months of coming into office, despite the fact that this position had pertained for years previously, is an indication that I am interested and concerned about it. It would be better for me to wait until the review is completed before indicating to the House what action we may or may not be able to take on the matter.
Is the Minister aware that the Ombudsman has reflected negatively on the Department's attitude to this issue? I can only assume it will be a matter of time before it is referred to the European court. Will he agree it would be better and more equitable to take the initiative now and make the necessary legislative change to resolve the problem?
This matter is under review in my Department and as soon as the outcome is available I will report to the House on it.
The time for dealing with priority questions is now exhausted, but I will proceed to deal with Question No. 5 in ordinary time.
