Vol. 475 No. 6
143 Mr. Gallagher (Laoighis-Offaly) asked the Minister for Social Welfare the changes, if any, he proposes to make regarding rules for requalification for unemployment benefit for fire-fighters, in order to make it easier for them to remain in benefit when the initial claim period is over; if so, when such changes will come into effect; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5513/97]
As I announced in last month's budget, an important change is being made in the rules relating to the requalification for unemployment benefit which will have a substantial beneficial effect on the incomes of many workers, particularly those in atypical employment such as seasonal and casual workers like dockers and firefighters.
These workers were precluded from requalifying for unemployment benefit until they had a further 13 PRSI contributions paid subsequent to exhausting their unemployment benefit entitlement. In future, a person will be able to requalify for unemployment benefit by having 13 paid conributions at any stage after the 156th day — i.e. six months — of unemployment. This will mean that, where the 13 contributions are paid between the 156th day and the 390th day, the claimant can requalify for a further 390 days of unemployment benefit immediately after the first 390 days has been exhausted.
These arrangements will be brought into effect at the end of next month, following the enactment of the Social Welfare Bill, 1997.
144 Mrs. O'Rourke asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will review the case of a person (details supplied) in County Westmeath who is undergoing a training course and has had her rent allowance cut by the supplementary welfare office in spite of the fact that she was told that going on such a course would not affect her allowance and in view of the fact that this person is very keen on obtaining employment for which this course is necessary since this would make her independent; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5572/97]
Section 179 of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1993 as substituted by paragraph 3 of the sixth Schedule to the Act, provides for the payment of a rent supplement in the case of a person whose means are insufficient to meet their needs. The legislation also enables the Minister to make regulations prescribing the circumstances and conditions under which such a supplement may be paid, the class or classes of persons to whom a supplement may be paid and the amount of supplement that may be paid, and this has been done in S.I. 382 (Social Welfare (Consolidated SWA) Regs.) of 1995. The SWA scheme is administered by the health boards and my Department has no function in deciding entitlement in individual cases.
In addition, Article 12 (1) of 1995 specifies that the amount of weekly rent supplement paid will be calculated so as to ensure that the person, after payment of rent, has an income equal to the rate of SWA appropriate to the family circumstances, less £6. This £6 represents the minimum contribution which clients are required to pay from their own resources.
The Midland Health Board have indicated that the person in question was being paid a rent supplement of £27.40 up to the week ending 15 February 1997. When she commenced a FÁS course in retail sales the following week, her case was reviewed and her means were reassessed to take account of her change in circumstances. The Midland Health Board decided that her combined income of £79.70 from a single parent family payment and her FÁS course allowance of £64.70, totalling £144.40, exceeded the income guidelines for eligibility for a rent supplement. She has been informed by the Midland Health Board of her right of appeal but no appeal against this decision has been lodged to date.
FÁS training allowances are assessed as means for the purpose of determining entitlement to a rent or mortgage supplement. People participating in FÁS training courses do not automatically retain secondary benefits. I am having this situation reviewed.
