Vol. 501 No. 5
3 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of carers excluded by the means test from any payment of carer's allowance; the cost of extending the proposed respite care grant to all these carers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6482/99]
The carer's allowance is a social assistance payment to carers on low incomes who live with and look after certain people who need full-time care and attention. At the end of December 1998 there were 11,416 carers in receipt of the allowance at an annual cost of over £45 million.
Following a detailed examination of the review of the carer's allowance report, which was published in October 1998, I introduced a range of measures in the 1999 budget to improve the position of carers. Over 11,500 existing carers will benefit from the measures I have introduced while an additional 3,300 carers will now qualify for allowance. This budget package, costing over £18 million in a full year, represents a 40 per cent increase on existing expenditure and is a very considerable addition to the £45 million spent on carers in 1998.
The review estimated that there are approximately 49,000 people in need of full-time care and attention. Of this number, almost 11,500 are in receipt of carer's allowance and this number is expected to increase to almost 15,000 following the package of measures introduced for carers in the budget. In addition, it should be noted that there are at least 2,000 carers (based on applications for the allowance) in receipt of another social welfare payment from my Department which is of greater benefit to them than the carers allowance.
The complete abolition of the means test would cost an estimated £200 million in a full year.
The cost of extending the respite care annual payment of £200 to all full time carers would cost up to £8 million.
The review of the carer's allowance examined the means test and considered that, in line with other social assistance schemes, it should be maintained so as to ensure that limited resources are directed to those in greatest need. The means test for the carer's allowance has been eased significantly in the past few years, most notably with the introduction of disregards of the earnings from employment of the carer's spouse.
9 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the reason there have been no increases in child dependant allowances since 1994 in view of the past commitments to introduce a basic income for children. [6437/99]
It has been widely recognised that the loss of child dependant allowances by social welfare recipients on taking up employment, can act as a disincentive to taking up available work opportunities. This problem was highlighted in various reports, most notably the report of the Expert Working Group on Integrating Tax and Social Welfare.
The policy direction followed by the Government has, therefore, been to concentrate resources for child income support on child benefit. Unlike child dependant allowances, child benefit does not contribute to poverty traps or work disincentives, as it is a universal payment without any means test. In this respect it has many similarities to a basic income for children. However, I would point out to the Deputy that the Government has not made any commitment to introduce a basic income for children and there is no such commitment in Partnership 2000 or in the national anti-poverty strategy.
I should point out that this approach of improving child benefit, is similar to that pursued in practice by the previous Government. Despite the commitment in their programme to create a child benefit supplement, payable to all social welfare recipients and to low and middle income families, it never materialised.
From September of this year, the higher monthly rate of child benefit payable in respect of third and subsequent children will have increased from £39 in 1997 to £46 while the lower rate, payable in respect of the first and second child, will have increased from £30 in 1997 to £34.50. This represents an increase of 15 per cent in the lower rate and 18 per cent in the higher rate over the two years and involves full-year costs of over £64 million in total.
I should mention also that in 1998 we provided for the introduction of a new 150 per cent rate of payment in respect of twins at a further cost of over £4.8 million.
10 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the position in relation to the discussions with the Department of the Environment and Local Government regarding the practice by some local authorities of including family income supplement in assessing liability for differential rents. [6407/99]
The position in regard to the practice of some local authorities including family income supplement (FIS) payments in the income assessment for local authority differential rents is as I set out in reply to Parliamentary Question No. 106 of 2 February 1999.
Briefly, the position is that from the point of view of ensuring that the full value of the FIS payment is retained by the claimant, it would be my wish that local authorities should not include such payments when assessing the level of rents payable.
This view is reflected also in the report of the consultants who undertook a review of the disincentive effects of secondary benefits and other entitlements. The report recommends that this practice should be discontinued.
However, the Deputy will be aware that each local authority has responsibility for setting its own differential rents scheme, subject only to broad guidelines laid down by the Department of the Environment and Local Government.
The question of excluding any particular type of income from rent assessment would have to have regard to the implications for local responsibility and its financial effects on authorities, including their capacity to carry out proper management and maintenance of their dwellings.
While I recognise that the devolution of responsibility to local authorities for setting the terms of their own differential rents schemes presents some difficulties in seeking to achieve a uniform treatment of FIS payments, I intend to continue to urge that local authorities should exclude such payments from their income assessments.
11 Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the plans, if any, he has to introduce a cost of care allowance to cover VAT on necessary care items and other costs incurred by carers as advocated by the Carers Association. [6420/99]
22 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the plans, if any, he has to abolish the means tests for all full-time carers and to introduce a carer's benefit for carers who have to give up paid work to care at home; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6401/99]
46 Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the issues which have been considered to extend the carer allowance scheme; his views on whether there is tremendous potential to extend this scheme particularly in conjunction with other areas such as health and environment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6295/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 11, 22 and 46 together.
The carers allowance is a social assistance payment to carers on low incomes who live with and look after certain people who need full-time care and attention. At the end of December 1998 there were 11,416 carers in receipt of the carers allowance at an annual cost of over £45 million.
As part of the Government's commitment to carers, as set out in An Action Programme for the Millennium, an overall review of the carers allowance was completed by an interdepartmental committee, chaired by my Department and launched by me in October 1998.
The submissions and proposals of all organisations representing carers were considered as part of the review process and are comprehensively addressed in the report. The major issues raised by these groups were the removal or easing of the carers allowance means test, the introduction of a needs assessment and the provision of adequate respite and other healthcare services.
Following a detailed examination of the review and its proposals on the improvement and development of the carers allowance, I introduced a range of measures in the 1999 budget to improve and develop the position of carers. Over 11,500 existing carers will benefit from the measures I have introduced while an additional 3,300 new carers will now qualify for a carers allowance.
The budget package, costing over £18 million, represents a 40 per cent increase on existing expenditure and is a very considerable addition to the £45 million spent on carers in 1998.
12 Mr. Spring asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the basis on which farm income will be calculated for the farm assist scheme; and if his attention has been drawn to the urgency of the implementation of the new scheme in view of the current crisis in agriculture. [6410/99]
The means testing arrangements under the new farm assist scheme will differ in two key respects from that which applied hitherto to low-income farmers who were claiming small holders unemployment assistance.
First, the scheme provides for the introduction of child-related income disregards of £100 for the first two qualified children and £200 for the third and subsequent children. This feature of the scheme is designed to target additional support to families with children.
Second, all income from self-employment – both farm income and off-farm income – will be assessed at 80 per cent rather than 100 per cent as is the case currently under unemployment assistance. This is designed to provide claimants with an incentive to seek to increase their income from self-employment.
The amount of income derived from farming is calculated by reference to the gross income from the farm less the expenses necessarily incurred in producing that income. These expenses include such items as fertiliser, veterinary costs, interest on borrowing for farm purposes, cost of hired labour, repairs to farm building and machinery, etc.
I am very much aware of the need to bring the new farm assist scheme into operation at the earliest possible date and have taken active steps to ensure that this is done. As the Deputy will be aware, the legislative basis for the scheme is contained in the Social Welfare Bill, 1999, which is currently before the House. Once the legislation is enacted, I intend to bring the scheme into immediate operation, that is, with effect from 7 April 1999. To allow for the means-testing of new claimants, however, payments may not issue in some cases until the first week of June, but I would emphasise that any claims received by the end of May 1999 will have their entitlements back dated to 7 April.
Where it is feasible to do so – for instance, in the case of existing claimants of small holders unemployment assistance who have been subject to a recent means assessment – it is intended to pay their increased entitlements immediately the scheme is brought into operation.
13 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the plans, if any, he has to end the anomaly whereby people with long social insurance records in the United Kingdom who cannot find employment when they come or return to Ireland are disallowed from claiming unemployment benefit. [6454/99]
The general insurance contributions conditions which govern the award of unemployment benefit require that a claimant must have 39 weeks PRSI paid and 39 weeks PRSI paid or credited in the relevant tax year, that is, in the last complete income tax year before the benefit year in which the claim is made. These conditions ensure that a person must have a reasonable recent level of attachment to the active labour force in order to secure entitlement to unemployment benefit.
The EU Social Security Regulations 1408/71 and 574/72 co-ordinate social security schemes, including unemployment benefit, for workers, self-employed persons and their families moving throughout the European Economic Area and these apply to EU nationals coming to or returning to Ireland from the United Kingdom.
The regulations provide that, subject to satisfying certain conditions, the persons concerned can arrange to have UK unemployment benefit payments for which they have qualified paid to them for up to three months when they return to Ireland in search of work.
Some may, on returning to Ireland, qualify for Irish benefit without reference to the EU regulations, if they satisfy the conditions for entitlement based on their previous Irish PRSI contribution record. In the case of persons who have insufficient Irish insurance to qualify for benefit, there is provision made in the EU regulations to aggregate periods of insurance or employment completed in other EEA states, as if these periods were completed in Ireland. The EU regulations, however, provide that aggregation of such periods can only occur in cases where the person was lastly insured or employed in the State in which the unemployment benefit is claimed. In Ireland this requirement necessitates the payment of at least one PRSI contribution in respect of the person making the claim arising from employment in this State.
This requirement is designed to avoid situations whereby claims for unemployment benefit could be made by persons with virtually no attachment to the active labour force of the country where the claim is being made and who had previously paid little or no social insurance contributions in that country.
