Vol. 509 No. 1
256 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will increase the annual respite care grant scheme to £1,000 for carers in the next budget as sought by the Carers Association; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19944/99]
257 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will pay the respite grant to carers in a manner which ensures that they receive it by the end of the calendar year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19945/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 256 and 257 together.
The 1999 budget introduced a once-a-year payment of £200 towards the cost of respite care. This payment was paid on 3 June and benefited some 12,000 carers at a total cost of almost £2.4 million. It was paid to those in receipt of the carer's allowance and to the carers of people receiving prescribed relatives allowance and constant attendance allowance.
The annual cost of paying the grant at £1,000 in 2000 to each eligible carer would be of the order of £15 million given the expected increase in the number of recipients.
The question of further improvements to the carer's allowance will be considered in a budgetary context with due regard being paid to the availability of resources and requests for improvements in other areas of the social welfare code.
258 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the fact that people can be cut off rent allowances and be denied carer's supplementary welfare allowances for special diets and heating due to the fact carer's allowance is treated as income; if he will rectify this problem; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19932/99]
The supplementary welfare allowance, SWA, scheme is generally intended as a short-term payment which is designed to provide immediate assistance for those in need. The SWA scheme is administered on behalf of my Department by the health boards and my Department has no function in deciding entitlement in individual cases.
Those eligible for assistance under the SWA scheme would normally be in receipt of a social welfare or health board payment and would have to satisfy a number of criteria, including a means test. In addition, people with low incomes may also qualify for a weekly supplement to meet certain special needs, for example, diet, rent, heating, or a payment to assist with the cost of any exceptional needs they may have.
259 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the measures, if any, he will take to ensure that those taking early retirement towards the end of what would be their normal working lives do not lose dental and optical benefit after 18 months but rather would have continuance of these benefits. [19498/99]
One of the qualifying conditions for treatment – dental, optical and aural – benefits requires people over 21 years of age to have had at least 39 weekly PRSI contributions paid or credited in a particular tax year governing the claim. This is normally the last complete tax year before the beginning of the calendar year in which the claim is submitted.
Where a person satisfies the qualifying conditions for entitlement to treatment benefits on attaining the age of 60 years, he/she remains entitled for life thereafter. In effect, this will apply to persons retiring not more than one complete tax year before the beginning of the year in which their 60th birthday falls. Where a person ceases to be insurably employed before that, entitlement will normally lapse after a residual period of up to two years.
However, a person who retires on grounds of ill health, or who is deemed to be unemployed, may apply for disability or unemployment benefit, subject to satisfying the statutory conditions. In addition to any payments that may be due, entitlement to such benefits may also result in the award of credited contributions which can be taken into account to extend coverage for treatment benefits for further periods.
Any changes to the qualifying conditions to grant indefinite entitlement to persons who retire before reaching 60 years of age would have significant financial implications which could only be considered in a budgetary context.
