Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 27 Jan 2000

Vol. 513 No. 2

Written Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.

Seán Ryan

Question:

31 Mr. S. Ryan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will reconsider the £70 to £135 earnings limits for the spouses of social welfare recipients taking up employment in the context of the forthcoming Social Welfare Bill; and his views on the submission from SIPTU that the earnings limits should be raised to £100 or £200 per week. [1920/00]

Regulations currently provide for the tapered withdrawal of the qualified adult allowance for claimants of certain welfare payments where the spouse or partner of the claimant is earning between £60 and £105 per week.

A range of significant improvements to these tapering arrangements which will take effect from April of this year were announced in the recent budget. Most notably, these changes include an adjustment in the income range over which the tapering arrangements apply from the current £60 – £105 to £70 – £135; an improvement in the withdrawal rate of the QAA; the deferral of the reduction of 50% in the level of child dependant allowances, which currently takes effect when the income of the spouse exceeds £60, until such income exceeds £135; an increase in the spouse income disregard from the current level of £45 plus travel costs to £60 inclusive of travel costs; and the extension of tapering arrangements to long-term welfare payments such as invalidity pension, retirement pension and old age contributory pension.

In drawing up these measures, careful account was taken of the views expressed by SIPTU. In addition, account needed to be taken of other factors, such as equity vis-à-vis other categories of people who combine work with receipt of a partial social welfare payment, and the need to ensure that the changes did not worsen the poverty trap by withdrawing the QAA over a range of income where the withdrawal rate would interact with the tax system. The measures we are introducing represent a reasonable balance between the various factors, and will have the effect of substantially alleviating the poverty traps associated with the withdrawal of the qualified adult allowance.

Eamon Gilmore

Question:

32 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs whether the spouse of a person suffering from multiple disability, who becomes a participant on a community employment scheme, automatically loses his or her carer's allowance. [1921/00]

The carer's allowance is a social assistance payment made to people who are providing elderly or certain people with disabilities full time care and attention and whose income falls below certain limits. The principal condition for receipt of the allowance is that full time care and attention is required and being provided.

A person participating on a community employment scheme would not be considered as requiring full time care and attention. In such cir cumstances carer's allowance would not be payable.
I am conscious of the need to facilitate and support rehabilitation or respite from caring for care recipients and their carers. My Department has already reviewed the operation of the carer's allowance scheme and, in particular, the condition whereby the carer is required to provide the care recipient with full time care and attention and this requirement has been progressively eased.
Care recipients may now attend approved rehabilitation courses without affecting the allowance payable to the carer. Care recipients and carers may now also attend educational or training courses or participate in voluntary or community based activities. Furthermore in the Social Welfare Act 1999, I made provision that carers can undertake employment for up to ten hours per week while retaining their allowance.
These changes have facilitated more people to qualify for carer's allowance. The numbers of persons receiving carer's allowance has increased to 14,600 compared with 11,416 at the end of 1998.
Participation in community employment schemes is outside the scope of this provision. I will, however, review this position in the context of the future development of the scheme.
The increase in the overall number of persons claiming the allowance allied to the measures I have introduced over successive budgets clearly indicate my personal commitment and that of the Government to carers, who enable people in need of care to be looked after in their own homes and communities.

Róisín Shortall

Question:

33 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the plans, if any, he has to examine the feasibility of paying family income supplement through the taxation system as a tax credit as recommended by the NESC report, Opportunities, Challenges and Capacities for Choice; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1904/00]

The family income supplement scheme provides an incentive to low-paid employees with families to take up or remain in full-time employment by ensuring that such people are better off than they would be if they were instead relying on welfare payments.

The recent NESC report recommends that the feasibility of paying FIS through the tax system be examined. NESC considered that if the payment were made through the tax system it would be more acceptable to potential beneficiaries. As with a range of other proposals contained in the NESC report, this issue will be explored initially in the context of the current discussions on the development of a successor agreement to Partnership 2000.

Any examination of the feasibility of this proposal would not just be a matter for my Department but would require detailed examination by the Revenue Commissioners of the practical arrangements. The examination would have to take careful account of a number of key points.
For instance, a substantial number of FIS claimants have income which is below the tax exemption limits appropriate to their family size. In order for such families to benefit from a tax credits system, the payment would have to take the form of a refundable tax credit. Refundable tax credits are not a feature of the current tax system here and the practicalities of introducing such payments would require further consideration.
Entitlement to FIS is not determined solely on the basis of the claimant's earnings. Account is also taken, for instance, of family size, hours worked, the likely duration of employment, as well as any earnings which the spouse or partner of the claimant, where relevant, may have. Not all of this information is collected at present through tax returns made to the Revenue Commissioners, and the tax system is, therefore, not currently capable of automatically identifying the households with an entitlement to FIS. Any payment through the tax system would, therefore, still have to operate on the basis of the individual in the first instance supplying the additional information needed to establish entitlement to the payment.
Top
Share