Vol. 527 No. 2
8 Mr. U. Burke asked the Minister for Finance the plans he has to change and enhance tax concession regulations for applicants for the disabled drivers scheme in the forthcoming budget; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27890/00]
As the Deputy is aware, it is not customary for the Minister for Finance to give advance notice of what measures, if any, will be taken in the budget and it is not my intention to break with this tradition.
As I informed the House on a number of occasions, including in the Adjournment Debate on this subject on 18 October 2000, an interdepartmental review group, under the chair of an official from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, was set up to review the disabled drivers' and disabled passengers' tax concessions scheme. The principal issue of concern expressed by the public in connection with the reliefs under the scheme was, and still is, in relation to the medical criteria. Arguably, the continual pressure to extend the scheme is driven by its valuable reliefs, giving access to tax free cars and motor fuel, in effect, for life.
The qualifying disability criteria set out in the regulations relate essentially to persons who have severe and permanent physical mobility problems. While the number of potential beneficiaries is unclear, up to 350,000 persons in Ireland could be regarded as disabled to some degree. Not all of them would, or could, use any widened scheme, but the substantial tax benefits make for considerable interest in it.
As I am on record as saying in the House, I appreciate the difficulties people who suffer from some disability face in coping with every day life. Many people with various forms of disability would consider themselves as having a genuine case for the tax relief. However, given the level of the benefits available under the scheme, the cost is considerable and extending it further would present any Minister for Finance with some dilemmas.
The total number of beneficiaries under the scheme is in the region of 5,400. The cost of the reliefs, excluding the annual road tax costs, in 1999 was approximately £18 million compared to £4 million in 1994. The cost of the scheme, excluding the annual road tax costs, is estimated at £22 million in 2000. The average benefit per person per year is approximately £4,000 on the basis that more than 90% claim in respect of the purchase of a car every two years. Thus, the cost per beneficiary is very high in that benefits apply for life from date of admission. The scheme is not means tested.
The interdepartmental review group is trying to resolve the complex issues involved. I understand that over 250 written submissions were received by the group. Oral submissions were heard over a three day period in early May 2000 and over a two and a half day period in September 2000. All the written and oral submissions are now being examined by the group and I hope they will help in the finalisation of the report. The review group has given no indication yet of when its work will be completed.
The Minister has not indicated when the review group will complete its work, but when did it start its work? The complicated criteria for the assessment of disability are causing serious problems and delays for many applicants. This aspect more than any other is causing difficulty. While the tax relief is welcome, and in some cases adequate, the delay and torture applicants and their spouses or family members must undergo to establish entitlement causes serious difficulties.
The motorised grant element is processed by health boards. It is the co-ordination of the two elements that is causing problems. I ask the Minister to review that.
I do not have in my notes information on when the review group was set up, but it was at least two years ago. I will give that information to the Deputy.
There is considerable interest in this scheme due to the generosity of the tax reliefs. Once one is in this scheme, one is in it for life. This is a particularly generous scheme. Furthermore, Ireland is unique in adopting a tax based approach to this. Other countries have some form of relief but they are not usually tax based.
An increasing number of people have been trying to get into this scheme in recent times, but many of them have failed to do so. They then appeal the decision, knowing they will not qualify. That is also delaying matters. I am not saying there is a deliberate campaign to do that, but there has been a campaign to raise this debate over recent years. I have answered a number of parliamentary questions on this and my Department has sent replies on it to Deputies from both sides of the House.
As I pointed out previously, it is a particularly generous scheme. Perhaps, if we were starting again, we would not go down this particular route. However, I remember that when a Minister for Health proposed some changes to the scheme in the 1980s, all hell broke loose. I have had enough hell breaking around my head in recent times not to want to start that again. I am waiting for the review group to report.
The Minister has become cautious – he is not as interesting as he used to be.
We will have to wait and see about that.
