Vol. 534 No. 3
40 Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the way in which his Department is supporting those whose incomes have fallen or disappeared as a direct or indirect result of the foot and mouth crisis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10524/01]
42 Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of workers who have been laid off in the wake of the foot and mouth crisis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10473/01]
44 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if there has been an increase in the take-up of the farm assist payment as a result of the foot and mouth crisis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10475/01]
As these are three oral questions, not more than 18 minutes may be allocated.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 40, 42 and 44 together.
The farm assist scheme is my Department's primary response to farmers whose livelihoods have been adversely affected by foot and mouth disease. Farm assist is a means tested scheme. Normally, income received in the year prior to which farmers claim this payment is assessed as means. However, inspectors of my Department have been advised to take the current situation into account when assessing means from farming from customers whose income has been adversely affected by the current outbreak.
I have directed my Department to fast-track the claim process wherever possible in keeping with precautions to prevent the spread of the disease, and to ensure that support is provided without delay to those who need it. Thus, inspectors are deferring their visits to farms to assess means for the duration of the present emergency. Instead, farmers may supply details by telephone or by letter, or they may call personally to their nearest social welfare local office. I have also arranged for direct transfer of relevant information between the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development's district veterinary offices and my Department's inspectorate to minimise any delay in the processing of claims.
To ensure farmers generally are aware of the supports that are available, my Department is giving widespread publicity to the farm assist scheme and urging farmers who have been affected by the outbreak to avail of it. In County Louth we issued a mailshot of 700 letters to farmers who have been affected by culling. In addition, I established a task force to review the responses required in the areas most directly affected by the crisis. The task force is overseeing the putting in place of practical measures to address the situation and will report to me shortly on the full range of activities required to address this issue.
In the period covering the last week in February 2001, when foot and mouth disease was first detected in the UK, to Monday 9 April 2001 a total of 872 additional claims for unemployment payments and 59 farm assist claims were identified as having been made as a result of foot and mouth disease. Employees who are laid off due to the foot and mouth disease may qualify for unemployment benefit or unemployment assistance subject to satisfying the usual conditions for receipt of payment.
Each case is decided on its own merits within the framework of the legislation. A full-time worker who is laid off due to a cessation of work would normally satisfy the statutory conditions of being available for full-time work and genuinely seeking work. Consequently, he or she would qualify for an unemployment payment subject to satisfying either the contribution conditions for receipt of UB, or the means test for receipt of UA.
Deciding officers working in my Department's local offices have regard to the temporary nature of the layoffs arising from the foot and mouth crisis, to the expectation that employment will be resumed once relevant restrictions are eased or lifted and to the fact that, in the circumstances, the persons concerned may not have had a chance to consider other employment opportunities.
Persons whose self-employment has ceased due to the foot and mouth disease may also qualify for UA for the duration of the layoff. The supplementary welfare allowance schemes are also available to any person whose means are insufficient to meet his or her needs. A person can make an application at his or her local health centre and the application will be determined on the basis of the person's present circumstances and immediate needs.
My Department will continue to monitor the situation on a daily basis and we will use every available means to bring supports and services to the attention of those who may need them as a result of the impact of the present crisis.
Has the Minister held discussions with the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation to ascertain the impact of foot and mouth disease on employment in the tourism sector? Has research been carried out or projections made to determine the level of unemployment which might result from the difficulties faced by that sector? If so, will the Minister provide figures?
Discussions are ongoing between myself and my colleague, the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation, Deputy McDaid, regarding the tourism sector generally and my area specifically. I have figures for some tourist areas. It is interesting that, for example, in County Kerry only seven people have applied for UA, two for farm assist and 32 for UB. Up to yesterday, large numbers had not applied. A total of 150 people have applied in County Louth for all those schemes while the total in Cork city is 79. The crisis has still not manifested itself in this regard but part-time workers in the tourism industry would be probably the first victims because employers will tend to keep on full-time workers longer in the hope that the situation will turn around. The Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation is fully conscious of the difficulties in the tourism sector.
I refer to an earlier Priority Question. What does the Minister expect to happen in the coming months? Has he any projections in this regard? What will be the likely levels of unemployment given that there have been so many cancellations affecting the tourism sector? For example, the three main political party conferences have been cancelled. Our conference was scheduled to take place in the middle of May and while that may have had a small impact in Cork—
Is this an advertisement?
The conference has been deferred until just before the general election in September. We will have the general election-launch in the run-up to the election.
Can we throw that back at the Deputy?
What are the projections given that my trade union colleagues feel the real impact will occur in the coming months? Is it not the case that the Government in the UK has taken a more proactive role in regard to supports for workers in the tourism industry, utilising both the social welfare and taxation systems? I appreciate that goes beyond the Minister's brief but is there is case for a more proactive role on the part of the Government, in particular, in protecting tourism?
With regard to projections, my Department is demand-led and responds to people's claims. We react to demand in regard to applications for unemployment assistance and so on. Applications for UA was slow at the outset. The number of applications in recent times, primarily in my county, has accelerated but it has not manifested itself as much as my Government colleagues and I thought. That may change in the coming weeks.
The Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation is acutely conscious of the difficulties and has already discussed proposals at Cabinet level to redress some of the incorrect perceptions that exist, particularly on the other side of the Atlantic, regarding travelling to Ireland. The Minister will bring forward measures in this respect and he conducted an extremely responsible advertisement campaign at the weekend.
Does the Minister accept one of the reasons a considerable number of applications has not been made is that many of those who have lost income are involved in casual labour? Many are women who work part-time and are suffering a loss of income as a result of the reduction in their employment and they are not entitled to UA or UB because of their means. Has the Minister considered extending the family income supplement to address this crisis given the predicament that faces thousands of people involved in casual labour?
The family income supplement relates only to employees. It does not relate to those who are unemployed.
That is why I asked the question.
The figures, when divided between UA and UB, show that the majority qualify for UB. In other words, they qualify on the record of their stamps. I hazard a guess that many of those who qualify for UB are casual and part-time workers who are coming back into the system and who, perhaps, have been in and out of the system over the past number of years. We have not come across major difficulties in this regard or in regard to people being refused. I am not saying there are no refusals. The figures I have provided relate to the number of claims and not to the numbers in receipt of money. There will be some attrition in those figures. Generally, we have not come across major difficulties but if Members are aware of cases where there have been difficulties, we will examine them. People also have the right to appeal.
Regarding immigration workers, what outcome does the Minister want from his discussions with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform?
Is the Deputy referring to non-EEA people?
Yes.
I would hope they would be assured of a payment. As I said earlier, the difficulty is that they came to Ireland for a specific job. I understand the number of cases related to foot and mouth disease is small, but the position could change in the coming weeks. Ultimately, these people would be entitled to a supplementary welfare allowance, which is available to all residents who fall through the net. I hope their interests will be protected through the supplementary allowance or some other arrangement that may be forthcoming.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Farmers in the Minister's constituency clearly have been affected by the foot and mouth disease crisis, but does he accept that farmers in many parts of the country are trying to buy fodder for stock they did not expect to have and that they are also in financial difficulties? Should they also apply for help?
Yes. I agree with the Deputy that such farmers should come forward for assistance and they have been encouraged to do so. I compliment the farming organisations, particularly the IFA and the ICMSA, on the documents they have produced on this area. The documents also indicate that changes have been made to the farm assist scheme which take into account current means as opposed to last year's means. This is a major change and I hope it will help many farmers. A total of 68 people have applied for farm assist and 59 of the applicants are from my county.
In relation to the rule that one must be genuinely seeking work and following the committee meeting last week, has the Minister given further instructions on this matter? The Minister said deciding officers are independent and Deputy McGrath said that copies of the tran script of the committee meeting should be sent to the various departmental branch offices. Has the Minister given further consideration to issuing general guidelines in relation to flexibility?
Before the outbreak in Proleek, an instruction was given—
On 12 March.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): The Deputy definitely will be on that side.
The instruction was given on 12 March. The Deputy benefited from the Freedom of Information Act. Perhaps he could submit a freedom of information request in relation to the Pensions Bill and he might find out that it is not in this office.
I hit a raw nerve there.
The instruction was given by the top officials in my Department who are involved in policy in this area. I had a concern and, as a result, the officials instructed the deciding officers to take into account the particular circumstances of employment arising from the outbreak of foot and mouth disease. The officers were to take into account that people would not have had an opportunity to seek alternative work because of the restrictions. This would not apply in every instance, but it is relevant in farming related cases because they would have difficulty getting alternative work. In effect, many people would not even have to qualify under the guidelines in the context of paid contributions for unemployment benefit and the means test for unemployment assistance.
Will the Minister confirm that what he told the House is not what is happening on the ground? Will he state if the farm assist scheme is working at all? For obvious reasons, he identified a number of people in his constituency who have applied for it but, on the basis of previous experience, the scheme does not work. A person must be virtually destitute before he or she qualifies for it on the basis of the regulations laid down by the Minister and applied by the Department and not by deciding officers.
In relation to supplementary welfare, will the Minister confirm that, due to regulations laid down and the serious restrictions imposed on deciding officers by him recently, it is almost impossible to qualify for the allowance? Will the Minister indicate if he intends to relax any of the previous draconian directions he issued to deciding officers because of the crisis?
I assure the Deputy that I did not give any instructions to any deciding officers or community welfare officers in relation to any issue about the delivery of supplementary welfare allowance.
I get replies every day about it.
The Deputy is incorrect.
We have been inundated with them.
There are hundreds of them.
The Minister without interruption.
The Deputy continually gives an impression – I suspect he gave it when he was the Minister of State in the Department – that there is a possibility of influencing decisions on whether a person should receive an unemployment payment or supplementary welfare allowance. That is incorrect
The Minister blamed the deciding officers. He should be ashamed of himself.
The Minister is like Robocop.
The Deputy should not try to hoodwink the people.
I am anxious to allow Deputy Durkan's colleagues an opportunity to ask supplementary questions, but if he takes up the time, that will not be possible.
As the Deputy should be aware, the social welfare system is a basic low income safety net for people who are not in employment or who are not self-employed. Any social welfare payment is minimal and that has always been accepted.
The farm assist scheme is better than the previous scheme of farmholders dole. I made changes in relation to assessments of capital and these are relevant to farmers who are currently in trouble because of a lack of income. They may have a large amount of capital in a bank or building society which, in the normal course of events, would be included as part of the assessment. However, changes I made two years ago mean that people can have a relatively large amount of capital that is not included in any social welfare means test.
Other changes in relation to farm assist were requested by the farming organisations and I granted them in the first year of the PPF. Therefore, the Deputy is incorrect in relation to farm assist. I looked at the figures in that regard last night.
They are depressing figures.
At least 2,500 more people are in receipt of farm assist than were in receipt of the farmholders dole.
Will the Minister make a greater effort to ensure personnel at local office level are fully aware of his comments in the House and at the committee in relation to flexibility in the farm assist scheme? This is most important. There is no point saying things in the House if they are not followed through on the ground.
Does the Minister agree many farmers are not aware of the farm assist scheme and that it is imperative to circulate the information to all farmers and not only to those in hard pressed County Louth? Did the Minister say the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform are blocking unemployment assistance payments to workers from outside Ireland? Why are they being blocked?
Their permits are job specific and a problem arises if they are no longer in the job.
It should be changed.
That is why the discussions are taking place. We are trying to come up with some arrangement whereby such cases can be accepted.
I agree with the Deputies that enough information can never be given. However, my experience is that the farming organisations are extremely adept at getting the message across to their members.
Perhaps the Minister could do an article in the News of the World.
Poison pen.
The Irish Times.
As Deputy Crawford is aware and I experienced on the Cooley peninsula recently, farmers by their nature, even in times of extreme hardship, are reluctant to seek social welfare payments from the State.
