Vol. 537 No. 1
5 Mr. Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny) asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of people who have been awarded a pension based on pre-1953 contributions; and the number of applications being processed. [15341/01]
Last year I was happy to introduce a special old age (contributory) pension, payable from 5 May 2000, for people with pre-1953 contributions who might otherwise not qualify for a pension or only for a reduced pension. Under these arrangements people who commenced insurable employment before 1953 and who had at least five years paid insurance comprising either pre-1953 contributions or a combination of pre – and post-1953 contributions can now qualify for pension. The pension payable amounts to 50% of the maximum weekly personal rate of pension, £48 from May 2000 increased to £53 from April 2001. Allowances for adult and child dependants, where applicable, are also payable at 50%.
Since its introduction, a total of 17,000 applications have been received from people not previously in receipt of a pension from my Department, of which 7,700 have now been decided. Of these, some 5,400 people have been awarded a pre-1953 pension. In addition, my Department examined 13,800 cases where pensioners were receiving a pro rata contributory pension to determine whether they had entitlement to a pre-1953 pension at a higher rate. Of those 8,500 have been awarded pre-1953 pensions bringing the total in receipt of the pre-1953 pension to almost 14,000. All of these pensions have been paid retrospective to 5 May 2000.
The number receiving this payment is greater that my Department had anticipated initially. As a result there are 9,300 cases in various stages of processing. Processing of these cases is necessarily slower than the standard cases because, given the lapse of time since the relevant employment, there are difficulties in many cases in tracing contribution records. Every effort is made to process these applications as quickly as possible. Claimants can be assured that they will not lose out due to the delay and that their applications, if successful, will receive full arrears to 5 May last year.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Why did a simple, straightforward question requesting the number of people who have been awarded the pension, and the number of applications, necessitate such a dose of verbosity to bamboozle me with information on the basis for the scheme and so on? Why are so many applications awaiting delivery? It is a simple question.
My Department estimated that about 3,000 people would qualify. If my memory serves me correctly, approximately 13,000 or 14,000 people are qualifying, between new applicants and those who were on a lower pension. It was as a result of representations, primarily from Deputies Noel Ahern and Pat Carey, that I examined this situation.
That is a real marginal for you.
These are priority questions. There are to be no interruptions.
Deputy Hayes will learn on this one because he was not here earlier when I said it.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): The Minister should answer the question I asked him.
This change was against the advice of my officials for a number of reasons but one of the reasons was—
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I am not interested.
The Deputy should let me finish because I will answer his question.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I will, and then I will come back to the Minister.
I would like to think Deputy Browne might qualify for the pension if he worked pre-1953.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): If I have to wait as long as it takes the Minister to answer a question—
There are former Members of this House, and not necessarily from this side of the House, who have qualified for this new pension.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I have to interrupt. A Cheann Comhairle, can I ask a question that is relevant?
I will give the Deputy a chance to ask a supplementary when the Minister has concluded.
The reason the officials were somewhat reluctant to advise me in favour of this scheme was because of the huge volume of work it would generate. Many of the old files were not on computer, the records may have been destroyed in the Department and we would have had to rely on people getting their own work records but of all the things I have done as Minister in the past four years, this is one scheme I was delighted to be able to deliver.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I intended to ask brief questions but in view of what is going on, a Cheann Comhairle, you will have to forgive me for using my time. I accept fully that this is a good scheme but I did not put down a question about that. Will the Minister explain to me, in terms of the surprise that hit everyone in the Department about the numbers, why only four people are dealing with applications?
Four people.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): This is not child benefit, which someone gets for years. The people involved in this scheme are at least 70 years of age. Does the Minister think we are living in Tir na nÓg, and that these people can wait forever? One applicant applied last January and will be dealt with next September, yet the Minister is bragging about the scheme. Will the Minister deal with reality and stop giving me background information that has nothing to do with the reality of dealing with these applications? Why should a person of 70 years of age wait nine months to get his or her entitlement? What will the Minister do about the staffing?
The Deputy is wrong in relation to the staffing—
Is it five?
—and all efforts are being made to fast track this scheme.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): How many staff?
I again guarantee that anyone who qualifies will have the money backdated to the day the scheme was brought in.
They will be dead by then.
Rather than criticising this side of this House for introducing it, the Deputies should thank us for bringing in something his party did not introduce when it was on this side of the House.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Surely the Minister does not believe that is an answer to my question. Four staff are dealing with a backlog that is causing a nine months' delay—
The Deputy is wrong.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): —for people over 70 years of age. How many people are working on it?
I do not have the figure but it is a good number more than four.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I have the figure because I inquired into it.
Put down a question about it and we will give the answer.
Four people.
It is more than four.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I had put down a question but the Minister did not have to ramble around the place.
We must now proceed to Question No. 6.
The reality is that they are completely inundated with applications because of the success that this Government has delivered in relation to old age pensioners.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Four people are dealing with this scheme. That is the number. These people will be long dead before they are paid.
The Chair has called Question No. 6.
Will the Minister deal with Question No. 6?
It is like Dublin Castle all over again.
