I remind the House that there is a six minute limit on these questions.
Priority Questions. - Social Welfare Payments.
Thomas P. Broughan
Question:30 Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of letters sent out in his name, since 1 January 2002, informing customers of his Department of increases in payments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6863/02]
In 2002, for the first time, increases in weekly social welfare rates provided for in the budget were effective from the beginning of January. Increases in short-term weekly payments such as unemployment and disability benefits were implemented from the first pay-day in January. However, book-based payment systems, which are the chosen payment option for the majority of pensioners and other long-term weekly beneficiaries, are less flexible than other payment methods and require longer lead-in times to implement increases. Budget increases for those customer categories were paid via lump sum payments in February, with full retrospection applied to the effective date of the increases in all cases.
Customers on schemes where books were renewed in February were paid a lump sum in respect of the six weeks increase due from the start of 2002 in payments issued on 14 and 15 February. Customers on schemes where new books are due in April 2002 also received a lump sum during February containing six weeks' backdated payment to the start of 2002, plus an advance payment of the increase for seven weeks to bring them up to the date on which their new books arrive.
Because the manner and date by which customers received their increases differed depending on their payment category, it was essential to ensure that all customers were fully aware of when and how their increases would be paid. It was also essential that, where payments were being made via lump sums in February, the relevant customer groups should be made aware that retrospection was being applied so that they would receive the full benefit of the increases effective back to the start of January.
To that end, my Department implemented a range of measures to ensure that our diverse range of customers was fully aware of the arrangements for payment of budget rate increases. These measures included television, radio and national newspaper advertising, a freefone service for customer inquiries and a mailshot delivered during late January and early February 2002 to 588,944 customers in categories which received their increase via lump sum payments in February. The mailshot explained the payment arrangements for the increases and provided departmental contact details for further inquiries arising.
Additional information.It was particularly important to ensure that an appropriate range of public awareness measures were in place regarding the arrangements for payment of budget increases in the situation where euro notes and coins were also being introduced from the start of January so as to reassure customers that no one would lose out either as a result of the arrangements for payment of budget increases or on the changeover to the euro. By implementing these measures, my Department ensured that all our customers were provided with the necessary clarity and reassurance about how and when their budget increases would be paid.
I have a sheaf of copies of the Minister's letter which irate constituents have sent to me. They felt the mailshot was unnecessary. I note that the Minister did not tell us how much it cost people on social welfare benefit to send these letters relating to the changeover to the euro and the payment of benefits on 1 January. Does the Minster not agree that this could have been avoided if he and the Minister for Finance had listened to the advice of the Joint Committee on Family, Community and Social Affairs to present the budget last October? If this had been done the payments could have been made on 1 January without difficulty.
Is the Minister's action not blatant electioneering? He has taken four or five opportunities to hit almost every household in the country, particularly in County Louth. Should this matter not be raised with the Public Offices Commission? It was totally unnecessary and confusing. Many Deputies received queries from people who believed that child benefit increases would also be paid from 1 January but, of course, this is not the case and people are still waiting for their increases. Is this action not merely a publicity scam by the Government and could the letter not equally have been signed by regional officers of the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs rather than by the Minister?
The Deputy's constituents may not have been very happy with the letter but I am sure they were happy with the increases in benefit. I am sure they are not inclined to give the increases back to the Department.
A sum of €10.
My Department makes payments to 850,000 people every week. There was a confluence of the euro changeover and the back-dating of social welfare payments to 1 January.
And the forthcoming election.
Deputy Broughan has a hard neck in criticising the Government for bringing payments back to 1 January from 2 June. When I came to office there had been a budget the previous December but social welfare increases were not delivered until the second week of June.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Here we go again.
As I leave office, the budget was presented in December and payments are made effective from 1 January. Apart from the increases, which are three times the rate of inflation in most cases, people are also receiving their increased payments, in the budget year, for a longer period than was the case when the Government came to office. Apart from the increased payments customers also have an increase in their income of between 4% and 5% in the budget year because they are being paid for an extra 23 weeks. My Department has received great praise for the way in which we have delivered these payments and the fact that there were no glitches in the payment of the increases.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Why should there be?
Deputy Broughan spoke about presenting the budget earlier. I am sure he will agree that for too long Governments have been accused of making announcements and not delivering on them until months later. No one can accuse this Government of doing that.