Vol. 556 No. 2
11 Mr. English asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the length of time it takes for an appeal to go to oral hearing from the scheduling section of the social welfare appeals office, giving details on a county basis; if this process can be overhauled to ensure that those waiting the longest for an oral hearing, irrespective of where they are located, can be given priority; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [19535/02]
Every person who is dissatisfied with a decision or a claim to a social welfare payment made by a deciding officer of my Department or with certain decisions made by health boards in regard to supplementary welfare allowance has a statutory right of appeal. If an appeals officer considers that an oral hearing is required to determine the question at issue he or she will arrange for the case to be listed for hearing. At present approximately 60% of all cases coming before appeals officers are referred for oral hearing. The policy of the appeals office is to hold hearings at venues as convenient as possible for the appellant. In the Dublin area appeals are heard at the appeals office headquarters. The rest of the country is divided into seven circuits as follows: Cork, Galway, Mayo, north-east, north-west, south-east and south-west.
In any given week there will normally be five appeals officers on circuit outside Dublin. The areas selected for hearings are based on the number of appeals on hand and the length of time cases are on hand. A small number of cases are given priority where exceptional circumstances arise.
I regret the figures sought by the Deputy of the length of time on a county basis it takes to have an appeal heard are not available. There is, however, a table following this reply showing the number of cases awaiting appeals. Those who are waiting longest can expect to be scheduled for hearing when an appeals officer is next in the area. However, some cases may not be in a position to proceed because, for example, the proposed date does not suit the appellant or their representatives. In general, however, efforts are made to deal with as many hearings as possible when an appeals officer is in an area.
A national list system from which hearings would be granted in strict chronological order, while it might appear equitable, would be unworkable in practice. The present system has advantages in terms of efficiency and accessibility which would be lost if the age of the appeal was to be the sole criterion for determining when a hearing should take place.
During the three year period to 2000, the number of appeals received increased by over 25%. However, average processing times were broadly maintained at around 22 weeks. My objective is to achieve an improvement in this. A consultancy study of the appeals office, which included an examination of all the processes involved in dealing with claims to the appeals stage has recently been concluded. The report is being considered with a view to implementing improvements to the system generally.
|
Circuit |
Cases awaiting oral hearing |
|
Dublin |
176 |
|
Cork |
198 |
|
Galway |
116 |
|
Mayo |
155 |
|
North East |
78 |
|
North West |
97 |
|
South East |
177 |
|
South West |
196 |
Is there a possibility of increasing the number of staff dealing with appeals? I know of a number of cases where appeals have been going on for a very long time. It might solve the problem if the number of cases being appealed could be limited. I do not have the exact figures available to me but a number of appeals are won. It begs the question, if people are winning appeals why do they have to appeal the case in the first instance?
A processing time of 22 weeks has been the average since 1977, even though there has been an increase in the number of appeals. However, it is not satisfactory. There are 17 appeals officers who are not necessarily out on circuit at the one time where they must deal with decisions. A number of appeals are dealt with by a deciding officer but a number have gone to oral hearing. The Deputy referred to the availability of oral hearings throughout the country. I appreciate that is an issue and I have raised it with the new appeals officer in the context of the review.
I take on board what he said in regard to the necessity for appeals. This matter is always evaluated. However, it is obvious that the independence of the appeals office is a good thing.
There is a precedent in the Department of Social and Family Affairs. I am asking the Minister to investigate this matter because it is creating a number of problems in regard to waiting lists. When people go to social welfare offices throughout the country they are told by staff that if work is available they must get out there and do it. This is a complaint made to me at meetings throughout my constituency. For example, for the first time this year when people who worked in Bord na Móna for 25 or 30 years tried to collect their stamp money they were told that work was available. North Mayo is the biggest blackspot in the country. The figures are not a true reflection of what is happening because many people who try to collect their stamp money must go to the community welfare officer. Twenty two weeks is an outrageous length of time to wait for an appeal. No one else should be assessed until the backlog is dealt with because it is wrong to have people waiting 22 weeks for an appeal.
I am glad Fine Gael is still under illusions because there are no cutbacks in the Department.
That is fiction.
The appeals office is an independent office in which I have absolutely no role. The reason it was set up was to be independent. On the other issues raised, in certain areas such as north Mayo, parts of Donegal and parts of the inner city perhaps there are difficulties in regard to the availability of work. However, it is incumbent on me and on the Deputy to ensure that where suitable work is available people should take up that work and not rely on the State. In that context, the scheme indicates that one must be available for work. This matter must be looked at to ensure people are facilitated through the job facilitator in consultation with FÁS and other agencies in regard to suitable work which is available. I am sure Deputy Ring will agree that we must ensure people in north Mayo and throughout the country are facilitated in regard to work through the mechanisms of the Department.
The Minister is adamant that there will be no cutbacks in social welfare. There was a miserable €10, or £8, increase last year. I hope that will be equalled in the forthcoming budget, otherwise it would be a major cutback.
The Minister mentioned the consultancy study on appeals. There have been a number of such studies, including academic studies and so on, which recommended that the appeals system should be put on a statutory basis. Why not put it on a statutory basis? The Acting Chairman is a distinguished former Minister for Social Welfare. This is something which should have been given some attention over the years.
Deputy Ahern told me eight or nine months ago that there was a backlog of 7,000 cases and that if he could reduce it to 4,000 he would regard it as a reasonable service. It is nowhere near to that figure. There is a huge backlog and 22 weeks is an outrageous time to wait for an appeal.
I appreciate that there are difficulties with appeals and the majority of them are as a consequence of people going for oral hearings. That is not taking from the fact that people wish to have appeals dealt with and the number of spurious appeals is minimal. People's angst has been outlined in the House. I have concluded from the consultants' report that greater delivery of services is needed. I have no proposals to change the status of the appeals office as it a very efficient and effective way of dealing with the issues. I will raise that matter again with my officials in the context of the delays and I will try to ensure there is a greater delivery of the service.
Is it independent?
It is independent. I have no role in the appeals process.
The Chair can vouch for that.
