Vol. 569 No. 5
6 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will increase the rate of disability allowance to allow for the fact that people with disabilities may have higher costs of living due to their disability. [18084/03]
People with disabilities represent a diverse group with differing needs. For example, disability can have different consequences for individuals depending on the nature of the disability, the person's age, social circumstances, etc. The approach suggested by the Deputy does not recognise the fact that the additional costs associated with disability are not incurred to the same degree by all people with disabilities and I do not consider that increasing the level of income maintenance payments, such as disability allowance, is necessarily the most appropriate method of addressing the additional costs of disability.
Additional costs associated with disability can arise whether or not a person is in employment or claiming a social welfare payment. Indeed, these costs can be greater where the person is working. If support towards the additional costs of disability were to be incorporated into payments such as the disability allowance, then this support would be withdrawn on taking up employment, thereby creating a significant disincentive to move from welfare dependency into work. For these reasons, the costs of disability might best be met in ways that are less dependent on the person's labour force status, if people with disabilities are to be given the opportunity to participate in the workforce. This approach is in line with the views of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities, which recommended that the additional costs of disability should be met separately to income maintenance needs.
The complex issues involved in addressing how best to meet the additional costs of disability are currently being examined by a working group on the feasibility of a cost of disability payment, which comprises representatives of relevant Departments and agencies, including my own Department. The outcome of this group will be important in informing future policy in this area. The rate of disability allowance has been increased by €6.00 to €124.80 a week from the beginning of this year. Since 1997, social welfare payments have been increased substantially in real terms. For instance, during that period, the rate of disability allowance has increased by 45.6% compared with an increase of 26.6% in the cost of living, a real increase of 15%.
Following a review of the national anti-poverty strategy, the Government set a target of achieving by 2007 a rate of €150 per week, in 2002 terms, for the lowest rates of social welfare payments. The achievement of this target, reiterated in Sustaining Progress, will significantly increase the value of payments to persons on low incomes and at risk of poverty, including those on disability allowance.
I appreciate the Minister's lengthy answer but it does not give much hope to those who are in poverty, such as people with disabilities. Is the Minister aware that somebody on disability allowance has to pay an increase for waste collection from €153 last year to €280 this year? That is an increase of €2.5 per week. That person also has an increase in the TV licence fee and some other things if he or she has not been on unemployment assistance for long enough. He or she has to bear all the increases that others have to bear and received only €6. For instance, somebody on disability allowance has to pay increased rent to the local authority or to a landlord if he or she is in a rented flat because of the Minister's change in the other rent allowance.
I ask the Minister to consider this group as one that needs to be cared for. This is the European Year of People with Disabilities. Many high profile people have been out meeting those who have come here for the Special OIympics. Let us look after those who are in our care. I urge her to look again at that situation and make sure that those people get a realistic increase, €6 was the lowest that anybody got this year.
I was criticised on several occasions after the budget and during the debates for saying that any real increases would be on the basis of our inflation figures. I indicated that 5% was the parameter I was given and we are well within that, in fact below it.
The bin charges were a lot more than 5%.
That being said I agree that there are additional costs attached to disability, and as the commission indicated, income maintenance was not necessarily everything that was needed. Other support networks are needed. In my own Department we look at the free schemes which have been very beneficial and supportive as well as other ancillary benefits that are available to people who suffer from a disability or who are disabled. My concern is that there would be an outcry. I agree that people with disability should be allowed to participate fully within the workforce in particular. It is a concept towards which we all must strive. Therefore, I have concerns about changing the methodology whereby we support people. The working group is looking at and evaluating the adequacies of the scheme, what new schemes perhaps are needed and what can be added. That will be completed soon and I look forward to the debate on that because it will be important.
Deputy Seán Ryan may ask only a brief question as Deputy Boyle is waiting and we are rapidly running out of time.
I hope that we will not have a situation where we will be calling Deputy Coughlan the Minister for working groups. In the context of the group which is now assessing the situation when does the Minister expect a report from it? Will it be in time for assessment for preparation of the Estimates for next year? I want the Minister to be truthful with us in that regard.
Given that unemployment within disability groups is running at 80%, far above the national average, the Minister's answer that to increase payments might be a welfare trap for people with disability is not addressing the real problem. Institutional barriers prevent people with disability from getting work. In this European Year of People with Disabilities the Government has yet to produce an initiative that would improve the quality of life of people with disability. There is an opportunity now to build on the goodwill and success of the Special Olympics. That would win support from many people in the House if it were to produce such an initiative. If that helps in getting any resources from the Minister's colleagues at the Cabinet table people on this side of the House will be prepared to shout quite loudly about it.
I thank my colleagues for their tremendous support. I look forward to it. There have been recent changes in the payments made available to people with disabilities. For a long time we had a difficulty as the Deputy probably is aware. When people on a disability allowance went into an institution they lost their income support. We changed that and it was very important because it allowed people to have access to their own finance. People in part-time residential care are also getting their full-term disability allowances since 2000. The spending allowances and the standardisation of many of these allowances have now come to my Department and have been taken from the Department of Health and Children so income support for people with disabilities is now wholly within my remit which is progressive. Despite the economic difficulties, none of my schemes in which a person with a disability was entitled to participate was touched. All the measures for people with disabilities were ring-fenced and accordingly no scheme in my Department has changed in any way.
As the Members are saying, it is very important that people with disabilities make progress. There are several great initiatives in existence of which we are not as aware as we should be, for example, working with county enterprise boards to set up soft loans for people with disabilities and providing certain types of initiatives whereby we also work with credit unions in supporting people with disabilities to get into work, buy machines and so on that are very important to them. All those initiatives are in place, but perhaps they are not shouted about loudly enough. They have made a real impact.
In answer to Deputy Seán Ryan, I could not put my hand on my heart and say that the group will complete its deliberations next week. It should be soon, and I will try to get a firm date for the Deputy.
It is for yourself.
I revert back, but I have been advised following recent inquiries that it will be very soon.
7 Ms Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the total number of persons who received benefit under the back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme; her plans to improve this scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18079/03]
The back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme was introduced in 1990. The scheme was designed to provide assistance towards the cost of school clothing and footwear for children attending primary and post-primary schools. It replaced the former public assistance footwear scheme, which was introduced in 1944, as well as taking over supplementary welfare allowance exceptional needs payments made in respect of school clothing. The scheme operates from the beginning of June to the end of September each year and is administered on behalf of my Department by the health boards.
The scheme is advertised by health boards locally. The level and type of advertising varies from board to board but includes advertisements in the local press and posters in health centres and general medical scheme surgeries. Some boards issue application forms to those who received the allowance in previous years. Forms are available on health board Internet sites. An updated information booklet has been made available to citizens' information centres and local offices of the Department. In addition, I will be issuing a press release shortly to remind parents to apply for the allowance. A person may qualify for a back to school clothing and footwear allowance if he or she is in receipt of a social welfare or health board payment, is participating in an approved employment scheme or attending a recognised education and training course and has a household income at or below certain set levels.
Under the scheme an allowance of €80 is payable in respect of qualifying children aged between two and 11, and an allowance of €150 is payable in respect of those aged between 12 and 22. Recipients of the allowance are now better able to meet the cost of school clothing and footwear than was the case in 1990, when the scheme was introduced. The value of the allowance in real terms has improved considerably since the inception of the scheme.
According to the consumer price index, in the period 1990-2002 the cost of clothing and footwear fell by 23%. In the same period, payment rates for the scheme increased by 137% in the case of children aged over 12 and by 152% in the case of those under 12. The €150 rate payable this year represents an increase of 194% over the corresponding 1990 rate. In 2002, 71,759 applications were approved under the scheme, which benefited 155,800 children at a cost of €15.2 million. This year it is expected that the scheme will cost €16.8 million and that a similar number of children will benefit.
As part of its expenditure review programme, my Department established a working group to undertake a review of the back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme. The working group is undertaking a fundamental examination of all aspects of the scheme, including the rate of payment as well as the income limits, the means test, the timing of payments, eligibility criteria and other issues. I will consider changes to the scheme in light of the recommendations of the working group.
The Minister has given me some of the answers that I wanted, the main issue being that of advertising. I am conscious that the scheme must reach everyone entitled to it.
If Deputies confined themselves to questions, we would hear all three. Otherwise we will not.
There are people who do not receive the payments or have trouble doing so. The Minister mentioned the means test. Does she intend to increase the level to allow more people to receive the payments or will she make it easier to facilitate the scheme? Some people find it very difficult to get past some of the community welfare officers.
There are strict criteria for income limits, which I can forward to the Deputy, and in no way should any officer working on my behalf fail to take those into consideration. I would be concerned if that were the situation, as they are outlined by the Department, and the CWOs are expected to deal with people accordingly. If the Deputy has specific concerns, I am most anxious to hear of them. The limits were increased last year to take into consideration the increases in social welfare benefits and social welfare assistance schemes. For example, for a couple with one child, the limit is €331.40, and for a lone parent with one child, €227.40. For up to four children the limit is €389.30 and for a lone parent with a third child the limit is €270.60. It is increased by €19.30 for each child, and then by €21.60.
Given the importance of early payment to enable parents to acquire the footwear and clothing, is the Minister aware that this year's scheme will be a shambles since it will not operate on time? Does she know that in the Northern Area Health Board, the applications are to a certain extent processed by the community welfare officers, then sent on to a control unit? This year there is an embargo in that section and no control unit is in operation. The application forms are currently in the various offices and are not being processed on time. On that basis, what is she prepared to do to ensure that the parents get the grants on time and that the scheme does not end up as an utter shambles?
I suggest to the Minister that, to help the operation of the scheme, community welfare officers might liaise better with home-school liaison officers in schools, particularly those in disadvantaged areas. Very often the knowledge of the family situation helps in making payments quicker and making more effective use of resources.
The problem has not been brought to my attention, although I met all the chief executives of the boards on Wednesday.
The Minister had better get back to them because that is the reality.
I will contact the chief executive of the Northern Area Health Board. We have the money for the scheme and want to make the payments fairly quickly, since people like to buy their footwear and clothing in July and August, especially the latter month when the sales are on. I will certainly address that matter immediately, and if something has to be done, we will deal with it.
I could examine liaising with the home-school liaison officer. I get criticised on the other side of the House if I send out too much information or spend too much. However, we could examine a mail-shot to the schools or something of that sort. There is a fair amount of information available, and in the main people know about the scheme, just like the Deputies. Perhaps we could consider how we get the information out to people in time for next year's scheme. It is advertised locally by the boards.
