Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 14 Dec 2006

Vol. 629 No. 5

Priority Questions.

Community Welfare Service.

David Stanton

Question:

1 Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the direct consultation his Department has had with the community welfare service in respect of the transfer of functions to his Department; the forum he will provide to community welfare officers to respond to the findings of the report of the working group on the review of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme phase II; the way he will enhance the role of the community welfare officer in the context of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme or otherwise; his plans regarding the transfer of functions; the timescale for same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43567/06]

Willie Penrose

Question:

4 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his view on proposals that community welfare officers should be transferred from the Health Service Executive to his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43407/06]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Mr. Brennan)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 4 together.

The decision taken by the Government to transfer certain functions from the Health Service Executive to my Department came on foot of recommendations made by the Commission on Financial Management and Control Systems in the Health Service. I am fully in favour of and support that decision. The decision will involve the transfer of responsibility for the delivery of the supplementary welfare allowance, SWA, scheme and of certain costs of disability and caring payments, as well as responsibility for the General Register Office, which currently comes under the aegis of the Department of Health and Children.

An examination is also being conducted into the mechanics of transferring responsibility for the treatment benefit scheme, which is operated by my Department currently, to the HSE.

Following the Government decision, a number of implementation working groups were established. One such group oversees the implementation of the SWA element of the transfer of functions programme. The group's work to date has centred mainly on providing the necessary foundation for the successful transfer of the scheme. This includes identifying all of the functions currently carried out within the community welfare service for the purpose of identifying appropriate arrangements for the continued administration and management of these functions in the context of the transfer.

Separately from the process which led to the decision to transfer responsibility for the scheme, my Department had undertaken a review under the expenditure review programme of all aspects of the SWA scheme, the report of which was recently published. The report acknowledges that the SWA scheme has moved beyond its original role as a safety net and plays a more extensive role than was originally intended. The report makes a number of recommendations for change in the context of ensuring a more streamlined delivery of income support through the social welfare system generally, including active case management to deliver immediate and flexible solutions to individuals' needs. The report was presented to superintendent community welfare officers at a briefing seminar on 29 November 2006. Arrangements are also being made to have a copy of the report circulated to all community welfare officers early in the new year.

The transfer of functions will present fundamental reform and developmental opportunities for an integrated and enhanced income support system, including a restructuring and integration of support services within my Department, while facilitating the HSE in concentrating on its core health and personal social services functions. The SWA review is timely in that it addresses all the major issues facing the scheme that can be addressed effectively in the context of the transfer process.

The existing mechanisms of delivery by the community welfare service allow the service to be responsive, flexible and outcome focused. These are attributes for which there will be a continuing need into the future and there will be no diminution in the existing role and responsibility afforded to community welfare officers. The transfer of functions is an opportunity for an enhancement of the support role that community welfare officers currently provide to those disadvantaged in society.

The implementation of a change programme of this magnitude involves organisational, human resource and service delivery issues. Throughout the change programme both the HSE and my Department will give a very high priority to involving the community welfare service in the planning and implementation of the changes and providing clear and precise information on all elements of the change process. Staff in my Department who will be impacted by the change will also be involved and kept informed throughout the process.

A comprehensive information process is being put in place through newsletters to staff, briefing sessions and discussions with representative groups. A series of information seminars will be held by the HSE and my Department on a regional basis for all staff of the service early in 2007. These fora will provide further opportunities for those working within the service to comment on the implementation programme and the recommendations contained in the SWA review. At the same time, staff and unions within my own Department will also be kept informed and consulted as the implementation programme progresses.

The HSE unions have indicated a wish to meet with officials from my Department to discuss the transfer of functions and my Department would welcome an early opportunity for such a meeting. While no date has been set for the completion of the transfer process, I propose to bring forward necessary enabling legislation to give effect as early as possible next year and I would intend that the transfer would take place as soon as possible thereafter.

During the period of transition, my Department will continue to give a high priority to supporting the delivery of the very high standard of service currently provided by staff in the community welfare service.

Mr. Stanton

I thank the Minister for his response. Am I correct in stating that the decision has been made? If so, why did no direct consultation or discussion take place with the community welfare officers prior to the decision being made? Is the Minister aware of the community welfare officers' concerns, for instance, that they maintain that their role is more a personal social service than welfare supports, and regarding the possible diminution in the transfer of their personal social service role?

Is this move more about financial management and control, as the Minister mentioned early in his reply, than anything else? If the transfer goes ahead, will the community welfare officers remain headquartered in the health services, as owned by the HSE, or will they be moved to some other location? Does the Minister see the community welfare officers' existing discretionary payment process being changed in any way?

The Minister indicated he would bring forward legislation. Could he enlighten us as to whether this will be a stand-alone Bill or an addition to another Bill, such as the social welfare and pensions Bill, which is expected in February? Will the decisions on the discretionary payments be based on legislation, standing operating procedures, as with other social welfare claims, or guidelines? Will changes be made there?

Is the Minister aware that the community welfare officers have had no opportunity to provide an input into this process to date and that the first time they had one was at the meeting of the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs on 22 June last where they had an opportunity to give a formal viewpoint on the process to transfer the community welfare service from the health sector to the remit of the Department of Social and Family Affairs? Most importantly, is he also aware of the community welfare officers' important link with the health service and could he guarantee that this link will be maintained? Is he also aware of the advocacy, pseudo-counselling role performed by the community welfare officers, that their role involves much more than giving out money to people and that people go to them for more than just that?

Mr. Brennan

I greatly acknowledge and thank the 701 community welfare officers throughout the country and the 183 supporting clerical staff, including, for example, porters. The service is delivered through 1,000 locations throughout the country. There are nine appeals officers in the community welfare service who deal with SWA appeals and there are 59 superintendents.

This has been discussed over many years. It has arisen at conferences, it has been the subject of many discussions between officials and it is no surprise. It has been in the system for a long time. The Government has finally copperfastened its thinking on it and taken the decision to move ahead with it now.

In thanking all of those community welfare officers, I want to give an absolute assurance that there will be no diminution in their discretion, that there will be full consultations with them as we go through this process and they will be listened to carefully, that, obviously, terms and conditions and employment issues will be worked out with the unions who will be kept fully involved in the process as it progresses, and that they have nothing to fear from this move. It is an opportunity in many ways to enhance the service which they give.

When this service started it was a fairly small safety net. It has now grown into a €700 million scheme and it has moved far beyond its original intention. It is helping welfare customers and the welfare Department is the line Department that should have the responsibility for helping welfare customers. It is for those reasons that this makes sense.

The main message I want to send in answering these parliamentary questions is that the community welfare officers have nothing to fear. It offers the chance for enhancement. Full terms and conditions of course will be guaranteed.

I see no great need for changes of locations. Those locations will always be needed, but the detail of that must be worked out with management. I see there being no interference in the community welfare officers' flexibility and discretion because they are at the coalface and help so many people. Their tangential work for the Department of Health and Children can continue.

I have spent much of my time in office over the years fighting major battles trying to move civil servants out into agencies. On at least three or four occasions I fought considerable battles, on the floor of this House and elsewhere. I was told that I was diminishing their Civil Service status and pushing them into agencies and further away from the centre. We are doing the opposite here. We are taking them back from an agency into a Civil Service Department in which they have a bright future. They will be fully consulted and all the issues with the unions will be fully thrashed out in good time to proceed with this.

Mr. Penrose

The impetus for this arose, not with the community welfare officers or their representatives, but at official level. It is nothing more than a diktat. Imagine imposing something, then calling for the referee to decide something and then calling in the players without having any consultation with them. The first time that SIPTU and IMPACT were given an opportunity to respond was before a committee when I invited them in to make their presentation.

The Labour Party is deeply alarmed at this proposal to subsume the community welfare service into the Department of Social and Family Affairs. We strongly believe that this service, catering for the most vulnerable in society and operating at the cutting edge of the link between health and poverty, is best left where it is within the health service. If it is not broke, why does the Minister and his officials set out to break it?

Is this little more than a craftily disguised cutback, an attack on a vulnerable community? Will this plan proceed under the 2007 Social Welfare Bill? Will community welfare officers ultimately be reined in and prevented from providing information, advice and advocacy to vulnerable people in our communities as their link to statutory health and personal social services would be effectively severed?

What is the Minister's game? I realise that the interdepartmental review group's Core Functions of the Health Service report recommended the transfer. There is no difficulty with the objective focusing of the HSE's resources on core health functions. Does the Minister agree that the community welfare service performs a core health function? I put it to the Minister that it is a profound misunderstanding to characterise the community welfare service as being limited to the administration of cash benefits from the social welfare allowance system.

The late Frank Cluskey introduced this in 1977 and the administration of the CWS scheme is obviously an important and integral part of the work of CWOs. Mr. Cluskey said that the CWO system was more than a mere cash response. Is it the position that the service was deliberately placed within the community care structure and under the auspices of the Department of Health and Children with the intention of delivering a local response to individual needs, including providing clients with access to a range of health and personal social services? The importance of the relationship between income maintenance and effective personal and health services, as well as the safety net separate from other social welfare payments, was clearly and specifically identified in the debates in this House that led to the establishment of the service. These factors are as important and as real today as they were when the scheme was introduced.

Even if this is not the Minister's intent, we are concerned that the proposed transfer will inevitably mean an end to the discretionary SWA payments and that this will have a direct and damaging effect on the ability of clients to access health services. I accept the Minister's bona fides, but we must look at what the end result would mean. Does the Minister agree that CWOs are in a position to deal with people out of hours and in all sorts of emergencies? How will this function within the remit of the Minister's Department? Will the discretion be eliminated, abolished or curtailed? If someone requires an ambulance but finds there is none available, they can turn to a CWO to get funds to pay for alternative transport. Who will administer such a scheme in the future? Where are we going with this? Why is it happening? Is this a crusade by someone to curtail CWOs?

The Labour Party supports the view of the unions representing CWOs that there must be a full study of the service and wide consultation about the likely effects of the changes with those who manage, deliver, use and interact with it before any change is proposed or implemented. There has been no consultation with the people who use and benefit from the service and the great work being carried out by the 700 CWOs. Why should something that is working so well be changed? If it is not broken, the Minister should not set out to break it.

Mr. Brennan

This recommendation was made by a commission on financial management and control systems in the health service. It follows on from the reorganisation and restructuring of the Health Service Executive. Community welfare officers administer, for example, the rent scheme which runs to between €400 million and €500 million annually. It is an enormous scheme and must be seen as a welfare scheme which must be connected and interrelated with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. It is means tested, connected to other schemes in the Department and comprises more than half of the community welfare officers' budget. The salaries and expenses of all 700 community welfare officers come through the HSE but are paid by my Department.

This is a restructuring to take account of what has happened in recent years. The HSE has come on stream, the rent scheme has grown dramatically and the argument has moved on from Frank Cluskey's original idea to have a basic safety net with discretion. It has moved on because the budget administered by the CWOs, who do a superb job, now stands at €700 million annually. I hope to include this in the next social welfare Bill. I will ensure their flexibility is assured and that there is maximum consultation, especially with the trade unions involved.

There is no agenda other than ensuring that the Department of Social and Family Affairs, that spends more than €15 billion annually and is ultimately responsible for the other €700 million, continues to employ the CWOs. They are excellent staff and look after the welfare of the community, and they must work directly for the welfare Department rather than for the Health Service Executive. It will not affect the customer one whit.

Family Support Services.

Willie Penrose

Question:

2 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the disclosure by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul that it spent some €41 million assisting families in need over the past year; his views on whether it is acceptable that a voluntary organisation such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul effectively should have to subsidise State supports to this extent; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43406/06]

Mr. Brennan

I record my appreciation for the work undertaken by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and others on behalf of the most vulnerable members of society, particularly families who for one reason or another are unable to survive financially, especially at times of difficulty or acute financial pressure.

Government support for families facing financial difficulty is provided mainly through the social welfare system which provides substantial income supports. In this regard, the Government is committed to improving significantly the standard of living of welfare dependent and low-income households and to making a decisive impact on poverty and social exclusion. Over the period since 1997, the Government has greatly increased the levels of income support provided through the social welfare system, and this was again evident in the increases announced last week as part of the budget. Expenditure on social welfare has increased by nearly 270% since 1997. In 2007, almost €15.5 billion is being allocated to social welfare compared with €5.7 billion in 1997.

The 2007 budget has provided more than €1.4 billion of an increase, the largest social welfare package ever in the history of the State. This is more than five times the amount allocated to social welfare in the 1997 budget. Almost one third of all current Government expenditure is being provided for social welfare in 2007 to support and benefit 1.5 million people directly. In recent years we have lifted more than 250,000 people, including 100,000 children, out of poverty. We have travelled some distance towards eliminating poverty and the measures I have outlined will pay a major part in confronting remaining poverty.

We are confronting the issue of fuel poverty, which I know is a concern of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. Last year, I increased the fuel allowance by €5 a week to €14 and this year I increased it to €18 a week. This means that the level of the fuel allowance, which is paid to 274,000 recipients, will have doubled in the past two years. As I already announced in September last, as and from next January the number of free units of electricity and gas paid under the household benefits scheme will increase from 1,800 units to more than 2,400 units per year as part of a €50 million package to protect welfare customers from price increases.

I also announced a wide-ranging employment support package of €21 million in the budget, with measures built in to alleviate poverty and support activation by improving income disregards and tapers for the unemployed and qualified adults. The full package of measures I announced for carers will cost more than €107 million. It includes increases in the income disregards for entitlement to carer's allowance and a €300 increase in the respite care grant to €1,500 per year. I am also introducing fundamental structural reforms for carers. In future people in receipt of another social welfare payment, who also provide full-time care, will be able to retain their main welfare payment and receive another payment equivalent to a half-rate carer's allowance. Some 18,000 carers are likely to benefit by up to €109 per week. The recent budget package is a strong statement of the Government's commitment to the elderly, children, carers and all those who, for one reason or another, are more vulnerable in our society.

Mr. Penrose

I thank the Minister for his reply. I accept and acknowledge that there has been a substantial increase in expenditure, especially in specific areas of the social welfare system such as for pensioners. Nevertheless, how does the Minister and his officials explain that the Society of St. Vincent de Paul must do this work? The Society of St. Vincent de Paul's ultimate aim is to render itself redundant because it is no longer required. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul does its excellent work because it must. It takes up church gate collections and organises raffles throughout the country. How does the Minister explain that in a time of unprecedented wealth and economic activity, voluntary organisations such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul must spend €41 million annually and help 300,000 families in financial difficulties? Those families must have been let down by the State social support system or they would not find themselves in such dire straits, necessitating recourse to those great volunteers who do tremendous work at all hours of the day and night, visiting people to ensure they are not hungry and have heat.

Some €7.5 million of the emergency support was for families who had no food, no money and no resources, €4.6 million was for food and €3.1 million for fuel. Approximately €1 million was spent reconnecting families to gas and electricity supplies but fuel prices escalated and, though the Commission for Energy Regulation reduced the increases, the prices projected for the next few weeks will still significantly impact on people with fixed incomes. Despite the Minister increasing the fuel allowances it was certainly not enough. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul sought a further €6 to the additional €18 and an extension of the period in which they were provided.

Does the Minister agree that fuel poverty is still one of the greatest threats to the comfort of elderly people and many on fixed or low incomes? They find it exceedingly difficult to meet significant fuel price increases and to keep warm and be able to prepare hot food, which is vital for their health. A lot has been done but much more needs to be done to prevent the activity of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul being curtailed and its spending cut. The figure of €41 million relates to 2005 so the 2006 figures will be worse.

Mr. Brennan

The Society of St. Vincent de Paul is at the forefront of this issue and encounters much hardship and deprivation. On behalf of all in the House, I thank the society for its work. Its volunteers knock on hundreds of thousands of doors in any one year and they are worth listening to. We did not meet all the requests in its pre-budget submission but we achieved much on issues such as school meals, CDAs, thresholds, automatic payments, basic rates, pensions, lone parents and family income supplements. We have met most of its main requests. Why it needs to spend €41 million on top of all the funds it receives is a good question. I assume it is that, just because one is poor or under pressure, prices are no cheaper. For what it could have bought for €5 million many years ago it now needs €41 million. It behoves us to listen to what the Society of St. Vincent de Paul states.

I recently offered a vacancy on the Combat Poverty Agency to the vice-president of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, Professor John Monaghan. He was concerned whether there would be a conflict of interest and I had to ask him a couple of times to convince him to take it because nobody knows the subject better than he does. It will help that the Society of St. Vincent de Paul is represented on the Combat Poverty Agency and I am sure most people in the House will agree.

Mr. Penrose

I applaud that appointment.

David Stanton

Question:

3 Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the efforts his Department is making to support the diversity of family life and prevent the increasing number of breakdowns of marital and non-marital families; the key issues identified by his Department as contributing to and resulting from family breakdowns; the number of people availing of the different types of family services delivered through the Family Support Agency; the breakdown of same in each of the years 2004, 2005 and to date in 2006; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43568/06]

Mr. Brennan

My Department, through the Family Support Agency, has responsibility for a number of initiatives to support families and help prevent relationship breakdown. The scheme of grants for voluntary organisations providing marriage, child and bereavement counselling services is a non-statutory scheme of once-off grants to voluntary organisations providing a range of family counselling services aimed at enhancing stability in family life and assisting families and their members to deal with difficult periods which they may experience.

In 2006 over €9 million was provided by the agency and a total of 541 organisations countrywide have received funding under the scheme. During 2006, the agency also commissioned a review of the scheme and preliminary findings from the report indicate that up to 70,000 people benefit from the counselling provided. Some €10 million has been allocated to the scheme for 2007.

The Family Support Agency also administers the family and community services resource centre, FRC, programme. The emphasis in the family resource centres is on the involvement of local communities in developing approaches to tackle the problems they face and on creating successful partnerships between the voluntary and statutory agencies in the areas concerned. I am pleased to say that the Family Support Agency will deliver on the target set by the Government under the National Development Plan 2000-2006 of including 100 family resource centres in the programme nationwide by the end of 2006.

Government commitment to this key sector has seen an increase in funding from €8.39 million in 2004, to €12.94 million in 2006. The 2007 allocation of €18.75 million more than doubles the level of funding provided in 2004.

The Family Support Agency also has responsibility for the family mediation service, FMS, a free, professional and confidential service for couples, married and non-married, who have decided to separate or divorce and who together want to negotiate the terms of their separation or divorce with the help of a trained mediator.

A number of issues have been highlighted in recent research as contributing to relationship difficulties and family breakdown, including styles of conflict resolution, poor communication and partner criticism, domestic violence, alcohol abuse, child care and unfaithfulness. The FMS suggests that the age profile of their clients may be decreasing with more young and unmarried people seeking mediation.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

Family mediation assists separating couples to look at the resources and options open to them and to reach an agreement that meets the interests of both and those of their children. The service has 26 professionally-trained mediators working from a total of 16 centres nationally. Funding for the service has increased from €2.45 million in 2004 to €3.71 million in 2006. Funding will increase to over €3.9 million in 2007. The service assists almost 1,500 couples per annum.

Mr. Stanton

I thank the Minister for his response. Does he accept that one in every six marriages ends in divorce? Is he concerned about the number of families, marital and non-marital, which break down? What is his Department doing to promote positive family development and family values? He has told us his views on the reasons behind the increase in family breakdown. Does he agree that more research needs to be carried out into the issues behind family breakdown and barriers to new family formation, and has he any plans in that regard? Has he carried out any research into the impact on children of family breakdown?

Is the Minister aware of the criticism of Barnardos and its assertion that early intervention and prevention is essential to address family problems? Many families accessing such services through the Family Support Agency and the Health Service Executive experience delays. The approach seems to be one of intervention rather than prevention so will he take action in that area? Is the Government concerned at the number of lone parent families with children under 20, which increased by 82% between 1995 and 2004, according to the Central Statistics Office report, Measuring Ireland's Progress 2004?

Mr. Brennan

The Family Support Agency is the main agency to address the issues the Deputy raises. It funds 541 organisations countrywide and deals with family counselling in all areas, including separation, divorce and bereavement. Those 541 organisations do a magnificent job. As I said, the preliminary findings of the study we carried out indicate that up to 70,000 people benefit from the counselling service. I have allocated €10 million to the scheme for 2007 and it is through those organisations we can give the most immediate support in cases of break-up.

The Family Support Agency provides a mediation service, post-break-up, for marital and non-marital families and funds organisations dealing with prevention. I have put the concept of offering the mediation service after the decision has been taken to separate to the Family Support Agency. Otherwise, its great talents might be too confined. I will ask the agency to determine whether it can become directly involved on the preventative side, but perhaps it feels it should do so through the organisations. I must rely on its professional judgment.

Deputy Stanton referred to the protection of children, which is the objective in this regard. While the relationship issue is important, protection of children in that situation is more important. For this reason, the Family Support Agency has substantial funds and resources to conduct acres of research, in which respect it is doing a good job.

Question No. 4 answered with QuestionNo. 1.