Vol. 739 No. 3
20 Deputy Sandra McLellan asked the Minister for Social Protection if she will offer a commitment that there will be no further cuts to the various social welfare payments for carers; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21358/11]
25 Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Social Protection if she can reassure the 161,000 carers in the country that there will be no further cuts to their payments in Budget 2012; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21409/11]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 20 and 25 together.
There will be an ongoing necessity to curtail overall expenditure in 2012 and in later years. The comprehensive review of expenditure currently under way in all Departments and agencies will form the basis for making the necessary decisions to achieve this. The outcome of the review will be considered by the Government in September.
There are not 161,000 carers in receipt of payments from my Department. That figure is the number of persons identified in the 2006 census as providing as little as one hour of care per week. There are currently just over 51,000 full-time carers in receipt of a carer's allowance payment from the Department. This includes almost 22,000 who are receiving half-rate carer's allowance in addition to another social welfare payment. There are just over 1,700 people in receipt of carer's benefit. In addition, more than 17,000 people who are not in receipt of a carer's allowance or benefit payment received the annual respite care grant of €1,700 in June.
Since the introduction of the carer's allowance, payments to carers have been expanded greatly. Carer's allowance was increased in 2007, 2008 and 2009 respectively and recipients are also eligible for household benefits, free travel and the respite care grant.
The rate of carer's allowance for those over 66 was maintained at €239 in the budget for 2011. The current rate of carer's allowance for those aged under 66 is €204 per week. The estimated expenditure for carers in 2011, including carer's allowance, carer's benefit and the respite care grant is approximately €658 million.
The means test for carers is one of the most liberal means tests in the social welfare system, most notably with regard to spouse's earnings. The income disregard is currently €332.50 per week for a single person and €665 per week for a couple. This means that a couple with two children can earn in the region of €35,400 and qualify for the maximum rate of carer's allowance as well as the associated free travel and household benefits. A couple with an income in the region of €59,300 can still qualify for a minimum payment, as well as the associated free travel and household benefits package.
Last week the Minister indicated her intention to do a U-turn on the commitment to maintain social welfare rates by introducing a cut in the household benefits package. That caused huge anxiety among carers and even the words she used in her answer about the means test, calling it one of the most liberal means tests, will cause further anxiety. Will the Minister commit today to not cut or restrict in any way the carer's allowance, half rate carer's allowance, carer's benefit, domiciliary care allowance or respite care grant in the budget in December?
A couple with an income of just under €60,000 can still qualify for a minimum payment in respect of carer's allowance while still getting the associated free travel and household benefits package. In anyone's language, that is a generous income disregard.
I have already said the comprehensive review of expenditure is under way and budgetary decisions will be made in the context of the budget in December. I am not in a position to indicate at this point what decisions will be made in the context of the comprehensive review of expenditure and in the context of the budget. I am simply not in a position to say anything; these are budgetary matters for the Minister for Finance and I am not in a position to give an undertaking on them at this point.
When talking about the liberalism of the means test for the carer's allowance, is it not the case that the real story is that carers save the State an estimated €2.5 billion euro per year, according to the Carers Association? The cost to the State would be massively higher if those being cared for had to be looked after fully by the State. Is it not also the case that what the Minister calls the generosity of the scheme results from the fact that carers have extra financial burdens, such as increased electricity costs, extra washing and lighting costs, extra heating costs and extra medical bills, along with many other extra burdens that other people do not have to face? That is why we need a carer's allowance. Carers are already shocked that the Minister has cut the home benefits package. All they want is an assurance that given the contribution they make to the State and the welfare of sick and vulnerable people, the Minister will not cut their allowances further.
I agree with the Deputy that carers do a very important job. Their contribution in looking after members of their own families with particular needs, who are ill or may have a disability is truly heroic in many cases. However, as I have said, I am not in a position at this time to make any commitments regarding the outcome of the comprehensive review of expenditure or budget 2012. During the years when the economy was doing well we perhaps lost an opportunity to develop services which were often as important to carers, if not more so, than cash amounts, although they are important also. In looking at the best way to assist carers in the important job they do within their own families I will certainly do everything I can to ensure carers are treated as fairly as possible within the system. Given their significance and importance, particularly those providing full-time care for people with various needs, including disabilities, their needs must be recognised.
I must interrupt the Minister and remind the House that there is one minute to ask a supplementary question and a maximum of one minute for the Minister to reply.
I will be very brief. I know the Minister fully appreciates the value of the role and task of carers, as well as their commitment to helping those most in need of care. Recently I have received a number of complaints from people who are experiencing delays in having their applications for carer's allowance processed. Is the Minister aware of this and does she have any suggestions to make or plans to help to fast-track applications for carer's allowances?
Receipt of carer's allowance is based on medical evidence. One of the difficulties with the system is that very often the initial application does not contain sufficient medical evidence of the quality required by deciding officers in the Department. There is scope to improve on this because when decisions on applications for carer's allowance are appealed, the successful appeal rate is over 50% which suggests the initial application submitted is often inadequate. There is something we can do in this regard. Shortly after becoming Minister, I appointed an extra nine appeals officers because I was conscious of how important this matter was. They will not just be deciding on appeals from carers, they will be working throughout the entire appeals structure. We are beginning to make progress in reducing the time taken to process appeals.
To follow up on an issue raised by Deputy Boyd Barrett, has the Government carried out an objective economic impact assessment of carers' work to assess exactly how valuable their work is from an economic viewpoint? We already know how valuable it is from a human viewpoint. Has any proposal been examined to differentiate between the levels of care provided, for example, low, medium or high dependency? Does the Minister agree it would make sense for somebody who needs high dependency care who is bed-ridden to receive more assistance than someone who needs low dependency care?
It is alarming that the Minister cannot confirm there will not be cuts in this area in the budget. The EU-IMF-ECB troika requires that there be "reforms" — as they are euphemistically called — in the social welfare system. Has the troika commented or made any specific demands concerning carer's allowance?
I have a brief question about carers and the programme for Government. The Labour Party made a commitment in its election manifesto to abolish the habitual residency condition for family carers, in particular. Has there been any such move since the Minister has announced that she cannot stick to the commitment that there will be no social welfare cuts?
As regards Deputy Stanton's point on carers providing care for adults or children with a severe disability, I am not aware if such a study has been conducted. The previous Government made commitments in respect of a carers' strategy. From my own experience, the provision of services is as important as providing income. For instance, the provision of services for a child with a high-level disability is absolutely critical. I will come back to the Deputy on the matter.
As regards the European Union and the IMF, I can only say to Deputy Boyd Barrett they have not mentioned the matter to me, but that is not to say they have not mentioned it, perhaps to officials, in their detailed discussions with the Department of Finance. What they said about budget 2012 concerned reductions of €3.6 billion, if I remember correctly. These included reductions in expenditure across the board. However, as far as I am aware, they did not specify any particular areas. As regards social protection, they did specify the need to activate people to move them from social welfare back into education, training and gaining work experience. Mr. Chopra was extremely keen on this, as were some of his associates.
As regards the habitual residency condition, I will have to revert to Deputy Ó Snodaigh in some detail.
21 Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Social Protection the position on the integration of community welfare officers into her Department, including whether it will be fully completed by September; if the necessary accommodation is available; and her plans to inform the public of the new situation. [21328/11]
The transfer of the community welfare service to the Department of Social Protection is part of the process of streamlining the health service. By taking income support functions from the HSE and merging them with my Department, the HSE has more capacity to concentrate on its core functions of health service delivery. As a first step in the process, the staff of the community welfare service were transferred on secondment to the Department from the Health Service Executive on 1 January this year. During this time they have remained employees of the HSE and retained their current terms and conditions of employment. Plans are well advanced to have them fully transferred to the Department by the end of September. Talks are ongoing at the Labour Relations Commission to agree the terms for the final transfer. Therefore, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further on the labour relations aspects of the transfer at this time. The Department is confident that the talks, taking account of some recent recommendations from the Labour Court, will conclude in time for the transfer to be completed by the target date.
The community welfare officers coming into the Department are part of the creation of what one would call a public employment service, to be called the national employment and entitlements service, whereby somebody will be able to have an integrated service for entitlements to payments and income, as well as advice on jobs and training opportunities. This will ensure people will be positively encouraged to take up options and opportunities offered in respect of training.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
The transfer of the community welfare service to my Department is also part of the process of developing and implementing the national employment and entitlements service, a commitment given in the programme for Government. In establishing this new service, the aim of the Department is to integrate employment and benefit payments within one service and thus provide a more complete service for customers. The focus of the new service will be on activation; enabling and encouraging the individual to take up job opportunities and engage on developmental pathways to employment. Continued payment of full welfare allowances and benefits will be conditional on the individual engaging in this process.
Since January my Department and the HSE have been working closely to ensure the various HR and administrative systems such as payroll records and IT systems will be put in place for the full transfer of staff at the end of September. Significant progress has been made as follows: legislation providing for the integration of the community welfare service with the Department, including the transfer of staff and buildings, was passed in the Social Welfare and Pensions Act 2010. This provision is subject to a commencement order which will be signed as soon as the full service is ready to transfer.
A programme of communications with community welfare service, CWS, staff is being implemented and this includes ongoing communications about the transformation agenda through newsletters, question and answer updates and information through the intranet and email. In addition, all CWS staff were issued with a welcome pack at the beginning of the year and a number of meet and greet sessions for all staff have been held at six regional locations as follows: Dublin, Cork, Sligo, Galway, Waterford and Limerick.
In relation to communications with the public and customers, a comprehensive external communications strategy is being prepared. This will provide relevant and timely information for all stakeholders and key customer groups on changes to service delivery as they are implemented.
Until the end of June CWS staff continued to provide appeals and means-testing services in relation to medical cards and other health services. The HSE has now established an alternative system for providing these services.
An interim management structure has been put in place for the community welfare service. This will be finalised as part of the full transfer.
As regards location, CWS staff will, on transfer, continue to be headquartered at their current base location or town. However, in the interests of improving customer service and reducing costs, opportunities for co-location with other departmental staff will be pursued as appropriate. This may involve staff of the Department moving to CWS locations or vice versa. Any changes that may be proposed in relation to geographical deployment will take account of the relevant provisions on staff deployment contained in the public service agreement 2010-14.
I welcome the changes being brought about, as well as the concept of a one-stop-shop, as the Minister has described it. My questions were not about labour relations and IR issues, and I welcome the fact that there is progress. They were more about accommodation. If they are being transferred, has the accommodation been made available? Will it be available by September to ensure that they are in the same building as people dealing with applications for social welfare payments? Will there be an advertising campaign on this so that the public know about the change? It is a substantial change, given the fact that many people have been dependent on the community welfare officer system. I hope people will understand what they are entitled to apply for in the future, so that if they are refused at one hatch, they can go to another hatch rather than to another building.
I appreciate the Deputy's concern. It is anticipated that there will be no change to current base locations immediately following transfer. However, as the establishment of the national employment and entitlements service progresses, there will inevitably be changes in office locations to facilitate the integration and the provision of the so-called one-stop-shop area to customers. This may mean that departmental staff could transfer to community welfare officer locations or vice versa. The Department is working on a stakeholder communication strategy to ensure that communication is made with internal and external customers in the most appropriate way at the most appropriate time.
I am aware that there is a long history of particular individuals having an ongoing relationship with a particular community welfare officer in their district or area. That is very valuable to certain people, and we will do our best to ensure that this service remains intact. However, there is also more direct payment of certain services at the local office, such as the one-parent family payment. That often entailed visits to community welfare officers while the payment on the status was being sorted out. That should now happen directly in the social welfareoffice.
How will this improve waiting times for people? A lady in my area has been waiting 17 weeks for a decision on her habitual residency. In the meantime, she has had no income because the community welfare officer is unable to process any payments for her. Will this move help alleviate those waiting times? Will there be better communication?
I hope it will, once the initial changeover period has been achieved. Additional guidelines on habitual residency were issued in recent weeks for people who are Irish passport holders or who are originally Irish and who have come back to Ireland. I am not sure if that is the kind of person the Deputy has in mind.
It is.
Sometimes people come home perhaps to look after an elderly relative, but they still might have a house in the UK or wherever they have come from. New guidelines have come out in recent weeks, so I hope they may be of benefit to that particular individual. The Deputy might correspond with me on the issue and I will ask the Department officials to have a look at it.
I call on Deputy Cowen and Deputy Stanton briefly.
Will this have any cost implications for the Department? Members of our party met EU and IMF officials a couple of weeks ago and were told that they would not allow for any savings or cutbacks that would impinge on the less well off, the old and the vulnerable. I am mindful of what was done last week, which may have had implications in that very area. They mentioned that the Minister had passed on some correspondence to the EU and the IMF. Is it possible for that to be made public?
Does the Minister intend to involve MABS and the citizens information centres in some way with the national employment and entitlements service?
The IMF officials visit the country one week after the end of every quarter, so there are ongoing discussions between the IMF and my Department. I have also met the troika team and spoken to them about the importance of social welfare to domestic spending in the Irish economy. I will speak to officials in the Department about Deputy Cowen's request.
On MABS and citizens information centres, I hope that there will be a role for citizens information centres and that in some cases they will be able to be near the one-stop-shop area, so that people can get information about entitlements. Social welfare staff have access to social welfare lines, but I do not think that citizens information centre staff have such access, and we may need to examine that issue with a view to improving it. That suggestion has been made.
22 Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Social Protection further to Parliamentary Question No. 65 of 10 May 2011, 28 out of the 166 applications finalised by the Social Welfare Appeals Office in 2010, the numbers which were allowed and partially allowed by revised decision, summary decision or oral hearing; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21357/11]
26 Deputy Derek Keating asked the Minister for Social Protection the number of persons in receipt of supplementary welfare allowance for longer than three months pending an appeal for a social welfare payment; the reasons for the delay; if she has satisfied herself with the manner in which the appeals are being managed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21394/11]
37 Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection the extent to which she expects to be in a position to deal with backlogs and appeals in respect of various payments that have accumulated over the past 12 months; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21392/11]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 22, 26 and 37 together.
Figures on the breakdown of decisions in respect of the 28,166 appeals disposed of by the social welfare appeals office during 2010 are enclosed in the following table. I am informed by the social welfare appeals office that the number of appeals waiting to be processed on 17 July was 19,525. There are limited statistics available on the number of individuals in receipt of supplementary welfare allowance for greater than three months pending an appeal for a social welfare payment. However, Department records show that there are currently 1,257 such individuals awaiting the outcome of their appeal on either a jobseeker's allowance, a jobseeker's benefit or an illness benefit claim.
In an effort to reduce the backlog of appeals, I made nine additional appointments to the appeals office in recent weeks. These assignments will augment the three appointments made to the office in 2010, bringing the total number of appeals officers serving in the office to 29. In addition, since July 2010, eight retired appeals officers, equating to a further three full-time officers, have been assisting on a strictly part-time basis with the backlogs of appeals and it is intended that they will be employed until the end of the year.
I am assured by the chief appeals officer that she is keeping the methods of operation by which the social welfare appeals office conducts its business under constant review, and that the processes are continuously being enhanced to reduce the backlogs in the office and to reduce the overall processing times for dealing with appeals. In that regard, 3,000 cases registered prior to 31 December 2010 have been ring fenced and a team of ten of the most experienced appeals officers have been freed from all other work in the office and will concentrate on clearing this backlog. This project began on 1 July.
More emphasis is now being placed on dealing with appeals on a summary basis where possible to increase productivity. In some cases, if applications were made more clearly and the medical evidence more clearly laid out, that would certainly assist the process of making a decision in the first instance. As a result, the number of appeals dealt with by way of oral hearing was reduced from 42% for the first six months of 2010 to just over 30% for the same period in 2011.
I have been to the appeals office to visit the staff. They are under tremendous pressure and to give them their due, they are working flat out to deal with the backlog.
|
Revised decisions by Deciding Officers |
Allowed |
Partially Allowed |
Appeals Disallowed |
Appeals Withdrawn |
Total |
|
7,282 |
4,124 |
623 |
12,752 |
3,385 |
28,166 |
|
Oral Hearing |
2,094 |
389 |
3,031 |
||
|
Summary Decision |
2,030 |
234 |
9,721 |
With the extra staff, who are all experienced social welfare staff, I am hopeful we will continue to make inroads into dealing with the backlog.
I thank the Minister for her reply. I am delighted to hear of the progress that is being made. Has the Minister a target set for waiting times, whether it would be acceptable to have three weeks or five weeks or what would be the target time at the end of this process? Is it true that the number of appeals received by the social welfare appeals office has increased by more 100% from 2007 to 2010? Can the Minister advise as to why this might be the case? Has it anything to do with claims being refused by deciding officers or the application of stricter qualifications criteria? Can the Minister advise on the impact of the office deciding more appeals by summary decision? Is this translating into more appeals being turned down? How is the decision on whether to grant an oral hearing made? Who makes the decision? Are there transparent criteria for that?
I will arrange for the details to be forwarded to the Deputy. There has been an enormous increase in the number of appeals. The number of them has multiplied several times in each of the recent years. There was a 46% increase in the number of appeals in 2009 compared with 2008, and that was 27% greater than the number in 2007. There was a further increase of 26% in the number of appeals received in 2010. There has been an enormous increase in the number of appeals. I will forward the Deputy the statistical information.
On the question of cutting back the time involved in the processing of an appeal, we are not yet at the stage where we can give an indicative time for this. We have to reduce the backlog and improve the system. People will be familiar with the idea that in the case of passport applications and citizenship applications, it has become a standard that an applicant must complete the application properly and that greatly increases the opportunity to deal with the application at first instance. If applications can be dealt with on a summary, first instance basis, then the matters which go to appeal can be dealt with much more rapidly. Because there is more than a 50% success rate on appeals, that is a strong indication that many of the appeals are not fully presented with the fullest amount of information that would enhance the making of a decision by the person who decides initially and, subsequently, on appeal.
The Minister has referred previously to the review by a deciding officer before an application would reach the stage of an appeal. I wonder if anything more can be done in that respect. For instance, in many cases where an application for carer's allowance is refused, a simple telephone call or an explanation of the information that is missing would probably prevent the application having to be appealed in the first instance. Can more be done at the early stage of the processing of applications before the stage of appeal? This would help to reduce the waiting list.
That is a very sensible suggestion. As the community welfare officers move into the Department, this is an area where they in particular probably have enhanced experience and sensitivity. Perhaps we can have better advisory services and a better quality of information available in citizens information centres. Various organisations supply excellent information which enables people to make a much more directed application that is likely to be successful. We will return to this topic as, hopefully, we reduce the backlog and we will see what can be done to streamline and improve the quality of the application process.
I did not realise that Question No. 26 was being taken with Question No. 22. These are difficult times and the appeals system is under severe pressure. The Minister said that community welfare officers will be transferring to her Department. Will that require the introduction of legislation? Under the 2005 supplementary welfare legislation, SI 412, a community welfare officer has exceptional powers of discretion when it comes to emergency funding or in circumstances where he or she and the primary team who might work with the community came across a situation that allows them to override the system. The Minister is aware that the supplementary welfare legislation is known as the payment of last resort and considerable changes have taken place in practice whereby the community welfare officer can now act as a buffer until the appeals system is dealt with. I am mindful of extraordinary cases, be they of poverty, where a special appliance is needed, a payment is required by a person who is terminally ill and there may be no time to carry out a means test, or a payment is required to cover the cost of a funeral. Is there a need for the supplementary welfare legislation to be reviewed? When community welfare officers transfer to her Department, will they no longer have the title "community welfare officers"? What level of community contact will they have and will there be a service available for people with exceptional needs, some examples of which I gave?
Negotiations are ongoing in the Labour Relations Commission in regard to the community welfare officers. They will become full civil servants and they will be community welfare officers. On the matter of whether changes are required to the legislation, I will return to the Deputy on that. First, we must achieve the integration of the service. The community welfare officers have a potentially extremely valuable and important role to play in improving the services of the Department. The number of people getting special needs payments and the amounts of the payments have grown significantly in recent years. It is perhaps an area which could be reviewed but first we want to get the integration of the community welfare officers into the Department and that in itself is a big job. There will be up to 1,000 extra staff and that will be a big change for the staff in the Department of Social Protection. Obviously it will be a very big change for the community welfare officers. There has been a fair number of meetings of senior staff in the Department with community welfare officers and I am very anxious to see them successfully joining the staff of the Department.
Is it true it is taking six weeks for appeals to be logged to the system from the time they are received in the office? In saying that I am not criticising the staff in any way because I realise the pressure they are under. If that is the case, when does the clock start ticking? Is it when the appeal is received or when it is logged?
It can take quite a period of time. There is an attempt to streamline what is happening to improve the quality of the decision making and particularly to improve the time period in which decisions are made. The streamlining is being achieved through meetings with various areas of the Department.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
