I welcome Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh, assistant secretary, Department of Social and Family Affairs; Mr. Pat Healy, assistant national director, Health Service Executive; and Ms Barbara Nic Aongusa, director, office of disabiity and mental health. I ask them to brief the committee on the core function transfer programme. Members may then ask questions. I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
Core Function Transfer Programme: Discussion.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
I thank the Chairman and the committee for the invitation to attend today. I propose to make a presentation, a copy of which may have been circulated to members, to provide background information on the origins, scope and rationale of the core function transfer programme. I wish to update the committee on the progress made to date, set out the vision for the future and refer to the immediate next steps.
The background to the programme lies in the Commission on Financial Management and Control Systems in the Health Service, which was set up in 2002 and reported in 2003. The report became known as the Brennan report. One of the recommendations in the report was that the health system had accumulated tasks that were not core to the health system and that the Government should consider re-assigning non-core activities to other more appropriate bodies.
To implement that part of the report a working group was established representing the Departments of Health and Children, Finance and the Taoiseach. The working group concluded its work in 2005 and made a number of recommendations including that income support and maintenance schemes, and associated resources — staff and finance — should transfer to the Department of Social and Family Affairs; the General Register Office should transfer to the Department; the mechanics of the dental treatment benefit scheme going in the opposite direction should be examined; a working group should oversee this implementation; and the special housing aid for the elderly scheme should move from the Health Service Executive to local authorities. I do not propose to speak about that last one. I understand it has been implemented but was done in a separate campaign, so to speak, between the HSE and the local authorities.
The working group doing this work examined also the desirability of keeping personal social services and health in the one organisation. The personal social services are social work services, day care, and alternatives to care such as adoption, etc. It concluded that those services should continue to be part and parcel of a unified health and personal social services system.
The Government accepted those recommendations and from that the core functions programme was set in motion in February 2006. The rationale for the programme lies in the Government concluding that to increase the effectiveness of the health service generally and its capacity to deliver the reform agenda, it was important that the service was fully concentrated on addressing its core health objectives. To that end, it was necessary to take certain functions out of the HSE.
The distinction between health and personal social services on the one hand and income services on the other is central to this process. There are natural linkages between health and personal social services which makes it desirable and more efficient to have these delivered together in a properly co-ordinated manner within an integrated organisational structure. That is happening. There are similar advantages in having all income support delivered in one structure also. The fact that the health sector was delivering income supports outside the context of the Department of Social and Family Affairs created an unnecessary duplication of effort and a distraction for the health service management.
A number of benefits of the programme were identified. From a policy perspective the SWA service, which was one of the services being transferred, has always been a policy prerogative of the Minister for Social and Family Affairs. It was never part of the Minister for Health and Children's concerns; that goes back to the 1970s. The Department of Social and Family Affairs has always funded the service 100%.
A second benefit of the transfer is the potential it provides to integrate this with the Department's social and economic participation programme,which is being delivered as part of the national development plan. There is a commitment in Towards 2016 to work in a more active way with people of working age to provide income support for them but also to help them achieve their potential and removing the barriers that prevent them taking up employment or whatever.
A further policy benefit of the transfer is the possibility of creating a more unified income support system which meets people's needs in a more integrated manner. We hear the criticism from time to time that the current system is quite differentiated and that people can fall between the gaps.
The transfer will facilitate the implementation of the disability sectoral plans developed by our Department and the Department of Health and Children. It will also provide an opportunity for further integration of the civil registration system; that is to do with the General Register Office.
In terms of service delivery, it is intended the service will relieve pressure on the HSE by taking a number of functions off its plate about which it will no longer have to be concerned. Most of the people receiving income supports who are being transferred from the HSE are already customers of the Department of Social and Family Affairs. The transfer will facilitate a better, more integrated service for them.
I will deal with the individual parts of the programme. The transfer of the General Register Office to the Department took place with effect from 1 January 2008. Henceforth, the GRO will be managed and developed as an integral part of the Department.
The second of the four elements of the transfer concerns dental and other treatment benefits. The background to that is that insured workers may qualify for dental, optical and other treatment benefits on the back of their PRSI contributions. Equally, medical card holders may qualify for similar benefits from the HSE. There are significant numbers of people in low wage employment who qualify under both sets of schemes. A further important factor to take into account is that while the PRSI contributors and the medical card holders are the ultimate beneficiaries, the payments arising under the scheme are made to dentists, opticians etc. There are relatively few of those — approximately 2,000 in total. Therefore, the question of having two separate non-integrated computer systems and two separate organisations dealing with those 2,000 people is called into question.
The working group that began examining that has concluded that there is a case to be made for doing the transfer and that there is merit in having a more integrated system. Arising from that, a second working group is now drawing up detailed plans for the transfer. When they are complete they will go back to Government for a decision as to whether the transfer takes places and when.
The remaining two elements, which are probably the ones of major interest to the committee, are the transfer of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme to the Department and the transfer of certain disability payments. In the presentation circulated the components of the SWA scheme are set out and I do not intend to deal with that. There are approximately 1,000 staff involved in the community welfare service and the equivalent of approximately 866 of those are engaged in delivering the SWA service. Most, but not all, of the people in the community welfare service are involved. Approximately 110,000 people benefit from SWA every week. Approximately 60,000 of those receive rent supplement. Overall spending last year, including the cost of administration, was €740 million. In the presentation I have circulated the provision for 2008 is set out as well as the amounts for each of the component parts. I will not go through those in detail.
The project planning for the transfer is well advanced, particularly in regard to the way IT support will be provided, the way the accommodation will be paid for and managed etc. There is ongoing consultation and communication with the voluntary and community sector and with other stakeholders. The transfer envisages that income support and specialist services such as the homeless persons unit, the asylum seekers unit etc. will transfer in their entirety to the Department. The health and personal social services administered by the HSE, such as the nursing home subvention and medical cards, do not form part of the transfer programme. However, a means testing function is undertaken by some community welfare service personnel outside Dublin in respect of those schemes. That is being reorganised by the HSE as part of the transfer.
I will refer to the communication and consultation aspect of this programme, which arose on the last occasion we were before the committee. The programme involves major organisational, human resource and service delivery issues for all the stakeholders involved. There are over 4,000 people in the Department. There are over 1,000 people in the HSE and there are people working in the community and voluntary sector who have an interest in this as well. We have produced information newsletters for all the staff of the two organisations concerned. We have organised meetings with the management cadre in the HSE who are dealing with this area. We met the voluntary and community sector on a number of occasions, most recently on 12 November, and I can report it is supportive, in general, of the transfer. We intend to have a series of regional meetings when the industrial relations discussions currently under way are completed.
We appeared before this committee in the previous Dáil in June 2006. On the industrial relations front, we are engaging with two trade unions, which we must necessarily do separately. We set up a joint liaison group to deal with the health sector unions, SIPTU and IMPACT, which involves the HSE and the Departments of Health and Children and Social and Family Affairs. We met that group and subgroups of it on more than 20 occasions in the past 12 months. Similarly, we met the unions representing staff in the Department on a number of occasions. The date for the transfer of the scheme will be recommended to Government when discussions currently under way with the two unions have been completed.
The last element of the programme is the transfer of the disability schemes, which I listed in the presentation. The committee will be aware that a large element of the Social Welfare and Pensions Bill, Committee Stage of which this committee dealt with recently, is devoted to the transfer of these schemes. Given that, I will go quickly through them. The largest of these payments is the domiciliary care allowance, which is the payment made in respect of the care of a child up to the age of 16. The payment rate is almost €300 per month and 21,000 children benefit from it. A respite care grant of €1,500 is paid with that allowance once a year. The total cost of the respite care grant and the domiciliary care allowance for those 21,000 children was €108 million in 2007.
The second largest disability payment for which responsibility is being transferred is the blind welfare allowance. It is paid at a weekly rate of €66.60 to 3,200 people. Almost €10 million was spent on the payment of that allowance in 2007.
In terms of the vision for the future in this regard, I want to emphasise a number of points. A number of the principles underpin the transfer of responsibility for the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. They include an acknowledgement that the community welfare service plays a vital role in the overall social welfare system. The key attributes of that service will be preserved, including its responsiveness, flexibility and the fact it is outcome focused. There will be no diminution of the service or coverage of the system. Discretion is an important part of that system, which is provided for in social welfare legislation and that will remain unchanged. Thus, it will be preserved into the future. Linkages with health and other systems are also important. On many occasions when people present for assistance, an allocation of money may be required in the first instance, but there may be other issues that need to be addressed through other services. Those linkages will be addressed.
The transfer of functions presents a potential for fundamental reform of and developmental opportunities for the income support system. We intend to take advantage of those opportunities to create a better system. Given the time constraints we are under, I will not go fully through what I outlined in the presentation. The domiciliary care allowance and the blind welfare allowance will be transferred, in the first instance, on an "as is" basis. When the transfer of those schemes is bedded down, so to be speak, next year, we will embark on a review of how they might be better integrated with our other payments. For example, the committee will be aware that disability allowance is payable to applicants at the age of 16. The reason for that is that the domiciliary care allowance ceases to be paid in respect of persons on reaching the age of 16. We are aware that some applicants join the scheme at the age of 16 who have not been but should have been in receipt of domiciliary care allowance. Equally, for some young people, when domiciliary care allowance ceases to be paid in respect of them on reaching the age of 16, there is a gap in terms of their future income support. Therefore, there is scope for more integration in that respect.
The next steps to be taken include the enactment of Social Welfare and Pensions Bill, currently before the Oireachtas, which will give us a mandate to implement the transfer of the domiciliary care allowance and the blind welfare allowance. We will prepare detailed secondary legislation, regulations for those schemes, which will be an advance, as they do not exist under the current regime. We will develop our IT system to incorporate the two disability schemes with a view to their transfer in the first half of 2009. The other immediate next steps are the conclusion of the discussions with the trade unions on the transfer of responsibility for the supplementary welfare allowance scheme and the preparation of the detailed plans for the transfer of responsibility for the treatment benefits scheme.
I thank Mr. Ó Raghallaigh and his colleagues for their contribution. I only received this presentation on arriving here and it was difficult to read it as Mr. Ó Raghallaigh was speaking. I do not know if anything can be done about that in the future. It would be helpful if we had such presentations a few days in advance of the meeting. Having listened to Mr. Ó Raghallaigh, it is difficult to get a sense of exactly where we are at in this process, what is aspirational and what has happened or is proposed to happen in the future. This transfer of responsibility has been talked about for many years but, from Mr. Ó Raghallaigh's presentation, I did not get a sense of any major progress having been made. The major proposal is the transfer of responsibility for the community welfare service to the Department, which has been talked about for at least the past decade. Where is the level of progress on the transfer of that service? When is it likely to happen? Does it make sense to transfer the rent supplement element of that service to the Department of Social and Family Affairs? Given that this allowance has become a core element of housing strategy, surely responsibility for that element of the service should be transferred to the local authorities. That was my understanding of the initial transfer proposal. Why is that not happening?
A related matter is the proposed transfer of responsibility to the Department for the various agencies such as the homeless persons unit. Why is responsibility for that being transferred to the Department of Social and Family Affairs rather than to the local authorities? What element of the service provided for asylum seekers is to be transferred to the Department? This proposal is news to me. What is the rationale for transferring responsibility for dental and treatment benefits from the Department, which is the parent Department in terms of dealing with people's entitlements on the basis of their PRSI contributions, to the HSE?
When I received the agenda and saw the core functions programme listed, while I did not google those words to see what information would be presented, I did not know what exactly we would be discussing at this meeting. I have a few questions on it. Mr. Ó Raghallaigh indicated in his presentation that the transfer will facilitate the implementation of the disability sectoral plans developed by the Department and the Department of Health and Children. What progress has been made on that? When can we expect the plans to be fully implemented? What effect will this programme have on speeding up progress on the implementation of those plans?
Mr. Ó Raghallaigh also said that a question arises concerning the merits of having separate computer administration systems dealing with such a relatively small number of payments. Is he saying there will be two systems or there are two and they will be reduced to one? What is the cost involved in setting up a new computer system to provide for that?
I do not have a difficulty with the transfer of responsibility for dental benefits to the health sector. Mr. Ó Raghallaigh indicated in his presentation that he is not concerned about a lack of independence or a diminution in the service, but the Department's customers, who are currently the HSE's customers, are concerned about that. Certainly, at the time of the transfer the community welfare officers were concerned. The Department of Social and Family Affairs has effectively become their boss. If somebody is refused a social welfare payment or if a payment such as FIS is withdrawn while it is being investigated, the person will go to the community welfare officer for support which means, effectively, going to the same Department that suspended their payment. What type of directives will be given to community welfare officers when the system is fully in place to ensure the flexibility they have — although some are more flexible than others — will remain in the system?
The other issue I wish to raise is the domiciliary care allowance. One of the main complaints about this allowance over the years has been that different areas and different doctors mean there are different opportunities to get the allowance. There is one area in the south of the country where, if one could move people's addresses there, they would be eligible for the allowance. In my area, however, people have difficulty getting it. Will that type of inconsistency be addressed by this? It is important that it is. While community welfare officers should have flexibility there must be equality, and the parent of a child with a particular illness or disability in Offaly should get the same payment as somebody in the same situation in Tipperary. That is not the case at present. This must be addressed.
I apologise for missing the start of the presentation. Does the transfer of the dental treatment benefit include orthodontics for children? It was intended that the local authorities would have an input into the rent supplement system. How will that relate to the role the Department will play in the scheme?
The community welfare officers usually meet their clients in HSE accommodation. Will the Department provide accommodation throughout the different villages and towns and how far has this been progressed?
Community welfare officers usually meet their clients in health centres and they are always available there. I compliment them on the job they do. They are frontline staff so I hope it will be a smooth transition.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
I will reply to the questions in the order they were asked. With regard to the programme, one part of it, the GRO, is done and has been transferred. The second part, the treatment benefits, is at the earliest stage of the remaining three because a definitive decision to transfer has not been made.
Is that at ministerial level or union level?
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
The Government has not decided to transfer treatment benefits. Perhaps I should explain how we reached this point. The Brennan report examined the functions being carried out in the health sector and called for rationalisation. Most of the rationalisation involved functions being moved from the HSE into my Department. In this one case, however, the question of traffic going in the opposite direction came up, so that had to be examined in more depth. A working group looked into it and saw that duplicate computer systems had attendant inefficiencies. There was a group of people in the middle who qualify under both schemes and that required rationalisation. That is as far as the working group went with it. The Government has instructed that detailed plans be drawn up and in the course of doing those plans, it can decide whether to shift the thing across.
That leaves two other elements of the programme, the disability payments, such as domiciliary care allowance and blind welfare allowance, and supplementary welfare allowance. With regard to the domiciliary care and blind welfare allowances, the legislation required to implement the transfer is included in the Bill the committee has been dealing with. Our expectation is that they will transfer across in the first half of 2009. The big part is the supplementary welfare allowance, in which the community welfare officers are involved. We have a ten point implementation plan. One part of it deals with the locations, as mentioned by Deputy McGrath and Deputy Carey. We are examining the leasing arrangements for the accommodation the officers have throughout the country and how that might best be taken over into the care of the Department where it is appropriate to do that. We have nine other pillars of activity, as it were, in that regard. We are engaged with the trade unions representing the staff in the two areas.
What type of timescale is envisaged?
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
We have not set a date because we are still in discussions with the trade unions. Those discussions cannot go on forever and when they are concluded we will recommend a date to the Government. It would not make sense to have a far off date once we have concluded the industrial relations discussions.
With regard to the locations, the service is available in 1,000 locations throughout the country at present. In 297 of those locations the community welfare officer is based there; in the other 700 they travel to visit the locations. A total of 69 of the 297 are occupied solely by community welfare staff. We expect to take over the leases of those 69 immediately when we do the transfer. We will then incrementally take over other locations as they are required but the officers will stay in their health service accommodation until it is necessary to make a change in that.
What will necessitate that? What are the criteria for deciding what the requirements are and, after the 69 are taken over, how will the Department decide the rest?
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
There are over 200 locations which are base locations for community welfare officers but they also accommodate public health nurses and other HSE staff. Unless there is some presenting reason to change that arrangement, we will let it continue indefinitely. However, if, for example, the HSE wishes to expand its services in a particular location, it would make sense for us to move our staff out and let it expand in the location it already has. As leases expire, the question would arise as to whether they would be renewed or otherwise. As part of the Government's decentralisation programme offices will be built in various towns which will accommodate the local staff as well as the decentralising staff. It is an opportunistic programme once we go beyond the 69 locations that are exclusively community welfare service.
Deputy Shortall asked why rent supplement is not going to local authorities. Deputy Brady also raised that issue. There are approximately 60,000 recipients of rent supplement. About half of them are long-term recipients and the plan is that the local authority should assume responsibility for that half of the scheme through the rental accommodation scheme, which is being rolled out at present. We do not believe it is appropriate for the local authorities to have responsibility for the other half, comprising short-term recipients. In many cases the people are perhaps unemployed for a short time or they have some short-term need for income support but they do not particularly need housing as such. They have housing but on a short-term basis they cannot afford to pay for it. There is that element within the rent supplement scheme. That is income support business which we believe belongs with the Department.
Is Mr. Ó Raghallaigh saying that the long-term plan is to switch the majority of people on rent supplement to the local authorities or to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government under the RAS scheme?
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
Yes.
But that is at a very early stage.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
It is, yes.
We are talking about a very long time before RAS will be geared up to cope with the existing demand.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
I agree that it will take time it but that is the plan. In the meantime, rent supplement will continue as at present.
Does Mr. Ó Raghallaighhave a breakdown of the numbers of people on the short-term list?
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
The last time I looked, there were 32,000 who had been on the short-term list for more than 18 months. The balance of about 28,000 were on for a shorter period.
It is about 50:50.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
It is roughly 50:50, yes.
Deputy Shortall asked about the homeless persons unit and the asylum seekers unit. With your permission, Chairman, I will ask my colleague, Mr. Healy, to address that issue.
Mr. Pat Healy
In the context of discussions with the Department on where those services would be best placed, as regards the homeless service, it became clear that the group we are talking about transferring comprises essentially community welfare officers whose work is concentrated around income support. Specifically, we are transferring the services focused on dealing with the needs of particular homeless categories. It makes sense that they would transfer. Following the transfer, we will ensure that the kind of linkage needed by the professional community teams within the health service will be maintained. In that way, there will be a close working relationship between those providing income support, such as community welfare officers, and the community teams who will work with the HSE in future in primary care teams and social care networks.
They do not exist.
Mr. Pat Healy
They are in development. Where professional teams exist at present they support homeless people and will continue to do that.
What is the role of local authorities concerning homeless persons?
Mr. Pat Healy
Local authorities have a role, jointly with ourselves, which will continue. There will be no change in that regard. We currently fund €33 million worth of services, significantly through the voluntary sector or directly by the Health Service Executive, in support to homeless people or by way of direct provision of care by voluntary agencies on our behalf. Local authorities also provide support and have responsibility for the capital build. That connectivity will continue to exist under the terms of the new initiatives. What is important is that in future all income supports to homeless people will be dealt with through the Department of Social and Family Affairs. What is critical for us in terms of Government responsiveness to homeless people is that in future the work that will be done through the Department of Social and Family Affairs, the health service and local authorities, will be joined up and clear. The future roles and responsibilities will be much clearer. We will be responsible for health service delivery, the Department will be involved in income support, and local government will be involved in the housing component, particularly concerning capital developments and associated staff costs.
What about the asylum seekers?
Mr. Pat Healy
We developed specific units where we brought together community welfare officers who were supporting asylum seekers. It is an income support function and there is no question but that the obvious place for that in future is with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. The key issue is that health-related supports will continue to be provided by the HSE but we will have a clear working relationship with the income support provision through the Department of Social and Family Affairs. We will make provision for that kind of connectivity in future and there will be clarity concerning the roles of income support providers and the HSE.
To clarify that, is Mr. Healy talking about the HSE functions in respect of asylum seekers coming to the Department?
Mr. Pat Healy
We will transfer only those staff who are involved in the income support component — essentially the community welfare officers and related supports. Those are the people we propose to transfer to the Department.
Just those? Okay.
Will Mr. Healy explain in a little more detail how it operates for people within the asylum process, as regards where they are generally located versus where the community welfare officers are located? The income does not enable them to get taxis. Do community welfare officers travel to these centres to meet asylum seekers? If not, how do they engage with the process? We are talking about core functions in both Departments. As regards the asylum process, what communication does the Department of Social and Family Affairs have with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform? One of Mr. Healy's colleagues in the midlands area told Oireachtas Members from my constituency that 200 asylum seekers arrived at a centre in County Laois and that the HSE was notified after their arrival. The HSE had no prior knowledge of these people being sent to that centre. While they are more than welcome, that had an immense effect on the HSE and community welfare officers in the area. Two Departments or sections are involved but good communications are required across the board.
Mr. Pat Healy
The Deputy referred to a particular case in the midlands. From the health service perspective, over the years since these arrangements were put in place, there have been some glitches from time to time but, in general, the system has worked well. There is a good working relationship between ourselves, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and the social welfare unit. Greater problems emerged at the outset while things were bedding down, but a well developed system exists at present. The community welfare service component concerns income support. We have done different things in various parts of the country but where large numbers of asylum seekers are resident in particular centres provided by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform we have supported those by providing community welfare officers on site who work closely with them.
As regards this transfer, those staff will in future work with the Department of Social and Family Affairs but it should not make any difference for the individual asylum seeker. It will mean the matter will be placed, more appropriately, with the Department of Social and Family Affairs, and income support requirements will be provided by that Department. We will continue within the health service to provide health-related supports. Depending on the scale of the centres involved, we often do that when people attend them. In that sense, I do not see the transfer having a negative impact from the service users' perspective. One of the tests for this will be that it should deliver a more effective service for individuals in future under a much clearer set of arrangements on both sides.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
If the reply concerning that issue is sufficient, I will move on. Deputy Shortall asked about the rationale for the proposal to move dental and optical benefits to the HSE. The rationale revolves around the fact that some 2,000 dentists and opticians are benefiting, or certainly receiving payment, from the HSE and from us. It is a small group of people, yet we have two different administrations and computer systems meeting that need. We feel there is scope for rationalisation by having it all under the one roof. That is the rationale in a nutshell.
How many clients receive treatment?
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
An enormous number.
Yes but that figure is based on their insurance records, which are held by the Department.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
Yes.
Surely it would make sense therefore to keep it within the Department.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
The establishment of entitlement based on insurance will be still with the Department. It is the payment function we propose to move across. It is an unusual social welfare scheme in that some 600,000 claims are received per annum. While that number of claims are received, they are forwarded by 2,000 people or small businesses. We are not dealing directly with the PRSI contributors.
Deputy Enright raised a number of questions, one of which concerned the IT system that supports this payment. The intention is to have one system. The planning of that is being done at present. We do not have costings or anything like it, that would be premature.
Deputy Enright asked about the possibility of there being a perceived lack of independence or a diminution in the independence or the discretion of the community welfare officers when they are working for the Department. We have no intention that such would arise. We recognise that there is need for a focus on the outcome and if somebody does not have any means, he or she must receive a payment. We intend to make no change in that regard because it is such a necessary part of the overall system. This is legislated for in social welfare legislation and we will not change that. As we view it, all that will happen is that the logo on the pay cheque the community welfare officer gets will be different but their function will remain the same because it is a necessary one.
Deputy Enright made fair points on inconsistency in the domiciliary care allowance. The allowance is a payment which is thinly provided for in legislation. Mr. Pat Healy might help me out on this. I believe there is a section of the Health Act that enables the HSE to make a payment where it considers that is necessary. By contrast, in the Social Welfare and Pensions Bill 2008 that has been before the committee we are making a detailed legislative provision that sets out exactly the entitlements. When the Bill is enacted we will make secondary legislation that will set out in full detail the circumstances in which people qualify and that, in itself, will bring consistency to the matter which has been missing in the absence of that kind of legislative underpinning. The domiciliary care allowance will look and feel like a standard social welfare payment, such as the widow's pension. There will be much greater clarity and transparency on entitlement. We accept there is a need for equality of treatment. Where one lives should not come into it at all.
Deputy Brady asked me about orthodontics for children. I must plead ignorance on that one.
It was the dental benefit schemes.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
Anything paid under the dental benefit scheme is encompassed within the proposal. I do not know the position regarding children's orthodontic services.
Mr. Pat Healy
Children's orthodontic services will remain with us in the Health Service Executive. It is not really encompassed by the dental treatment scheme. We will continue to provide orthodontic services.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
The answer is that it is not part of the dental benefit scheme and therefore it does not arise. Those were the questions of which I took note.
I was interested in some of the points which had already been made. I am trying to get to grips with this. Often I have said about social welfare benefits generally that it is important the Department understands the need to continue to disseminate information. People still come to every public representative in the country about issues. That is not necessarily Mr. Ó Raghallaigh's fault and I am not suggesting it is. The presentation highlights that the Department must continue to tell the public about these matters so that the public will understand them more. Many years ago I went to a function attended by the former Taoiseach, Dr. Garret FitzGerald, who made that point. As I stated, I am not singling out the Department of Social and Family Affairs. In fact, the Department is probably one of the better ones. We have all said so and colleagues made the point in the Dáil that the Department responds to us better than most. There still is that gap in public information and I would hope that the public will be made aware of the issues the Department has brought to our attention today.
Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh
I completely agree with Deputy O'Connor about information provision. Part of the difficulty is that the Department has such a plethora of schemes, the reason for which is largely historic. If one was designing a social welfare system ab initio one would not have as many schemes. One of the benefits we see in bringing all of the income maintenance schemes, particularly in the disability area, under our roof is that we can undertake some rationalisation but also disseminate information about them. I mentioned in my presentation that some people who are entitled to domiciliary care allowance are simply not aware of it and do not claim it. Sometimes those people come to our attention when the child reaches the age of 16 and they are aware of our disability allowance. It seems a shame that the domiciliary care allowance, which should have been in payment, has not been. By having responsibility for the full range of payments, we feel we will be able to do a better job in terms of take-up and information provision.
That is a fair point. Recently I had a case where an elderly pensioner got back from the Department what I regarded as an amazing amount of money because he had not claimed. We both are making the same point. It is necessary, even in this day and age, to continue to apply pressure to ensure that information is disseminated and that people know their entitlements and are helped through the system as much as possible. Every public representative would tell Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh these issues come to our clinics. In Tallaght there is a citizens' information centre getting more calls than I am. There is always that information deficit. As I stated, it is not always the Department's fault but there is that need to continue to apply pressure.
Ms Barbara Nic Aongusa
Deputy Enright mentioned the disability sectoral plans. I am the director of the office of disability and mental health which is located in the Department of Health and Children. Part of our remit is to facilitate the delivery of the sectoral plan for the health services, which was published under the Disability Act 2005. Under the national disability strategy, six Departments have published sectoral plans and they are all aimed at improving services for persons with disabilities.
The core functions transfer project, and, in particular, the transfer of these disability payments, is one of the actions under the disability sectoral plan for the health services but it is also a corresponding action in the sectoral plan for disability of the Department of Social and Family Affairs. The two Departments have been working jointly to bring this about.
The purpose of it, in line with many of the other actions, is to make the service more focussed around the lives of the person with a disability. As Mr. Ó Raghallaigh stated earlier, it makes much more sense for the client with a disability or the parent of a child with a disability to have all the income support payments available from one source rather than to have to go to several different sources for them. This is one of the areas that we are progressing in line with the sectoral plans for the two Departments.
I thank the officials for coming before the committee today and briefing us so comprehensively. We are very grateful to them.