I move:
That Seanad Éireann approves the Draft of the Regulations entitled Social Welfare (Insurance Inclusions and Exclusions) Regulations, 1971.
Social Welfare (Insurance Inclusions and Exclusions) Regulations, 1971: Draft Order.
The purpose of these regulations is to give the full protection of the Social Insurance system to persons who are employed by local or public authorities on work of a rehabilitational nature. Persons so employed by these authorities are at present specifically excluded from insurance under the Social Welfare Acts, except for occupational injuries benefit purposes, and as a result their rights to the other benefits are eroded because contributions are not payable while they are in the employment in question. Representations have been made by the persons concerned, by organisations involved in rehabilitation and by public representatives to have the position changed. The particular type of employment which has been brought to notice is that of park ranger with Dublin Corporation where the men concerned were receiving wages which in the normal course are equal to those paid in many insurable employments.
The exclusion was made by the Social Welfare (Insurance Inclusions and Exclusions) Regulations, 1952, which inserted paragraph 7 into Part II of the First Schedule to the Social Welfare Act, 1952. The purpose was to provide an incentive to local or public authorities to employ sick or disabled persons with a view to their rehabilitation.
The matter has now been fully examined in the light of present circumstances and I have come to the conclusion that the exclusion of this type of employment from social insurance can no longer be justified. The draft regulations which are the subject of this motion are designed to end the exclusion by removing the relevant provision from Part II of the First Schedule to the Social Welfare Act, 1952. I accordingly recommend the motion for the approval of Seanad Éireann.
As I explained in the Dáil, this means that those people who were excluded from the provisions of the Social Welfare Acts in relation to the weekly contributions on account of their being persons doing work of a rehabilitation nature will in future be insurable and thus share in the benefits that go with the contributions they are paid. The purpose of having them excluded in the first instance was that it might be an incentive to public authorities to employ them, but now it is found that long periods of employment of this type without any contributions except the contributions for occupational injuries puts them in the position that if and when they resume normal employment, as they often do, they find they have no contribution record which qualifies them for benefit. This motion, which has already been passed in the Dáil, is simply to rectify that position and make these employments subject to the normal weekly insurance contributions which would entitle employees to all benefits if and when they become qualified to apply for them.
I am personally very pleased to hear what the Minister has said. We, on this side of the House, welcome very much this change that he has brought in here. I only hope that by bringing it in it will not act as a disincentive to the employment of these people.
The Minister himself raised the question of the park rangers in Dublin Corporation, but I suppose the Minister might know himself that in Dún Laoghaire Town Hall there is a blind telephonist employed at the present moment and has been for years. There is in the private sector a garage in Merrion Row that employs handicapped people. I agree with this. We on this side are very glad the Minister has brought this in, but we hope that it will not provide a disincentive for the employment of these handicapped people in the future.
The Minister said that, if these handicapped people got other employment, they would be insurable but they would not get the benefit of contributions up to that point and this is the purpose of bringing in these regulations. By doing this he is crediting these people with contributions that they have not paid. I think this is what he means. In effect, he is making it retrospective.
The Senator is perfectly right in what he says.
The Minister has acted rapidly in this, and I hope it is an example to legislators to act as rapidly in other types of legislation as the Minister has done with this measure.
It is a sign of humanity on the part of the people who brought this in. I fully endorse what the Minister has said and support it wholeheartedly.
The only thing I should like to say in conclusion by way of explanation on a point raised by the Senator is that the motion here removing the exemption of these people from social welfare insurance is not in itself retrospective. But Senator Belton is correct in saying that, if and when they resume normal employment and should they become unemployed or disabled or ever find themselves in the position where they would have to apply for disability benefit and have not accumulated the necessary contribution to qualify them, they may, under the amended regulation, have contributions credited to them which will qualify. To that extent one could say it has some retrospective effect and they would not lose anything by it.
Rehabilitation employment in the private sector will be subject to the contribution regulations in the ordinary way if it is a contract service, except in cases where persons might be constantly under medical supervision. In that case they would be exempt. Ordinarily the same test applies as to normal employees in the private sector. I sincerely hope that it will not act as a disincentive to these public authorities in their employment of persons for rehabilitation purposes in the future.
Question put and agreed to.
Business suspended at 5.30 p.m. and resumed at 7 p.m.