Skip to main content
Normal View

Select Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection debate -
Wednesday, 27 Mar 2019

Vote 37 - Employment Affairs and Social Protection (Revised)

I welcome the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection, Deputy Regina Doherty, and her officials to the meeting. I thank them for the briefing material which they provided and has been circulated to the members.

This meeting has been convened to consider the Revised Estimate for Vote 37 - employment affairs and social protection, which was referred by the Dáil to the committee with the instruction to report back to the Dáil. While the committee has no role in actually approving the Estimate, there is an opportunity for the committee to make the process more transparent and to engage in a meaningful way on relevant performance issues.

I propose to proceed with the Minister and ask her to make her opening statements, after which I will afford members an opportunity to raise issues with the Minister.

I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to come and discuss with the committee the Revised Estimates for the Department. Our officials have provided committee members with detailed briefing material for use at the meeting, which includes comprehensive financial and recipient data. This briefing also provides updates on the Department's performance on its output targets for 2018.

On foot of the observations made by the Chairman at last year's meeting, the briefing this year provides for a clearer comparison with last year's expenditure and the Estimates for 2019. Tables have been provided which show last year's outturn excluding the payment of the Christmas bonus allowing for a like-for-like comparison. Additional columns have also been included which explain the variance between actual expenditure for 2018 and the Estimate for 2019. I hope this provides more clarity to the committee.

As members know, the work of the Department is broad in scope and has widened over the last number of years. Throughout the life cycle, the Department offers services and income support to people from the payment of child benefit to supporting people through income support until they reach pension age. The Department's expenditure, at €20.5 billion for 2019, is the largest of any Department and accounts for 35% of gross current Government expenditure. To put this in perspective, each week, over 1.3 million people - pensioners, people with disabilities, people on maternity or sick leave, carers, and jobseekers - receive a payment from my Department. In addition, over 628,000 families receive child benefit each month in respect of 1.2 million children. With this level of expenditure, we must ensure that our social protection system is properly structured and that it provides support when people need it most. We also aim to ensure that the system is flexible enough to deal with changes in the economy and society in order that we are ready to deal with changes and challenges if they emerge.

Without the social transfers we provide, we would see a society in which poverty and social exclusion were much more extreme and acute. We are grateful to be able to do that. As I mentioned, the €20.5 billion departmental budget represents 35% of gross current Government expenditure and it useful for a moment to consider the areas in which this money is to be spent. The biggest single block of expenditure in 2019 will be on pensions, which will amount to more than €8 billion, or 39% of overall expenditure. As our population ages as, thankfully, people are living longer and healthier lives, an increasing proportion of departmental expenditure will go to pension provision and providing income support for people in their older years.

Expenditure on illness, disability and carers' payments amount to €4.4 billion in 2019, representing 22% of expenditure. We will see a further reduction in expenditure on working age income support schemes in 2019, largely driven by the ongoing downward trend in the number of jobseeker payments. Working age income supports will account for 16% of our output, or €3.2 billion this year. That also includes one-parent families, maternity and paternity payments and supplementary welfare allowances, as well as jobseeker payments. In parallel, expenditure on employment supports, including community employment, back-to-education allowances, Tús, the rural social scheme and various employment and activation programmes, amounts to €724 million this year or 3.5% of expenditure. Expenditure on working age employment supports is decreasing, reflecting reduced demand in the context of rising employment and reductions in unemployment, which we all think is a great thing.

Expenditure on children and families will account for over 13%, or €2.7 billion, of which €2.1 billion is spent on child benefit and €416 million is spent on working family payment supports. Expenditure on supplementary payments like rent supplement and on agencies like the Citizens Information Board and miscellaneous services accounts for €806 million or just over 4% of expenditure.

As I mentioned, 2018 saw a continuing fall in the live register and improvements in the labour market. Last week, the live register was at 193,300 people, more than 37,000 fewer people than was the case at the same time last year and over 75,000 fewer people than two years ago. This is great and welcome but we must not forget those people who are still unemployed. The Department's schemes and services are continuously adapting to ensure that they encourage movement from unemployment to employment or training and that we support people through activation services and employment opportunities and programmes where they need additional help to find a job.

In budget 2019, my second budget as Minister, I sought to focus on encouraging employment and supporting families with children. Building on the increases made in 2017 and 2018, people receiving weekly social welfare payments saw another increase in their rates, with €5 being added to the maximum weekly rates of payment, which is happening this week. Proportionate increases are also provided to qualified adults. Again, these increases will benefit our pensioners, people with disabilities, carers and jobseekers and will take effect from this week. Over the last four budgets, the Government has tried to increase the main weekly rates of payment by €15 per week and the main rates of State pension by €18 per week. This year, we are again increasing the rate for qualified children. Last year was the first time it was done and the rate is being increased this week by €2.20 for children up to the age of 12 and €5.20 for children aged 12 years and over. The rates are now €34 and €37 per week respectively. This represents increases for children in households dependent upon social welfare and is a direct response to evidence presented by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice and Barnardos that the cost of raising and caring for children increases once that child reaches his or her secondary school years.

The rate of daily expenses allowance, formerly known as direct provision allowance, is being increased to the levels recommended in the McMahon report. The rate for an adult will rise by €17.80 to €38.80 and, for children, it will rise by €8.20 to €29.80. The income disregard for lone parents is again being increased by €20 to bring it to €150 per week and a new disregard for maintenance payments, which are used towards housing costs, will be introduced to the working family payment.

This year will see the introduction of a new jobseeker's benefit payment for the self-employed. My Department and I are currently working through the finer details of the scheme, which will provide a safety net not currently available to people setting up, running their own businesses and providing tens if not hundreds of thousands of jobs for others. In addition, a new parental benefit scheme will be introduced later this year which will allow both parents to access paid parental leave within the first year of their child's life. Other measures include the fuel allowance season being extended by one week, which will be paid in April, and a new hot school meals pilot programme, which is almost ready to be rolled out. The proof of concept for that started in January of this year and has gone incredibly well. It will be provided in up to 36 schools this year and, if successful, which I have no doubt it will be, my aim is to extend the scheme to a much wider audience. We are also commissioning research into the cost of disability which I hope will provide this committee and my Department with evidence to inform future policy direction, services and payments in this area.

The Department has also provided briefing in relation to progress against claims processing targets which I know is important to this committee. For many of the Department's schemes, claims are processed within or close to the Department's processing time standards. There were significant improvement in processing times for domiciliary care allowance in 2018.

However, for some schemes, the processing time standards were not achieved in 2018, particularly for illness related schemes. In mid-October additional staff were assigned to the carer’s allowance area and it resulted in a 35% reduction in the number of claims awaiting decision at the end of February 2019, as compared to the number at the end of September 2018. Given this reduction in the number of claims pending, it is expected that claim processing times will improve in the coming weeks. We will watch this carefully and reallocate staff if they do not. As I have said before, my Department is committed to ensuring claims are processed as quickly as possible and that delays are kept to a minimum. It is also worth mentioning again that anyone who is awaiting a decision on a social welfare payment can apply for a means-tested supplementary welfare allowance payment, pending the outcome of their social welfare application.

In comparing the Department’s expenditure in 2018 with the allocation for 2019 it is important to note that variances in expenditure under most social welfare schemes are typically explained by a combination of factors, including trends, including downward trends, in recipient numbers; changes in average weekly payment values; and differences in the number of pay days in any given year. In addition, comparisons in expenditure between 2018 and 2019 are impacted on by the measures introduced in budget 2019, including the increases in the weekly rates of payment, the carryover costs of budget 2018 measures and the payment of a 100% Christmas bonus in 2018, at a cost of €265 million. Provision for the bonus is made, subject to the financial position of the State, in October each year as part of the budgetary process and is not included in the Revised Estimates.

As I mentioned, I hope the revised presentation in the committee’s brief for this year provides greater clarity on the ability to compare 2018 expenditure and the 2019 Estimate. We live in uncertain times. What my Department and I intend to do is deliver some certainty to people when they meet challenges in their lives. The Department supports people during these life events when they cannot support themselves. Fortunately, as the economy has improved, we have been in a position to provide greater resources for improvements in the social protection system. In my statement I have sought to provide the committee with an overview of the scale and scope of the Department’s expenditure and how many people it reaches and illustrate how we could not manage without it.

I acknowledge the Minister and her officials for the manner in which they have presented the changes to the Christmas bonus payment. They are now comparing like with like which gives a truer reflection of the position. The Minister has said the Christmas bonus was not included in the Revised Estimates but that a decision is made, depending on the financial position of the State, in October. We need to move away from that situation because recipients of the bonus have built it into their annual expectations. It is an expensive time of year and most people do not have the capacity to get through the Christmas period without this payment. It is not a luxury, rather it has become a necessity. Therefore, we need to build it into the annual Estimates, rather than allowing it to be an optional payment that comes about by chance or good fortune.

The Minister mentioned pensions. A year ago we spoke about the anomaly for persons in receipt of a pension since 2012. That issue has not been addressed in full and there are still many people affected. Perhaps the Minister might bring us up to date on the matter. We thought it would have been completed by now. A significant number of people do not know where they stand. More importantly, we do not know when the entire process will be completed.

I am all for providing certainty and stability, as evidenced by what I am attempting to do with social welfare payments. I have said on a number of occasions that once the legislation is passed and the regulations are signed, we will start the review process for the 80,000 or so people involved, each of whom has received a letter. They have all been invited to come forward. Where there are gaps in their payments or contribution history, they have been invited to fill them in. The Chairman seems to be making an assumption that the onus to provide the information is on the Department, but we can only move so fast with the information given to us. As it has been provided, reviews have taken place. Some 8,500 people have received a completed review and been given a payment. There is no delay on the part of the Department. We took on 120 staff specifically to do this job. They are reviewing on a daily basis the cases of people who were adversely affected by the changes made in 2012. In some cases, there has been no change following the review, but for 80% there is an uplift, backdated to March 2018, while the others carry on as before. As long as there are people affected, they will continue to receive a service from us. We will not stop until the review for everybody review has been completed.

The Minister said the onus was on the individual to supply the information where there were gaps. I was under the impression that if the information on any gap resided in the Department such as in the case of child benefit, those cases would be completed first and that claimants would have to deal with other gaps themselves. If somebody was out of work for a ten-year period and had children, the Department would have the dates for when children benefit applied. Does the claimant have to supply this information or does the Department deal with it automatically?

Everybody has to have a review completed. Whether it is conducted with information held within the Department, it still has to take place. For example, an operative in Sligo has to check the record and if he or she can find all of the gaps, he or she can conduct the review without the intervention of the claimant and it will be completed more quickly than if he or she has to invite the claimant to come forward to fill in the gaps. There are 87,000 records that need to be gone through. Everyone has to go through a review by one of the 120 members of staff to whom I referred. We did not pick the cases without gaps first, as that would not have been fair. Instead, it has been done chronologically. Everybody's case will be reached and all those with information to give us are encouraged to share it with us as quickly as possible. I am told that almost 24,000 requests for information have been issued to date but fewer than half have responded.

Another 11,000 requests are to be issued shortly.

Was any preparatory work done from the time the Minister came up with the scheme, or did it all kick in after the passing of the relevant legislation?

We were recruiting staff and getting the IT systems ready before the regulations were signed. When they were signed, our team was ready to push buttons and send letters. That is exactly what happened.

I thank the Minister and her officials for the information provided. However, I only received the supplementary information yesterday afternoon. I do not know if others received it sooner.

There has been a substantial saving in jobseeker's allowance payments arising from the drop in unemployment and it feeds through to the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. I notice that there has been a very sharp drop in the budget for exceptional needs payment, from €43.8 million to €38.5 million. Is the scheme demand-led? Is any specific provision made for it? Staff in local offices have told me that they were out of money in the exceptional needs fund, but I take it that is not correct.

A small sum of €2 million has been provided in 2019 to extend jobseeker's benefit to the self-employed.

When is that scheme due to commence? In regard to the working age employment supports, there has been a shocking decrease in the take-up of that support and, therefore, payment of the back-to-work enterprise allowance scheme and the back-to-education allowance scheme. If the Minister cannot point me to where in the information before us the number of people on each of those schemes is set out, she might have her officials forward them to me.

What are the schemes?

All of the schemes, including the community employment scheme, the rural social scheme, Tús, the back-to-work enterprise allowance scheme and the back-to-education allowance scheme.

In regard to the carer's allowance, there has been an increase of approximately 5,000 in the number of people in receipt of this allowance. Approximately 80% of carers in this country do not get any payment. In other words, they do not qualify for carer's allowance for one reason or another. Representations have been made by the association representing carers and others seeking flexibility in the rules governing carer's allowance. For example, there is a specific proposal from Family Carers Ireland that the amount of time a person is allowed to spend working outside of the home be increased from 15 hours to, say, 18.5 hours. What would be the likely cost of that proposal and how many people are in receipt of the carer's support grant who are not in receipt of the carer's allowance?

I note a slight decrease in uptake of the disability activation supports. A problem we hear about on a regular basis is access to the workforce for people with disabilities. As the Minister will be aware, unemployment is very high among people with disabilities. It is generally accepted that not only must these people be helped and supported into the workforce but they must be supported to adjust to the workforce. The existing provision in this regard appears to be grossly inadequate. In the figures before us today there is a decrease in provision rather than an increase.

Rent supplement is down from €176 million to €132 million, which is related to the transfer to the housing assistance payment, HAP. Can the Minister indicate the overall amount for HAP and rent supplement?

I do not think so.

Is the back-to-work family dividend due to expire this year? In regard to control measures, can the Minister indicate the amount recovered for the last measurable period, which I presume is 2018, in terms of overpayments and the amount of that attributable to direct fraud?

I note there has been an increase of approximately 6,000 in the number of people in receipt of validity pension. Invalidity pension has been extended to the self-employed. What percentage of the overall payment of invalidity pensions is attributable to the self-employed? In other words, how many self-employed people have applied for and been granted the invalidity pension?

Deputy O'Dea has asked some technical questions. Would the Minister like to address them now?

I have to leave in a few minutes. Would be it okay if I ask two questions before I do so?

Figures on the percentage of the population at risk of poverty for 2017 and 2018 are not yet available. We have already received the report from the Society of St. Vincent de Paul in respect of the 2017 figures for lone parents, which have increased significantly on what they were in 2017. The income disregard for lone parents is welcome but according to the Society of St. Vincent de Paul report, we have an awful long way to go.

The youth employment rate for 2017 was 16.8%. This year, it is expected to be 14.3%. In 2016, the rate of long-term unemployment was 4.3%. It is currently 2.1%. There has been no real progress in this area.

Page 176 refers to the number of Magdalen commission customers in payment. The Department needs to be a little more sensitive in regard to Magdalen survivors. They should perhaps be recorded as Magdalen survivors rather than Magdalen customers, which sounds very clinical.

On the Deputy's final comment, not to be disrespectful to the survivors from the Magdalen laundries - I think I have had this conversation here before - I hate the term "customers". We do not have customers but we also do not only serve citizens because there are many people who are not Irish citizens that we do not serve. Perhaps we can collectively come up with an appropriate term. I desperately try to call people recipients but in doing so I often feel as if I am speaking about robots. For what it is worth, I agree with Deputy Collins.

I will also answer Deputy Collins's other question before she leaves. I cannot understand why the data is two years behind. I do not have any idea why that is the case. The next time I expect to receive data is in December 2019. Taking into account the report we received a couple of months ago that showed a devastating picture of the impact of policy changes and cuts on, in particular, lone parents, I am very hopeful that the initiatives taken last year and the year before will have had a positive impact. I know that many of our lone parents are now working in much better jobs than would have been the case a number of years ago. What I really want to see is data which identify where problems continue to exist so that we can home in and see exactly who has not benefitted from the changes we have made. We can then collectively decided what next needs to be done. It is not the case that we can just keep increasing a disregard if the disregard is not hitting certain women because they are not working. While the increase in the qualified child increase, QCI, is welcome, we are not going to get increases of QCI by 20% every year. We need to target increases at the people who are not benefitting from the changes we have made but I will not have that data until later this year.

I acknowledge that youth unemployment is not decreasing as quickly as the long-term unemployment and general unemployment rates are. I am hopeful that the pilot programme that we launched a couple of months ago, the youth employment support scheme, YESS, will have an impact. I originally asked for a particular amount of funding. We have to go through the pilot project for six months before I can get increased funding. We are approximately four months into the six months and so I would expect to have a good preliminary report on the success of YESS in the next couple of months. I might then be here seeking agreement for more money. We have to address this area. The initiatives will have to be employer-led. It is not a case of simply sending some of our young people to college or to an employment scheme. The initiatives must be more tailored and in the employment environment. I am hopeful the YESS project will work. I will come back to the Deputy with an update.

I thank the Minister.

I will now respond to Deputy O'Dea's questions. The vast majority of our schemes are demand-led. I do not know who would have said to the Deputy anecdotally that we have run out of money. Funds for emergency needs payments and exceptional needs payments never run out. It is easy for me to say that because it is not my money that we are spending. These payments exist to help people at times when they cannot help themselves and have nobody else to go to. We never say "No". The policy is what it is. It has changed slightly in recent years arising from conversations that we would have had in this committee but, we never run out of money and we do not refuse.

The Deputy asked why only €2 million is provided for the self-employed. It looks like a miserly amount of money but the legislation will not go to Cabinet until next week or the week after. It will then have to be processed through the Houses. All of that can take time. Notwithstanding any difficulties, I expect that the legislation will be passed by the autumn and that we can go live in October or November. When the amount provided is grossed up it amounts to €35 million for next year. I hope it does not look like that because we are not expecting people to be out of work. It is only a support payment.

I will come back to the Deputy with the activation schemes data. There is a long list of schemes, which we have here and the Deputy can have a look it following the meeting, if he wishes. I can also have a hard copy of it sent to him.

On the carer's support grant, 116,860 people are in receipt of the grant. There are 80,989 in receipt of carer's allowance and 2,740 people in receipt of carer's benefit. A number of those in receipt of an incapacitated tax credit would not qualify for either carer's allowance or carer's benefit but are in receipt of the carer's support grant. The incapacitated tax credits relate to children and older members of the family and the grant makes up the difference.

In terms of the supports that we provide for people with disabilities, members may be aware that the Department launched an ability programme last year. We got money from the European Union which we then matched. The aim of the programme is to tailor employment opportunities and in-employment supports for young adults with disabilities. The scheme was over-subscribed threefold in terms of the number of organisations that wanted to run programmes. Some of them started last year and I do not need to tell members that these are absolutely wonderful organisations, which are providing very valuable supports to people. I was out in Airfield a couple of months ago with the WALK organisation. There were some fabulous young people there who are ten foot tall with their jobs, support mechanisms and their mentors. Members may be aware that all Departments and Government agencies are obliged to increase the percentage of people with disabilities in their employ from 3% to 4%. When I visited Airfield I spoke to a man who has a son in his 20s. He is far more intelligent than I would ever aspire to be but his father told me that he finds the application process for public jobs exceptionally difficult. I discovered that the application process for all public jobs is exactly the same for people with disabilities, intellectual or physical, as for people with no disability. That does not sit well with me. He joked with me that day and said that he felt that some of the questions were trick questions so that he would answer the same question differently twice and we would be able to catch him out and then not give him the job. Apparently, we do such profile testing but it is very disconcerting for people who might read into things more. That is an issue that should be addressed by the Public Appointments Service, PAS. We expect more people to join the ability programme. It is a three-year programme and I would like to see it continue and expand.

We also have the employability programme that works with people who may not have a disability but who have mental health issues. We are talking about all ends of the scale, from those with mild mental health issues to those with very severe problems. That programme operates in every single HSE centre in the country and is very successful. We can never be exhaustive in terms of what we are doing in this area but we have introduced a couple of new interventions in recent years, particularly for people with extra challenges in their lives.

I do not have the figure to hand on HAP. Sorry, I am wrong - I do have the figures. There are three schemes, namely, RAS, HAP and rent supplement. There are 18,900 people on RAS, 22,600 on rent supplement and 45,700 people on HAP, giving a total of 87,200 private rental tenancy supports. This represents 26% of the private rental market.

What is the total payout?

The combined total for the three schemes in this year's Estimates is €688.4 million.

The back to work family dividend scheme is not ending. On control measures, we had overpayments in 2018 of €107 million, of which suspected fraud amounted to €29.7 million. The figure for recoveries is €86.3 million. The Deputy asked how many recipients of the invalidity pension were self-employed but I do not have that figure here. I will have to revert to him on that, if that is okay.

I hope Deputy O'Dea is happy with that. Deputy Brady is next.

I must commend the Minister and the Department on putting the document before us together. It makes this process an awful lot clearer and easier to follow. A lot of the questions I had intended to ask have been covered by my colleagues but I would like some additional information on a number of issues already raised.

On the 2012 changes to the pension and the recalculation process, the Minister said that 8,500 people have received payment. She said that a further 24,000 have been contacted, leaving approximately 50,000 people still to be contacted. It is also my understanding that 11,000 have yet to receive the initial correspondence from the Department. This means that approximately 61,000 people have yet to be dealt with.

At least 50,000 have yet to be even reviewed. How long is that process expected to take, in terms of finalising the 24,000 and dealing with the others? Is there a timeframe for dealing with all of that? I ask the Minister to indicate the size of the average payment. She said that 80% of the 8,500 have seen their payment increase. What is the average uplift?

I agree with the comments of the Chairman with regard to the Christmas bonus including the fact that it is called a bonus. There has been talk of changing the name because it is not an actual bonus. People see it as a payment and perhaps it should be called the Christmas payment. There should not be a question hanging over it every year in terms of whether it will be paid. People need certainty. I urge the Minister to consider that matter.

The Minister provided an update on the hot school meal pilot scheme, which is ongoing and said that she wants to expand it to include 36 schools. She also said that she would like to see it rolled out to a much wider audience. What does she mean by that? The scheme is brilliant and I would love to see it extended to every school in the State. Is that the type of audience to which the Minister refers or is she talking about DEIS schools only at this stage? I ask her to elaborate a little more on that.

Deputy O'Dea made reference to exceptional and urgent needs payments. The figures show that in 2018, the Department spent more on such payments than was provided for in the Estimates. However, the Estimate for this year is significantly lower than the 2018 provision. I ask for an explanation for that. We are constantly raising the fact that the discretion applied by community welfare officers varies widely from office to office. There does not seem to be any oversight there. Last year there were considerable difficulties with illness benefit payments and people were advised to go to their local community welfare office. Some were given money while others were not. The Department had sent a memorandum to all community welfare offices telling them that payments should be made but there were considerable discrepancies between offices, which is a matter of serious concern.

The Minister referred to the fact that level of unemployment among young jobseekers is not falling as fast as she would like. The rate of unemployment among this cohort is currently 14.3%, which is absolutely scandalous. The discriminatory policy of the Department, under which young jobseekers are given considerably less financial support than those aged 26 and over, has not worked. This policy must be looked at again because it has a very negative impact on young jobseekers, including leading to homelessness. When can we expect to see the report on young jobseekers? I expect that report will back up what I am saying. It was supposed to be published in 2017 but has not yet materialised. The rate of unemployment among young jobseekers is 14.3% and that report is critical. We need to know when it is going to be published and when we will be able to scrutinise it carefully and go through it in fine detail.

Can we get clarity on that?

I referred to illness benefit a moment ago. This area was plagued by huge issues last year. The Minister said that many things have been changed since and procedures put in place. Hopefully the matter has been resolved. I do not know if further issues have arisen. Some issues came across my desk, and just after Christmas I had sent them to the Department and to the Minister and they have been dealt with quite speedily, to be fair. The big issue was where some GPs used the new system while others did not. The Minister said that she hoped that all GPs would be signed up to and using the new system by now. What stage has this reached?

How long is a piece of string? I do not want to tell the Deputy that the reviews will be completed by the summer because if we do not get the information from people we will have to keep asking until they provide us with it. I do not want to say that the reviews will close on 1 July. People get envelopes and they put them in drawers and sometimes they forget. They may have good intentions to respond but it does not happen. I would like to say that it will be openended until everyone has their review and they are satisfied with it. I do not want to close it off. I think what the Deputy is asking is how quickly the ones in question should be getting their payment.

Of the 50,000 some will be straightforward and I expect the payment will be automatic, and some will need to come back and fill in the gaps. It is a question of going through the remaining 50,000 to weed out the ones that might need a little more work and the ones that should be straightforward.

I am probably guilty of giving the Deputy the impression that because there were people on whom we already had the information that somehow some computer would magically zap it together. Everybody must have a review. It must go through a human's hands. Even if I know that someone had a baby in 1972 and another in 1989 and I can see that information, I must still physically go through that person's review and sign off on it to say, for instance, "Johnny, you are going from an 80% pension to a 100% pension" and give the backdated payments along with the relevant correspondence. None of this is automated which is why we took on 120 staff. On some of it we would have hoped that we could do most of the interaction between people and the Department online. That would have reduced the time it took because information could have been submitted much more quickly than through the post. That does not suit some people of pensionable age. On that basis we have had forms which have been dispatched and it takes a few weeks for them to be returned. There are 120 people working in the office in Sligo. They work all day, every day. They are doing the reviews as efficiently as they can. Some 24,000 requests for information were dispatched in recent weeks and over half of these await a response. I assume they will come in but if they do not we will have to send the individuals more requests for information. The only people who will be automated are the ones that we know will not be liable to a change. Unfortunately there are some gentlemen who we know did not look after their babies because we can see they were out of the country, for instance. Again, that review must take place and we must say to the individuals that we can see gaps in their history. These individuals can be invited to fill in those gaps but the likelihood is that we already know what the gaps are.

A sum of €55 million is allocated to the budget this year. I cannot give exact details of that. Some ten people went from 85% to 95%.

Is there an average?

Some 80% of the people who have applied so far have had an uplift and about 20% have had no change. The vast majority are going to either a full pension or a 95% pension. Once the process is complete, I will be able to give an exact breakdown of how many are involved, how quickly the decisions are being made and so on. My intention is not to close it. I would like to think that in the main, the vast majority of people will be looked after before the summer but I do not want to close it off in case for some reason somebody just has not got around to responding and we will continue.

I am not asking the Minister to close it off.

On the same point, the people who are entitled to an uplift are also entitled to arrears.

Will they have to wait for the arrears payments?

How soon after the uplift will we see the payment of arrears?

Let us use Deputy O'Dea as an example. Say we reviewed Deputy O'Dea last week and he was moved from an 85% pension to 100%. The following week's payment will not only reflect the uplift but will also include the backdated payment to 30 March last year.

I hope it will put a smile on the Deputy's face to say that it is a rare occasion when we are both on the same page when I say to a much larger audience - and I am sure that if the Minister for Finance was listening to me, he would have a heart attack - I do not treat children differently. I do not think that we should segregate children because they go to a DEIS school or a different school. We do not do that under our current provisions, for instance the cold school meals programme, the breakfast clubs or after-school clubs. There are many schools which do not have DEIS status which are involved in our programmes which is why the pilot scheme - which is only small, with 36 schools and some 7,200 kids - will not be confined to DEIS schools. My aim, which may be unusual coming from our Department, is to get a better educational outturn. Children who eat good nutritional food get better advantages from the educational offering they receive from the State. We should sample it in small schools, in rural schools, in huge urban schools and in Gaelscoileanna and hopefully that is what the pilot will do, so that a wide variety of schools by type and size are examined to reflect whether it works much better in a school which, for example, has a catering company up the road, or in a small school on the Aran Islands. That pilot will go live in a couple of months and we will get those figures relatively quickly. I do not intend to wait for years to ensure that the pilot is working, we will know relatively quickly what our aim and ambition will bear out.

The exceptional needs payments were reduced in the budget this year insofar as all the types of payments that would normally be associated with an exceptional needs claim are also reducing. I know I will be here later on in the year looking for a supplementary budget to give me more money, although I hope that we do not have to do that, but if that is the case, then that is the case. It is all demand led.

On youth unemployment, this is not an excuse but we need to do something specific over and above training and education for our young people. Some of the young people who are long-term unemployed have other challenges over and above not having the correct skillset. The Youth Employment Support Scheme, YESS, programme is something that will be genuinely beneficial. We only have a small number of people on it at the moment, but I hope to increase that number significantly at the end of the pilot project, which is six months. I say that because when I look at the norms across Europe, our unemployment and long-term unemployment figures are coming down at a much faster rate than the same figures in other countries, but youth unemployment across Europe is stubbornly static. Other European countries do not have the same economic difficulties which we experienced in recent years, yet they still have the same stubbornly high youth unemployment figures. To me, it does not correlate. Younger people today have different challenges in life than we might have had growing up and we need to genuinely address these to put in support mechanisms around them which I hope YESS programme will do, however I cannot say until the pilot is complete. However, the Deputy and I will differ that bringing the payment back to the same figure as for those aged of 25 years will not fix the problem. The problem will be fixed by finding sustainable jobs for these young people.

It will not fix the problem but it will end the discrimination.

Deputy Brady and I have different views on that so I will not rehash that argument with him today.

There is something odd in relation to the next query raised by the Deputy. The same circular on training, policies and management protocols exists in every single office that we have around the country. I was in the Clondalkin office some weeks ago. A young woman works there who has been in my Department for some time but originally came from the old HSE community welfare system. She was telling me how much more flexibility she had in the old days. As she put it, there is a policy framework now that officers must stick within, which is actually music to my ears, but what the Deputy is telling me is that some people have more discretion than others, and they should not have. There is a policy and a specific set of guidelines. The money is there if it is needed. Somebody in Clondalkin should not have a different view from somebody in Ratoath or Finglas. There should be a similarity of operation. All I can do is to keep doing the continuous training programmes that we do and remind people of what the policy is through circulars.

Again, if the Deputy knows of an example of somebody he thinks should be getting something but is not, he can let me know and I can snoop behind the scenes to check.

Regarding the jobs report, we have been waiting an awfully long time for it. We committed to doing the review of the report on the impact of the reduced rates but we can only do that when we get the report from Maynooth, and we have not received it yet.

That is the problem.

I might send Maynooth a little note today to ask if it has any expectation as to when it will be ready. If it cannot do that, perhaps we will do something different. I will refer back to the Deputy.

After two years there must be a considerable amount of work done on it.

Perhaps there could be an interim report.

Actually, there was an interim-----

Yes. If the Minister is saying she will scrap that and start on a different process-----

You have been co-operative today, Deputy. An interim report would suffice.

We received the interim report last December and we discussed it here at the committee. The problem is that the interim report's findings are very positive and the Deputy does not agree with them.

I have not seen them.

The report was issued in December. It is not the completed report but the interim report finds that it incentivised people to educate and train themselves further, although the Deputy does not subscribe to that. However, I will send a note to see if we can get the final report because we all want the same thing, which is fewer young people unemployed and more people working and training.

Regarding illness benefits, I will probably goose this as soon as I say it but thankfully everything has settled down, notwithstanding that there are people every week who do not get a payment. That is no different today from what would have occurred under the old system. There are reasons for people not getting the payments, such as a box is ticked incorrectly, a general practitioner filled in a wrong box or somebody in the Department might tick the wrong box on a screen, but they are few and far between. We still get in excess of 50,000 applications every week and there are 50,000 payments every week. There is no problem with our call waiting numbers. Thankfully, calm and peace have been restored to the office. Our staff went through a very stressful time through no fault of their own, and I am grateful for their forbearance. Things are back to normal and we are going into a period when fewer people tend to be ill than would be the case in the period from which we have just emerged, so peace reigns at present.

What about the issue with the GPs?

The Deputy might have missed that we had formalised discussions with all our GPs and a new contract was negotiated. It gave them a significant increase on the old illness certificate payments. It was probably long overdue insofar as they had not received a different payment for many years. Everybody is using the new forms and we are all happy. In fact, we are in negotiations to move to a newer type of certification system in the future. Good, peaceful and harmonious relations are ongoing.

I have a supplementary question, which I should have mentioned in the first round. It relates to the local employment service, LES. The committee is due to discuss the service but I note the Estimate is the same as in 2018. That has to be welcome-----

The Deputy did not believe me when I said that.

There is massive concern among the public on foot of the Indecon report. Much of it is legitimate concern. The Minister has the opportunity now to allay some of the concern. I will not delve into the Indecon report because that is a separate piece of work the committee intends to undertake. I would appreciate it if the Minister could allay the concern and say that the LES, as is, will remain.

I jested that the Deputy did not believe me, but I know he did not believe me. I met the Irish Local Development Network, ILDN, just before Christmas. I attended its annual conference and spoke to the members. When anybody issues a report on a person's work and it is not exactly to his or her liking, he or she will be afraid. However, I assured the network then, and I did so previously in this committee, that the people in our partnership organisations, the ILDN, and the people who run our jobs clubs, the local employment services and the CV clubs all provide valuable services to unemployed people in this country. That might change in the new iteration of activation and supports we need, which we are examining and assessing. Challenges today are different from what they were. The ILDN and its staff are placed to address those challenges because they have access to other funds that do not come from our Department, such as social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP, funding, which allows them to provide extended services for people who might have anxiety or social discourse issues. There are a new range of issues, challenges and barriers facing people today in terms of having and not having a job. The services the State provides must reflect and support those challenges. The organisations in the report by Indecon are one leg of a three-legged stool, and we would not be able to provide the services, and this was the case historically and will be in the future, without their help, support, guidance, intelligence and empathy. They are a vital part of our service and they are not going anywhere.

The Minister spoke about the processing time for carer's allowance. What is the processing time for carer's benefit?

I will find that out.

I had intended raising that issue because I have come across a number of cases where emergency situations arise, for example, somebody suffers a stroke and so forth, and somebody suddenly has to leave work. It is taking 12 weeks to process the application even though there is no means test.

Do members make the assumption that the problem with adjudicating on a carer's application is money? Most of the time it is not.

No, it is specifically about carer's benefit. I have come across a number of emergency cases where an elderly person ends up in hospital, often as a result of a fall or a stroke, and the person will not be able to go home without a carer. When somebody who is working applies for carer's benefit, it takes an age to have it processed. The person applies to take time off work but is afraid to take that time off because he or she does not know if he or she will get a payment. It seems to take forever. As it is not means tested but is contribution-based, I do not understand why this cannot be done in a week or two in a case where there is a medical report and somebody is in a hospital.

The medical assessment process is the same for both payments. There is no difference. The Department does not have to figure our income, rent and so forth which is part of the carer's allowance payment, but a great chunk of the delay is the interaction between our medical assessors and the documentation provided by applicants and their doctors with regard to whether the person fulfils the medical assessment part of the application. Carer's benefit is no different from carer's allowance in that regard.

It is causing difficulties for people who have a job and are trying to take time out for a period. It is mainly cases of elderly people having falls or strokes who cannot subsequently be discharged from a hospital or discharged to a nursing home. I have come across a number of such cases in the past year and I was surprised.

I will add to that. In my experience it is taking the same length of time to process a carer's benefit application as to process a carer's allowance application. That makes no sense because there is a means test for the carer's allowance, which is a time-consuming process.

I am sorry to contradict the Deputy but it does not. Our improved figure for carer's allowance has reduced from 19 weeks to 17 weeks. I hope that with the additional staff we have deployed in the last couple of weeks we will continue to see that number fall. It takes 12 weeks for carer's benefit.

It is a long time.

It is proving problematic for people who are working.

With respect, the medical evidence that must be provided must meet the same threshold. It is not easier for somebody to get carer's benefit from a medical assessment perspective than it is to get carer's allowance. I would be loath to have a situation where people with contributions get dealt with more quickly than others. It is not something we should ever have. We should improve both waiting times.

I have seen cases where people have had a stroke and are incapable of going home from hospital. Their discharge from hospital is delayed where the medical evidence would be very robust but the ability of the Department to process the medical evidence is the slowing factor. Something must be examined there.

It could be argued that all the cases are time dependent. A person does not apply to care for somebody unless the care is needed.

No, but it depends-----

What I was going to say is that if somebody is waiting to be discharged out of a hospital maybe we should have a fast track, but then everybody would want to be on the fast track.

Not everybody is in hospital. With the likes of Alzheimer's disease and dementia, there is not a day or time. It is not like a stroke. Certainly, I have seen last year, in particular, with benefit, a number of people who were hospitalised.

Let me have a look. What I would hate to do is to have a two-tier system where we would be treating people differently-----

I am not suggesting that.

-----but maybe there is a way around it. Let us have a look.

I have one or two other quick questions. The 2018 estimate for JobPath was €48 million and the outturn was €71 million. In her opening statement, the Minister indicated a significant drop in the live register yet the Estimate for 2019 is €57 million. While it is less than the outturn, it is still significantly more than the Estimate this time last year. Does the Minister want to explain why?

I can only explain to the Chairman that we probably did not anticipate that JobPath would be as accessible as it was.

It is not proportionate to the drop in the live register. The live register, as the Minister stated, is down 75,000 over two years. My question was in that context.

First of all, the purpose of JobPath is not only to get somebody a job. It is to make sure that he or she keeps it and that we support him or her. It is a holistic service. It is not only about getting somebody his or her CV, sitting the person in front of an employer and making sure he or she gets the job. It is making sure the person maintains sustainability within employment. That will last much longer than the day after the person gets the job. There are the payments thereafter to hopefully keep participants in their jobs so that they can then go off and not need our support afterwards. We never anticipated JobPath to be as successful as it was. It exceeded our expectations last year.

We still have 198,000 people on the unemployment register. It is my job, and our collective job, to make sure that those people find jobs in an environment where there are more jobs than there are people at present, and every support that people need to be able to get the jobs that are readily available today. We have a jobs fair in Dublin Castle tomorrow that I will go to where there will be far more employers with work than there will be people to fill that work. We need to continue to make sure, with whatever support is available to people who cannot currently get work, that we help them to get work.

I was taken by the Minister talking in her opening statement about those who remain unemployed, whether young or old. We are at a stage where the Minister rightly states there are jobs out there and it is more than merely equipping individuals. I accept that Deputy Regina Doherty is only the Minister for one Department and many of our solutions must be cross-departmental to be effective. There have been intergenerational unemployment and geographic unemployment black spots. More than merely supporting the individuals, a range of programmes across Government needs to be devised to lift those communities where there is long-term and intergenerational unemployment. What the Government is doing with the school meals is only one element. Recent reports show the outcomes of children attending a DEIS school still are some way behind those in non-DEIS schools. We have quite a considerable way to go to positively discriminate for those communities that are experiencing long-term intergenerational unemployment. While Deputy Regina Doherty has a role to play in it - I am not having a go at the Minister - it requires other Departments to work with her. Maybe we missed it previously. As an economy where there is almost at full employment, there is an opportunity to drive that and, for once and for all, as the opportunity is there, make the opportunity a reality for people to work and they break that cycle.

Ms Kathleen O'Toole, the Irish-American who we employed to produce The Future of Policing in Ireland report for Government, made a presentation a number of months ago. I accept that was only about policing, but some of it is connected with the issues that we all experience and see in our towns and villages. Ms O'Toole cited examples of what she did in Seattle, Boston and New York that worked. They put together interdepartmental task forces. Instead of going into an area where there was deprivation, a drugs issue or lack of educational opportunities, they went into an area and took 1,000 people. There were five or six different departments sitting around the table and they specifically looked at those 1,000 people and asked what could they do for the mothers and what could they do for the husbands. They asked if they needed work and training. For example, they saw that there were two young fellows in a family who had problems with alcohol. They looked holistically at a community, decided what needed to be done to help that community, and all got together and collectively did their little bit, specifically, targeted for one set of people. Ms O'Toole cited the example of a particular area in New York where there was particularly high crime. The angle that they were coming from was crime. When they looked after this group of people for six months, the crime rates reduced by over 1,000% because all of the people were getting the supports and the service that they required to have a better quality of life. Ms O'Toole's other recommendation was that it should not be led by the Department of Justice and Equality and An Garda Síochána.

When we launch the new national action plan for social inclusion in May to which all committee members will be invited, I would like for us - mine is only one Department, it depends on co-operation and I would be grateful for anything the Chairman can do to help - to get a number of Departments to pick a number of areas and use task forces so that we can see if the approach works here. If it does, I would like us to have a national programme of holistically looking at issues that range from something as small as our younger people maybe growing up not knowing how to cook for themselves and teaching people skills, to providing education, helping people with addictions, talking to people with social anxiety, helping mothers who have not worked for years to have the confidence to do it, and all the factors that might be affecting particular issues, specifically, as the Chairman stated, the intergenerational issues. Last year we started the programme to look at jobless households. We are only doing it on a voluntary basis because we cannot do it in any other way but, because people do not know any different, they are not volunteering to come in and work with us. We need to look at it in a different way.

I thank the Minister for attending today. That concludes consideration of the Revised Estimate for Vote 37 - Employment Affairs and Social Protection.

Top
Share