Skip to main content
Normal View

Social Welfare Benefits.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 11 February 2004

Wednesday, 11 February 2004

Questions (35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48)

Michael Ring

Question:

96 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the plans she has to award a nominal, non-means tested payment to all carers as recognition of their work; and the amount saved by the Government in subvention, home help and so on as a direct result of the care they give. [3989/04]

View answer

Gerard Murphy

Question:

102 Mr. Murphy asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she intends to increase the 50% carer's allowance grant to persons to provide care to a second person; and if she will consider extra payments of carer's allowance to those who provide care to more than two persons to reflect the care given. [4016/04]

View answer

Damien English

Question:

103 Mr. English asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on whether the limited definition of “carer” is too restrictive and excludes many genuine carers; and if she will review the situation. [4015/04]

View answer

Phil Hogan

Question:

123 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of carers in receipt of a payment; the number likely to qualify in the event of an expansion of the scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4000/04]

View answer

Denis Naughten

Question:

135 Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will consider giving widows and widowers who are under the age of 66 and do not qualify for the carer's allowance or the respite care grant at least the respite grant, in view of the fact that they are full-time carers but receive no recognition of this fact by her Department in the form of a payment. [4019/04]

View answer

Joe Costello

Question:

143 Mr. Costello asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her plans to implement the 15 recommendations contained in the November 2003 report, The Position of Full Time Carers, from the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs, specifically the recommendation for the abolition of the means test for the carers allowance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [3868/04]

View answer

James Breen

Question:

302 Mr. J. Breen asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if the means test for carers will be abolished, and if widows who are carers will receive the allowance back-dated to the date of application; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4099/04]

View answer

Bernard J. Durkan

Question:

308 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of recipients of carer's allowance; the number of persons deemed to be in need of care; her plans to meet the needs of the larger group; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4366/04]

View answer

Bernard J. Durkan

Question:

311 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she has proposals to expand or extend the carer's allowance to a wider group of carers; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4369/04]

View answer

Written answers

I propose to take Questions Nos. 96, 102, 103, 123, 135, 143, 302, 308 and 311 together.

The Central Statistics Office, CSO, included a question in the 2002 census to identify the number of persons providing unpaid personal care for a friend or family member with a long-term illness, health problem or disability. The analysis of this portion of the census, which became available on 15 October 2003, found that 40,500 people provide 43 hours or more unpaid personal help per week, or over six hours per day; 23,400 people provide 15 to 42 hours unpaid personal help per week, or between two and six hours per day; and 84,900 people provide one to four hours unpaid personal help per week, or up to two hours per day.

There are currently approximately 22,000 carers in receipt of carer's allowance or carer's benefit. This means that over 34% of the 64,000 carers, as estimated by the CSO to be caring for more than two hours per day, are in receipt of a specific carer's payment from the Department of Social and Family Affairs. People providing lower levels of care would not necessarily meet all the qualifying conditions for receipt of a carer's allowance.

Carers of more than one incapacitated person are currently entitled to an additional 50% of their rate of payment. This is an acknowledgement of the particular difficulties, both financial and personal, which are faced by these carers. These recipients also receive a double respite care grant of €1,670 in June each year. The introduction of further improvements for this group of carers would have to be considered in a budgetary context.

The respite care grant is paid to carers who are in receipt of a carer's allowance and to carers who are caring for recipients of a constant attendance or prescribed relative's allowance. It is not payable with other social welfare payments. All other matters relating to the provision and availability of respite care generally are the responsibility of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children.

On the question of paying carer's allowance concurrently with another social welfare payment, such as widow's pension, the primary objective of the social welfare system is to provide income support and, as a general rule, only one social welfare payment is payable to an individual. Persons qualifying for two social welfare payments always receive the higher payment to which they are entitled.

With regard to the definition of full-time care, one of the principal conditions for receipt of the carer's allowance is that full-time care and attention is required and being provided by the carer. Under the legislative provisions, full-time care and attention means that the care recipient must be so disabled as to require continuous supervision and frequent assistance throughout the day in connection with their normal personal needs. In addition, the care recipient must be so disabled as to be likely to require this care for at least 12 months.

My Department takes the view that full-time care and attention does not necessarily mean 24 hours in each day. Full-time care and attention can be considered to apply where there is an ongoing and daily commitment by the carer, and which also generally results in the carer not being able to support him/herself through normal full-time employment. Carer's allowance applications are assessed on an individual basis having regard to the medical and other related evidence supplied by the applicant.

I am aware of the report, The Position of Full Time Carers, which was published by the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs in November 2003, and I have examined its recommendations. In relation specifically to the proposal to abolish the means test for carer's allowance, it is estimated that abolition of the means test could cost in the region of €180 million per annum. It is debatable whether abolition of the means test could be considered to be the best way to support carers or the best use of these resources.

The committee's recommendations are broad in scope and cover the responsibilities of several Departments. With regard to the responsibilities of my own Department, the committee proposes expanding the carer's allowance scheme. Those recommendations would involve additional expenditure and could only be considered in a budgetary context. They would need to be examined in the context of current Government policy in this area.

With regard to the introduction of a non-means tested payment to all carers, the review of the carer's allowance, which was published in 1998, considered the introduction of a non-means tested ‘continual care' payment to be given, following a needs assessment, to carers caring for those who are in the highest category of dependency.

More recently, in 2003, I launched a study on the future financing of long-term care. The study considers a range of benefit delivery mechanisms, including the ‘continual care' payment, as well as the issue of a needs assessment. It suggests that consideration be given to a flexible system whereby, following needs assessment, the person in need of care and their carer would select in kind services or a cash payment or a mix of both.

As there are significant issues discussed in the study, including those relating to benefit design, cost and financing of long-term care, my officials are currently preparing a consultation document to accompany the study. This document will focus all interested parties on the specific issues we need to address. I expect that this document will be ready for circulation by the end of this month.

On completion of this consultation process, a working group, which will include all relevant parties, will examine the strategic policy, cost and service delivery issues associated with the care of older people. The issue of a continual care payment will be considered, as will other proposals, in the course of the consultation process.

With regard to the amount of money saved in nursing home subventions, home helps and other services as a direct result of the work of family carers, research suggests that community care can be as costly, if not more costly, than institutional care where a proper and adequate range of community services are provided. This is because the medical professionals involved are mainly dealing with people on a one to one basis, and it is also the case that many people who are being cared for at home also spend a certain amount of time in hospitals.

Government policy is strongly in favour of supporting care in the community and enabling people to remain in their own homes for as long as possible. However, the State cannot, and would not wish to, replace the personal support and care provided within the family and the community. Its primary role, therefore, is to provide adequate support to carers and to those for whom they are caring to enable them remain in their own communities for as long aspossible.

The development of the range of supports for carers will continue to be a priority for this Government and, building on the foundations now in place, we will continue to develop the types of services which recognise the value of the caring ethos and which provide real support and practical assistance to people who devote their time to improving the quality of life forothers.

Pádraic McCormack

Question:

97 Mr. McCormack asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the supports her Department offers to multiple birth parents; her views on whether such supports are adequate; the number of parents who received such supports in 2003; and the costs of same. [4022/04]

View answer

Significant improvements in the level of support under the child benefit scheme have been made in recent years to parents with multiple births. Prior to 1998, child benefit was payable at the normal rate for each child in the case of twins with an added grant of €634.87, £500, payable at birth. Further grants of €634.87 were payable when the twins reached the ages of four and 12. Child benefit was paid at double the normal rate where three or more children were born together. However, no birth grants were payable at that time in the case of triplets.

In the Social Welfare Act 1998, two key additional measures were introduced, designed to improve the overall package of benefits available to parents of multiple births. First, the €634.87, £500, grants, which previously were confined to families with twins, were extended to include families with multiple births of three or more children. Second, the rate of child benefit payable in respect of twins was increased to 150% of the normal rate.

In the year to November 2003, child benefit payments were made in respect of 27,523 children of multiple births, including 13,332 sets of twins, 262 sets of triplets, 12 sets of quadruplets and one set of quintuplets. The estimated total cost of child benefit to all multiple birth children in the year was €66.75 million.

Substantial investments have been made in general to the CB scheme in recent years, with total expenditure on child benefit expected to reach €1.9 billion when the current programmeof multi-annual increases is complete. These improvements benefit all families with children, including, of course, families with multiple births.

Olwyn Enright

Question:

98 Ms Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of persons who were refused the back to school clothing and footwear allowance who were subsequently awarded an exceptional needs payment in 2002 and 2003. [3993/04]

View answer

Paul McGrath

Question:

106 Mr. P. McGrath asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of applications received by health boards for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance in 2003; the number of applications granted and refused; and the number of children involved. [3992/04]

View answer

I propose to take Questions Nos. 98 and 106 together.

The back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme provides assistance towards the cost of school clothing and footwear for children mainly attending primary or post-primary schools. The scheme operates from the beginning of June to the end of September each year and is administered on behalf of my Department by the health boards.

A person may qualify for payment of a back to school clothing and footwear allowance if he or she is in receipt of a social welfare or health board payment, is participating in an approved employment scheme, is attending a recognised education or training course and has household income at or below certain set levels. Under the scheme an allowance of €80 is payable in respect of qualified children aged from two to 11 years and an allowance of €150 is payable in respect of qualified children aged from 12 to 22 years.

In 2003, 81,851 applications were received, 75,202 were approved and 6,649 were refused under the scheme. I am arranging to have a tabular statement made available to the Deputy setting out the relevant statistics in greater detail. Some 172,100 children benefited in 2003 at a cost of €17.7 million.

Details regarding the number of claimants who were refused assistance under the back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme and who were subsequently awarded payments under the exceptional needs payments scheme are not available.

However, the average number of exceptional needs payments made in respect of children's clothing during the period July to October inclusive is about €350 per month higher than the average for the other eight months of the year. This suggests that a relatively small number of people who are refused assistance under the back to school clothing and footwear scheme are subsequently awarded an exceptional needs payment.

Back to School Clothing and Footwear Allowance 2003

Health Board

Applications Received

Applications Granted

Applications Refused

No. of Children that benefited

ERHA area *

27,062

24,517

2,545

58,971

Western

7,940

7,427

513

18,139

Southern

11,628

10,896

732

22,634

South Eastern

10,157

9,370

787

19,197

North Eastern

7,617

6,880

737

14,403

Mid-Western

6,706

6,185

521

13,372

North Western

6,533

6,055

478

13,949

Midland

4,208

3,872

336

11,458

Totals

81,851

75,202

6,649

172,123

* The Eastern Regional Health Authority, ERHA, area includes the Northern Area Health Board, the East Coast Area Health Board and the South Western Area Health Board.

Ciarán Cuffe

Question:

99 Mr. Cuffe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the additional cost to the State which will ensue as a result of recent charge increases to the free telephone rental scheme. [4029/04]

View answer

Brian O'Shea

Question:

137 Mr. O'Shea asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the outcome of her talks with Eircom regarding increases in telephone charges for pensioners and welfare recipients; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [3880/04]

View answer

I propose to take Questions Nos. 99 and 137 together.

My Department introduced a significant change to the telephone allowance scheme in October 2003. The structure of the allowance was changed to make it a cash credit on bills, not attributable to any particular component of the bill. This change makes it easier for additional service providers to participate in the scheme, by applying a standardised allowance amount to bills irrespective of the tariff components.

In conjunction with this change, a special "bundle rate", the Eircom social benefits scheme was negotiated with Eircom, which provided telephone allowance customers with line and equipment rental plus an enhanced call credit of up to €5.35 worth of free calls per two month billing period. The cost of the bundle, €20.41 plus VAT per month, was at a substantial discount to the previous cost of these services.

The Commission for Telecommunications Regulation, ComReg, recently approved a price increase application from Eircom of 7.5% in line rental, effective from 4 February 2004. A lesser percentage increase is also being applied to telephone instrument rental where applicable. It is my understanding that these increases will be offset by reductions in call costs in order to limit the average, private, customer bill increase to the consumer price index rate.

Following detailed discussions between officials of my Department and Eircom, it was agreed that the increase in the Eircom social benefits scheme would be limited to the rate of CPI, 1.9%. Some technical restructuring of the bundle was also agreed which removed some additional call unit value. To offset this, Eircom offered to give low use customers up to €10 worth of calls free per two month bill, by offering them its separate "vulnerable users" scheme in addition to the social benefit scheme.

The revised package results in an increase to the social welfare customer of €0.94, including VAT, per two monthly bill. The other revisions to call costs by Eircom should be broadly beneficial to social welfare customers. There is no additional cost on the social welfare vote arising from the charge increase.

Question No. 100 answered with QuestionNo. 93.
Top
Share