Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 15 June 2004
76 Mr. Hayes asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of refusals to date for supplementary welfare allowance for failure to meet criteria introduced by her Department in relation to accommodation needs; the amount her Department has saved from the introduction of this measure; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [17651/04]
View answer94 Mr. Connaughton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she has received reports or observations from the community welfare service concerning the operation of Statutory Instrument 728 of 2003 regarding rent supplement. [17656/04]
View answer99 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she has monitored the impact of the recent changes that were introduced on eligibility criteria for the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. [17539/04]
View answer611 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the extent to which instructions have been given to community welfare officers arising from budgetary cuts in 2004; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [17878/04]
View answer612 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of persons who have been refused rent allowance in 2004; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [17879/04]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 76, 94, 99, 611 and 612 together.
The main objective of the measures I introduced to the supplementary welfare allowance scheme is to re-focus the scheme on its original objective which is to meet immediate short-term income maintenance needs as opposed to long-term needs. The principal changes relate to rent supplement Statutory Instrument 728 of 2003, which gives effect to the main rent supplement measures. As a result of these changes people applying for rent supplement will have their housing needs assessed by the local authorities in a systematic manner and this should increase their chances of getting social housing where appropriate. Subject to the normal means assessment and other qualifying criteria, a person who is assessed by a housing authority as having a housing need will qualify for rent supplement regardless of how long that person has been renting.
With certain very important exceptions, it is no longer possible for a person to become a tenant in the private rented sector with the support of rent supplement unless the local authority is satisfied that the person has a housing need. The impact of this and the other measures was fully assessed and the manner of their implementation was carefully designed to ensure that the interests of vulnerable groups such as the homeless, the elderly and disabled are fully protected. The six months prior renting requirement does not apply in their case. Community welfare officers who administer the schemes have been kept fully apprised of the changes. A circular was issued by my Department to the health boards last December in which the details of the changes to the SWA scheme were set out.
My Department has been in regular contact with the community welfare staff of the health boards both prior to and since the introduction of the measures in January. These contacts range from daily telephone and e-mail exchanges to informal meetings as well as more formal structured meetings at which the operation of the new measures has been discussed. In addition to the ongoing contacts between my Department and the health boards, a working group has been established under the Sustaining Progress agreement to facilitate engagement with the social partners in respect of monitoring the impact of the recent changes to the scheme. The working group, which is chaired by the Department of the Taoiseach, includes representatives from ICTU and the community and voluntary pillar as well as my Department and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
Details of rent supplement applications refused on grounds of failure to meet the new criteria are not maintained on my Department's computer system. However, my Department requested the health boards to examine a sample of applications for rent supplement which were refused since last January in order to monitor the impact of the changes. Of the 242 cases examined, 25 were refused on account of the new measures. It is not known how may of these cases appealed against the original decision or what the outcomes were in any such appeals. The savings arising from these measures derive from refusals of claims, where the applicant does not fulfil the new requirements, and also from instances where people do not submit a claim but make alternative arrangements to meet these needs. For that reason, it is not possible to state exactly how much has been saved so far this year as a result of the new rent supplement measures. The total savings for the year are estimated at €12 million.
My Department has not been made aware of any cases of hardship arising from the application of the new measures. None of the measures which I have introduced affect the discretion of a health board to provide assistance where a board considers that the circumstances of a particular case warrant treatment as an exceptional measure.
These cutbacks have been in place for the last six months. Has the Minister had a recent meeting with the community welfare officers and if she has, what was the feedback from that meeting? What concerns, if any, did they express and what are their reactions to the working of the new changes? Has the Minister had a meeting with the housing groups, the people who monitor the situation on a daily basis? When the Minister made this announcement, she met with a number of groups who came together and who were concerned about the cutbacks. Has the Minister had a meeting with those groups in the last six months and what is the feedback from those groups? Has the Minister a report for the House? She stated she would report back to the House on the effects of the cutbacks.
I have had ongoing discussions with many groups, both within and without Sustaining Progress. On the basis of those discussions, it was agreed to set up a monitoring group, the composition of which I alluded to earlier. My Department will be involved in the group which will be facilitated and chaired by the Department of the Taoiseach. We are, therefore, examining the implications and impact of these decisions not only in my Department but also under the auspices of Sustaining Progress. It is my intention to continue to keep in touch with people.
With regard to meeting community welfare officers and housing authorities, while I have not personally met representatives of the former group, formal and informal discussions are ongoing between my Department and officials and representative groups. Although the housing authorities do not fall under the auspices of the Department, we have been in touch and I have met the Minister of State with responsibility for housing on a number of occasions to progress our action plan. One of the greatest benefits of these contacts has been the current tremendous interaction between the health boards and housing officers in dealing with housing. In the majority of areas, the application form and information provided are uniform. The continuation of this co-operation and the implementation of the proposed action plan by my Department and the Minister of State with responsibility for housing will address many of the long-term issues which prevent people who are unfortunately reliant on long-term SWA rent supplement from receiving the best supports.
The Minister stated that her Department is not aware of increased hardship. I do not mean to insult her but she should talk to the groups involved in the housing issue, for example, the Simon Community, Threshold and the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. The reality is that the average cost of accommodation is €121 per week, which is above the cap. People are, therefore, conspiring with their landlords by dipping into their social welfare payments to pay for rent increases. The Minister must be aware of this problem from her clinics. An increasing number of people who come to me and other Deputies are using their social welfare, borrowing or being subsidised by their families to pay rents.
The latest report on Dublin by the Simon Community showed that not one person moved from transitional, temporary accommodation into social housing. Why is this? The reason is that housing is not being built and made available to those who need it. If the Department is not aware of increased hardship, it is living in a different world.
Will the Minister explain the reason community welfare officers are operating the practice whereby a mother with one child who has a subsequent child and claims child dependant allowance from the Department has her rent allowance reduced? This is illegal because the person in question does not receive a budget increase. Why is this happening?
Am I sleep-walking or is the Minister living in the land of Walter Mitty in stating there is no hardship?
It is crazy.
That is an unbelievable comment; of course there is hardship. The Minister stated that approximately €330 million has been diverted into this scheme. What meetings have been held with the Minister of State with responsibility for housing in the past five to six months to ensure that some transitory housing accommodation is made available to those who find themselves in hardship? In what cuckooland or ivory tower are people living or are we fools?
The Minister must be aware that the Simon Community in Dublin has stated that not only has there been an increase in the number of homeless individuals this year but that the number of homeless families has also increased. As the Minister who sits at the Cabinet table with responsibility for social and family affairs, how can she stand over that state of affairs?
Contrary to the buoyancy of Deputies opposite, I am aware of what is going on. It was on that basis that I met all the relevant organisations on a number of occasions and set up a special group under the Department of the Taoiseach to examine the implications of decisions. Moreover, I have had numerous meetings with the Minister of State with responsibility for housing — I do not have time to check them out — to examine the action plan to progress this issue.
As regards Deputy Durkan's question, having analysed every parliamentary question he has tabled to me, it is obvious he has a problem with the community welfare officer in Kildare because that seems to be the crux of the issue. With regard to his specific question, which I have answered three times, the woman in question had another child and, as a consequence, received an increase in child dependant allowance and one parent family allowance. Rent allowance is determined by income and the rent allowance of the woman in question was reduced because she received an increase in income. I have answered the question three times and if the Deputy is not happy, I would be delighted to give him the permutations on which such decisions are made.
That never happened before. It started on the Minister's watch and she knows it. It is disgraceful.
Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.
