Written Answers Nos. 163-177
163. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Social Protection if the rate of illness benefit being paid to a person (details supplied) will be reviewed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17669/16]
View answerUnder Social Protection Regulations, the rate payable on illness benefit claims is dependent on a person's average weekly earnings in the governing contribution year. For claims made in 2016 the governing contribution year is 2014.
The person concerned is in receipt of illness benefit from 30 May 2016. The rate of illness benefit payable is €147.30 per week which reflects their average weekly earnings in the 2014 governing contribution year.
If the person concerned is unable to meet their needs or the needs of their household, they may be entitled to supplementary welfare allowance and should contact my department's community welfare services at their local Intreo centre.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
164. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Social Protection the reason for a refusal of payment for a person (details supplied) under the family income supplement scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17670/16]
View answerThe person concerned applied for Family Income Supplement (FIS) on the 24th March 2016.
To qualify for FIS, you must be engaged in full-time remunerative employment as an employee for at least 19 hours per week or 38 hours per fortnight and this condition must continue to be satisfied for the duration of your claim.
Based on all the evidence available, a deciding officer disallowed this claim as the customer was not working the required number of hours in order to qualify for FIS.
The claimant was notified of this decision and of their right of review or appeal.
165. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Social Protection when a decision will be made on an application by a person (details supplied) under the back to work enterprise allowance scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17673/16]
View answerThe application for back to work enterprise allowance by the person concerned is currently with a social welfare inspector for investigation. When the inspector completes his investigation, a report will be forwarded to a deciding officer in the local INTREO Centre. The person concerned will be notified in writing when a decision has been made.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the deputy.
166. Deputy Anne Rabbitte asked the Minister for Social Protection his plans to reintroduce the telephone allowance for old age pensioners which was reduced in 2014. [17678/16]
View answerThe overall concern in recent years has been to protect the primary social welfare rates. Expenditure on pensions at approx. €6.976 billion is the largest block of expenditure in the Department in the Estimate for 2016, representing approximately 35% of overall expenditure. Due to demographic changes, my Department’s spending on older people is increasing year on year. Maintaining the rate of the State pension and other core payments is critical in protecting people from poverty.
The decision to discontinue the telephone allowance was estimated to provide annual savings of €48 million. These savings meant that my Department was able to retain the other valuable elements of the household benefits package such as the electricity and gas allowance and the television licence. My Department will spend approximately €227 million this year on these elements of the household benefits package for over 418,000 customers.
The cost of the telephone allowance scheme had risen significantly each year, as the number of eligible customers grew, arising from the increased number of pension recipients. In 2007 there were some 316,000 people receiving the telephone allowance compared to almost 396,000 at the end of September 2013, an increase of 25%, or an average increase of nearly 4% per annum.
Any decision to restore the telephone allowance would have to be considered in the context of overall budgetary negotiations.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
167. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for Social Protection the cost of reintroducing public sector allowances for public sector workers in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17689/16]
View answerResponsibility for Civil Service allowances rests with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform.
Following the Government Decision of 18th September 2012 in relation to allowances in payment to civil servants, a number of allowances were to be abolished or reviewed and modified. This was communicated to all Departments by letter from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform on 4th October 2012 and was fully implemented by my Department.
In the time available it has not been possible to produce an accurate estimate of the cost of re-introducing these allowances. This is being prepared and will be sent to the Deputy shortly.
168. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for Social Protection the cost of ensuring that public sector workers recruited in his Department post-2011 are paid on the pre-2011 rate; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17699/16]
View answerResponsibility for Civil Service grades and pay scales rests with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform.
With effect from 1st January 2011 reduced pay rates applied to certain direct entry grades in the Civil Service, namely Administrative Officer, Executive Officer, Clerical Officer, Services Officer, Services Attendant and Cleaner. This was communicated to all Departments by Department of Finance Circular 18/10 and was fully implemented by my Department.
With effect from 1st November 2013 Clause 2.31 of the Haddington Road Agreement was implemented which re-introduced a single pay scale for both pre-2011 and post-2011 entrants for the affected grades. This was communicated to all Departments by Department of Public Expenditure and Reform Circular 2/2014 and was fully implemented by my Department at the time.
In the time available it has not been possible to produce an accurate estimate of the cost of paying new entrants at the rate which applied in 2010. This is being prepared and will be sent to the Deputy shortly.
169. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection if half-rate carer's payment will be restored, as a matter of urgency, in the case of a person (details supplied) on a full-time basis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17724/16]
View answerCarer’s allowance (CA) was in payment to the person concerned from 22 January 2015 in respect of one care recipient.
It is a condition for receipt of a CA that the carer must be providing full-time care and attention. A person is deemed to require full-time care and attention (FTCA) where they require from another person continual supervision and frequent assistance throughout the day in connection with normal bodily functions or continual supervision in order to avoid being a danger to themselves.
As part of a review of continuing eligibility for CA, the application was referred to a local social welfare inspector (SWI) on 27 April 2015 to confirm that all the conditions for receipt of CA continue to be satisfied.
Following this review and having considered all the evidence available, a deciding officer (DO) decided that the person concerned was not entitled to CA with effect from 20 April 2016 as she was not providing full-time care and attention as required. This decision creates an overpayment for the period from 21/4/16 to 22/6/16 which is recoverable by my department.
The person concerned was notified on 16 June 2016 of this decision, the reason for it and of her right of review or appeal.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
170. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Social Protection his plans to increase the top-up allowance paid to participants on JobBridge, Tús and community employment schemes; if no increase is planned, the reasons for same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17734/16]
View answerWork experience and placement opportunities programmes such as JobBridge, Tús and Community Employment are among a range of activation measures administered by the Department to support unemployed people in their efforts to get back into the labour force. Significant exchequer resources have been invested in the provision and maintenance of these programmes. The basic allowance paid to participants was increased in Budget 2016.
JobBridge was introduced in 2011 as an urgent response to the unemployment crisis. The main aim was to provide an opportunity for jobseekers to secure some work experience, while at the same time supporting employers in taking the first step in recruitment at a time when access to finance was very limited and business risk was very high. To date, it has helped over 19,000 mainly small employers to provide opportunities to nearly 48,000 jobseekers. An independent evaluation found that about 61% of JobBridge participants progressed into paid employment within a short period of finishing.
JobBridge participants receive an allowance equivalent to their underlying their jobseeker payment and an additional top-up of €52 per week.
Economic and labour market conditions have improved significantly since JobBridge was introduced and a second comprehensive evaluation of the JobBridge is currently underway. I expect the results to be published in September 2016. I have already announced that I plan to replace the scheme at that time and have asked the Labour Market Council to assist me in the design of its replacement. The rate of payment will be one of the issues that I will look at.
Both Tús and Community Employment (CE) focus on those who are long-term unemployed, and aim to improve the employability and work readiness of participants by providing them with the opportunities to put skills into practice and learn new ones thus enabling progression to work, further education or skill development opportunities.
Participants in Community Employment and Tús schemes work an average of 19.5 hours per week and receive a weekly payment which is equivalent to the social welfare payment appropriate to their family size, plus a top up of €22.50, subject to a minimum payment of €210.50 per week. The top up payment was increased from €20 to €22.50 last year. Any further changes to the scheme to increase the rate of payment would have to be considered in a budgetary context.
171. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Social Protection the cost of increasing the age at which child benefit is paid to cover children in full-time education up to 19, 20, 21 and 22 years of age respectively; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17787/16]
View answerChild Benefit is a monthly payment made to families with children in respect of all qualified children up to the age of 16 years. The payment continues to be paid in respect of children up to their 18th birthday who are in full-time education, or who have a disability.
Child Benefit is currently paid to around 624,000 families in respect of some 1.2 million children, with an estimated expenditure in the order of over €2 billion in 2016. Child Benefit is an important source of income for all families and in Budget 2016 the Government increased Child Benefit by €5 per month, at a cost of €72 million.
Budget 2009 reduced the age for eligibility for Child Benefit from 19 years to less than 18 years. A value for money review of child income supports, published by the Department of Social Protection in 2010, found that the participation pattern of children in education supports the current age limit for Child Benefit.
Families on low incomes can avail of a number of provisions to social welfare schemes that support children in full-time education until the age of 22, including:
- qualified child increases (IQCs) with primary social welfare payments;
- family income supplement (FIS) for low-paid employees with children;
- the back to school clothing and footwear allowance for low income families (paid at the full-time second level education rate).
These schemes provide targeted assistance that is directly linked with household income and thereby supports low-income families with older children participating in full-time education.
The estimated annual costs of extending the upper age limits for payment for those in all full time education settings, based on figures from the Department of Education and Skills are as follows:-
Up to 19 years in the region of €147.8 million
Up to 20 years in the region of €205.8 million
It is not possible to disaggregate the figures for 21 year olds and 22 year olds as the Department of Education and Skills only capture the numbers of all people in education age 21 and over.
Any changes to the eligibility criteria for Child Benefit have to be considered in an overall budgetary context.
172. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Social Protection the cost of increasing the weekly family income thresholds by €5 and €10, respectively, per child for each income band; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17788/16]
View answerFamily Income Supplement (FIS) is an in-work support which provides an income top-up for employees on low earnings with children. FIS is designed to prevent child and family poverty and offers a financial incentive to take-up employment as compared to other social welfare payments. There are currently over 56,000 families with more than 122,000 children in receipt of FIS. Expenditure on FIS is estimated to be of the order of €410 million in 2016.
To qualify for FIS average weekly family income must be below a specified amount which varies according to the number of qualified children in the family. The income thresholds reflect a number of objectives: to maintain the incentive to take up employment; to reduce the risk of household poverty; and to provide a more consistent level of support per child to poor households.
Between 2010 and 2015 FIS income thresholds remained unchanged. In Budget 2016 they were raised by €5 for families with one child and €10 for families with two or more children, at a cost of €18 million in a full year. The average weekly payment made to families is currently estimated at €135 per week. Since 2010 the number of families in receipt of FIS has doubled.
Based on the most recent FIS recipient numbers from early June 2016, the cost of further increasing the weekly FIS income thresholds by €5 per child per week is estimated to be in the region of €19.2 million. The cost of increasing the thresholds by €10 per child per week is estimated to be in the region of €38.5 million.
My Department has no way of predicting with any degree of accuracy the potential in-flow from raising the income thresholds as proposed by the Deputy. Therefore neither of the estimates above includes the potential additional costs associated with such a measure.
Any changes to the FIS income thresholds would have to be considered in an overall Budgetary context.
173. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Social Protection the number of cases before the High Court in which the payment of child benefit is being contested on equality grounds; the implications of these cases for general policy in relation to payment of child benefit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17789/16]
View answerChild Benefit is a monthly payment made to families with children in respect of all qualified children up to the age of 16 years. The payment continues to be paid in respect of children up to their 18th birthday who are in full-time education, or who have a disability. Child Benefit is currently paid to around 623,607 families in respect of some 1.2 million children, with an estimated expenditure in the order of over €2 billion in 2016.
There are currently 8 cases before the High Court brought by asylum seekers/declared refugees/persons in receipt of subsidiary protection, claiming that they are being discriminated against and are not being equally before the law in the context of backdating child benefit. There are no cases before the High Court brought solely under the Equal Status Acts 2000-2015.
The day-to-day needs of the children are the priority consideration in the operation of the current child benefit payment arrangements.
The Department regularly reviews all of its schemes, including Child Benefit, in order to ensure that they are still delivering on their original policy aims and objectives.
174. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Social Protection the amount recovered through Operation DIRT in 2014 and 2015; the amount recovered by Operation DIRT since its inception; his views on the implementation of Operation DIRT to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17797/16]
View answer175. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Social Protection the top ten individual amounts recovered from social protection claimants through Operation DIRT in 2015; the aggregate amount in their bank accounts; when those persons first made incorrect declarations to his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17798/16]
View answer176. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Social Protection the top ten amounts in the bank accounts of persons who have made repayments to her Department as a result of Operation DIRT since it commenced; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17799/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 174 to 176, inclusive, together.
Section 261 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 provides for the sharing of data for the purpose of preventing and detecting fraud in social welfare schemes. Information held by another Government Department or a public body which is required for the purposes of the Act for the control of schemes may be transferred to the Department.
In 2012, the Revenue Commissioners provided information on persons who had paid high levels of Deposit Interest Retention Tax (DIRT) in previous years. High value DIRT payments indicate that significant amounts of capital have been invested. This data was cross-referenced with persons in receipt of means-tested social welfare payments. Broader investigations were initiated following completion of a pilot project undertaken by the Department’s Special Investigations Unit in 2012. These investigations and related processes, such as the recovery of overpaid social welfare payments, are ongoing. Given the complexity of individual investigations, it is not possible to give a definitive timeline as to when outcomes will be finalised.
The Department does not record the value of capital held in respect of individual bank accounts. The dates of false declarations made in individual cases range from the dates of application to schemes and subsequent declarations made over the life cycle of scheme payments.
To the end of 2015, some €23.1 million has been recovered from persons who had failed to advise the Department of their investments. Details of the amount recovered in 2013 and 2014 are provided in the following table:
TABLE: Amounts Recovered on DIRT related Investigations 2013 to 2015
|
Year |
Amount Recovered |
|
2013 |
€10.3m |
|
2014 |
€8.4m |
|
2015 |
€4.4m |
The Department can indicate that the highest value repayment in 2015 amounted to some €144,000 with an average of the highest value recoveries (those over €90,000) amounting to some €118,300. The Department does not maintain records of the value of the investment held by each individual customer and, therefore, it is not possible to provide aggregate values for the sums invested, not all of which had been concealed from the Department.
177. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Social Protection the number of claims under the dental treatment services scheme in each of the years 2011 to 2015, in tabular form; the annual cost of the scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17801/16]
View answerThe total number of claims and the cost of the Dental Benefit scheme in the relevant years are detailed in the following table:
|
Year |
Claims |
Cost |
|
2011 |
272,865 |
€9,149,860 |
|
2012 |
270,602 |
€8,933,611 |
|
2013 |
298,658 |
€9,850,981 |
|
2014 |
310,350 |
€10,236,427 |
|
2015 |
312,659 |
€10,314,722 |
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
