Written Answers Nos. 519-537
519. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the estimated full year cost of reducing the hours required to qualify for the working family payment from 19 to 15 hours for lone parents; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14740/19]
View answerThe Working Family Payment (WFP) is an in-work support which provides an income top-up for employees on low earnings with children. WFP is designed to prevent in-work poverty for low paid workers with child dependants and to offer a financial incentive to take-up employment. Estimated expenditure on WFP in 2018 was approximately €430 million and it is currently paid to almost 54,000 families in respect of some 122,000 children.
To qualify for WFP, a person must be engaged in full-time insurable employment which is expected to last for at least 3 months and be working for a minimum of 38 hours per fortnight or 19 hours per week. A couple may combine their hours of employment to meet the qualification criteria. The applicant must also have at least one qualified child who normally resides with them or is supported by them. Furthermore, the average family income must be below a specified amount which varies according to the number of qualified children in the family.
The “hours worked” eligibility criterion has been reduced significantly since the introduction of the scheme, from 30 hours per week to 19 hours per week.
For low income workers with less than the minimum hours of employment for WFP and working on a casual basis (that is, up to and including 3 days per week) the Jobseeker’s Allowance (JA) scheme provides in-work income support through daily disregards and tapered withdrawal of payments .
Apart from the jobseeker schemes, if a person cannot meet the 19 hours WFP threshold or if their hours vary significantly from week to week, the Department offers a number of other schemes which can provide income support that can be combined with earnings from employment, subject to each individual’s circumstances. These include One-Parent Family Payment (OFP), the Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment (JST), and the Part-Time Job Incentive (PTJI) scheme
Further reducing the “hours worked” requirement would potentially have significant expenditure implications which are not possible to quantify. The number of families working between 15-18 hours who are earning below the relevant WFP thresholds is currently unknown. Also, reducing the numbers of hours worked required to access WFP from 19 to 15 could have a number of behavioural effects the increased cost of which would be difficult to predict. These effects include:
- reducing the incentive to increase part-time hours, resulting in recipients on the minimum 19 hours threshold reducing their hours of work;
- attracting new recipients currently on higher wages above the WFP threshold, who might decide to reduce their hours in order to qualify.
- greater dependency on WFP to support very low earnings, with significant budgetary implications.
It is crucially important that WFP does not inadvertently subsidise unsustainably low earnings or encourage employers to offer minimal hours of employment. The longer term goal of WFP, as an incentive to take up and remain in work, could be compromised if the nature of the work taken up is not ultimately sustainable without ever-increasing and perhaps ultimately unsustainable levels of subvention.
520. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the estimated full year cost of allowing lone parents in employment whose children are aged between 7 and 14 years of age to receive both the jobseeker's transition payment and the working family payment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14741/19]
View answerMy Department provides a number of options for income support to lone parents once their entitlement to the One-Parent Family Payment (OFP) ceases. These include the Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment (JST) payment where the youngest child is aged 7-13 years (inclusive), and the Jobseeker’s Allowance (JA) payment which may be paid to lone parents where the youngest child is aged 14 or over. The Working Family Payment (WFP), is also available to lone parents who are working 19 or more hours per week. Lone parents who move to WFP may also apply for the Back to Work Family Dividend (BTWFD).
The concurrent payment of JST and WFP contradicts the policy goal of the changes to the OFP scheme, which were to tackle long-term social welfare dependency - and its associated poverty risks - through a tapering of income supports and a more active engagement process offering enhanced educational, training and employment supports. Concurrent payment of JST and WFP would also introduce a steep financial "cliff" for lone parents when their youngest child reaches 14 years of age and they potentially move to Jobseeker’s Allowance.
Lone parents currently on JST who increase their working hours to 19 or more per week can transfer from JST to WFP.
Bearing the above policy position in mind, the Department has calculated the cost of allowing JST recipients who meet the eligibility requirements for WFP (i.e. 19hrs average working hours per week), and the cost of allowing those in receipt of WFP with children aged between 7 and 13 (inclusive) who would meet the eligibility requirements for JST to be some €62m on an annual basis.
521. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the estimated full year cost of extending the jobseeker's transitional payment for lone parents until their youngest child reaches 18 years of age; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14742/19]
View answerMy Department provides a number of options for income support to lone parents once their entitlement to the One-Parent Family Payment (OFP) ceases. These include the Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment (JST) payment where the youngest child is aged 7-13 years (inclusive) and the Jobseeker’s Allowance (JA) payment which may be paid to lone parents where the youngest child is aged 14 or over. The Working Family Payment (WFP), is also available to lone parents who are working 19 or more hours per week. Lone parents who move to WFP may also apply for the Back to Work Family Dividend (BTWFD).
The cost of increasing the age limit for a qualified child for the jobseeker's transitional payment (JST) while the youngest child remains in secondary school is not easily estimated as there are significant barriers to undertaking such an exercise. For example, customers may no longer be within the welfare system, while others could seek to move from alternative payments such as Jobseekers Allowance (JA), the Working Family Payment (WFP) and the Back to Work Family Dividend (BTWFD) back to JST. It would be difficult for my Department to estimate the magnitude of this flow into and between schemes with any degree of accuracy.
Likewise, the number of young people 18 years of age and over who are still in secondary education, and the proportion of those who are the children of lone parents in receipt of benefits is not readily available or easily estimated. As these unknown factors are critical to providing a reliable costing my Department is not in a position to provide the costing requested.
522. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the estimated full year cost of increasing the earnings disregard for the jobseeker's transitional payment by €10, €15, €20 and €25, respectively, in tabular form; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14743/19]
View answerThe estimated full year cost of increasing the earnings disregard for the Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment €10, €15, €20 and €25, respectively is set out in tabular form:
|
Estimated additional Annual Cost @ 160 disregard |
€1,340,300.00 |
|
Estimated additional Annual Cost @ 165 disregard |
€2,010,450.00 |
|
Estimated additional Annual Cost @ 170 disregard |
€2,680,600.00 |
|
Estimated additional Annual Cost @ 175 disregard |
€3,350,750.00 |
The above costings are based on the number of recipients who were working and earning in excess of €150 per week on the Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment as of March 2019.
The costings do not take into account potential behavioural changes, or the inflow of new entrants, which may arise from the introduction of higher income disregards. There would be additional costs on foot of these two factors, which are not possible to cost and have not been factored into the above costings.
523. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the estimated full year cost of increasing the earnings disregard for the one parent family payment by €10, €15, €20 and €25, respectively, in tabular form; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14744/19]
View answerThe estimated full year cost of increasing the earnings disregard for the One Parent Family payment €10, €15, €20 and €25, respectively, is set out in tabular form:
|
Estimated additional Annual Cost @ 160 disregard |
€2,996,500.00 |
|
Estimated additional Annual Cost @ 165 disregard |
€4,494,750.00 |
|
Estimated additional Annual Cost @ 170 disregard |
€5,993,000.00 |
|
Estimated additional Annual Cost @ 175 disregard |
€7,491,250.00 |
The above costings are based on the number of recipients who were working and earning in excess of €150 per week on the One-Parent Family Payment as of March 2019.
The costings do not take into account potential behavioural changes, or the inflow of new entrants, which may arise from the introduction of higher income disregards. There would be additional costs on foot of these two factors, which are not possible to cost and have not been factored into the above costing.
524. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the estimated full year cost of increasing the week hours a carer can work or study while receiving carer's allowance, carer's benefit or the carer support grant from 15 to 18.5 hours; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14745/19]
View answerIt is a condition for receipt of carer’s benefit, carer’s allowance and the carer’s support grant that the carer must be providing full-time care and attention (FTCA) to a person who requires such full-time care and attention because of a specified illness or disability. This condition is moderated by legislation allowing the carer to work or engage in training outside the home for an aggregate total of 15 hours per week. During this period of employment or education or training, adequate provision must be made for the care of the relevant person. At the end of 2016, there were 70,459 CA recipients 14,322 (approximately 20 per cent) were in engaged in some form of employment over the course of the year.
The main cost elements of a proposal to increase the limit would arise from potentially additional claimants who would not currently be eligible or do not apply because of the 15 hours condition. As administrative data does not provide a breakdown of the latter and the former is unknown, the Department has provided an indicative estimate annual cost of around €1 million for those in receipt of Carer's Allowance only.
Any changes to qualifying criteria would have to be considered in an overall budgetary context.
525. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the estimated full year cost of extending the free travel scheme for children in receipt of the domiciliary care allowance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14746/19]
View answer555. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if she will provide for a free travel pass for children in receipt of domiciliary care allowance in view of the numerous medical appointments they may have to travel to attend; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15171/19]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 525 and 555 together.
Domiciliary care allowance is a monthly payment of €309.50 to the carer of a child with a disability. There are currently 43,439 children who benefit from the allowance. The allowance may be used for the additional costs involved in caring for the child, including additional transport costs where they arise.
The free travel scheme provides free travel on the main public and private transport services for those eligible under the scheme. These include road, rail and ferry services provided by companies such as Bus Átha Cliath, Bus Éireann and Iarnród Éireann, as well as Luas and services provided by over 80 private transport operators. There are currently approx. 939,000 customers with direct eligibility. Following Budget 2019 the funding for the free travel scheme was increased by €5 million to a total of €95 million.
Providing an estimate of the cost of extending the free travel scheme to all children in receipt of domiciliary care allowance is difficult as the cost is determined by the usage of the extra passes provided, and not by the increased number. The fact that many operators have reduced fares for children and that in some cases children under five years of age can travel for free would also have to be taken into account. Taking all of this into consideration the yearly cost of the measure suggested by the Deputy may be in the region of €5 million, however this is a tentative estimate.
Any decision to extend the free travel scheme to all children who are in receipt of a domiciliary care allowance would require additional funding for the free travel scheme and would have to be considered in the context of overall budgetary negotiations.
Under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme (SWA) the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection may award a travel supplement in any case where the circumstances of the case so warrant. The supplement is intended to assist with ongoing or recurring travel costs that cannot be met from the client’s own resources and are deemed to be necessary. Every decision is based on consideration of the circumstances of the case, taking account of the nature and extent of the need and of the resources of the person concerned.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
526. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the estimated full year cost of increasing the income disregard for carer's allowance from €332.50 for a single person and €665 for a couple to €450 and €900, respectively in tabular form; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14747/19]
View answerCarer's Allowance (CA) is a means tested payment, made to people who are providing full-time care and attention to elderly people or to people with disabilities and whose income falls below certain limits. The principal conditions for receipt of the allowance are that full time care and attention is required and being provided and that the means test which applies is satisfied.
The conditions attached to payment of CA are consistent with the overall conditions that apply to social assistance payments generally. This system of social assistance supports provides payments based on an income need with the means test playing the critical role in determining whether or not an income need arises as a consequence of a particular contingency - be that illness/disability, unemployment or caring.
The means test for Carer's Allowance is one of the most generous in the social protection system in that €332.50 of gross weekly income is disregarded in the calculation of means for a single person; the equivalent for someone who is married, in a civil partnership or cohabiting is €665 of combined gross weekly income. A married couple with 2 children could have weekly earnings of €734 net of PRSI, superannuation and union subscription costs and still qualify for the full rate of Carer's Allowance. This is equivalent to over €38,000 per annum.
At the end of December 2018, there were 79,914 people in receipt of CA. The projected expenditure on CA in 2019 is almost €840 million.
It has not been possible in the time available to make a robust estimate of the costs requested using administrative and other data of the level of additional programme costs, particularly as such a change would be highly sensitive to the income distribution in households at the time of implementation. However, the Department did make an estimate in 2017 of the estimated cost of increasing the weekly income disregards for Carer’s Allowance by €51 for a couple and by €25.50 for a single person using administrative records and various assumptions. This analysis suggested at that time that it would cost in the region of €51 million (an increase of 7.3% on the programme allocation at the time). The estimated cost of the higher increase specified in the question would be expected to be several multiples of this amount. Any changes to qualifying criteria would have to be considered in an overall budgetary context.
527. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the reason illness benefit payments are not correct in the case of a person (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14752/19]
View answerThe person concerned was previously in receipt of Occupational Injury Benefit and was paid up to the 18th November 2018 on this scheme. His Illness Benefit payment commenced from the 19th November 2018. An officer of the Department has examined his claim and decided he is due arrears of €33.00 for the 19th November 2018 and this money has now issued to him.
The Illness Benefit claim from the person concerned is currently at the maximum rate of €203 and has been paid up to the 17th March 2019, which is the date on his most recent medical certificate.
If the person concerned remains unfit for work, a further medical certificate should be submitted to the Department as soon as possible in order for further payments to issue.
It is worth noting that under the closed certification model introduced in March, general practitioners can give a medical certificate to cover the full period the person is expected to be unfit for work. Such a certificate facilitates a weekly payment to be made to the person each week over the period of certification without the need for the person to attend his general practitioner to obtain a medical certificate each week.
I trust this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
528. Deputy James Browne asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the reason Turas Nua is engaging with a person (details supplied) a year after they had secured employment; her views on the approach of Turas Nua to dealing with the person; the reason an appointment with the person was recently cancelled with one hour's notice; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14756/19]
View answerAll Jobseekers on the live register must be capable of; available for and actively seeking full-time employment. They are also required to engage with the Department’s activation services. The Social Welfare (Consolidated) Act 2005, as amended, specifies that participation in activation meetings is mandatory.
JobPath is an employment activation service that supports people who are long-term unemployed, including those working part time and those at risk of becoming long-term unemployed, to secure and sustain full-time paid employment. All jobseekers over one year on the Live Register are eligible for selection for the JobPath service and clients are chosen by means of a random selection process. The person concerned was referred to JobPath on 04/03/2019 as a part-time casual worker.
Customers referred to JobPath who are also working part-time have all activities including meetings with their personal advisor scheduled around their work commitments and the JobPath contractors are required to be flexible in the provision of the service in that respect. The Department have confirmed with the JobPath contractor that the customer’s appointments will also be scheduled around their caring commitments.
JobPath contractors endeavour to give due notice of any changes to scheduled appointments including cancellations. Unfortunately, in this case the appointment, which was scheduled for 10.30am, had to be cancelled at short notice as the Personal Adviser needed to take unplanned emergency leave. The customer was informed of same as soon as possible via a cancellation text message which issued at 9.08 a.m.
JobPath contractors do not encourage customers to give up their job. Their Personal Advisers work to provide customers with advice and guidance to secure full-time employment.
Any queries in relation to social welfare payments, either for the customer themselves or regarding their spouse, are directed to their Intreo office.
I trust this clarifies matters for the Deputy.
529. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if a couple with savings of €40,000 are means tested for jobseeker's allowance; and if they would be entitled to full payment. [14758/19]
View answerIn assessing means for social assistance payments including jobseeker’s allowance, account is taken of the value of capital and property belonging to the person and their spouse or partner. Property such as the family home or a premises used by a person in carrying out a business is not liable for assessment.
The capital assessment method for jobseeker’s allowance involves disregarding an initial amount of capital / savings and applying an increasing notional weekly value for amounts in excess of the disregarded amount, as outlined in the table. The same assessment of capital applies to capital / savings in the name of the claimant and his or her spouse / partner.
|
Amount of Capital |
Weekly Means Assessed |
|
Up to €20,000 |
Nil |
|
€20,000 - €30,000 |
€1 per each €1,000 |
|
€30,000 - €40,000 |
€2 per each €1,000 |
|
Over €40,000 |
€4 per each €1,000 |
The weekly entitlement of the claimant is the maximum weekly rate of payment for the person less the means calculated.
This means that a couple on jobseeker's allowance can have €20,000 in savings and be assessed with nil means from capital and receive the maximum weekly rate of JA. A couple with savings of €40,000 would be assessed with €30 of capital means, meaning they would entitled to the full rate minus €30.
530. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if a pension rate for a person (details supplied) will be examined; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14799/19]
View answerSince late September 2018, my Department has been examining the social insurance records of approximately 90,000 pensioners, born on or after 1 September 1946, who have a reduced rate State pension contributory entitlement based on post Budget 2012 rate-bands. These payments are being reviewed under a new Total Contributions Approach (TCA) to pension calculation which includes provision for homecaring periods.
The person concerned applied for HomeCaring Periods to my Department and all of the periods applied for have been awarded. The person has 740 reckonable paid contributions which combined with the maximum permissible number of HomeCaring periods and reckonable credits of 1,040, as set out in legislation, results in an increase from 85% to 85.58% of maximum rate of pension.
A review outcome letter has issued to the person, outlining details of their increase in payment and includes a breakdown of their social insurance contribution record.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
531. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the progress to date in the determination of an appeal for a disability allowance in the case of a person (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14811/19]
View answerThe person concerned submitted an application for disability allowance (DA) on 23 August 2017. Their application, based upon all the evidence submitted, was disallowed on medical grounds as it was not found that this lady was substantially restricted in taking up employment. The person concerned was notified in writing of this decision on 23 October 2017.
They requested a review of the decision by a deciding officer (DO) and submitted additional medical evidence for consideration on 03 April 2018. On review the original decision was upheld and this lady was notified in writing of this decision on 05 July 2018.
To date my department has had no request for a further review. It is open for this lady to reapply for DA.
I trust this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
532. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if she will review eligibility for a carer's allowance in the case of a person (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14821/19]
View answerMy department received an application for carer’s allowance (CA) from the person concerned on 4 December 2018. Carer's allowance (CA) is a means-tested social assistance payment, made to persons who are providing full-time care and attention to a person who has such a disability that they require that level of care.
The evidence submitted in support of this application was examined and the deciding officer decided that although a certain level of care was being provided the level involved did not amount to full-time care.
The person concerned was notified on 1 March 2019 of this decision, the reason for it and of her right of review and appeal.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
533. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection further to Parliamentary Question Nos. 304 and 305 of 5 December 2018, the latest costings for the proposals regarding the scheme in question over a full calendar year. [14886/19]
View answerThe farm assist (FA) scheme is a means-tested payment for farmers on low incomes and is similar to jobseeker’s allowance (JA). Recipients retain the advantages of the JA scheme such as the retention of secondary benefits and access to activation programmes. The 2019 Revised Estimates for this Department provides for expenditure of some €72 million for the FA (which also includes the Fish Assist provision).
Budget 2017 fully reversed the previous cuts to the FA means test. The changes included that 70% of farm income is now assessed as means, down from 100% (which is equivalent to a 30% income disregard) and an additional annual means disregard of €254 for each of the first two children and €381 for the third and subsequent children
It is estimated that the cost of changing the FA means testing rules in order that irrespective of the source of income the first €3,000 would be disregarded and the balance would be means tested at 50% would be approximately €12.5 million over a full calendar year. This estimate is based on the existing number of recipients and current rates. However, it is envisaged that there may be an increase of new FA claims if these measures were introduced. Therefore, the estimated cost of €12.5 million should be regarded as a minimum estimate. Any further changes to the FA scheme would have to be considered in the overall budgetary context.
I want to take this opportunity to advise the Deputy that budget 2019 provided for a €5 per week increase in the personal rate of payment for FA from €198 to €203 per week from 25 March 2019.
534. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if a person on jobseeker's allowance can continue to pay into a private pension scheme he or she enrolled in while in full-time employment; and if the pension value is regarded as means even though the person has no access to those funds until the pension has matured. [14887/19]
View answerJobseekers Allowance is one of a range of means-tested social assistance schemes, where account is taken of the income and the value of capital, including shares, of the claimant and his or her spouse/ partner.
The general rule for assessment of pension funds or annuities is that money invested in a pension fund is not assessable for means purposes if it is not accessible to the claimant. However, this must specifically be a pension fund, and not a general savings account being used by the claimant as savings for their retirement.
The value of any cash otherwise available from a pension fund is assessed on the basis of the capital valuation of that fund and any regular pension payments received are treated as income for means purposes.
When assessing income from earnings, social welfare legislation provides for various payments to be deducted from gross earnings for means assessment purposes including: PRSI contributions, payments to a trade union, and superannuation contributions, such as additional voluntary contributions (AVCs) and personal retirement savings accounts (PRSAs).
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
535. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection her plans for legislation to outlaw bogus self-employment practices; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14896/19]
View answerEmployers are required to maintain accurate records of employees and contractors who they engage and to pay the appropriate class of PRSI. There are already legislative provisions within the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 prohibiting the practice of misclassifying employment in order to avoid paying the correct social insurance contributions.
Workers who have concerns in relation to their employment status have recourse to the Department’s Scope section. This section determines employment status and the correct class of pay-related social insurance (PRSI). Where misclassification of workers as self-employed is detected, the correct status and class is determined and social insurance arrears are collected as required. Depending on the length of time involved, this collection of arrears due in itself can impose a significant penalty on employers.
Given the concerns expressed in this House and elsewhere regarding a perceived increase in the incidence of self-employment, and to ensure that people are aware of their rights and the protections available, my Department conducted a communications campaign covering radio, print and social media, in relation to the issue of false self-employment during 2018 and will repeat aspects of this campaign again during 2019.
My Department has also increased the number of employer inspections in recent months with a specific focus on detecting cases of false / bogus self-employment. It is also implementing more intensive training for inspectors. Inspections are also undertaken jointly with other agencies including the Revenue Commissioners and Workplace Relations Commission. Where evidence of non-compliance is detected, it is pursued.
In addition, I intend to implement a number of new measures.
Firstly, I will seek to put the Code of Practice for Determining Employment Status on a statutory basis. It is currently being reviewed and updated by an interdepartmental group from the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection, Finance, Revenue and the Workplace Relations Commission.
Secondly, I intend to bring forward measures to address victimisation of workers who seek a determination of their employment status.
Furthermore, I’m exploring the possibility of providing for Deciding Officers in Scope Section in my Department to make determinations on the employment status of groups or classes of workers who are engaged and operate on the same terms and conditions without having to investigate each individual worker separately. This would go a long way to ensure consistency of status decisions and their timely determination.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
536. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection when invalidity pension arrears will issue to a person (details supplied) in County Kerry; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [14897/19]
View answerThe gentleman referred to has been awarded invalidity pension with effect from 06 September 2018. Payment issued to his nominated bank account on 14 March 2019. Arrears due from 06 September 2018 to 13 March 2019 will issue to the gentleman concerned on 04 April 2019.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
537. Deputy John Brady asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the number of persons that received a letter from her Department advising them of the recalculation of their State pension rate; and the number of persons that received a letter seeking additional information as part of the recalculation of their State pension rate in tabular form. [14952/19]
View answerSince late September 2018, my Department has been examining the social insurance records of approximately 90,000 pensioners, born on or after 1 September 1946, who have a reduced rate State pension contributory entitlement based on post Budget 2012 rate-bands. These payments are being reviewed under a new Total Contributions Approach (TCA) to pension calculation which includes provision for homecaring periods.
Reviews commenced from 13 February 2019, the day after I signed the necessary regulations which together with provisions in the Social Welfare, Pensions and Civil Registrations Act 2018, which allows the increased payments to be made. As of 28 March 2019, 11,646 of reviews have been completed. Of these, over 8,850 resulted in an increase in payment for the pensioners concerned. The pensioners who did not qualify for an increase in payments will continue to receive their existing weekly rate.
I have stated from the outset that it will take a number of months to complete all of the reviews due to the numbers involved and the individual nature of social insurance records. In some cases it is necessary to engage in correspondence with the pensioner in order to clarify periods of caring, work and contribution histories. To date, over 34,000 requests for information have issued to pensioners. In order to process these reviews over 100 temporary staff have been recruited to the Departments offices in the north-west.
Regardless of when a review is conducted, where an increase in payment is due, the person's rate of payment will be adjusted without delay and arrears issued backdated to 30 March 2018, or the pensioner’s 66th birthday if later. Where a person's rate does not increase following a review, the person will continue to receive their existing rate of payment.
Given the scale (90,000 pensioners) involved, the fact that each case requires close individual examination and that some cases are more complex than others, it would not be reasonable to expect all to be processed immediately. While this work will take a number of months to complete, it will continue until all pensioners have been notified of the outcome of their review in writing.
I would urge anyone who has yet to provide additional requested information to the Department to do so as soon as possible so that their review can be processed.
I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
