Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 20 February 2024
52. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Minister for Social Protection if she will review the fact that standard disregards for maintenance that apply in the means testing of other payments do not apply in the means testing of the guardians payment, non-contributory. [8089/24]
View answerThere is a lot of talk about care at the minute in the context of the referendum. We should acknowledge, in that context, the role that kinship carers play. Very often they are the unsung heroes of the system who step up when, for whatever reason, a relative of theirs is not in a position to care for children. Very often they are working very hard, they step up and it can be complicated. In many instances, I do not believe they are recognised financially. There is also a significant issue of small contributions from the natural parent and what this means in terms of the knock-on impact to guardianship payments.
I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. The guardian’s payment, contributory, and guardian’s payment, non-contributory, are, respectively, social insurance and social assistance payments made to a person caring for a child where that child is defined as an orphan under the social welfare legislation.
A child is considered an orphan if they are under 18, or 22 if in full-time education, and both parents are deceased; or one parent is either dead or unknown or has abandoned and failed to provide for the child and the other parent is unknown or has abandoned and failed to provide for the child.
The guardian’s payment, non-contributory, is a means-tested payment which is based on the means of the child. The means of the guardian, including any maintenance payments paid to him or her in respect of the child, are not assessed when establishing entitlement to the payment. The social welfare and civil law-----
Will the Minister repeat that last sentence? I wish to understand it.
Yes. The means of the guardian, including any maintenance payments paid to him or her in respect of the child, are not assessed when establishing entitlement to the payment. It is a means-tested payment that is based on the means of the child.
The Social Welfare and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2023 is currently before the Oireachtas and is expected to be enacted in the coming weeks. One of the main purposes of the Bill is to give legislative effect to changes to the social welfare system, which provide that child maintenance payments will no longer be assessed as means for social welfare purposes. This covers a range of schemes including the guardian’s payment, non-contributory. The amendment follows from a recommendation of the child maintenance review group, which was accepted by the Government.
Currently, the guardian's payment, contributory, is paid in respect of 1,575 children and the guardian's payment, non-contributory, is paid in respect of 814 children. That is the current situation.
My sense of this is that either this has not fully established itself yet or maybe the change in approach has not factored through on the ground. I received a parliamentary question response saying that the means of the guardian, including any maintenance payment paid to them, in respect of the child are not assessed when establishing entitlement. The problem is not just in terms of means when it comes to this particular payment. This needs to be looked at in terms of operational guidelines and at deciding officer level. It is not just how it interferes with means, contributions from the payment are considered a contradiction to parental abandonment, which is a requirement of the guardianship payment. If it interferes with that then they can be disallowed. A child could receive €50 for their confirmation from a parent who is hardly in the picture at all and that could interfere with the sense of them being considered parentally abandoned. This is a problem that seems to be in terms of the actual operation of it. It is not just the overall means, the whole sum, but how it interferes with parental abandonment. This needs to be taken up in terms of operational guidelines as to how this flows through.
The only means we take account of under the guardian payment is that of the children themselves. In most cases the child has no means at all. We do not take account of the means or the income of the guardian. That does not come into play.
The only case where this should arise is in respect of maintenance payments that are paid directly to the child. When the child maintenance legislation currently going through the Houses is enacted that will mean even maintenance payments paid directly to the child will now be disregarded in the means test for the guardian payment. There should not be an issue but if the Deputy has a specific case, were he to send me the details I would be very happy to look at it. I certainly would not want to see somebody's payment reduced because the child got a small gift in the course of it. The maintenance payments will not be included when this legislation concludes its passage. It will be finished next week, I think.
I could probably send several cases to the Minister albeit I do not have them directly. Kinship Care, a subsection of Treoir, highlighted this issue to me. Kinship Care met the guardian's payment deciding officer relatively recently. As far as that meeting was concerned, the deciding officers were unaware of the recent change of maintenance not being factored into entitlements for other payments.
This was not something they were aware of and they went on to explain that irregular maintenance, or pocket money, can be deemed to be a parental contribution. It is not about the child's means rising above a certain level. It is about the fact there is a contribution happening at all being considered a contradiction to the fact there is parental abandonment happening.
I will send as much information as I can. I am of the view that maintenance information should be excluded from applications altogether. If that is the Minister's view also will she confirm that? Any disallowed recent applications due to maintenance or pocket money should either be reviewed or people should contact the Department to reapply. People have lost out here not because the child is over an income level but because the contribution itself, by definition, contradicts the supposed test.
The Deputy is saying that by virtue of the fact a child got anything it disqualifies him or her because it is not then deemed as parental abandonment.
I will speak to my officials about that. I am happy to engage with the Deputy because that is not the purpose here. We want to try to help people, especially if they have a guardian and especially now that I am removing the maintenance payment that a child may have got. That will not be taken into consideration. It is not about putting obstacles in anybody's way here.
Taking on a child who has been abandoned, has no parents to look after it or whose parents are dead is a big undertaking for anybody. If the Deputy send me on the details, I will be happy to look at them.
