asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he is aware of the serious hardship caused to old age pensioners, widows, etc. because the increase in the British social welfare benefits is calculated as increased income to such persons as are resident in the Republic; and if he will take the necessary steps to amend the regulations and have pension books restored to former recipients.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Increased British Social Welfare Benefits.
17.
I would refer the Deputy to my reply to a number of questions on this subject on the 14th June.
I should perhaps add that the inclusion of increases in these pensions as means did not cause hardship as legislation provides that the reduction in pension here cannot be greater than the increase in the British pension.
Is the Minister seriously saying that he is not aware of any hardship?
Yes.
Is the Minister serious when he says it?
Surely the Minister will agree it is a hardship upon the recipients of social welfare benefits of this kind to have his or her book kept for months?
There is no hardship because it is specifically provided that there cannot be a net decrease in the income from both pensions.
I mean the retention of the book, pending investigations.
I am not aware of any such long retentions.
The Minister's Department or the Exchequer has gained to the extent of £350,000.
No, that is not the case. The amount saved, in so far as could be estimated, was taken into account in deciding on the increase it was possible to give in the Budget last year.
(Interruptions.)
(Cavan): Is it not a fact that the Minister's Department effected a net saving of something like £150,000?
£350,000.
(Cavan): A substantial amount of at least £150,000 between the saving they effected by reducing the pensions and the amount of the increase they gave in other directions.
This money was re-allocated in giving increases to those people who were most in need under the Social Welfare Bill of this year.
(Cavan): Is it not a fact that there was a saving of £150,000 at least?
On the contrary, there was an additional sum allocated in the Budget for pensions.
This was after the Budget.
Before the Budget.
Does the Minister not recall in replying to a question of mine, and Deputies Barrett and O'Donnell, I think, that there was a net saving of £268,000?
There was, but this was re-allocated in the increases which were passed under the Social Welfare Bill prior to the Recess.
(Interruptions.)
I cannot allow this to go on all day.
I put down a question and I think I am entitled to ask——
The Deputy has asked supplementary questions; I cannot allow it to go on all day.