asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason for the continuous delays in payment of disability benefit to members of the social insurance fund in Waterford city and county; what steps he has taken to rectify this neglect following complaints made on several occasions; and the longest delay between the suspension of benefit following a request for a district medical referee's report, the actual date of the examination and the date of payment of benefit.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Waterford Disability Benefit Delays.
142.
I am not aware that there is, in general, any delay in the payment of disability benefit under the Social Welfare Acts to claimants in Waterford city and county and I can assure the Deputy that the prompt payment of social welfare benefits is at all times the concern of all officers of my Department.
There are always, of course, the occasional instances in which, for one reason or another, delay of some kind occurs despite all efforts to avoid it, and if the Deputy will let me have details of any specific case which he may have in mind I will have enquiries made in the matter.
With regard to the latter part of the question I should perhaps point out that, as the Deputy is, no doubt, aware my Department has also the responsibility of ensuring that benefit is paid only to those persons duly entitled to it. When, therefore, it is considered that there are reasonable grounds for obtaining a second medical opinion in the case of a claim for disability benefit the claimant is required to present himself for examination by a medical referee, but unless in exceptional cases where there are clear grounds for doing so, this does not entail as the Deputy suggests, immediate suspension of benefit. Payment of benefit is not normally suspended until a report indicating that the claimant is fit for work has been received from the Medical Referee.
Medical referees attended in the Waterford City and County area at intervals of two to three weeks but records in relation to disability benefit cases referred for medical referee examination are not kept in such a form as to render the information which the Deputy requests readily available. The required information could not be extracted without a very considerable expenditure of time and labour which would not be warranted.
Will the Minister not agree that the one big slur on his Department is the delay which occurs between the report of the referee and the hearing of an appeal as a result of somebody's being dissatisfied with the referee's decision. There are many instances—in fact, in almost every instance—where months pass by before the second examination takes place. The Minister's predecessor said it was not important because the Department had made up their minds that they were fit for work and therefore it did not matter very much to have a delay like that.
Where the medical referee reports that a person is capable of work, one could not quite prove that there is serious hardship if, in a doctor's opinion, the person is fit for work.
If the Minister would come down the country with some of us and see, for example, the father of seven or eight children being left without any benefit because of some of these stupid arrangements, he would change his mind.
Would the Minister state the number of medical referees employed on appeal cases?
It is a separate question.
It is a good question.
It relates to Waterford city. It is not a general question. The Deputy is not in order. I am calling Question No. 143.
In view of the fact that the number of referees employed would have a big bearing on the availability of a referee going to Waterford city, surely the Minister might be allowed to answer the question?
I do not know the number of medical referees but I know that there are regular medical referees sittings in Waterford and county, actually fortnightly in Waterford, which is very good.