asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she will increase allowances for dependants at the same rate as benefits, for example widows' pensions.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.
9.
All weekly social welfare payments have been increased from the beginning of October. The percentage increases made in the allowances for dependants were the same as those applying to the personal rates of payment. Further increases are a matter for consideration in the context of next year's budget.
Would the Minister of State accept that the practice up to now of flat increases in rates of benefit has resulted in the increases being less in the case of dependants? The Opposition refer often to their having increased social welfare payments by 20 per cent in their last budget but in reality the increase for dependants was of the order of 8 to 9 per cent. In the interest of honesty would the Minister agree that the same level of increases should apply to dependants as applies to beneficiaries?
I understood that was what the Deputy had in mind. The practice followed by the last Government in April was that the personal and adult dependant rates were increased by 25 per cent with a 20 per cent increase for short-term benefits, but child dependant rates were increased by 10 per cent only. Perhaps in those circumstances there was a certain misleading by the usage of the term "general increase of 25 per cent".
10.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the local authority contribution to the supplementary welfare allowance fund in (i) County Kilkenny and (ii) the State in the last two financial years.
Audited accounts for 1979 and 1980 are not yet available but preliminary figures indicate that the contributions were: (i) £156,270 and £166,009, respectively; (ii) £5.952 million and £6.323 million, respectively.
11.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare which categories of social welfare payments must be taken into account by the court where claims are brought by injured persons for damages arising out of accidents; and which categories may be disregarded in assessing damages against the party responsible.
12.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she will arrange to seek an amendment of the law to provide that all social welfare payments to persons injured in accidents, whether on the road or at work, need not be taken into account by the court in assessing the damages against the party responsible.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle I propose to take Question Nos. 11 and 12 together.
The only social welfare payments which must be taken into account by the court in assessing damages in claims brought by injured persons are payments of injury benefit, disablement benefit and funeral grant under the occupational injuries scheme. It is not proposed to amend the law in respect of these payments.
The social welfare payments which may be disregarded in assessing damages in respect of injury or disease are all other social insurance payments and children's allowances.
Will the Minister of State explain the logic whereby credit is permitted to be given to insurance companies in settling these claims, the insurance companies taking credit in these circumstances for social welfare payments which have been given by the State?
The categories which can be disregarded are those involved in a tripartite payment. Those which are taken into account particularly are related specifically to occupational injuries where the whole contribution is made by the employer. It is felt that it is valid that that should be taken into account in these cases.
Is the Minister of State aware that if a person receives injuries in the course of his work he makes a claim? In the meantime the injured party has been receiving payments from the social welfare fund. When it comes to settling the person's claim the insurance company take credit for those payments which have come out of State funds. It seems entirely illogical. Could I ask the Minister of State to comment?
I must admit that the thrust of the Deputy's question was misunderstood. If he likes, in the light of his comments I will have a further look into it.
I appreciate that.
13.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she will now make the financing of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme a national charge in view of the serious effects that its funding is having on local authorities.
As part of the commitment in the Programme for Government, I am reviewing the operation of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. The financing of the scheme will be part of the review.
What is the estimated total expenditure on supplementary welfare allowance in 1981.
The original estimate was £15.563 million.
What is the estimated total amount of money now owed by various local authorities to health boards on foot of this scheme?
As I indicated yesterday in answer to a similar question, that figure is not available at the moment. We will make it available to the Deputy as soon as it is.
I have one final supplementary. Would the Minister of State regard as desirable the continuation of the ridiculous situation that pertains now as far as social welfare allowance funding is concerned where you have a scheme initiated by the Department of Social Welfare, regulations as to the amount of benefit to be paid taken without consultation with anybody, the health boards authorised to implement the scheme and they subsequently having to get funding of it from the local authorities? Would the Minister regard that as a desirable and acceptable form of dealing with supplementary welfare allowances?
The Minister clearly is so unhappy with the situation that she has undertaken a complete commitment to a radical review of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. The financing of that will be a part of the review. I trust that in the last years the Deputy was as enthusiastic in his criticism of the scheme. If he was, why was it not advanced much earlier than this?
By way of clarification for the Minister of State at the Department of Social Welfare I would point out to her that anything worthwhile ever done by way of supplementary welfare allowances was done by Fianna Fáil. Is she aware that health boards in this country at this time are incurring overdrafts to accommodate money owed to them by local authorities? What does she propose doing about it besides suggesting to me that we should have done something?
I indicated yesterday in answer to a similar question that meetings are taking place with the chief executives of the health boards to discuss their current difficulties and that the matter is getting serious consideration now.
Is a committee being set up to deal with this? It will add further to the set of commissions.
(Interruptions.)
Ceist 14.
14.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she is aware that the Eastern Health Board informed Deputy Gay Mitchell that delays in issuing fuel vouchers in his constituency at the beginning of the year arose because Dublin Corporation were allegedly having the vouchers printed and there was a problem with the printers; if, in view of the fact that the corporation deny this, she will ascertain why the Deputy was so informed; and if she is satisfied that such delays will not recur.
The Deputy's question evidently refers to the issue of supplementary vouchers to implement the increase in the value of the fuel scheme from £2 to £3 weekly under the 1981 budget. I am not in a position to comment on this allegation regarding the information stated to have been given by the Eastern Health Board regarding delay in having supplementary vouchers printed but I am satisfied—and from discussions I imagine this is the main thrust—that such delay as did occur did not affect the position of the recipients. The corporation and the health board involved moved separately with the result that at no point were the beneficiaries without the vouchers or the value of the vouchers and they had sufficient vouchers in their possession from mid-January to avail themselves of the budget increase until the supplementary vouchers were available.
My grouse is not with the Minister or her Department essentially except for the fact that without doubt and as a matter of honour I want to put on the record of this House——
A question.
Would the Minister consider that it would be a very serious matter for a public representative to be informed that there was such a delay on the part of a public body by another public body? I accept that the Minister has been advised as she has been by her officials and other authorities, but would she consider that it would be a very serious matter should that occur?
I would consider it fairly serious if anybody was misinforming anybody else, and particularly a Member of the Dáil. I gather from my reading of the correspondence in the matter that where delay was mentioned in one case the reference was to a normal delay and it may have been interpreted as an exceptional delay. The difficulty may be more apparent, but if the Deputy feels that there are matters still outstanding about which my reply has not satisfied him I will be willing to meet with him personally and discuss this with him further.
Would the Minister confirm on what date the approval was given to the corporation to proceed with the printing?
I do not think I have that in my file. The important consequence was that pending the printing by the corporation extra vouchers were issued to cover the increase until the point where the supplementary vouchers were ready and printed by the corporation.
Is the Minister of State saying, therefore, that in effect the delay in reaching a decision about the rate which was to be applied to the vouchers meant that there was difficulty in the printing process for the corporation and presumably for others who had to face that problem? Would she ensure, therefore, that a similar situation does not arise now in relation to the Christmas double week? As she knows, that double week is to go into operation in the week commencing 7 December and as yet the legislation has not come before the House.
We will do everything to ensure that there are no delays.
Did I understand the Minister of State to say that she would be making herself available to discuss these matters concerning individual clients with individual Members of the House? She said she would be making herself available to discuss these matters privately with individual Members of the House.
I indicated that I was willing to pursue the matters raised in public in this House with the Deputy off the floor of the House to facilitate everybody involved if it would improve his understanding of the situation.
Would this be the means used due to the lack of communication with the Department by telephone?
15.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she will consider continuing the payment of unemployment assistance and benefit in respect of all children who attend educational institutions.
Increases for qualified children under the unemployment benefit and assistance schemes are paid up to 18 years of age, I have no proposals under consideration at this time for an extension of this age limit.
Would the Minister accept that considerable hardship can be imposed by the withdrawal of these allowances where children over the age of 18 are still attending school? The amount involved is £27 per month.
This is not a desirable situation and there are a great number of improvements we would like to make. We are having a look at quite a number of schemes and hoping that the general lot of those concerned will be improved and that their disposable income will be considerably improved when our proposals are implemented.
Is it necessary to introduce legislation to change the scheme so that payments can be made?
I am not clear whether a legislative change would be necessary but I will investigate the matter and inform the Deputy.
This is a serious question which should be handled promptly. Would the Minister accept that it might be necessary for supplementary welfare payments to be made in these instances? Would she order the health boards to ensure that families would not be at a loss as a result of this regulation?
The best way to approach the matter of children attending educational institutions is through educational grants and this Government have significantly increased the level of the grant and eligibility limits. In the past many seemingly well-intentioned proposals merely complicated the schemes and the best procedure would be to continue on the lines already adopted by the Government in significantly improving grants and making them directly available to students. The value of such a grant would amount to significantly more than the amount involved in the type of payment of which the Deputy speaks.
My question does not relate to the child who is living away from home and who may be in receipt of a university grant. I am referring to children receiving second-level education who are living at home with their families. Parents who are in receipt of social welfare payments cannot afford to do without £27 per month.
16.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she will consider continuing the payment of children's allowances in respect of all children who attend educational institutions.
Under present legislation children's allowances are already payable in respect of all children who are in full-time education, up to the age of 18 years.
This question will be reviewed in the light of the proposals to replace child tax allowance with an augmented child benefit scheme as included in the Programme for Government 1981-1986.
Would the Minister agree that the effect of the recent budget and the marked shift to indirect taxation are currently placing an extreme burden on families who have children receiving third-level education and that consequently it is now more important than ever to ensure that some assistance is given?
Those attending third level education have been very well treated by this Government at a time of grave economic recession and the level of payments is extremely generous. It amounts to significant maintenance support for children in that situation. The whole question will be reviewed in the light of our proposals to introduce a child benefit in place of a child tax allowance. All these matters will be taken into consideration at that time.
Is the Minister not aware that this improvement in grants, which has been very rapidly eroded by steps recently taken by the Government, does not apply to existing students?
The improvements in grants apply to all new students. They benefit not only from the increase in grant levels but also from the increase in eligibility limits which was quite significant and would include most of the lower and moderate wage-earners. Those already in receipt of a grant also got an increase.
17.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she is aware that fishermen are classified as self-employed for the purpose of unemployment assistance payments by her Department and as PAYE workers by the Department of Finance; and if she will take steps to eliminate this anomaly.
I am not aware that the position is as stated by the Deputy. However, I would be glad to have the matter fully investigated in conjunction with the income tax authorities if the Deputy will furnish me with particulars of any cases of which he is aware in which fishermen are treated differently by the two Departments.
Is the Minister aware that fishermen are classified as self-employed by her Department and there is an anomaly in regard to tax payments because they are classified as PAYE workers? Would the Minister accept it is unfair that a fisherman who may earn £500 for a season has to give an account of his earnings when he goes to the unemployment exchange while someone employed for a similar period who may have earned double the amount of money has only to give the date he finished employment and the name of his employer? Why must a part-time fisherman be classed as self-employed by the Department of Social Welfare?
The Deputy is moving into an area outside the scope of this question. We would be glad to investigate the cases of any individuals who are being dealt with differently by the two Departments. The Department of Finance have indicated that they would be very willing to examine this matter sympathetically.
Would the Minister accept that her Department classify these fishermen as self-employed? I am concerned mainly with part-time fishermen. When they wish to draw social Welfare payments they have to give an account of their earnings and if they earned £500 their payments are cut by £10. A person in my constituency who does temporary work for Bord na Móna and who earns double that amount automatically draws unemployment benefit.
The matter raised seems out of line with the question, but I will explain the thinking of the Department on this matter. The Deputy refers to seasonal fishermen on the Mayo coast who fish for salmon and lobster for a few months of the year. For unemployment assistance purposes, they are assessed on profits from fishing. Profits are assessed less expenses and there is a further disregard of £120 per year allowed under the Act.
This is in contrast to the earnings of employees who are working under a contract of service. They are statutorily excluded from the assessment of means for unemployment assistance purposes. However, employees can claim only when their employment cases whereas self-employed seasonal fishermen can claim all year round and they are paid the appropriate rate of unemployment assistance less the weekly means averaged over the full year. Income is taken into account over a yearly basis and is assessed as part of the normal assessment for supplementary assistance.
Will the Minister give full consideration to this matter? The fishermen she has mentioned are part-time, seasonal. They are being deprived of the maximum rate of unemployment assistance during the winter when they cannot go to sea. I support Deputy Gallagher and I ask the Minister to give further consideration to this matter.
This matter has been raised on many occasions. The fishermen in this case would seem to be a particular group. They fall to be examined through the method open to everybody else who, to some extent, is self-employed. A system which appeared to be universally fair might prove to be unfair in some cases. This would seem to be a matter which could be examined by the new agency which has been set up.
That is progress.
18.
Mr. Gallagher
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she is aware that considerable hardship is being caused to recipients of disability benefit because they are not notified in time as to when their eligibility will cease and because the health boards are not prepared to make retrospective payments of supplementary social welfare benefit; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
It is the practice of my Department to notify in advance recipients of disability benefit that payment is about to be terminated when for any reason entitlement ceases. Where, however, payment of benefit is disallowed following examination by a medical referee, who expresses the opinion that the claimant is capable of work, payment is disallowed from the date of examination or from the date of last payment, whichever is the later. In such cases the claimant is advised, if available for employment, to make application immediately to the local employment exchange for unemployment benefit or assistance. Provided he does so without undue delay the application is usually back-dated to the date of the disallowance of disability benefit.
Does the Minister accept that in practice this is not happening? Where there are people in receipt of sick benefit and where payments have been stopped because they might not have sufficient contributions, in practice the Department may notify them several weeks afterwards. The position then is that the persons involved have to await payments and if they do not get them they have to go to their public representatives. Does the Minister agree this is not a good practice, because the health boards will not make retrospective payments and consequently a period of up to seven weeks may elapse during which those people are without income.
If the Deputy has specific cases in mind he should report them for examination. Claimants whose entitlements to benefits have terminated are notified of termination of entitlements three to four weeks in advance. When they move into a further year when their contributions are not sufficient to cover them for benefit they are notified three to four weeks beforehand. Such persons who are without means can make application for supplementary benefits. I repeat that if the Deputy has specific cases in mind he should have them submitted for examination.
On a point of order, would the illustrious Deputy from Galway who is responsible for the following 37 questions consider taking up that offer of the Minister of State and arrange a little tête-á-tête with her so that these matters can be dealt with without wasting the time of the House—
This is not a point of order. Question No. 19.
Are these questions down because the Deputy from Galway is not getting a proper service from the Department?
19.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why a person (details supplied) in County Galway is not receiving an old age pension.
The person concerned was awarded an old age pension last year at a reduced rate. In view of the Deputy's question a social welfare officer called to the pensioner on 27 October and confirmed that he holds a pension book in the weekly amount of £11.95.
20.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she is aware that a person (details supplied) in County Dublin has received only four or five payments of disability benefit since July 1981; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
The person concerned has not claimed disability benefit and the payments referred to by the Deputy may relate to supplementary welfare allowance.
However, during the period July 1981 to October 1981 he called to a number of my Department's local offices to claim unemployment assistance but on each occasion when called on by a social welfare officer he had changed his address and could not be located.
He recently applied again for unemployment assistance at the employment exchange, Werburgh Street, Dublin and his case has been referred to a social welfare officer for immediate investigation. When the investigations have been completed I will write to the Deputy to let him know the position.
For the information of the House, and particularly for the benefit of the person involved in this question——
Could we have a question?
Is the Minister aware that on behalf of the individual in question I am not satisfied with the response of the Department to the queries I addressed to them on behalf of this individual? Is the Minister aware that the Department she looks after are particularly slow to reply to queries made on behalf of this individual, who seems to have gone astray?
I commend the Deputy for his interest on behalf of this individual. The claimant made application at Tulla at the end of July and between 30 July and 21 August he repeated the claims at Limerick, Navan Road, Dublin, and the Werburgh Street exchange. The officers of the Department were unable to locate him.
In view of the detailed reply given by the Minister, am I to take it that in future if Deputies receive from the Department what they regard as unsatisfactory replies it will be in order for them to table questions here in the House for detailed replies——
It is not up to me to decide whether certain types of questions will be accepted. That is for the House to decide.
Did the Minister hear her backbencher state that he had received several unsatisfactory replies? Is it open to us now to put down the questions for oral answer in the House—
It does not arise on the question.
21.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a person (details supplied) in County Galway will be paid an old age pension.
An old age non-contributory pension is not payable in this case as the claimant's means, consisting of the weekly value of a British retirement pension, exceed the statutory limit for entitlement.
22.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a person (details supplied) in County Galway, who is an old age pensioner living alone, will be granted free electricity and free television licence.
The pensioner referred to in the question has been in receipt of a free electricity allowance since the October/November 1980 billing period. She is also the holder of a current free television licence.
23.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a person (details supplied) in County Galway will be paid an old age pension; and the reason for the delay to date.
A pension book issued to the person concerned in July last. The application was received at the end of April and as it was for a non-contributory pension inquires were necessary to establish the claimant's means. There was no undue delay.
What is the approximate time currently for such non-contributory old age pension claims?
I imagine it would depend very much on the details available and the co-operation of the individuals involved. In some cases there can be difficulties over that, in getting access to banks and so on.
Will the Minister confirm or deny that there are undue delays in relation to the re-issue of existing pensioners' old age pension books?
The Deputy is the first person to mention that there are undue delays and if he puts down a specific question about the matter I will certainly have it investigated.
24.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a person (details supplied) in County Galway will be granted an increase in his old age pension.
A pension book implementing the "living alone allowance" for the person concerned was issued on 8 September 1981.
25.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a person (details supplied) in County Galway will be granted an old age pension.
The investigation in this case has been completed and the claim has been referred to the local pension committee for decision with a recommendation for payment of pension at the weekly rate of £25.15 plus £12.65 adult dependant allowance.
A pension book payable from 23 October, 1981, the Friday following the claimant's 66th birthday has been issued provisionally pending the local pension committee's decision. If the claimant is dissatisfied with this decision he will, of course, have the right of appeal against it.
26.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why a person (details supplied) in County Galway has been granted a non-contributory old age pension of only £19.05 per week.
The weekly rate of pension originally recommended in this case was £19.05. An appeals officer to whom the case was referred, however, sought further particulars of the claimant's holding from the social welfare officer who investigated the claim before making his decision. It has now been decided by the appeals officer that the claimant is entitled to pension at the maximum rate.
The pensioner has been issued with a supplementary pension book to adjust the position and a payable order in respect of arrears due has also been sent to him.
27.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she will grant an old age pension to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
The social welfare officer, who is investigating the repeat claim to pension of the person concerned, is awaiting details of a will and probate which are necessary to enable him to finalise his report in the case. If a pension is recommended it will be put into payment on a provisional basis pending the local pension committee's decision. Should the decision be unfavourable the claimant will, of course, have the right of appeal against it.
28.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why the payment of an old age pension was recently suspended in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
It has been decided by an appeals officer that the person concerned has not been entitled to any old age pension with effect from 30 January 1981, when his pension was suspended, as his means exceed the statutory limit of £28 a week.
29.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a non-contributory old age pension will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
A repeat claim to old age non-contributory pension made by the person concerned in August 1981 was investigated by the social welfare officer on 8 September 1981. He referred the claim for decision to the local pension committee on 11 September 1981 with a recommendation that no pension be awarded, on the ground that the claimant's means, consisting of the weekly value of capital and a holding, exceeded the statutory limit. If the claimant is dissatisfied with the committee's decision, he will of course have the right to appeal against it.
30.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when an old age pension will be granted to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
An appeals officer has decided that the person concerned is not entitled to any pension as her means, consisting of half the weekly value of a holding and her husband's earnings, exceed the statutory limit.
31.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why a non-contributory old age pension is not being paid to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
An appeals officer has decided that the person concerned is not entitled to any old age pension as his means consisting of half the weekly value of a holding, exceed the statutory limit.
32.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when an overdue old age pension will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
An appeals officer decided in May 1980 that the person concerned was not entitled to any old age pension as his means, consisting of the weekly value of a holding and earnings from a potato business, exceeded the statutory limit. If there has been any change in the person's circumstances it is open to him to reapply for pension.
33.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why a widow's pension has been refused to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
34.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a widow's pension will be granted to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 33 and 34 together.
The claim of the person concerned to a widow's non-contributory pension was originally refused by decision dated 18 June 1981 on the grounds that her means, derived from the estimated yearly value of a farm, exceeded the statutory limit of £1,716 for a widow with one qualified child. An appeal against this decision was lodged and as a result a pension at the rate of £24.15 a week was awarded with effect from 9 April 1981. This has been increased to £25.20 since 2 October. A pension order book payable from 5 June 1981 was sent to the designated post office, for collection by her, on 12 August 1981 and a payable order for arrears of pension to 5 June was issued directly to her on 28 August 1981.
Arising from the Minister's detailed answers given to the last 15 or 16 questions I should like to know if, in view of the fact that a Government Deputy has had to resort to the parliamentary question procedure to get such replies, there is any way she can speed up such factual information either directly to the person concerned or to the Deputy, or representative, on the person's behalf? Obviously, the information given is factual, clear and up to date. If it is seen that a Deputy using this procedure can get replies very quickly the other 165 Deputies will adopt a similar course. Can the Minister introduce a procedure which will enable individuals, whom we are all concerned about, to get such information as has been outlined in the answers to the questions tabled by Deputy Donnellan?
Obviously, where any decision has been made about any individual that individual is more aware than any representative of the action that has been taken. Such people are the first to know when a pension book is issued because it arrives at his or her door.
Some of the replies given are honest and straightforward and the factual information must have been conveyed to some of those mentioned in the questions as long ago as September, six or eight weeks ago, and surely that information could have been conveyed to the Deputy in the meantime rather than delaying the House? The Minister has told the House in some of the replies that the information was available to somebody as far back as last September. It is now 11 November.
I am not responsible for the timing of the question or of the correspondence. I am not to know who is going to table a question or when. My responsibility is to ensure that questions are answered fully.
I am not arguing that point with the Minister but arising from the information that has been given to the questions mentioned I should like to know if there is any way the Minister can alter the system in her Department to give replies to representations by individuals and those who make representations on behalf of such people in a speedier manner than at present? Deputy Donnellan is entitled to put down such questions but so also are the 165 other Members and the Minister of State will be sitting here for the rest of the term answering such questions if that procedure is followed by all Members.
Payments are being made now and they were not being made this time last year. I was on the Opposition side a year ago and this was not happening.
Why are these questions down?
The same attention and speedy response is given to representations that come direct to the Department and my office as is attempted to give here. We give the same attention to correspondence that comes directly to the office as we do to parliamentary questions.
Is the Minister now accepting that Deputy Donnellan, because of the unsatisfactory nature of the replies he received from the Department in relation to these problems, was forced to table these questions?
I did not say that.
The Deputy did.
I wish to ask a supplementary.
Deputy Brady will have to move to the next question. There can be no supplementary on these questions because they all relate to individuals about whom we do not have any information.
Has Deputy Donnellan received any response to his representations? If so I should like to know if the response was similar to the replies read out today.
We must move on to Question No. 35.
35.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why a person (details supplied) in Dublin cannot be considered for benefits payable to widows particularly in view of the fact that evidence has been submitted concerning her legal status.
The person concerned has been in receipt of deserted wife's allowance from my Department since March 1974. The allowance is at the same rate as widow's non-contributory pension which would otherwise be payable in her case.
On the death of her husband abroad in 1977 she claimed widow's non-contributory pension. Her application was refused on the grounds that she had not established that she was his widow in law as the death certificate submitted by her showed him to have been divorced. She has, however, continued to be paid deserted wife's allowance.
Her claim was reviewed recently in the light of the documentary evidence submitted by the Deputy but as the legal advice available to my Department is to the effect that a divorce obtained by a person domiciled in another jurisdiction must be recognised as valid here it is not proposed to alter the decision in this case.
Is the Minister of State aware that following the death of this lady's husband a letter of administration was obtained in the High Court certifying she was his legal widow? In those circumstances surely the Department must take cognisance of such a decision or does the Minister of State not agree with a judgment of the High Court?
The advice of the Attorney General in this case was that this was a recognised foreign divorce and the Department followed the legal advice available. The lady's solicitor did not pursue the question of the letter of administration and accepted the point about the divorce in this case. The Department do not have any choice but to accept the law of the land in this case. It is regrettable that the law of the land is so deficient and has not faced up to the anomalies which now exist as a result of many deteriorating situations in the marriage situation here. We had a similar problem earlier in the session. It related to a different problem rather than the specific one here. I have every sympathy with the lady in question, who obviously would prefer to be considered as a widow rather than a deserted wife. In terms of benefit she does not suffer. I can understand that in terms of status she does, but it is not really a matter for the Department of Social Welfare. It is a matter of the law of the land in this case.
Is the Minister satisfied that the Department have followed the law of the land? As far as the law of the land is concerned the High Court ruled that this person was a widow of the deceased at the time of his death. If the law of the land has given this person the status of a widow the Department should do likewise and accept her application in that light.
Our legal advice is that the divorce of a person domiciled outside the State is recognised by the Irish courts as dissolving the marriage here and the application was therefore refused on those grounds.
This is a matter of the law. We cannot go into it here.
I must make it very clear that the law of the land has been pursued in this case and that the High Court, which is the highest court in this land, ruled that this person was the legal widow of the deceased. I cannot accept that the law of the land has been followed in this instance. Surely this person has been adjudged as the widow.
I cannot allow an argument to develop on this matter.
Will the Minister refer the matter to the Department of Justice and refer back to me on this case?
The legal aspect of the matter has been looked into very seriously by us. The situation the Deputy refers to, where she was described as a widow in the particular circumstances, has a different application from the general decision of the status of the marriage in this country. I will certainly have another look at it.
I would appreciate it if the Minister would, because the High Court has ruled otherwise.
36.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why a widow's pension at the full rate is not being paid to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
The person concerned was awarded a widow's non-contributory pension at a reduced rate of £5.85 a week with effect from 29 May 1981 on the basis of her means derived from a farm. She appealed against the decision and arising from the appeal her pension was increased to £11.85 a week from the same date. A pension order book at a revised rate of £12.65, which includes the general increase payable from 2 October 1981 was issued to the designated post office on 8 October 1981 for collection by her. A payable order in respect of the arrears due from 29 May 1981 has been sent direct to her.
The widow is not entitled to a pension at the maximum rate as her means, as assessed on appeal, are above the statutory limit for the payment of non-contributory pension at that rate.
37.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when disability benefit will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
The person concerned claimed disability benefit from 25 June 1981 and has been paid from 29 June 1981, fourth day of incapacity, at the maximum appropriate rate. All disability benefit and pay-related benefit due to 30 October 1981, date of the latest medical evidence received, has been issued.
38.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the action she is taking to ensure that disability benefit will be paid to applicants as benefit has not been paid in some cases since 1 January 1981.
Every effort is made by my Department to ensure that payment of disability benefit is made promptly to all claimants who are entitled to payment. While there was some delay in payment in certain cases earlier this year, the position has been back to normal for some time and, except where inquiries are necessary to establish entitlement, payments are being made without delay.
I am not aware of any instance in which disability benefit has not been paid to qualified claimants since January 1981. If, however, the Deputy has information about any such case, I will have the matter investigated immediately and I will let him know the result if he will furnish the name, address and RSI number of the person concerned.
39.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when disability benefit will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
The person concerned claimed disability benefit from 7 July 1981 and has been paid from 10 July 1981, fourth day of incapacity, at the maximum appropriate rate. All disability benefit due to 20 October 1981, has been issued.
When was payment issued?
He was in receipt of disability benefit from 25 May to 26 August. So, there seems to be no gap in his payments.
Would the Minister clarify when the payment was made?
Payment of the claim was delayed due to the industrial action. It was not immediately processed until 23 September 1981 in which case there was a cheque for £212 and the following week there was a cheque for £49.
Is the Minister saying that the payment was made on 23 September?
That is correct.
In other words, the claimant has had confirmation of that payment as far back as 23 September. I only raised this point in relation to the number of these detailed questions going through the House at the moment. In effect, it would appear that the claimant has been informed quite some time ago and has been paid.
(Interruptions.)
40.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a person (details supplied) in County Galway will be paid unemployment assistance.
The person concerned was paid all arrears of unemployment assistance due to him on 8 September 1981. He is currently in receipt of weekly payment of unemployment assistance at the rate of £11.60, being the maximum rate of £20.35 less means of £8.75.
41.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a person (details supplied) in County Galway will be granted unemployment assistance.
All arrears of unemployment assistance due to the person concerned were paid to him during the week ending 31 July 1981. He is presently in receipt of weekly payment of £15.80, being the maximum rate of £20.35 less means of £4.55.
42.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when an increase in unemployment benefit will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
The person concerned is in receipt of the correct rate of unemployment assistance appropriate to a single person residing in a rural area with means assessed on a factual basis. He is presently being paid at the rate of £12.70 a week, being the maximum rate of £20.35 less means of £7.65. However, due to a calculation error at the local office at the commencement of his claim he had been underpaid £29.15. This error was subsequently corrected and the full amount due was paid to him on 8 September 1981.
43.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when unemployment assistance will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
The person concerned has not been in touch with my Department since 28 March 1979 when his means exceeded the rate of the unemployment assistance payable in his case. It is open to him to again apply for unemployment assistance and his claim will be re-examined under the means limits which apply at present.
44.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when unemployment assistance will be granted to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
It has not been possible in the records of my Department to trace a claim to unemployment assistance from the particulars furnished. I would, however, be pleased to make further inquiries on receipt of additional details to enable me to identify the person concerned in this case.
45.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if an increase in unemployment assistance will be granted to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
The rate of unemployment assistance payable to the person concerned is the rate appropriate to a single person with means assessed at £10.00 weekly. The assessment was determined by an appeals officer and was based on income from fishing and the value of board and lodging in his father's home. If the person concerned is of opinion that his circumstances have now changed, it is open to him to apply for a reassessment of his means. A form for this purpose may be obtained by him at his local office.
46.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when unemployment assistance will be granted to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
A deciding officer recently assessed the person concerned with various levels of means from 29 June 1981 to date which entitled him to unemployment assistance at rates ranging up to the current rate of £2.70 weekly. All unemployment assistance due was paid during the week which commenced on 12 October 1981.
47.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why unemployment assistance has not been paid for the past few weeks to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
Payment of unemployment assistance in the case of the person concerned was withheld from 9 September 1981, pending the completion of inquiries about his availability for work. In the light of the investigations a deciding officer was satisfied that the person concerned continued to fulfil the statutory conditions for receipt of unemployment assistance and payment was restored. All unemployment assistance due has been paid.
48.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why unemployment assistance is not being paid to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
Inquiries to establish whether the person concerned is entitled to unemployment assistance have not yet been completed. Every effort is being made to complete the inquiries as soon as possible.
49.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why unemployment assistance has not been paid for the past three months to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.
Payment of unemployment assistance ceased following the decision of a deciding officer that the means of the person concerned exceeded the statutory limit. The person concerned appealed against the disallowance and an appeals officer revised the decision of the deciding officer and assessed him with means of £12.00 weekly with effect from 2 April 1980. This assessment entitled him to unemployment assistance. All arrears have been paid and he is presently in receipt of weekly payment of £23.15, being the maximum rate of £35.15 less means of £12.00.
50.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare when a person (details supplied) in County Galway will be paid pay-related benefit to which he appears to be entitled.
The claim of the person concerned to pay-related benefit was allowed following the completion of extensive inquiries and all arrears due were paid to him during the week which commenced on Monday, 12 October 1981.
Would the Minister confirm that the claimant received notice of payment and received back money as far back as 12 October?
It seems to annoy the Deputy that these payments are being made.
Not at all. I am just pointing out that we are spending time debating questions where the claimants have received notice months ago——
Last year they were not paid at all.
Would the Minister confirm, therefore, that the claimant has not only had the money paid but has also been fully informed of the details of the case at that stage——
(Interruptions.)
It must be embarrassing for the Deputy to hear questions being answered by the Minister that applicants have already been notified. Could this whole matter be referred to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges because it is wrong to have a situation where a Deputy can ask all these questions? Any of the agencies involved would have answered these questions. Three-quarters of an hour was taken up with answering them here.
The Chair will examine the matter.
It is the right of any Deputy to put down any question he wishes to ask.
We are not here for speeches.
Why did you disallow my Private Notice Question to the Minister for Industry and Energy regarding the closure of Clondalkin Paper Mills?
The Department concerned had no function in the matter but if the Deputy wishes to call to my office I will explain the points involved.
Apart from the loss of 470 jobs.
The Department to which the Deputy referred the question had no function in the matter.
The Minister for Finance has responsibility.
Surely the Minister for Rising Prices, Deputy Kelly, has responsibility for allowing increases in ESB charges which were of the order of 29 per cent when already the company's ESB bill was £1½ million per annum.
That is the responsibility of a totally different Department. The matter is more appropriate to the Department of Finance.
Could I have written answers to Questions Nos. 252, 263, 301, 305, 311 and 413?
The Deputy could have done that through the General Office.
This is the procedure. The remaining questions will appear on tomorrow's Order Paper.