Vol. 399 No. 3
8 Miss Flaherty asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will outline the details of the arrangements in place for payment of the clothing allowance for back to school expenses; and whether children of those on unemployment assistance will be eligible for such payments.
27 Mr. Spring asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will outline the new measures he intends to introduce, which were the subject matter of a recent public statement to alleviate hardship for parents at the start of the school year; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
31 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will outline the basis on which the new clothing allowance will be paid; if it will be paid in advance of the opening of the school year; if it will be available to those on low incomes, other than people on social welfare, such as persons in receipt of the family income supplement; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
108 Mr. Bell asked the Minister for Social Welfare the plans his Department have to assist low income families with the purchase of school uniforms/clothing/ footwear; the amount of any such assistance and the date from which it will apply; the method to be used for application purposes and when applications can be made for the September 1990 school term; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 27, 31 and 108 together.
The new clothing allowance which I am introducing this year will help families on social welfare payments with the costs of school clothing for their children at the start of the coming school year. This allowance will be of major benefit to the families concerned and recognises the difficulties that many families on social welfare experience in meeting these costs.
I have taken the opportunity to combine the clothing and footwear assistance which I am providing in a new simplified clothing and footwear scheme at two rates — £40 for each secondary school child and £25 for each primary school child.
Footwear needs are being met within the new scheme which replaces the streamlined footwear scheme for school-going children which I introduced in 1988. Over 170,000 children of people dependent on health board and social welfare payments, including unemployment assistance, will benefit at a cost of £5.3 million. This figure includes the extra £3 million I am now providing for clothing and the amounts hitherto provided for children's footwear under the footwear scheme and for school uniforms.
The clothing and footwear scheme will be administered by the health boards as part of the supplementary welfare allowances scheme which is funded by my Department. In determining entitlement to a clothing allowance under the new scheme, health boards will have regard to the circumstances of each individual case. Maximum allowances have been fixed at £40 for children attending secondary school and at £25 for children attending primary school. These maximum allowances will apply where the family is solely dependent on the basic rate of the relevant social welfare payment.
Health boards were given details of the new scheme in a circular letter which issued on 16 May. It is a matter for each board to determine the arrangements for administering the scheme in their area. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the scheme, however, boards have been advised that it is vital that allowances under the scheme be paid before the commencement of the school year in September next.
Persons in full-time employment are not entitled to supplementary welfare allowance. Thus, recipients of family income supplement scheme will not, in general, qualify for the new clothing allowance. However, I have made significant improvements in recent years in the benefits available under the family income supplement scheme. I will shortly be announcing further substantial increases in the rates of payment and a new minimum payment to recipients under this scheme with effect from July of this year.
Does the Minister consider it reasonable to expect community welfare officers to arrange for these payments to be made in advance of the commencement of the ensuing school year in view of the late notice? While welcoming the general improvement I should like to know whether, in this case, the benefits will be applicable to long-term recipients of disability benefit? The Minister quite rightly responded to their request in the fuel area. Will he say whether he will respond to their critical position with regard to this scheme, as he indicated he might in the course of the debate on the Social Welfare Bill?
I have been particularly anxious to introduce this measure as early as possible. It should be possible to pay by the beginning of the ensuing school year given the fact that the scheme has been simplified — Deputies should remember there are only two rates applicable — and, secondly, that the information with regard to it has been made available to health boards from 16 May. When I met the health boards about this subject earlier the community welfare officers stressed that they would need that information before the end of May so that they could effect payment at the beginning of the school year, taking into account summer holidays and so on. That is why it has been announced so early.
We must now proceed to other questions. A brief question from Deputy Flaherty.
Is the Minister aware of the problems encountered in previous years with regard to a particular category of children in qualifying families? Is he indicating that the instruction given by his Department is to the effect that all second level, school-going children of qualifying parents will qualify, and not simply the first child as had been the case often in the past?
Yes, of qualifying families. These would be in relation to SWA, UA, long-term and short-term, widows' pension and deserted wife's allowance, the same categories as qualify at present; they will all qualify. I might tell the Deputy that that is where the 170,000 children enter in.
