Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 4 Feb 1992

Vol. 415 No. 3

Adjournment Debate. - Carer's Allowance.

Mr. Browne

(Carlow-Kilkenny): Gabhaim buíochas leat, a Cheann Comhairle, gur thug tú deis dom an cheist seo a phlé. Tá súil agam go mbeidh an tAire ag éisteacht go géar agus go mbeidh toradh tairbheach as an méid a déarfaidh mé.

First, may I emphasise that the carer's allowance is an excellent scheme but because of the standards laid down it is difficult for people to qualify for it. I hope that when drawing up the Social Welfare Bill the Minister will consider some of the points I make.

I wish to highlight the case of a Carlow housewife who is looking after two members of her family, both of whom are mentally handicapped, and in receipt of the disabled person's maintenance allowance. However, one of them is severely handicapped and in need of special care. In theory a person is entitled to the carer's allowance for looking after one person and one would therefore imagine that in practice she would be guaranteed the full allowance for looking after both people. However if that had happened I would not be raising this question tonight.

Because her husband works and earns approximately £140 per week she is automatically regarded as having an income of half that amount and therefore her means exceed the limit of £50 which she is allowed to earn under this scheme.

This person looks after two people who would need institutional care if she was not so kind as to care for them at home, and she is saving the nation a great deal of money. I suggest that in this case the income limit should be doubled and that she would be allowed to earn £100 a week before being disqualified on means. Let us remember her income is only nominal because this person is a full-time carer and is not earning any money. If this were so it would go some way towards qualifying her for a carer's allowance. The situation where a person looks after two mentally handicapped people will not arise very often. She is not pretending that they are in need of care because the health board have acknowledged that position by giving them a disabled person's maintenance allowance. It is a question of adjusting the rules to show some justice. I am not looking for a double allowance but one payment for this person who looks after two people who are genuinely in need of constant care. The State should recognise the dedicated work of such carers. Theory is not adequate in such cases; actions speak louder than words.

Minister for Social Welfare (Mr. Daly)

As the Deputy is aware, the carer's allowance is a means-tested payment for persons who are providing elderly or incapacitated social welfare pensioners with full-time care and attention and whose income falls below certain limits.

One of the conditions for receipt of the carer's allowance requires that the person being cared for be in receipt of a social welfare pension. With effect from last July, the scheme was extended to include the carers of recipients of disabled person's maintenance allowance.

The person in question applied for a carer's allowance in January 1991 in respect of her sister who was in receipt of a disabled person's maintenance allowance. That claim was refused in February on the grounds that recipients of DPMA did not qualify under the scheme. She wrote to my Department appealing against this decision and pointed out that in addition to her sister she was also caring for her brother who was in receipt of DPMA. However, following review, she was informed that DPMA recipients did not qualify under the scheme and that therefore her claim could not be allowed.

A repeat claim was received in August 1991 following the extension of the carer's allowance to DPMA recipients. However, that claim was refused on the grounds that the claimant's means exceeded the limit. Her husband's earnings from employment were taken into account in determining the claimant's means. Where a claimant is married and living with their spouse, the application of the means test requires that half of the spouse's earnings are assessed against the claimant. On the basis of her husband's earnings which were confirmed by his employer, the claimant was assessed with means of £68.99 per week. This amount exceeds the means limit of £52.50 per week which applies in her case. Consequently, a carer's allowance is not payable to her.

I might mention that under the present scheme, only one carer's allowance is payable irrespective of the number of persons being cared for. I am aware that the application of the current means test has the effect that persons with moderate incomes sometimes do not qualify or receive a reduced allowance only. I have already indicated in the House last week that I intend to review the scheme during the coming year. This review will take into account all aspects of the scheme, including circumstances of the kind raised by the Deputy.