Vol. 452 No. 5
12 Eamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason supplementary welfare rent allowance is not payable to lone parents in receipt of a lone parents' allowance who are full-time students; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7412/95]
The supplementary welfare allowance scheme is administered on behalf of my Department by the eight regional health boards. Under the legislation governing the scheme the determination of entitlement is a matter for the chief executive officer of the board. Under section 172 (1) of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1993 people attending a full time day course of study at an institution of education are excluded from entitlement to supplementary welfare allowance; however, in exceptional circumstances, section 172 (3) of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1993 allows a health board to make a payment when it considers this to be justified. Each application for assistance is decided on its own merits by the health boards.
My Department has introduced a number of educational incentives for lone parents and the long term unemployed. Participants in "second chance" educational schemes, such as the vocational training opportunities scheme and the third level allowance scheme, may continue to receive their full social welfare payment and retain a range of secondary benefits, such as rent supplements, under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme for the duration of their course. These participants are required to have been in receipt of a social welfare payment for at least one year and to be aged 23 years of age or over.
At present, the total number of lone parents participating on the vocational training opportunities scheme and the third level allowance scheme is approximately 500 and 90 respectively.
Following my meeting with lone parents studying at UCG concerning this issue the payment of rent supplements to lone parents in full time education is being actively reviewed. Lone parents have special needs and I am anxious, in so far as possible and bearing in mind financial considerations, that they are not discouraged from participating in full time education.
I refer the Minister to the terms of the question which related to people in receipt of lone parent's allowance, not people on VTO or third level schemes. The question related to the fact that, until recently, people in third level education in receipt of lone parent's allowance were, under normal rules, entitled to and received rent allowance. Recently, those people have been disallowed rent allowance which means that for many of them, their opportunity to continue to third level education will disappear because they cannot afford to pay rent costs. Is the Minister willing to instruct the health boards to reverse this decision thereby allowing these people to receive rent allowance?
I cannot instruct health boards to do something which they may consider to be illegal. The health boards are obliged to interpret the law in the same way as anybody with responsibility for administering funds on behalf of the public.
There are different interpretations of the section dealing with special needs and the discretion of boards on rent supplement for lone parents in third level education. As I indicated in my reply, lone parents who are 23 years and over may qualify for a rent supplement but in some health board areas lone parents who are under 23 years have been refused. As the Deputy indicated, some lone parents in the Western Health Board area who had been in receipt of a rent supplement have recently had it withdrawn because of a recent decision. As I indicated also in my reply I met lone parents students some weeks ago when I visited UCG and they made a strong case that if they were not assisted with their rent they would have no option but to give up their third level course. I undertook to have the situation examined and it is being actively reviewed in my Department with a view to seeing how we can ensure these students and others in similar circumstances can participate and remain in third level education.
Far be it from me to ask the Minister to do anything illegal. It seemed to have been legal before Christmas and I am a bit surprised that after Christmas it is illegal. While he is carrying out this review will he, in consultation with the health board, try to arrange that those who were in receipt of a rent allowance will continue to receive it until the review has been completed as otherwise they will be left high and dry while people are talking?
The Deputy asks why it is illegal now but may have been considered legal before. We have a thriving legal industry which makes fortunes out of disputes over what is legal and illegal. Unfortunately, there is a difference of opinion as to what is or is not allowed under the Act. We are currently trying to resolve those differences to see whether we can find a way of ensuring that young women under 23 years with children who are already in college may remain in college and those with aspirations to go to college may do so. In UCG, for example, not all the lone parent students I met were from Galway and in order to pursue their courses they needed good quality accommodation and not a hole of a place such as the places in which many students have to live. They need also to be able to retain the accommodation throughout the summer months when the college is not operating. We need to address a range of problems and we are attempting to find a solution that will assist not only those students already affected but future students as well.
