Mary Wallace
Ceist:31 Miss M. Wallace asked the Minister for Social Welfare the proposals, if any, he intends to bring forward to allow full-time carers be given credits towards contributory pensions. [10646/95]
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Carer's Allowance.
Batt O'Keeffe
Ceist:46 Mr. B. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he intends to introduce changes in the carer's allowance. [10488/95]
Liam Fitzgerald
Ceist:57 Mr. L. Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Social Welfare the plans, if any, he has to review eligibility requirements for the carer's allowance, in particular the existing residence requirement. [10626/95]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:60 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Social Welfare the new initiatives, if any, he has for the acknowledgement of the rights of carers of persons with disabilities which would give a more appropriate recognition to carers than is the case at present. [10642/95]
Brendan Kenneally
Ceist:63 Mr. Kenneally asked the Minister for Social Welfare the number of people who do not qualify for any social welfare payment or supplementary welfare allowance who are in receipt of the full amount of carer's allowance; the number of recipients whose payment has been enhanced by opting for carer's allowance instead of any other social welfare payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10541/95]
Éamon Ó Cuív
Ceist:78 Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he intends introducing any disregard of income for applicants for carer's allowance where the applicant has a self-employed income; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10325/95]
Chris Flood
Ceist:154 Mr. Flood asked the Minister for Social Welfare the total number of people in receipt of carer's allowance for each of the past five years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10569/95]
Chris Flood
Ceist:155 Mr. Flood asked the Minister for Social Welfare the total amount of money paid out in carer's allowance for each of the past five years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10570/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 31, 46, 57, 60, 63, 78, 154 and 155 together.
The carer's allowance is a social assistance scheme which provides an income maintenance payment to people who are providing elderly or incapacitated pensioners with full-time care and attention and whose incomes fall below certain limits.
At the end of 1990, a total of 2,563 people were in receipt of carer's allowance at a cost of £0.97 million. In 1991 and 1992, the numbers were 3,959 and 4,437 respectively involving costs of £6 million and £10 million. In 1993 and 1994, the figures were 4,748 and 5,392 respectively with expenditure coming to £11.5 million and £14.4 million.
At the end of April this year, there was a total of 5,810 carer's allowances in payment of which 4,209 were awarded at the maximum rate. It is estimated that expenditure on the scheme for this year will be £20.1 million, an increase of £6 million over last year.
I am aware of the criticism of the means test. However, the means testing arrangements have been eased in recent years. Last year, the initial disregard of income of £2 per week was increased to £6. In addition, the first £100 of a spouse's weekly earnings were disregarded in the calculation of the allowance. This figure is being increased to £150 this year and covers other forms of spouse's income. However, any further relaxation of the means test which would involve the carer's own income, such as income from self-employment, would have cost implications which could only be examined in a budgetary context.
In recognition of the role of carers who look after people with disabilities in the home, a respite care fund was established by my Department in 1993 involving an initial sum of £500,000. This fund provides resources to finance respite care thus allowing carers of people with disabilities to avail of breaks from their caring duties. An additional £500,000 was added to the fund in 1994. From this year, the Department of Health has responsibility for administration of the fund.
It is a specific condition of the scheme that the carer lives with the person they provide with full-time care and attention. To extend the scheme to include carers who are not resident with the persons being cared for would involve a significant increase in expenditure and I am not convinced it would be the best use of additional resources for the scheme at this time. My Department does not maintain statistics as to the type of payment the person may have been receiving prior to qualifying for a carer's allowance.
Credited contributions, or "credits" as they are termed, are intended to protect the entitlements, particularly the pension rights, of employees and other persons participating in the social insurance system when they are ill or unemployed. The award of credits is subject to certain conditions. For example, a person who has no PRSI contributions paid or credited for two full tax years cannot get credits. Subject to such conditions, a person who is giving constant care and attention to a person as a carer is awarded credits on the same basis as if they were unemployed because of illness or unemployment.
The reason I specifically concentrate on the importance of giving credits to full-time carers is that while we pay lip service to carers and the great work they do — they give up jobs and possible earnings and get little credit from the State but yet, save the State a fortune in terms of institutional care — when they come to retirement age they do not qualify for a pension. Will the Minister give an assurance that he will introduce changes which will ensure that all full-time carers in the community will be entitled to a contributory pension on retirement?
The short answer is that I am not in a position to give that assurance. The carer's allowance is an innovation introduced by my predecessor. In Opposition I gave credit to the former Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy Woods, when he introduced the scheme which is a very good scheme in principle and has been improved gradually since its introduction. It is my intention to improve it and there are a number of ways in which this can be done. It is a question of deciding what is possible within the resources available given the demands which are also made in relation to other areas in the social welfare system. It is a question of trying to balance the resources available and the best benefit for those delivering care. There is some concern about the fact that the number of carers will be increased by 1,000 this year because of changes in the income disregard and the fact that we are now taking into account people who have occupational pensions as well as social welfare pensions. We expect that 1,000 will be added to the numbers currently on the scheme. We are spending £20 million on the scheme this year, a significant sum of money. We could decide to change the means test which would bring many more people into the scheme and leave the current rates of payment as they are or we could increase the rates of payment but maintain the means test as at present. We could improve the secondary benefits for carers or, as the Deputy suggests, examine the question of credits for pensions and so on. There is a range of things that might be done, all of which must be considered in the context of available resources. I am very supportive of this scheme and I would like to see it developed.
While improving the carer's allowance is a matter we debate here on a regular basis with the Minister I would like to concentrate on credits in regard to pensions. It is unfair that so many people, mostly women, in the community who provide full-time care on a long-term basis when they come close to retirement age discover they are at a disadvantage and not entitled to a contributory pension because they did not work all their lives and because they gave up work to provide care. We all say they are marvellous and that they have saved the State a huge sum of money.
A question, please.
Can we not concentrate today on the straightforward question as distinct from the general question of care? Can the Minister say if it will be possible for people who have provided care all their lives on a full-time basis in the community — and who saved the State huge sums in institutional care — to be protected on retirement with a contributory pension? They should not suffer because of the great work they have done throughout their lives.
I have already told the Deputy that I am not in a position to give such a commitment on this issue. Areas of the carer's allowance require improvement. The provision of guaranteeing contributory pensions to people in this situation would have a cost implication. We talked earlier about the pension costs we will face over the next 35-40 years. In about 40 years' time we will be facing something like a 100 per cent increase in pension costs. It is not an issue on which we can lightly make commitments; it has to be done in the context of other resources and issues that have a bearing on it. The carer will be entitled to a non-contributory pension depending on means. There is no question therefore of carers being abandoned. If they do not qualify for a contributory pension they will be entitled to claim a non-contributory pension which, like other allowances, is means tested.
I do not know if the Minister is taking the issue as seriously as I would like. He said that carers will be entitled to a non-contributory pension but the people we are talking about are those who give up good jobs and who would be entitled to a contributory pension. They also give up the opportunity to earn considerable sums and to accrue savings in return for a carer's allowance or some other supplementary payment. We do not offer them any protection throughout their working lives. We need to bear in mind that they will continue to work throughout their lives and provide care 24 hours a day, seven days a week. All we say to them when they reach pension age is "Thanks for all you have done and for all you have saved the State in terms of institutional and other costs but we would still like you to undergo a means test for non-contributory pension". The Minister should seriously consider providing credits for carers whom we compliment so much but do so little for.
I say for the third time that at this time I cannot give a commitment in relation to that matter. Other considerations have to be taken into account.
Will the Minister give a commitment to consider it?
The question of how we should use the resources that will be available in developing the scheme should not be approached on an ad hoc basis. If a carer does not qualify for a contributory pension, he or she may well qualify for a non-contributory pension, depending on means. They are not being abandoned.
They are being placed at a disadvantage.
In that event they will also qualify for all the free schemes that other pensioners qualify for on the same basis.
That is poor thanks for all the work they have done.
I have acknowledged as often as anyone else in this House the great work that carers do but we cannot separate them on that basis from the rest of society and say that they must receive special treatment when they reach pension age. I would prefer if my Department and the Department of Health looked at the carer's allowance and the question of care in the home to ensure that people would not have to provide care 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days of the year. It is not right that we expect them to do this.
That is what is happening.
I realise that but I would much prefer to see the Deputy arguing and campaigning for change to ensure that there would be no exploitation. I will try to ensure in so far as I can that the carer's allowance delivered to those providing full-time care is adequate and fair.