Vol. 481 No. 5
7 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his views on whether the carer's allowance should be extended to cover as far as possible all those caring for the elderly and the disabled at home. [16563/97]
The carer's allowance is a social assistance scheme which provides an income maintenance payment to people who are providing elderly or incapacitated pensioners or certain persons with disabilities with full-time care and attention and whose incomes fall below certain limits. At the end of last August 9,753 people were in receipt of a carer's allowance at an estimated full year cost of £36.4 million.
There have been a number of improvements in this payment since its introduction in 1990. In this year's Social Welfare Act a change was introduced to the rule which required that the carer must provide full-time care and attention to cater for those situations in which recipients of care attend approved rehabilitation courses. Under the new arrangements, the person may attend a recognised non-residential rehabilitation training or day care centre. An additional payment of 50 per cent of the basic rate was introduced for carers who take care of more than one person.
In its Action Programme for the Millennium the Government is committed to progressively relaxing the qualifying criteria for the carer's allowance to ensure more carers can get the benefit and increasing the value of the allowance in real terms. In line with these commitments, I will consider the further development of the scheme in the context of an overall review of the provisions for carers which is being carried out by my Department and in the light of budgetary considerations.
Many of the commitments in the infamous Fianna Fáil manifesto have been broken. I hope however that its commitment to extend the carer's allowance scheme to include those who care for people with a severe disability will not be broken. Does the Minister intend to honour it?
I have had detailed and fruitful discussions with groups which represent people with disabilities. A review of the carer's allowance scheme is being carried out in which the reports of the Joint Committee on Women's Rights on long-term support for female carers of older people and people with disabilities and the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities will be taken into account. We will be tick-tacking with the carer's association, the health boards and a number of other agencies to consider ways by which the scheme may be extended. Most people would admit that, when introduced in 1990, it was one of the most innovative schemes ever introduced and is one of the most successful.
I agree with the Minister. I was the Deputy who tabled the appropriate amendment to the Social Welfare Bill.
Is the Deputy claiming the credit?
I am not certain from the Minister's lengthy reply whether this is another broken promise.
A question, please.
A person is not entitled to receive the carer's allowance unless the person being cared for is so invalided and disabled as to need full-time care and attention. Will a payment be made, without reference to means, to all carers? If necessary, this could be topped up by further payments. There should be a basic payment of between £40 and £50 per week. Is that what the Minister has in mind or is this commitment to be consigned to the dustbin with all the others?
All of these issues and all of the commitments made in the Programme for Government will be looked at prior to the budget to be presented on 3 December.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): In the review, will the Minister place special emphasis on those providing care but not living with the person concerned? Although this would be open to abuse many people travel daily to care for relatives. They provide a great service. Because they are not living with the person concerned they do not qualify for the carer's allowance.
The scheme has been improved since its introduction in 1990. As time passes relaxation of the rules is considered in the light of budgetary considerations. In every budget since its introduction there have been changes to make it easier for people to qualify. I take the Deputy's point.
The Minister has indicated that he wants to increase the value of the carer's allowance. What target value does he have in mind? What specific conditions does he consider need to be relaxed as a matter of priority? Since it is estimated that at a minimum some 30,000 people care for people with mental and physical disabilities, will he indicate how much it would cost to include all of them?
We will be examining a number of those issues within the overall budgetary context. It would be wrong of me to put any value on the carer's allowance here and I doubt that the Deputy would have done so when he was on this side of the House. All aspects of the carer's allowance will be examined in conjunction with its review and the reports made available to us. The carer's allowance represents very large State expenditure and any changes proposed would be quite significant. A strong commitment within our programme for Government was its overall examination which we intend doing.
I welcome the Minister's statement of the Government's commitment to the relaxation of the guidelines applicable to applicants for this allowance. Will he specifically examine the circumstances that arise when a widow who had been caring for her husband and in receipt of the carer's allowance prior to his death is then disqualified despite the fact that she may have to continue to care for her husband's elderly father or mother in her home, thus creating an anomaly within an otherwise good scheme? Will the Minister consider allowing women to continue to draw the carer's allowance in addition to their widow's allowance?
Any extension of the carer's allowance will be examined within the context of the forthcoming budget. I am not prepared to enter into a discussion on a relaxation of the rules because of its budgetary implications. Anomalies have arisen which will be examined.
I will supply the Minister with a couple of very good examples.
Apart from carers receiving the carer's allowance, has the Minister any plans to assist individuals and groups being cared for, for instance, the deaf and blind, who might not then need further assistance?
While that is the responsibility of the Minister for Health and Children, the matter of assistance for such people in need could be examined within the context of the community and voluntary grants scheme which I will re-examine within the overall budgetary context. Perhaps the Deputy would take up the matter with the Minister for Health and Children. I would be amenable to giving them any assistance possible.
While acknowledging that the carer's allowance must be means tested, is the Minister aware that some people feel very aggrieved at the fact that, because their spouses are working, they are disqualified? Within the forthcoming budget will the Minister exempt at least the first £60 of income as a recognition of the valuable work undertaken by a man or woman caring for somebody in the home, bearing in mind that if the person being cared for was in a nursing home or State institution it would cost the State a massive amount? Will the Minister take up this matter with the Minister for Finance, ensuring at least exemption in the case of those barely above the income limit? It is only right that such people be rewarded for caring for the elderly at home.
I have no doubt the Deputy made that case when he was on this side of the House——
I did indeed.
——and obviously was unsuccessful in that regard.
I will continue to make the case.
I can only reiterate that I will be re-examining all aspects of this allowance within the budgetary context.
While welcoming the review of this allowance, perhaps the Minister would inform me, in writing, of the appropriate terms of reference. I have noted his comments on any extension of the existing scheme being considered within the context of the forthcoming budget on which I have differed with successive Ministers. The Minister will be aware that local authorities have withdrawn wardens from senior citizens' complexes in the Dublin region and various health boards are funding the elderly by way of nursing home subventions to the tune of £120 per week, according to each individual's level of dependence. Rather than viewing this allowance in a blinkered fashion, surely the Minister and his colleagues, the Ministers for Health and Children and the Environment and Local Government should together address the potential of elderly people to continue to enjoy their independence within their communities. Will the Minister, with his ministerial colleagues, place a timeframe on broadening such cover, by way of the carer's allowance or otherwise?
A fair junior Minister.
Who refused to be Minister of State at the Department for Social, Community and Family Affairs?
Rather than write to the Deputy, the review will consider the purpose and development of the carer's allowance scheme, the potential for its future, both in terms of its current operation and in the wider context of health care provision in the home generally. It will also examine the potential for the development of provisions for carers through the social insurance system and the role of the private sector. All of us who deal with elderly people living in the home will be of the view that, rather than have them continuously shunted off to nursing homes, it would be preferable if governmental policy was such that we could reach a stage at which all State efforts were geared at ensuring they could remain in their homes. No doubt that would be an aspiration of all Members.
The review of the carer's allowance will take all aspects and circumstances into account and is being examined by my Department in conjunction with the Department of Health and Children. Perhaps some day Deputy Callely will be standing where I am and will realise the difficulty any Minister has in relation to budgetary considerations.
The Minister has no Minister of State now.
We heard a slightly different song six months ago. Will the Minister agree there are two carer schemes, one operated by the Department and the home help scheme operated by the health boards, and that there is a total lack of co-ordination between the two in regard to the operation of these schemes? Will he agree also that there is no real incentive under the home help scheme operated by the health boards, some of which pay less than £2 per hour, and that carers are limited in the number of hours they spend providing care to the elderly? In the context of the review, will the Minister consider examining the question of carers vis-a-vis the Department of Health and Children?
I will not repeat my answer other than to say that the review of the carer's allowance is being carried out by my Department in conjunction with other relevant Departments. Obviously the whole question of home help is being examined in that regard. While it is acknowledged that the rate per hour paid to home helps is not great, it is a valuable service to those who avail of it.
In the context of the overall budgetary situation — a phrase used consistently by the Minister this afternoon — will he agree it would be cheaper to give the carer's allowance to all the people concerned rather than provide nursing home subvention or fund State run homes? It would be cheaper to giver the carer's allowance to these people and scrap the means test rather than fund these nursing homes.
We do not have any estimate of the cost of that but I believe it would be grossly excessive and could not be countenanced. The carer's allowance already costs a considerable amount of money. Deputy O'Keeffe referred to 30,000 people who require care but that does not include the thousands of elderly people being cared for in the home by their extended families and who might ultimately have to be cared for in a nursing home or other care institution. That is a huge cost not only to the family involved but also to the State.
