Vol. 492 No. 5
45 Ms McManus asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will consider the extension of secondary benefits on a transitional basis to those coming off community employment schemes in view of the fact that many community groups believe that the loss of these benefits has undermined the value and take-up of community employment places; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14342/98]
107 Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the loss of long-term payments for those who have completed community employment schemes is acting as a disincentive to people taking up a place on these schemes; the cost of providing for the maintenance of long-term payments for those completing community employment schemes and qualifying for unemployment benefit; the plans, if any, he has to address the issue of loss of long-term payments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14577/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 45 and 107 together.
Responsibility for the community employment scheme rests with FÁS and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. I am advised, however, that there has been no slackening in demand for places on CE schemes.
The central issue raised by the Deputies relates to those former community employment workers who revert to the live register after completing a period on a CE scheme, and who, by virtue of having paid class A PRSI contributions, may qualify or requalify for unemployment benefit rather than long-term unemployment assistance. As a consequence, they do not have entitlement to the social welfare secondary benefits which are payable only with long-term welfare payments.
This issue arises as a direct consequence of the extension of class A PRSI to CE workers, which was provided for in the Social Welfare Act, 1996. The purpose of that measure was to enhance the PRSI status of community employment workers and to put them on a par with other class A workers.
In the case of persons who qualify or requalify for unemployment benefit their earnings in the relevant tax year will determine whether they receive a graduated rate or the full rate of unemployment benefit. Persons entitled to a reduced or graduated rate of unemployment benefit are entitled to claim unemployment assistance if it is more beneficial to them. However, long-term unemployment assistance is not payable where the person is entitled to full rate unemployment benefit. The social welfare secondary benefits, including butter vouchers and the free fuel allowance, are payable only with long-term social welfare payments.
Secondary benefits can, however, be retained if the person transfers from a community employment scheme to a back-to-work allowance scheme or jobstart etc. It is important to note also that as regards income-related secondary benefits such as rent allowance, medical cards and differential rents, the position is that, in the normal course, former community employment workers who are solely dependent on a social welfare payment would continue, where appropriate, to receive these benefits.
47 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the plans, if any, he has to implement the sickness allowance as provided for under the Social Welfare Bill, 1997; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14455/98]
The 1997 Social Welfare Act provided for the introduction of a new means tested sickness allowance scheme. This scheme will bridge the gap which currently exists in the social welfare code whereby people who are incapable of work due to illness, but do not satisfy the contribution conditions for disability benefit or the qualifying conditions for disability allowance must have recourse to the supplementary welfare allowance to secure income support.
It had been estimated that this new scheme would, at any given time, provide for the needs of about 3,000 people who were incapable of work and who were in receipt of SWA, with some 13,500 people benefiting in the course of a full year. However, recent trends would indicate that the number of potential beneficiaries would now be somewhat lower, due mainly to a larger than anticipated move of claimants from SWA to disability allowance.
It was originally envisaged that the sickness allowance scheme would commence in 1997. However, it has been found that the level of computer systems development work which would be required to introduce this scheme is such that it could jeopardise the critical work which is necessary to ensure all of the Department's computer based payments systems are fully prepared for the year 2000. In the circumstances, it has been necessary to defer the introduction of the sickness allowance scheme for the present. The position will be reviewed later this year in the light of progress on year 2000 preparations.
I would like to point out, however, that all those who would have qualified for the sickness allowance payment are currently being catered for through other social welfare payments, such as supplementary welfare allowance and are not, therefore, losing out financially as a result of the deferred implementation.
