Michael Ring
Ceist:261 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of people who were in receipt of the farm assist scheme for 1999 and to date 2000 , giving details on a monthly basis. [23555/00]
Written Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.
The information requested by the Deputy is contained in the following table. The farm assist scheme was provided for in the Social Welfare Act, 1999, and came into operation with effect from 7 April 1999.
Number of recipients of farm assist, May 1999 to September 2000.
|
Week Ending |
No. of Recipients |
|
31/05/99 |
2,639 |
|
26/06/99 |
3,568 |
|
31/07/99 |
5,165 |
|
28/08/99 |
5,937 |
|
25/09/99 |
6,519 |
|
30/10/99 |
6,841 |
|
27/11/99 |
6,961 |
|
31/12/99 |
7,117 |
|
28/01/00 |
7,361 |
|
25/02/00 |
7,536 |
|
31/03/00 |
7,568 |
|
22/04/00 |
7,540 |
|
26/05/00 |
7,570 |
|
30/06/00 |
7,568 |
|
28/07/00 |
7,607 |
|
25/08/00 |
7,651 |
|
29/09/00 |
7,656 |
Michael Ring
Ceist:262 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will address the anomaly for means-testing of REP scheme payments whereby those in receipt of unemployment assistance, unemployment benefit and farm assist can disregard the first £2,000 REPS money but those on disability allowance are means-tested on this amount; if those in receipt of disability allowance could be approved a back-payment to the date when the disregard of REPS money was first introduced; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23556/00]
When the disregard of income arising under the rural environment protection scheme, REPS, was originally introduced in 1996, it was confined to those social assistance schemes which were considered to be of most direct relevance to farmers, i.e. unemployment assistance, smallholders assistance, pre-retirement allowance and old age, non-contributory, pension.
With the introduction last year of a specific farm-related income support payment scheme, i.e. the farm assist scheme, it was considered more appropriate to confine, as far as possible, all farm related exemptions and incentives to this scheme. The existing REPS disregard has, therefore, been applied to this new scheme.
The REPS disregard is not relevant in the case of the unemployment benefit scheme, as this is a social insurance payment and is not, therefore, subject to a means test.
While the REPS disregard does not apply in the case of the other social assistance schemes, it should be noted that many of these schemes already have their own separate income disregards which would apply to REPS payments. For instance, under the disability allowance scheme, the first £75 of weekly earnings from rehabilitative employment is disregarded for means test purposes. This disregard was extended to earnings from rehabilitative self-employment from April of this year and this means that it now applies to income from REPS payments.
Michael Ring
Ceist:263 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of people in County Mayo who have been refused unemployment benefit or unemployment assistance in 2000 on the grounds that they are not genuinely seeking work; the number of these who have submitted an appeal; and the number where these appeals have been finalised, giving details of the number of cases which were allowed and disallowed. [23559/00]
In the period 1 January 2000 to 31 August 2000 the number of unemployment benefit claims closed in local offices in County Mayo, having been disallowed on the grounds that the applicant was not genuinely seeking work and/or was not available for work, was 525. The corresponding national figure was 8,889.
Records held in local offices in County Mayo show that from 1 January 2000 to 31 August 2000 a total of 151 decisions relating to people genuinely seeking work and who were available for work were appealed to the social welfare appeals office. As at 3 October 2000, 99 of these cases had been finalised and returned to the local offices, of whom 16 had their appeals allowed, 81 were disallowed and two claimants withdrew their appeals.
Brendan Howlin
Ceist:264 Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if, further to his reply to Question No. 352 of 8 February 2000, he will indicate the current status of his Department's working group review of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme and his expectations regarding its completion; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23561/00]
The supplementary welfare allowance, SWA, scheme is administered on my Department's behalf by the health boards. An interdepartmental committee is currently reviewing the scheme as part of my Department's series of programme evaluations.
The current review is a fundamental appraisal of the scheme aimed at improving customer service and administrative efficiency. It also provides an opportunity to re-focus the scheme, and the health boards' community welfare service of which it is part, to become more effective in tackling poverty and social exclusion.
A widespread consultation process has been undertaken as part of the review with users of the SWA service, information providers and other interested parties including the social partners and the health boards who administer the scheme. The submissions received in response to this process are currently being considered and will inform the deliberations of the interdepartmental committee.
I expect that the proposals of the interdepartmental committee will be finalised by the end of next year.
Gay Mitchell
Ceist:265 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the reason an appeal by a person (details supplied) in Dublin 8 has not been decided on; and if he will take a favourable view of the appeal in the circumstances. [23622/00]
Gay Mitchell
Ceist:266 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if a person (details supplied) in Dublin 8 is entitled to the free fuel allowance. [23623/00]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 265 and 266 together.
Under social welfare legislation decisions on claims must be made by deciding officers and appeals officers. These officers are statutorily appointed and I have no role in regard to making such decisions. However, I have inquired into the situation and the following is the position.
The person concerned is in receipt of disability benefit of £80.50 per week from my Department. He is also in receipt of rent supplement of £35 per week from the Eastern Regional Health Authority. His spouse receives lone parent's allowance in respect of herself and a dependent child. Between them, they are in receipt of the maximum amount payable by my Department to a couple in their circumstances.
The person concerned applied to the Eastern Regional Health Authority for payment of supplementary welfare allowance in February 2000 arising from a court order which directs him to pay £15 per week towards the upkeep of his children. His application was refused on the grounds that he was already in receipt of disability benefit at a rate above the basic rate of supplementary welfare allowance.
The person appealed this decision to the Eastern Regional Health Authority and his appeal was disallowed.
His subsequent appeal to the social welfare appeals office was considered by an appeals officer and, following an oral hearing on 7 June 2000, his appeal was disallowed. The person was notified of the decision on 5 July 2000. It was drawn to his attention that it was open to him to seek a variation in the court order in the light of his circumstances.
I understand that in the light of representations made by the Deputy inquires are being made by the health board as to the present position in regard to the court order.
The free fuel allowance is payable to persons dependent on long-term social welfare payments. The person concerned is in receipt of short-term disability benefit which includes a weekly allowance of £3 towards the extra cost of smokeless fuel.