Michael Bell
Ceist:30 Mr. Bell asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the reason he did not give a double fuel allowance with the pre-Christmas double payment. [5748/01]
Other Questions. - Social Welfare Benefits.
Christmas bonus payments are provided by my Department to people in receipt of certain long-term social welfare payments. These payments are made to alleviate hardship due to the additional demands on people's resources at Christmas time. Last Christmas, the bonus was increased from 70% to 100%, the equivalent of an extra week's payment.
The aim of the national fuel scheme on the other hand is to assist householders who are on long-term social welfare or health board payments and who are unable to provide for their own heating needs. Fuel allowances of £5 per week are paid to eligible households and £8 per week is paid in smokeless zones. These allowances will be paid for 28 weeks in the fuel season from October 2000 to April 2001 and for 29 weeks in the 2001-02 fuel season. This represents an extension of three weeks in the fuel season. Virtually all recipients of fuel allowance benefited from the increase in the Christmas bonus from 70% to 100%. The increase was worth more than £23 in the case of single people on long-term unemployment assistance and at least £37 for couples.
Providing a double payment of fuel allowance at Christmas would, in effect mean paying one additional week of the allowance, with a value of either £8 or £5. While I accept this would be a popular innovation, I chose instead to extend the fuel season not by one week but by three weeks. Together with giving people an additional 30% on their Christmas bonus payment, this is a more beneficial approach to providing income support over the entire winter period.
Would the Minister accept that the problem is that there has not been an increase in the national fuel scheme since its introduction by a Fine Gael-Labour Government in 1984, a remarkable 15 or 16 years? Every pensioner who stops me asks why the payment is not being increased or doubled.
Today is a bitterly cold day as has been the case in recent days. Is it not true that the Minister should have aimed at having a 52 week fuel season rather than a 29 week one? Many pensioners feel cold even in June or July. Should the payment be doubled and should the fuel season be increased to 52 weeks?
This issue has been discussed during budget time in recent years. The free fuel scheme review which took place a few years ago suggested that rather than increasing the free fuel allowance it would be far better if we gave the primary payments to old age pensioners and others in receipt of this allowance in their weekly payment over 52 weeks. This is one of the reasons we gave larger than normal weekly increases over the 52 week period rather than increase the £5 fuel allowance. I think the Deputy will accept that if the fuel allowance was increased households would have their income reduced by a substantial amount each week after the cut-off date in April, which obviously would be a big burden on them.
Seán Barrett
Ceist:31 Mr. Barrett asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his proposals to transfer the operation of the rental subsidy scheme from health boards to local authorities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5705/01]
As the Deputy will be aware, the Government has decided in principle to introduce a new scheme of private sector rent assistance. The new scheme will be operated by the local authorities and will help to ensure a full range of housing options is made available to people with long-term housing needs who rely on supplementary welfare allowance rent supplement.
The Government's "Action on Housing" document, published in June 2000, indicated that a more supply-based approach to rental assistance would be explored. Arising from this, my colleague the Minister of State with responsibility for housing and urban renewal proposes to set up pilot schemes in nine local authorities to provide rental accommodation in the private sector for people who would otherwise rely on SWA rent supplement. Under this proposal the local authorities will procure suitable property from property owners and offer tenancies in those properties to people on their housing lists who are also on SWA rent supplement.
The trade unions representing community welfare officers, IMPACT and SIPTU have indicated that they will not co-operate with these pilot schemes unless they get certain guarantees concerning their members' future employment. Discussions are being held with the unions concerned to resolve this. If the industrial relations issues are resolved and the pilot schemes are successful, a permanent scheme will be established. It is expected that the pilot schemes will run for around 12 months and a further two year time frame is envisaged for introducing the new arrangements once the detailed proposals have been agreed.
Mr. Hayes:
Does the Minister accept the length of time it has taken to make progress on this issue is appalling? An interdepartmental report on the matter was issued more than two years ago. The Minister is proposing, together with the Minister of State with responsibility for housing, to put in place a pilot scheme. When will we see this pilot scheme? Is the Minister telling the House that after the pilot scheme is introduced he intends to transfer responsibility for the administration of the SWA rent supplement scheme to local authority housing departments?
The Government accepted the views expressed in the review of the scheme. The main responsibility for administration of the scheme will rest with the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government. The Deputy may be aware of the difficult industrial relations issues regarding the future employment of community welfare officers. This, by and large, is the reason the issue has progressed slowly. Obviously we want to progress the issue in a way which will preserve the employment of people in the community welfare system who believe that if responsibility for the scheme is taken from them there will be no work for them. There is also the difficulty that those who work as community welfare officers in health boards are on different scales from those who are employed by local authorities. These issues cause huge difficulties.
On the future role of community welfare officers, what discussions has the Minister had with them and what progress has been made on the issue? This issue has been ongoing for several months and is a cause of deep concern to community welfare officers who believe there is a lack of clarity about their future role. They believe their experience in this and the entire social welfare area is valuable and that they have a key role to play in the future. Does the Minister accept they have a key role to play in the future?
I accept that community welfare officers have a key role to play in the delivery of services to the less well off in society. Local authorities deal with people's long-term needs and it makes sense to have a connection between the delivery of rent supplement and the people who try to look after the needs of those on the housing lists. It does not make sense, as has been the case up to now, for the scheme to be administered by my Department which has no connection with the local authority system. When the rent supplement scheme was introduced in 1990 the figure was approximately £6 million, while it is now approaching £120 million.
Given the major problem with unregistered landlords in this city, is it not time the Minister and the Minister for the Environment and Local Government examined the possibility of local authorities renting the additional accommodation directly? The Minister might have a function in this area.
Mr. Hayes:
On the pilot scheme to be introduced shortly by the Minister of State with responsibility for housing, is it the Minister's intention to shift the budget and moneys from his Department to the Department of the Environment and Local Government as the scheme will ultimately be administered by it and local authorities?
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Does the Minister accept the community welfare officers, who have given a good service, have much more knowledge of the needs of people looking for a rent allowance than county councils which will be looking for non-existing apartments?
In reply to Deputy Browne, this issue was first identified in 1995 when I was in Opposition and it was only when we came into Government three years ago that it was decided to look at ways of changing the system.
In reply to Deputy Hayes, there will be some transfer from my Department to the Department of the Environment and Local Government. It is envisaged under the new scheme that people on the housing list for 12 months will be paid by my Department and that once they go over the 12 month period the issue will be taken up by the local authority.
Deputy Broughan's question on whether local authorities should rent houses should more appropriately be addressed to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government. It is an issue which needs to be addressed. When one looks at the amount of money expended on the scheme in the past few years there needs to be a connection in order to ensure that people on the housing list get a rent supplement and that those who do not need to be on the housing list do not get a rent supplement.