Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 5 Nov 2002

Vol. 556 No. 3

Written Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.

Paddy McHugh

Ceist:

743 Mr. McHugh asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason the free telephone and electricity allowance were withdrawn from a person (details supplied) in County Galway; if a widow whose spouse was in receipt of these benefits before their death would continue to receive the benefits after their death even though they are under the age of 65; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20389/02]

A widow/er aged 60 to 65 can retain household benefits if their late spouse was in receipt of them and provided that the couple were permanently residing together at the time of the death. The late husband of the person concerned had been entitled to free travel as he was aged over 66 and on that basis the person concerned was issued with a free travel pass in her own right after his death. He was not, however, in receipt of the other free schemes at the time of his death nor did he have an entitlement to them as he was not in receipt of a qualifying pension. In these circumstances, the person concerned does not have an entitlement to household benefits until she is 66 years of age. The person concerned is in receipt of a widow's non-contributory pension and was awarded an electricity allowance in error from 1 October 2001. When the error was discovered, the allowance ceased with effect from July 2002. Her application for a telephone allowance was refused on the grounds that she was under 66 years of age.

Denis Naughten

Ceist:

744 Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason an appeal by a person (details supplied) was refused; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20472/02]

The person's claim for unemployment benefit was disallowed by a deciding officer on the grounds that she was not available for employment. The person concerned is employed part-time and her contract of employment stated that she was not permitted to be engaged in, or connected with, any other employment. The person subsequently produced evidence from her employer that this clause had been inserted in error. However, the deciding officer did not consider that this additional evidence warranted a change in the decision.

The person concerned appealed against this decision to the social welfare appeals office. An appeals officer, having considered all the evidence presented, including that adduced at an oral hearing, disallowed the appeal. The appeals officer's decision was based on the fact that, although the new contract stated that the person concerned was available to pursue full-time employment, the person's efforts in that regard do not suggest that she is available for employment in the substantial manner required under social welfare legislation. Notification of the decision has issued to the person concerned. Under social welfare legislation decisions in relation to 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.

Barr
Roinn