Seán Crowe
Ceist:72 Mr. Crowe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will continue with the need for annual means and medical tests for applicants for the disability allowance. [24392/03]
Ceisteanna – Questions (Resumed). Priority Questions. - Social Welfare Benefits.
Disability allowance is a social assistance payment made to people whose employment capacity is substantially restricted because of a disability and whose income falls below certain limits.
Continuing entitlement to disability allowance is subject to the person satisfying both a means test and the medical eligibility criteria that apply. As with all my Department's schemes there is a review mechanism to ensure that these eligibility conditions continue to be satisfied. This is achieved through a systematic process of selective and periodic reviews of appropriate cases.
I emphasise that my Department does not review recipients of disability allowance on an annual basis, except in a minority of cases where this is warranted by the particular circumstances of the individual case. For example, the total number of reviews carried out so far this year is about 5,000 whereas there are over 66,000 disability allowance cases in payment.
My Department recognises that a considerable number of disability allowance applicants are severely disabled. The operation of the existing systematic review of cases takes account of this factor. In cases of profound or severe disability these recipients are medically assessed at the time of their original claim. Thereafter, they are not subject to any further medical review for the duration of their claim. For example, some 40% of applications awarded in 2003 do not require any further medical review.
Similarly, means reviews are carried out on the basis of the review status accorded to the recipient at the time he or she makes the claim or following means investigation. The vast majority of recipients of disability allowance do not have any means and such cases are not reviewed on a frequent basis.
In all cases, following a review of entitlement, whether this relates to means or medical eligibility, the recipients will be informed of the decision and the reasons for it in each case. They are advised of their right of appeal to the social welfare appeals office. Conversely, many reviews that are undertaken result in increases in payments for the person concerned.
I am satisfied that the systematic and selective review process operated by my Department for disability allowance is appropriate and balanced.
The reason for tabling the question was that a number of persons with severe disability contacted me about the Department's system. For example, one person, Peter, who has cerebral palsy found it degrading that the medical practitioner should ask if he was cured since the last time he had been examined. It appears to be a waste of the time of the medical practitioner. Is such a medical test necessary? I do not believe it is. The system needs to be looked at. The Minister said that those with severe disability are not called for a further medical review but the reality is that they are. If I was to bring a number of cases to the Minister perhaps she would look at them. What I am seeking is some kind of passport where, if people have a medical condition which will be with them for the rest of their life, save a miracle, they should not be degraded by being called for a further medical review. It is also degrading for the medical practitioner. There are other things which those medical practitioners could do if it is a case of keeping them busy.
If there are particular circumstances, I would prefer if they were brought to my personal attention. I would certainly look at them. On the basis of the Deputy's representation and his parliamentary question, I took it upon myself to examine the review and the selectivity of that review. I was happy in looking at the parameters and the numbers that those who were very severely handicapped would not have been called for a medical review. I will ascertain the particular circumstances but in the main that does not happen. I am glad the Deputy has brought it to my attention. I will speak with the relevant officials to ensure such a mishap does not recur. With 66,000 in receipt of an allowance, a situation may arise where someone is called incorrectly. If the Deputy gives me the details of the particular circumstances of his constituent, I will look at the matter personally for him.