Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 26 Jan 2012

Vol. 753 No. 1

Other Questions

Social Welfare Code

Patrick Deering

Ceist:

6Deputy Pat Deering asked the Minister for Social Protection the reason there is no review system in place that involves medical and parental input regarding the suspension of payment of domiciliary care allowance; the reason this process goes straight to appeal which can take up to 14 months with no payments; and if she will consider introducing a new system which will work more effectively for all those involved. [4357/12]

Domiciliary care allowance is paid to more than 24,000 parents and guardians in respect of 26,000 children at a cost of approximately €100 million in 2011, with the accompanying respite care grant costing a further €45 million. In addition, the Department makes an extensive range of payments to support families with children. In 2011, approximately €2 billion was paid out in respect of 1.36 million children on child benefit. In addition, qualified child increases were also paid to people on social welfare payments in respect of 495,000 children, with 369,000 at full rate and 126,000 at half rate.

Domiciliary care allowance is a monthly payment to the parent or guardian of a child with a disability so severe that the child requires care and attention and-or supervision substantially in excess of another child of the same age. This care and attention must be provided to allow the child to deal with the activities of daily living and the child must be likely to require this level of care and attention for at least 12 months.

Domiciliary care allowance cases are reviewed to ensure the conditions for receipt of the payment continue to be met. Cases are reviewed based on either a scheduled review based on the recommendation of the medical assessor when the claim is initially processed, or on the basis of information received about a change of circumstances which potentially affects the continued entitlement of a case already in payment. As with the carer's allowance, this is a medically based assessment.

Scheduled reviews, on the recommendation of one of the medical assessors, are based on the prognosis of the child's disability and how his or her condition may improve over time.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

The review interval will vary from 12 months in cases where the child's disability is likely to improve significantly in the short term, to a five or ten year review date if the child's condition is likely to remain unchanged for the foreseeable future. In circumstances where a child has a life-long disability that is unlikely to improve by any significant degree, a "do not review again" status may be used.

It is not accurate to say that parental or medical evidence is not sought or taken into account in the review process. Domiciliary care allowance reviews are initiated with the completion a review of medical criteria form by the parent, which also requires medical input from the child's doctor. The parent returns this form, together with any additional recent reports of medical or therapeutic services the child may be receiving. This information is then sent for review by one of the Department's medical assessors who will provide an opinion to the deciding officer on whether the child still meets the medical criteria for receipt of the payment.

The decision of the deciding officer is communicated to the customer in writing and they are given the option to appeal the decision to the social welfare appeals office within 21 days. The average processing time for an appeal dealt with on a summary basis is just under six months for appeals and just over a year for appeals where an oral hearing is requested.

I thank the Minister for her reply. The reason I tabled this question is a number of my constituents have had their cases reviewed even though their circumstances have not changed. In one case a child with Down's syndrome - circumstances which unfortunately are not going to change - had been assessed two years previously and payment was going to be reduced from 31 January. An appeal process would have taken 14 months. My point is that no review process exists between an application being turned down and an appeal process and potentially there could be a wait of 14 months for payment although the circumstances would not have changed. This seems very unfair.

A number of cases have come to light in recent weeks and a review process should be put in place for circumstances which will not change. I agree with reviewing cases where circumstances can change and improve but payments for children assessed two years previously whose circumstances will not change for a considerable period of time or perhaps never should not be cut.

This scheme came to the Department from HSE and the Department of Health in 2009 and its payment and structures need to be reviewed. As stated about carers, it is also subject to modernisation in terms of processing. Review dates are most often set by the medical reviewer suggesting a child may be looked at again after a particular interval. I am happy to speak to the chief medical officer in the Department. Again there are variations whereby some children have a condition which is likely to be life-long and in other cases - it is hoped - children make a full recovery or make such progress that a domiciliary care allowance may no longer be appropriate. As we improve the processing of claims we can then turn our attention to this area.

I thank the Minister for her very positive response. The issue is medical evidence. These cases are dismissed without medical evidence, after which new medical evidence is submitted. They are dismissed with the stroke of a pen or the push of a computer button. People want an opportunity to produce medical evidence in a review rather than having to wait a long period of time.

In the review being suggested, will the Minister deal with stakeholders and organisations which represent families who have gone through this? There is a sense that a consultant's letter rather than a GP's letter is all that is accepted. This is an insult to GPs and I would not say their representative bodies are too happy. Will the Minister confirm whether this is the case? Another aspect is the long waiting lists to see consultants, after which is a waiting list for the typing pool and yet another waiting list when the application is made. An undue amount of time is spent waiting.

Has the Minister carried out analysis on medical evidence given in the first instance? I get the impression that sometimes the medical people providing certification have not read the terms of the scheme. They state a condition exists but they do not read the terms of the scheme which require information on a level of support. Is this a problem? What steps is the Minister taking to ensure medical practitioners are made more aware of the terms of the scheme prior to providing certification?

One of the reasons for the refusal of an application which is subsequently awarded is the required medical evidence is not presented in the required format. The medical people in the Department have much contact with various medical organisations with a view to improving communication. As the various schemes we have been speaking about today are modernised and the new technology is settled down, we should examine being very clear to the applicants and their medical advisers on the minimum acceptable standard. If an application does not meet this standard at the initial stage before refusal is offered, as happens with regard to other applications, people are advised the application is incomplete and asked to complete it.

Social Welfare Benefits

Seán Crowe

Ceist:

7Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Minister for Social Protection the estimated number of families that will be impacted by the budget cut reducing the back to school clothing and footwear allowance from €305 to €250 for children aged 12 years or more and from €200 to €150 for children aged four years to 11 years; if her attention has been drawn to research published by Bernardos demonstrating that the 2011 allowance levels fell far short of the actual costs; and if she will reverse this cut. [4354/12]

The back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme provides a one-off payment to eligible families to assist with the cost of uniforms and footwear for children going to school. The survey to which the Deputy refers is a survey of the cost of sending a child to school which is not directly comparable. In 2011, more than 196,000 individuals received a back to school clothing and footwear allowance payment in respect of 384,000 children at a cost of almost €91 million. A means test is applied to the scheme to ensure that limited resources are directed to those in greatest need ensuring maximum value for money.

As a budgetary measure, the allowance payable was reduced from €305 to €250 for children aged from 12 to 22 and from €200 to €150 for children aged from four to 11 years for the 2012 scheme. No payment is being made with regard to children aged two or three years because they do not go to school. Despite these reductions, the current payment rates still show significant increases since 2006 and compare favourably when viewed in the context of clothing and footwear price trends over the same period. It is estimated that in 2012 some 340,000 children will benefit from the scheme at these lower rates.

According to the consumer price index for November 2011, the overall cost of clothing and footwear has fallen by 27.2% since December 2006. Since 2006, payment rates for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme have increased by 87% for those under 11 years of age and by 31% for those over 11 years of age.

I consider the back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme to be an important support for parents at a time of particular financial strain. I am satisfied the changes to the scheme in recent years, in particular the scheme improvements relative to the consumer price index trends, are still providing a major boost to meeting the financial costs associated with returning to school.

Although there has been a decrease in the rates of payment for this year, by maintaining the same income limits, which have increased significantly in recent years, I have ensured the back to school clothing and footwear allowance payment is targeted at those most in need of assistance.

The Minister stated this was an important payment in times of financial strain yet her decision in the budget was to cut it. This is a significant cutback as already many families experience a great deal of debt when their children are returning to school. The increase in recent years was to take account of the increase in the cost of getting children to school, and those costs have not dropped.

The Minister stated she was aware of the Barnardos school costs survey. Barnardos' main spokesperson, Fergus Finlay, a member of the Minister's party, has highlighted regularly the financial stress parents are under and this reduction in the back to school allowance will exacerbate that stress. Does the Minister agree with Barnardos that as a result of this cut more families will go into debt this September? Does she agree also that her cuts, including the cut in the back to school allowance, will deepen child poverty for the remainder of this year and into the future? Will she reinstate this payment to the 2011 level in recognition of the increase in day to day costs?

The country is in a major financial emergency and I was required to find extensive savings in terms of the social protection budget, which I did, but I also ensured that the core rates remained intact which I believed was very important.

Regarding this scheme, the allowance that will be available this year is significant in terms of the needs of a primary or secondary school child. We are now paying it to a very large number of children, 340,000, and we expect to pay it to that number of children this year. The reality is that the cost of clothing in particular has fallen significantly relative to the increases in the payments which were made, particularly in times when there were significant amounts of money to spend. The spending by the Department this year on the back to school clothing and footwear allowance will offer significant assistance to families, particularly families on a social welfare income. The Deputy should bear in mind that families are in receipt of child benefit and if they are on a social welfare income they would be in receipt of qualified child increases also. The support given to children by us in our budgetary process is very significant.

Does the Minister believe the cut will result in a drop in the school completion rates? This measure may discourage some children, particularly those in secondary schools, returning to school or discourage their parents allowing their children return to school. The fact that the Minister is paying this allowance to more people is a reflection of the crisis we are in and our unemployment levels because it is a means tested payment and is not as easy to obtain as other payments.

The Minister might indicate where she got the information that school clothing costs have decreased. To my knowledge they have not dropped in the areas I represent when I shop for school clothing for my own children, and those are not the only costs associated with going to school. While this is a clothing and footwear scheme it often goes beyond that in subsidising books and bus fares.

In regard to books, it is more than high time that primary schools in particular but secondary schools also had book rental schemes. A very large number of schools have book rental schemes for a modest contribution by parents and significant contributions by the Department of Education and Skills in the case of children who are disadvantaged.

Enormous savings can be effected in that regard but also a huge reduction in the level of concern and stress parents face when their children return to school. I hope I will see the day when every school will have a good quality book rental scheme as is the case in many schools.

Regarding school uniform costs, like the Deputy I have occasion to be involved on behalf of family members in shopping for school uniforms and checking prices. All of the very large department and chain stores give extraordinarily high quality value for money in school clothes. I understand some schools may have more expensive requirements such as crests but if a jumper must have a crest its cost can increase by €25. While we are in this financial emergency a profound argument can be made for schools allowing parents to choose the cheaper chain store options, which are nicely made and very good value for money. That will be a matter for individual school communities and school boards but we could save parents a great deal of stress if we emphasised access to value for money options regarding the annual return to school.

Many of the uniforms need to be changed.

Departmental Expenditure

Billy Kelleher

Ceist:

8Deputy Billy Kelleher asked the Minister for Social Protection if the Troika in their most recent review of the EU IMF agreement implementation or in previous reviews brought up any specific issue in relation to social protection; if they issued any specific guidance or dictates on social protection reform or reductions in expenditure; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4385/12]

Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Ceist:

41Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Social Protection the status of the work done to date by her on the development of the implementation plan she is committed to deliver to the Troika by the end of March 2012; if she will provide an indication of what it will contain; if she will publish it to allow for debate in Dáil Éireann in advance of submitting it to the Troika; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4356/12]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 and 41 together.

In November 2010 the then Fianna Fail-Green Party Government negotiated an agreement with the European Union-ECB-IMF funding troika which included undertakings regarding the social protection area, each with a specific timeframe for delivery. That Government agreed a structural adjustment programme which we are now working through and which I stress is subject to a weekly, monthly and quarterly reporting process as well as ongoing discussions on all expenditure headings, including social protection.

The progress made on current commitments is discussed with the troika delegation when it visits Dublin for each quarterly review, the achievement of commitments is noted where relevant, and the agreement is revised to reflect any new or follow-on commitments made in the course of the quarterly review, as appropriate. All of the commitments in the social protection area that were required to be delivered up to the present time have been delivered in full and on time.

Spending on social protection in 2012 is expected to account for almost 40% of current Government expenditure. The EU, the ECB and the IMF recognise the scale of spending on social protection and have emphasised the importance of reform in this area both as a contribution to fiscal consolidation and to facilitate economic recovery. The troika has not identified any specific programmes that should be curtailed or discontinued but rather expressed overall targets to be achieved.

However, as Deputies will be aware, the Government announced expenditure ceilings for all Departments for 2013 and 2014 when budget 2012 was brought before the Dáil last month. These provide for savings of just over €1 billion in total by the end of 2014 in the social protection area above the savings from measures introduced in budget 2012 and previously.

In that context, the Government has agreed with the troika that by the end of March the Department will draw up a comprehensive programme of reforms that can help better targeting of social support to those on lower incomes, and ensure that work pays for welfare recipients. The Government has also agreed that it will take steps to strengthen activation and training policies to help jobseekers get back to work.

The work done to date in respect of both of these commitments builds on policy documents published in 2010 in the areas of pensions, child income supports, payments to people of working age and payments to people with a disability.

It is not intended that the reform programme would be finalised by end of March. My intention is to bring reform proposals to Government initially and then to the Oireachtas in advance of finalisation, with implementation to commence in budget 2013.

Will the Minister accept that we need reform of the schemes on an ongoing basis? Many of the reforms mentioned in the EU-IMF memorandum of understanding were already in train and under discussion in the Department, particularly the rationalisation of the child payments, disability payments and so on. Does she intend to proceed with the part capacity provision introduced in the budget that would allow persons on invalidity pension to work and receive a partial payment, depending on the level of disability, the objective of which would be to facilitate those with a disability to remain in the workplace on a long term basis? Is the Minister confirming today that the changes to community employment schemes, one parent family payment, child benefit and so on in the budget were not dictated by the EU-IMF and were decisions of the Government rather than the censure of the IMF?

In the language of high diplomacy, Deputy Ó Cuív was the Minister in the Department and a member of the Government that negotiated the deal with the troika. The format of structural adjustment programmes around the world - we are not the first country to be in such a programme - is that there is enormous discussion between the people in the IMF, which is overseeing and supervising the programme and providing the loans, and the officials in the country which is in the programme. Clearly, that is what happened when the IMF came to Dublin in November 2010, though if the Deputy recalls there were some denials from some members of that Government that such a process was under way. We are in a framework. The framework that was signed up to by Fianna Fáil and the Green Party includes very detailed, weekly, monthly and quarterly reporting and discussion at all appropriate intervals of what progress is being achieved. The objective of the Government is to see the country exit successfully from the adjustment programme and return to economic growth. We must have regard to the programme. The troika members are exercised by issues such as activation, the cost overall of social protection and by various elements of various schemes. In the language of structural adjustment programmes they take an interest in all of these issues and, as we have heard from time to time, different parts of the troika have different views on different issues. I do not think the troika would describe itself as dictating to any particular Department.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh has a similar question.

Will the Minister confirm that the agreement to date does not commit us to delivery or introduction of a single working age payments scheme per se but to reform of the social welfare system and more efficiency? Does she agree that prior to moving to such widescale reform such reform should be predicated by a roll-out of activation measures of training and educational opportunities and, in particular - the elephant in the room - jobs being available. If only one part is rolled out the only people who will suffer are those who are dependent on social welfare. Has the Minster contacted the Department of Education and Skills, which would be involved in some of the activation and educational opportunities, and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation? Will the presentation to the troika in March-April be a combined one or will the Department of Social Protection make its presentation first?

I will take the last question first. The working method is to have both. Nine Departments have conversations and discussions with the troika on a continuing basis and when they come to do their reviews in Dublin, just as they report on a continuing basis. The co-ordinating Departments for dealing with the troika are the two finance Departments which oversee the process.

On the single working age payment and roll-out of activation opportunities, I agree with the Deputy that there are commitments in regard to both in respect of the end of the first quarter of 2012, which were signalled when the original structure of the adjustment programme was put in place. We will meet that deadline. Obviously, the most important one is that in the context of the €1 billion, to which I referred earlier, being spent on various employment supports ranging from the two scheme to CE schemes to back to education allowances, it is important to give as many people who are unemployed as much opportunity as possible to take part in appropriate options, opportunities and training and that they are spread as widely as possible among those who are at risk of becoming long-term unemployed.

In regard to the activation programme, next week I will launch with the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Department of Education and Skills a programme on the options, opportunities and structures of helping people to engage with the system in terms of getting back to work, back to education and back to training.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh asked about jobs. The jobs initiative, launched by the Government in May 2011, has produced good and significant responses from employers particularly in the area of tourism from various parts of the country, including the west. I am pleased that JobBridge, the national internship scheme that I launched in July 2011, has had a huge take up from employers. It is interesting that there is a significant demand from people who were not originally in the JobBridge process, such as lone parents and people with a disability, to take part in it. We are looking at that issue. A huge volume of people on the live register on job seekers' allowance are very interested in engaging in opportunities and we must ensure that actually happens. The troika constantly asks questions about this area.

Written Answers follow Adjournment.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.50 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 31 January 2012.

Barr
Roinn