Before the meeting begins, I wish to raise an issue I also brought up when acting as a substitute at a meeting of the Select Sub-Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. While I am aware that officials do not comment in meetings like this, would it be possible to have their names displayed? That would be nice.
Priority Issues for the Department of Social Protection: Discussion
The general rule is that when the Minister is present, he or she addresses and takes all questions and gives all answers when he or she can. It also is open to a Minister to revert with information afterwards. This is the reason officials' names are not displayed. However, as the Deputy is aware, all members have been invited to visit the Department next Wednesday, 27 July 2011 to meet the various officials who will be present on the day. We should take up that offer as a good way to get to know people. Certainly, when officials attend in the absence of a Minister, their names always are displayed. I am sure they would love to take all the questions. We also can forward their names to members.
Can the Minister introduce the officials?
There is no problem with that, if the Minister is agreeable.
I would appreciate it were the Minister to do so.
Before we begin, I must again note that members agreed at the first meeting to turn off their mobile telephones. Although no one disagreed, mobile telephones have been buzzing and so on. I accept they are not always on the Opposition side of the room and sometimes are on this side but mobile telephones must be switched off because recordings of members' own contributions are being affected. Consequently, they will not be available for the record or may not be used in other situations. Telephones must be switched off, as having them on silent mode no longer is good enough.
I apologise Chairman but I do not know the code to turn it back on again.
Place it at the back of the room where it will not affect the microphones.
As this is the first appearance by the Minister, Deputy Burton, before the joint committee I welcome her and express the hope that both the select and joint committees will work with her in a true spirit of mutual co-operation. I am sure we can work together productively and efficiently, as there are many issues members wish to address. I thank the Minister for attending at short notice. While I accept we have only an hour in which to discuss this subject, the Minister has attended at short notice. The idea was to invite the relevant Ministers before the joint committee for a short discussion before finalising the work programme. I invite the Minister to begin her contribution.
Thank you, Chairman for the invitation and am delighted to meet the committee again. I confirm and reiterate that any committee member who wishes may visit the Department to meet and have discussions with the officials. As I will not be present, members can ask them whatever they wish and perhaps can find out about the Department's works and all the changes that are taking place at present.
Second, on foot of Deputy Lawlor's request, seated beside me are Niamh O'Donoghue, Secretary General of the Department, Brian O'Raghallaigh, the assistant secretary in overall charge of budget and finance, Kathleen Stack, another assistant secretary who deals with a wide range of issues in the Department and Claire Conway, an assistant principal officer on the finance side of the Department. When members visit the Department, they probably will meet some of these officials again and can then talk to them on a one-to-one basis.
I was asked to attend to address the issue of priorities for me and the Department and I again thank members for the invitation. When I appeared before the select committee last week in connection with the Department's spending Estimates, the discussion inevitably touched upon issues that members considered should be priorities for my Department. For example, the issue of reducing waiting times for claims decisions on appeals was mentioned by many members. This is a key priority for me, together with four other key priority areas. The first concerns my Department's role in securing economic recovery through the stimulus effect of social welfare payments, which maintain economic activity, as well as the contribution of social welfare to the achievement of fiscal sustainability in this country in order that we recover our economic sovereignty and independence.
The second priority refers to what is technically called activation. It pertains to getting people of working age back into work training or education, as opposed to simply being in receipt of a social welfare payment. It also aims to maximise employment, to tackle fraud and abuse and to implement the other commitments, such as reforming rent supplement, in the programme for Government.
My Department's overall objective is to promote active participation in society through the provision of income supports and other services. These services impact on the lives of almost every person in the State. For example, in 2010 the Department processed some 2 million claims and made more than 84 million payment transactions. More than 6 million telephone calls were received in headquarter sections and almost 935,000 control reviews were conducted. The latter are designed to stop fraud and to ensure payments go to the people who are properly entitled to them. In 2011, 1.4 million people will receive a social welfare payment each week. When qualified adults and qualified children are included, a total of more than 2 million people will benefit from weekly payments. In addition to this, child benefit payments will reach nearly 600,000 families with nearly 1.12 million children every month.
Given that scale of business, it is a major challenge to provide a satisfactory level of service to the public in all parts of the Department at all times. One of my priorities is to improve processing times, especially in those parts of the Department which are problematic. It is not acceptable that people have to wait 4.4 weeks on average to have a claim for jobseeker's allowance decided, nor is it acceptable that people have to wait 27 weeks on average to have an appeal determined.
These problems arise from the large increase in the numbers of claims and appeals being submitted as a result of the economic downturn. People who never expected to be unemployed are now unemployed and finding themselves resorting to income support from my Department. Staff numbers have increased as a result of redeployment from other areas of the Civil Service such as the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Property Registration Authority. However, while staff numbers have increased from 4,439 at the end of 2007 to 4,836 at the end of 2010, an increase of 8.9%, this has not kept pace with the increase in workloads. For example, the number of claims received in local offices during 2010 was 548,500, compared to 302,200 in 2007, an increase of 82%. Similarly, the number of appeals lodged with the social welfare appeals office in 2010 was 32,432, compared to 14,070 in 2007, an increase of 130%.
Several initiatives have been taken to improve matters, including the introduction of more streamlined business processes, new computer systems and the appointment of an additional nine appeals officers, representing a 31% increase. These were some of my first actions as Minister. Much progress has been made as a result of these initiatives and through the sheer commitment of staff to providing the best possible service in these circumstances of unprecedented increases in claim numbers. For example, the number of people awaiting a decision on a claim for jobseeker's benefit or jobseeker's allowance is 31,000, compared to 44,000 a year ago, a reduction of 30%. I attach a high priority to making further progress on further improving claim and appeal processing times this year.
The Department is pursuing its overall objective of promoting active participation in society in the context of the programme for Government which includes several commitments specifically relevant to the Department of Social Protection and which determine my priorities.
Getting the economy back on its feet is the overriding concern for the Government. One of the core commitments in the programme for Government is the restoration of fiscal stability. Overall Government spending in 2011 will be approximately €18 billion more than this year's overall Government income. That level of Exchequer borrowing is clearly not sustainable. The total income the Government will get from tax and PRSI in 2011 is €42 billion, of which my Department is expected to spend more than €20 billion, nearly half. Accordingly, the transition to a more balanced budgetary position simply cannot be made without affecting social welfare spending.
This fiscal imbalance is due to many people losing their jobs in the past four years. Along with the collapse of the banks and the construction sector, there has been a fall in tax revenues and an increase in social welfare spending. As the economy recovers, we will see a reversal in that trend with a positive impact on the fiscal deficit. If a person loses his or her job and goes on social welfare, the average cost is €10,000 per annum plus the loss of tax and PRSI. If the person is the breadwinner for a family, the cost is higher due to the additional payments for dependants. If we get that person back to work the gain is significant with a reduction in direct payments and an increase in tax revenue and spending.
In the meantime, however, as people spend the income they receive in social welfare payments, it maintains employment and sustains economic activity at higher levels than would otherwise be possible. Social welfare amounts to 16% of gross national product. One can see what the social welfare spend means to local businesses and shops. It is an important economic stimulus. This economic stabiliser effect is an important and positive contribution to economic recovery, provided of course it takes place as part of a viable overall plan leading the economy back to its full growth potential within a reasonable period.
The funding agreement with the EU and IMF commits the Government to a further adjustment of at least €3.6 billion in the 2012 budget including a reduction in expenditure of €2.1 billion. The Department of Social Protection necessarily has a major contribution to make in achieving a more balanced budget as it accounts for 39% of gross current Voted expenditure, equivalent to 16% of gross national product. The exact level of contribution that spending on social welfare will make to the overall reduction in expenditure will be decided by the Government later this year, informed by the outcome of the comprehensive review of expenditure under way in all Departments. Another part of the funding agreement with the EU and the IMF commits the Department to developing a comprehensive programme of reform that can better target social support to people on lower incomes while at the same time ensuring that work pays for social welfare recipients.
An interim report is due by the end of 2011 and a final report by March 2012. This work will build on three reports published by the Department in November 2010, which dealt with child income supports, payments to people of working age and disability allowances. It also will be informed by the outcome of the comprehensive review of expenditure in respect of social welfare spending. My priority will be to ensure that the required reduction in expenditure on social welfare is achieved in an equitable and fair manner between this year and 2012.
The members received the Minister's statement.
I will summarise it for them, if I can have five minutes to go through the headings.
Two or three minutes would be preferable.
In relation to my third priority, activation and maximising employment, we have halved the amount of employers' PRSI payable on employees and the recent social welfare legislation reinstated the national minimum wage. The national internship scheme, JobBridge, was launched last month to give thousands of unemployed people work experience. This initiative involved an active collaboration with the private sector. A steering committee headed by Mr. Martin Murphy of Hewlett-Packard also included other people in industry in commerce in Ireland. We have received a significant amount of offers from employers and a number of interns are approaching hosts as part of the process of matching candidates with positions. I have also established an advisory group on tax and social welfare which will harness expert opinion to investigate the operation and interaction of the tax and social protection system with the objective of ensuring work pays, recommending cost-effective solutions to employment disincentives and overcoming poverty.
In regard to identifying specific practical institutional and administrative improvements to our operations, the changes which the Department is undergoing would be very challenging for the commercial sector. We are taking into the Department up to 1,000 community welfare officers who were previously employed by the HSE. They are a fantastic resource for activation, counselling and interviewing because many of the supplementary payments they administered will now be provided through local offices with improved turnaround times. We are also merging with the Department the employment services side of FÁS and up to 800 people will be involved in that process in the coming year. It is a significant challenge for an organisation that employs 5,000 people to take on an additional 1,800 staff and the Secretary General and the officials in charge of our transformation agenda are working flat out on it.
Our objective is to provide an automatic process to guide individuals who present at social welfare offices. It will profile applicants according to their education and experience. If an applicant is young and an early school leaver, I am anxious that he or she would be advised to consider education and training options rather than going straight onto social welfare. As someone who worked in education for more than 20 years, I make no apology for that. If young people cannot find jobs in the current difficult market it is critical that they are given opportunities to train or get involved in education in order to have opportunities to become financially independent when the recession ends.
I will respond to questions members may have about fraud and abuse but I have already taken on additional powers to integrate task forces comprising social welfare inspectors, gardaí and Revenue and customs officials to address this issue. Defrauding social welfare is a criminal activity and serious amounts of money are being made by the small number of people who attack the social welfare system for personal gain. We are drawing up a fresh action plan on fraud and I hope the committee will be in a position to get an in-depth briefing from the departmental officials who are dealing with this issue.
Other commitments include reform of rent supplement. If members have questions on this issue, I am happy to respond to them.
I ask members to be concise. We do not want big policy speeches because we have only 35 minutes to deal with the issues arising.
I thank the Minister for providing her statement to the committee in advance. One of the highest priorities for her Department is making further progress on improving claim and appeal processing times. Most of us have tabled parliamentary questions dealing with individual cases which are taking too long to process. She noted that nine appeals officers have been put in place and I hope this will bring results in the coming months. We should not accept a situation whereby domiciliary care and carer's allowance applications and appeals are taking up to one year to process. I ask that some type of performance indicator be put in place to measure improvements in this area.
In regard to economic recovery, the Minister's priority is to ensure the required reduction in spending on social welfare is achieved in an equitable manner. As head of one of the largest spending Departments, she will have to play a role in meeting her commitments in terms of Estimates and budgets. What will be the impact of the programme for Government on staffing numbers in the Department? Are there plans for redundancies or lay-offs in light of the proposal to reduce public sector staffing by 25,000 over a period of five years? I ask for an assurance that such reductions will not impact on the services or facilities offered by the Department.
I welcome the continuation of the last Government's policy of integrating FÁS and centralising services and supports for employment activation. I hope these efforts are proceeding apace and that more information will be made available in the near future. Given that the transfer of staff must be almost complete, I expect we will be able to learn more about the mechanics either today or in the near future. The measures on internships and reducing PRSI and VAT rates are welcome but they have been described as modest. What other measures are planned for the specific area of activation? I am interested in a joined-up approach to education, particularly with regard to preschool and younger children. If children's allowance is to be means tested or savings are to be made through better-off people not receiving it, the savings should be put towards preschool education because experts tell us the most important aspect of education is not primary, secondary or third level but preschool. Other European countries have made great strides in this regard. I hope the committee will take on board a commitment to work with the Minister and the Department of Education and Skills to make huge strides in improving facilities.
The programme for Government has high aspirations for tackling fraud and abuse. Answers from departmental officials at the previous meeting indicated we are only 10% ahead of what was achieved last year in this regard. In her responses at the previous meeting, the Minister indicated she is measuring her commitment to maintain rates against the ability to make further savings in this regard. If there has been an increase of only 10% can the Minister maintain this commitment?
I thank Deputy Cowen. I appointed nine extra appeal officers within a month of taking office. Already we have seen a reduction in the waiting list for appeals on jobseekers payments. It has reduced by 11,000 compared to this time last year.
As the Deputy knows, issues arising with regard to carers often have to do with how aspects of the case, such as medical evidence, are presented. We have a twin strike strategy, part of which is ensuring initial applications are better made with all of the data complete which will enable more decisions to be made at the initial stage rather than a higher level of refusals. At present, there is a relatively high level of refusals at the initial stage because the medical evidence and paperwork are inadequate. This may require more co-operation and interaction with doctors who provide the medical evidence. If we had clearer decisions at the outset of cases which would qualify but are badly presented it would reduce the total volume of appeals. Having extra appeals officers with a lower level of appeals would allow us to deal with them more quickly.
With regard to staffing numbers, lay-offs and redundancies the programme for Government includes a requirement to reduce staff numbers in the Department but this is back-loaded over the period of the programme. There will be modest reductions in 2011 and 2012 with a more significant requirement in 2013. There is general recognition of the current demand level for services in the Department and the work of the Department. In the budget for this year and in all of the economic planning documents the previous Government submitted, the estimated average number of people who would claim jobseekers payments this year was 405,000. The actual average number of jobseekers in the seven months of the year to date is 445,000. This is a difference of 40,000 per month on average. Last year, the previous Government forecasted a decrease in economic growth rates, but included in these economic growth rates was a higher level of employment which, unfortunately, did not turn out to be the case. This is part of the reason for the difficulties with the Department's budget.
When the integration of FÁS is achieved in the Department - a huge amount of work on this is ongoing and I will meet people from FÁS who are coming to the Department - we will move to having a national employment service or a public employment service. At present, its clunky title is the national employment and entitlements service, NEES. This will provide the basis for the integration and the holy grail of a one-stop shop for joined-up welfare, advisory, job placement and training placement services in the framework of a single organisation, preferably located in a single building. This is achievable in some areas. At present in Dún Laoghaire, we are working on the new profiling system which will allow people to be referred to FÁS far more rapidly than they are present.
I share the Deputy's view on the jobs initiative. I would be happier with far more money to spend on far more jobs initiatives. When the employment services side of FÁS joins the Department it will include the community employment scheme and local employment services, LES, with which I am sure many people are familiar. We probably need to think in terms of social employment schemes. If we have a gap in employment it is essential that we all work together to identify areas where people could work. Already, I have received representations from Social Justice Ireland on its thinking. I know other organisations are also thinking about how to generate more activity and employment for people who, unfortunately, find themselves without a job.
I strongly agree with the Deputy's comments on preschool. A standard to take from the Finnish banking collapse in the early 1990s is that one of the ways in which that country created social or State-funded employment was to create a quality preschool employment system. I have been interested in this for decades. This quality preschool employment system in Finland fed through to its educational activities at all levels. At present, Finland receives approximately 100,000 visitors a year from throughout the world who go to examine its education system because the outputs it has produced have been striking. Due to my personal involvement in education I have had many opportunities to speak to people from Finland. Perhaps we can come before the committee again to discuss it in detail. Other measures taken by the Finns were to invest in technology and change how mathematics were taught. People such as engineers were brought into classrooms to revolutionise the approach to mathematics. There are lessons we can learn from that.
I will have another opportunity today to ask questions of the Minister so I will keep this as brief as possible. I welcome the presentation and acknowledge the fact that staff in the Department are working under huge pressure. Last week, the Minister came before the select committee and there she acknowledged that approximately 30% of the Department's budget went on older people through pensions and services. She failed to mention to us that later that day she would slash the household benefits package, despite committee members asking about it. If the likes of such an announcement is due later on the same day the Minister is before the committee, I hope we and the Houses will be informed of it at that stage instead of learning of it from the website. The Minister stated that the announcement was tied to a decision of the previous Government, but her approach was mean-spirited and no one was expecting the scale of the cut. Are further cuts, in particular to the 30% of services for the elderly, due before the next budget?
I argued activation measures with the previous Government. What will be their outcome? According to newspaper reports, three people per week are receiving reduced social welfare payments for refusing to accept supposed job offers or activation measures. Given the scale of the jobseeker's allowance and the number of people involved, some 440,000 per month according to the Minister, surely this proves that the majority of people are not in a position to be offered jobs. What constitutes a realistic offer must be defined, given that there are few jobs available. Many of the courses people are being sent on are chaotic and ill conceived. Someone who came to my constituency office recently went on a warehousing course that did not have a Safe Pass element, which meant he could not accept any job offer upon completing the course. Beyond that, his course certificate would not arrive until five months later. We need to root out all of these problems. What measures will be taken to ensure the courses offered are realistic as opposed to merely intended to remove people from the live register for a few months? People should have realistic job opportunities at the end of these courses, which should not be stopgap measures.
I would like to tease out a number of other issues with the Minister but, given the short time available, I will leave it at that.
I do not deny that the Minister's brief is a difficult one. Not by choice, many people have found themselves on the dole line or must get jobseeker's allowance. This is my first opportunity to disassociate myself from the Minister's comments on people treating jobseeker's allowance like a lifestyle choice. Since her remarks, I have spoken to many people who are angry that this has become the main element of the Minister's brief in the past week. I have spoken to neighbours and friends who have lost their jobs during the recession and cannot find others. The tag of "lifestyle choice" has devastated them. Parents want their children to work, but they need jobs to do that. We need to be careful about the type of language we use in the media.
The Minister stated that there are nine extra appeals officers to deal with the backlog. While this is welcome, there is another side to the coin. I used to work in a semi-State company. When one is under pressure, facing a large queue of angry or upset people can be difficult. The Minister was CCed in on a letter I received from someone who, like many others, believed he or she had been badly treated at a counter. People are under pressure and not everyone is acting badly, but we should consider how front line staff deal with that pressure. They are not receiving extra staff, yet they are trying to tackle a difficult situation in which many people are applying for jobseeker's allowance or other benefits for the first time. We should consider how to support our front line staff so that people do not feel as bad when they walk away from the counter.
The elephant in the room is jobs. Another Minister will attend shortly to address this matter. Does the Minister, Deputy Burton, believe it will be resolved in the next two, three or four years? The Minister's budget is coming under increasing pressure, which will put greater pressure on her to cut social welfare payments. Like Deputy Ó Snodaigh, I asked her whether there would be cuts next year, to which she replied she could not comment. That afternoon, though, she made her announcement.
I hope the committee and I will have an opportunity to discuss the reduction in the household benefits package.
The Department of Social Protection is one of the major bulk purchasers of a wide range of important utility services, particularly for older people, from the ESB, Bord Gáis, RTE, coal suppliers, liquefied petroleum gas suppliers and so on. When I entered the Department, I was astonished to learn that, despite spending more than €500 million on purchasing utilities, we effectively receive no discounts. Perhaps we could pursue this matter collectively.
One of last week's cuts to which members referred was a better deal from Eircom in respect of telephones. I will explain. Believe it or not, and it probably applies to half the people in the room, including me, but a person can rent his or her telephone handset for up to €2 per month under the deal with Eircom. One can buy a nice handset from any supermarket or electrical supplier for €20 or €25. If one bought them in bulk, I suspect one would pay €10 each. One of the Senators in attendance could probably indicate the bulk price. It is amazing.
When someone becomes a pensioner at 66 years of age, his or her handset is rented for the rest of his or her life at roughly €2 per month. The cut was about getting a discount from Eircom. It is a bit of an achievement, not a cut.
The Minister has no problem discussing the Eircom part. She explained that part well, but not the rest of it.
The reconfiguration of this important part of the household package will save a significant amount of money.
The second change related to smoky coal and smokeless fuel. An additional €3.90 was being paid for smokeless fuel in smokeless areas. The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government has made a good proposal to extend smokeless fuel areas to incorporate practically the whole of the country during the coming period. Doing so would have required a large increase in spending by my Department. However, examining coal merchants' prices for smokeless fuel and smoky coal shows there is little difference between the two. The previous Government acknowledged this to be the case. This was one of the changes made.
The third change relates to a reduction from 2,400 to 1,800 per month in the number of ESB-equivalent units. More than 20% of people, particularly older people, use approximately 1,400 units per month. They will get 1,800 units per month from the Department. I hope we will not have a severe weather event three years in a row but if there is, we will look at the issue in that light. I assure the Deputy that community welfare officers have the authority to make additional fuel payments. It does not give me any pleasure to be involved in any action of restriction or cutback, particularly with regard to older people, but there is a profound case to be made for getting much more value from the €500 million spent by the Department as a bulk payer for utility services.
The reduced social welfare payments power was introduced in last year's Social Welfare Bill, and it commenced in April after I became Minister. I strongly feel there is an obligation on a person receiving a jobseeker's payment. Such people are entitled to receive the support of the State because they are unemployed and, as Deputy Joan Collins noted, the employment issue is a genuine difficulty. I agree with such sentiments, as I have noted before. However, if somebody receives a jobseeker's payment, that person also has a responsibility in a social contract and must actively engage with opportunities. I do not apologise for saying that.
Deputy Ó Snodaigh has stated that some of the training courses are not good and the Minister for Education and Skills will come before the committee shortly. We must improve those training courses, some of which are unacceptable. Like Deputies I have spoken to many people who have had good and bad experiences on training courses and in education. In this country we must have a conversation to change our concept of social protection. The social contract is effective during one's working life of approximately 40 years; a person contributes tax and PRSI, and if that person falls into unemployment the system is there to provide income support. A person has a responsibility to take up training, employment and work experience opportunities. We want to make that process meaningful and I agree with Deputy Joan Collins's argument that we should reform and expand such opportunities.
I have been delighted with the support of the private sector for the JobBridge programme. It is not perfect but there are more than 700 very good quality and interesting internships on the website. There were some posts advertised that should not have qualified as internships, and we are constantly monitoring the website so we can remove those advertisements. There are important opportunities and a wide range of small, medium and large employers across Ireland have offered opportunities for the process.
This is a start and we will need time to get numbers up. We must reconsider the role of community education, which is very valuable in local communities and in social employment. This is as opposed to simply paying people social welfare and not giving them an opportunity to contribute to society and the local community.
I will test the Minister's memory by taking questions from six members. That is to ensure everybody can contribute.
I thank the Minister for attending the committee. I asked the Minister about the possibility of tweaking the jobseeker's allowance so that people who may get a couple of hours work every week would not be penalised. Could that be considered generally? I have a number of ideas regarding social welfare fraud as I was doorstepped for 45 minutes by somebody who worked on the bottom rungs of the social welfare system. I often wonder if we get value for money from the inspectors. For example, there are 11.5 inspector positions serving Kildare but only 30 inspections were conducted last year, yielding ten infringements.
A number of reports were published for November 2010 that will have a bearing on the comprehensive review of expenditure. Is the documentation on the website or can it be e-mailed to me?
I welcome the Minister to the committee. I would like to make a recommendation as well as putting questions. As with other representatives, I am concerned about the number of refusals for carer applications, disability allowance and domiciliary care allowance. Despite the number of refusals some 50% are overturned on appeal, which is a concern.
With regard to the transfer of the community welfare officer programme, it has been indicated that this will, in effect, create a new organisation providing efficient and complimentary income, maintenance and related services to families and children, people of working age and retired and older people. That is exactly what community welfare officers do now. Will a new role be defined for them?
We would need five hours to discuss everything in this document, particularly social welfare fraud. I am very concerned about the significant problem of multiple identity fraud. Could we set aside a specific date in early September to discuss social welfare fraud as many of us have expertise relating to it?
Today we will just touch on areas to work on in future; we will not have full debates. We will agree on what to work on as a committee with the Minister. It is just to start the ball rolling.
There is much money to be saved in tackling multiple identity fraud.
I apologise for having my back to the Minister. The area of appeals is very frustrating and I have come to the end of my tether in that respect. I have referred to the position of one gentleman umpteen times and I have written to the Minister several times, receiving the same pat letter in return. This 92 year old will be dead by the time he gets a result from his appeal. I am utterly frustrated by the process. I appreciate that the Minister has appointed nine extra people but this would have been the first topic I raised after my election and nothing has happened.
The Minister mentioned a review group relating to mortgage interest supplement but when will the group report to the committee? It is an equally frustrating area.
I will also mention the appeals process. I note in the presentation that approximately 32,432 appeals exist relating to social welfare. Recent information I received indicated a high level of success with appeals. Will the Minister confirm the 40% figure? It seems that 40% of those 32,000 appeals related to bad decisions. Is there a process within the Department to review decisions based on successful appeals, perhaps examining procedures and, if necessary, retraining deciding officers?
My constituency includes Dublin Airport and I meet many people working there. There is anecdotal evidence that non-Irish nationals are coming and going while collecting social welfare payments. Information may be held by the Dublin Airport Authority and there could be an opportunity to put up red flags so that people can be targeted for possibly committing fraud.
Will the Minister examine the possibility of career guidance for students who are emerging from schools and need advice on possible careers or internships? I am pleased to hear the Minister saying she will examine community employment schemes and social employment schemes. I ask her also to consider classroom assistants for classes of more than 30 pupils, particularly in junior infant and senior infant classes.
The Minister for Education and Skills will be before us shortly.
Yes, but the Minister mentioned community employment schemes and that would be very valuable in schools.
A new profiling system in Dún Laoghaire was mentioned, which was carried out by the Southside Partnership DLR. Will that model be continued or will it be disbanded?
I have two questions for the Minister, who is welcome here. I welcome her comments on advising young people to choose education and training rather than social welfare. Has the Department considered examining the link between the numbers of people on welfare who are also suffering anxiety and depression? I see a correlation between the two in those who come to my constituency office. I refer to the long-term unemployed in particular. We must ward against this and put in place preventative measures. These people are framing their lives in a welfare dependency mode.
I was alarmed, as I am sure was the Minister, by the discrepancy between PPS numbers and the population, amounting to 2.6 million people. This feeds into the comments of Senator Kelly with regard to possible multiple identity fraud. What is the Department doing about this; is it conducting an inquiry?
Regarding some of the activation measures, I would like the Minister to consider the following. In areas of high unemployment with young men out of work as a result of the contraction in the construction industry, much of the work that can be done in these communities, such as environmental enhancements, allotments, community gardens and working with schools so they can see the nature, plants and vegetables part of their primary school curriculum operating in the real world, does not fit the mould of the community employment schemes, even though the latter are valuable. The Minister should invite suggestions from communities, which are keen to be involved in such schemes and activation measures. Rather than trying to fit the existing mould, we should create a structure around the ideas and enthusiasm people have about making a positive impact in their communities. We should structure schemes around the ideas people bring in rather than the other way around.
I apologise for rushing Deputy Conaghan but we must finish up.
One of the issues concerns social welfare and the self-employed. There is a taboo about the entitlements of self-employed people. The system needs to change and people need to be re-educated on the benefits for the self-employed and social welfare payments. The entitlements of self-employed people is a subject often raised in my constituency office. We must bring to the fore the entitlements of self-employed people.
The Minister has seven minutes to respond.
We could have separate meetings with the agenda set by each of the questions raised. I am anxious that members of the committee who want to meet departmental staff and take an interest in specific areas can be facilitated. I am on a steep learning curve because of the enormous complexity and breadth of the Department.
Regarding Deputy Lawlor's comments on social welfare fraud, we will launch a new drive and an action plan against fraud from September. I would like to see the social welfare equivalent of a fraud squad. The important thing is that inspectors revisit and make connections. There should be a knowledge and a confidence in the community that people defrauding social welfare will not have a free ride on the backs of those who are working and elderly people. In many ways, it is the money of elderly people that is being taken and it leaves less money for them. Away from party partisan lines, we could share much of our knowledge and experience. Regarding Senator Kelly's comments, I hope to launch that in September and I would welcome an opportunity to revert to this point. The headquarters of the Department dealing with fraud are in Carrick-on-Shannon and Longford. It may be possible at some stage to meet the staff involved in this area.
The critical point concerns the comments of Deputy Brendan Ryan regarding Dublin Airport, which is near my constituency. I am familiar with his concern that people may be coming to and from the country but not living and seeking work in this country. Therefore, they do not qualify for payments but they are on our books. We need joined up interaction between the Garda Síochána and the Revenue Commissioners. I met the chairman of the Revenue Commissioners to discuss their interaction with us with regard to social welfare fraud. The Revenue Commissioners collect PRSI on behalf of the Department. Regarding the Customs and Excise, there is quite an amount of fraud along the Border. Joint patrols and joint action teams are vital in combating fraud, and sharing intelligence and information is vital. In Australia, if one is in receipt of income support, there is an entitlement to have sight of one's bank account. Ireland does not do that but if large transactions are going through bank accounts, perhaps there should be a warning to alert people so that large transactions can be checked. Other countries have adopted various techniques and every penny saved in this area can go to someone entitled to a legitimate payment.
One of the critical points about Deputy Lawlor's comments is that the vast increase in applications means inspectors have to do more paperwork and processing. Under the new action plan, I hope to have more inspectors freed up from desk jobs and contacting individuals and employers to ensure they are employing people registered for social welfare purposes. Many Deputies have raised the following point privately with me and I do not have an answer to it. There is a problem in our system in that if people work for short periods of one month, it is easy to sign off but it can be difficult to come back into the system. People are fearful they will lose their status, particularly if they have medical cards and rent supplement, and they tell me they will have to go back to square one. We need to examine this but I do not have an answer. It is worth examining because we must encourage people, even if is just one month's work.
Regarding Deputy Conaghan's point on working opportunities and Deputy Mary Mitchell O'Connor's point on schools, we need to put on our thinking caps. Deputy Joan Collins asked when the employment situation will turn around. In modern economies, employment tends to follow economic growth with a lag. Sometimes one gets what is known by economists as jobless growth. We must intervene and re-examine community and social employment schemes. I have had quite a number of meetings with Social Justice Ireland on how we might do this and give people who want to work a chance. Employers also have a responsibility to give people an opportunity, particularly young people.
The appeals case Deputy McFadden raised is scheduled for appeal in the next two weeks. I will give her more advice at the end of the meeting. Several other Deputies raised the social welfare appeals system. Payments for carers, for example, are based on medical evidence. If the evidence is inadequate, it goes to appeal at which better medical evidence is usually produced. This results in the appeal being successful. The success rate stands at 52%. If the Department got a better first application, better decisions would be made at the initial stages.
Senator Kelly asked about the role of community welfare officers. The way social welfare is moving means many more payments are being made directly. The time for old style supplementary welfare allowance payments made temporarily while allowance decisions were being decided is being reduced. The community welfare officers being transferred to my Department will be an important resource. They are experienced and used to dealing with people on a one-to-one basis. As well as issuing supplementary and emergency payments, they have an important role in interviewing and advising people to find a path from unemployment into education, training and work. Many of the FÁS employees also have skills in that area too. As the OECD states on moving to an activation system, advising and helping people to get into employment takes time. It takes people of a certain maturity, experience and training to assist in this. Many of the new officials coming into the Department will have these skills.
There was a suggestion by Deputy Joan Collins that some people were treated roughly in social welfare offices. Social welfare staff do their absolute utmost to treat everyone with respect. They have faced a tremendous increase in the numbers of people they face. Training has been made available to assist staff in dealing with those attending social welfare offices who may be upset and unhappy at being there, having never been in one before and faced with a new system. We will certainly try to improve our communications but senior management has ordered that everybody is to be treated with dignity and respect. In the majority of cases they are. If people feel they have been badly treated, they can inform Deputy Joan Collins and we will look at how we can improve. The staff have been working very hard and pride themselves on the quality of treatment they give to people.
We have to wrap up and other questions can be dealt with by correspondence.
The Minister did not answer my question about the self-employed and access to social welfare payments.
The programme for Government has a commitment that the advisory group on tax and social welfare will examine the issue of potentially insuring the self-employed against unemployment and ill health. This would have to be paid for which would mean a major change in the system. Self-employed people pay social insurance for the old age, widow and widower's pension but do not contribute for unemployment or illness benefits. I have asked the advisory group to put this matter on its agenda. It will report when it finishes each review, so we will not wait four or five years for a report on every matter.
I welcome this development.
We need to wrap up this meeting.
I also asked the Minister an important question about multiple identity fraud.
Yes, but the size of the Irish diaspora needs to be borne in mind in this regard. For example, consider the number of Irish people living in England. The Department is working on a reconciliation of PPS numbers as there is a broad interest in the matter.
The Minister can send the answers to the other questions raised. There will be plenty of opportunities to have more discussions with the Minister. I thank the Minister for attending today's meeting. I know it seemed like a rush job but it was to get started before the September briefing.
Sitting suspended at 10.47 a.m. and resumed at 10.49 a.m.