Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 6 October 2004
128 Mr. Crawford asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he has made or intends to make changes to the assessment for carer’s allowance for farm families in view of the strict criteria being used by many of his social welfare officers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23185/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra136 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of persons in receipt of carer’s allowance; the number of applications refused in 2004; if this represents an increase or decrease on previous years; if he expects there to be an increase in the number of persons likely to be eligible for carers allowance in the course of the Estimates for 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23324/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra138 Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he has given consideration to establishing a national carer’s database with the aid of the Central Statistics Office. [23362/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra155 Mr. Gogarty asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if his Department influences the non-payment of further grant assistance to social welfare recipients, especially in relation to the domiciliary care allowance. [23400/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra168 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affair’s report on the position of full-time carers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23297/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra190 Mr. Kehoe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his proposals to change the eligibility criteria for carer’s allowance, particularly for persons in receipt of a social welfare payment prior to making application for carers allowance; if consideration will be given to the need for the introduction of an income disregard for those persons in receipt of a social welfare payment who subsequently qualify for carer’s allowance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23361/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra192 Ms B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the plans he has to increase the rate of payment of the respite care grant; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23303/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 128, 136, 138, 155, 168, 190 and 192 together.
Supporting carers in our society has been a priority of the Government since 1997. Over that period weekly payment rates to carers have been greatly increased, qualifying conditions for carer's allowance have been significantly eased, coverage of the scheme has been extended and new schemes such as carer's benefit and the respite care grant have been introduced. Under the provisions of the carer's allowance scheme, carers may engage in employment or self-employment for up to ten hours per week. This measure was introduced in recognition of the value such work affords to carers.
It also allows carers to maintain contact with the labour market. The reason for placing a limit on the hours that a recipient of carer's allowance can work is to safeguard the needs of the care recipient and to ensure that they receive the full-time care and attention that they require. The operation of this limit will be kept under review.
The report of the Joint Oireachtas Committee makes a range of recommendations, many of which relate to my Department and a number of which concern the Department of Health and Children. I am always prepared to consider changes to existing arrangements where these would be for the benefit of recipients and financially sustainable within the resources available to me.
One of the recommendations relating to my Department pertains to improvements in the information available to carers. In this regard, funding of €18,000 has been provided to the Carer's Association towards the publication and distribution of a new information pack which will provide information about services and supports for carers and their families. The information pack is currently being compiled by the association and will be distributed throughout the country in libraries, health board offices, clinics, citizen information centres and social welfare offices by the end of the year. It will contain important information to carers on the services and supports available to them and their families.
In addition, my Department is currently finalising plans for a nationwide campaign to increase awareness of carer's benefit and carer's leave arrangements. This is planned to take place during October.
Regarding a national carer's database, the Central Statistics Office included a question in the 2002 census to identify the number of persons providing unpaid personal care for a friend or family member with a long-term illness, health problem or disability. In March this year, the CSO published volume 10 of the census results pertaining to data in relation to people with disabilities and carers. This is a most comprehensive document with more than 40 tables of data relating to carers.
Carer's allowance is not paid concurrently with another social welfare payment or by introducing a disregard in respect of that payment on the grounds that, as a general rule, only one social welfare payment is payable to an individual. Persons qualifying for two social welfare payments always receive the higher payment to which they are entitled. The question of an income disregard for carer's allowance would raise similar issues.
The overall number of persons receiving a carer's allowance has increased from 10,126 at the end of 1997 to 22,300 the week ending 24 September 2004. Expenditure on the scheme has in the same period increased from €46.36 million to an estimated €203.8 million in 2004. The number of applications refused payment relative to claims received has declined in recent years arising from various improvements introduced by my Department. My Department has awarded 3,220 applications and refused 2,021 applications this year up to mid-September.
The respite care grant is paid to recipients of carer's allowance, including those who receive a carer's allowance in respect of recipients of a domiciliary care allowance. The Department of Health and Children pays a respite care grant to all other persons for whom a domiciliary care allowance is payable.
Government policy is strongly in favour of supporting care in the community and enabling people to remain in their own homes for as long as possible. The development of the range of supports for carers will continue to be a priority for this Government and, building on the foundations now in place, we will continue to develop the types of services which recognise the value of the caring ethos and which provide real support and practical assistance to the people involved.
Proposals relating to increasing rates of payment or other measures involving additional expenditure will be considered in the context of the forthcoming budget. As part of this process my Department is currently undertaking an internal review of the carer's allowance and carer's benefit schemes, taking account of the issues that have been raised in many fora.
I thank the Minister for his extremely extensive reply. It would not be fair to push him on the issues in my question which was tabled as a result of discussions I had with his predecessor specifically regarding farming issues.
The Minister referred to the issue of ten hours at work on a farm. The case of an individual who is away from the home doing ten hours work is different from the case of an individual operating a small farming enterprise who is in and out of the home on a constant basis. Social welfare officers will estimate, based on numbers of, for example, cattle, that the work cannot be completed within ten hours. Though the individual may be in serious financial difficulties, he or she will often be refused. The individual often has to pay money for assistance in looking after a loved one. When the single payment was introduced, social welfare officers were understanding and reasonable. However, in the past 12 months, they have kept to the letter of the law and refused genuine cases.
Small farmers are often asked to produce audited accounts for means tests, yet they are ignored by social welfare officers when provided. I know of a case where the individual concerned had come through serious banking and other problems, yet his means test found he was earning €729 per week. I ask the Minister to introduce more realism into these procedures. The Minister referred to approximately 2,000——
I remind the Deputy that supplementary questions are limited to one minute. The Deputy is now on his third minute.
I urge the Minister to have the procedures reviewed. The money should not be spent on a national advertising campaign. If people are getting a service, they will advertise it. If not, they will persuade other people not to waste their time in applying.
I am open to sensible and practicable changes that will remove nonsensical anomalies from the system. My basic approach to this matter is a common sense one in examining the merits of individual schemes to see how they can be improved. More must be done for carers. Much has happened as shown in the statistics I quoted. However, there is scope for further improvement and I am committed to examining it as a matter of urgency.
I am glad the Minister is open to sensible suggestions in correcting anomalies. One anomaly I have raised with previous Ministers, from Deputy Woods to Deputy Dermot Ahern to Deputy Coughlan, is that of a full-time carer losing the carer's allowance if he or she receives a widow's or widower's pension. Take the example of a small farmer's wife caring for someone at home who is incontinent and bedridden. If her husband dies, she will receive the widow's pension to compensate her for her loss but will lose the carer's allowance, despite continuing to be a full-time carer. She is then forced to employ casual work to replace her husband on the farm. What can be worse than that example? I have appealed to the Minister's predecessors on this issue, yet they have ignored me. I hope the new Minister, fresh with new ideas and open to suggestions, will answer me on this matter.
I will examine the case raised by the Deputy. I am in the business of providing solutions and targeting resources at people who need our support, and I will examine this in that spirit. However, I stress that having just heard of this example, it would be wrong of me to commit myself.
I am not rushing the Minister.
I am committed to examining procedures that do not make sense and sorting them out. That is my approach to work.
I will write to the Minister about these cases when I return to my office.
I do not intend to rehash last night's debate on the carer's allowance but there is a way the Minister can get around this problem. Widows and widowers are a specific example that the Committee on Social and Family Affairs put in its report's recommendations. Take the example of a husband earning €400 per week while his wife receives a carer's allowance for caring for a handicapped child. If he dies, his wife's income is reduced to a widow's pension but she loses the carer's allowance at the time she needs it most. One way to overcome the difficulty of two social welfare payments is to declare the widow's pension as an income support while the carer's allowance remains an allowance. It is now time to get rid of the many pedantic regulations in this area. The period of 15 months taken by an individual to look after a loved one should be extended to 30 months. I know it will have to be negotiated with IBEC and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. However, Deputies O'Connor and Wallace will confirm that this was one of the recommendations in our report on carers' interests and one which they supported.
I appreciate the work done by Deputy Penrose and the members of the Oireachtas Committee on Social and Family Affairs. I will examine those recommendations in the report with an open mind.
I appeal to the Minister to change the culture in the Department of Social and Family Affairs, particularly towards the carer's allowance and other allowances. A more rigid interpretation of rules and regulations in assessing means for carer's allowance is evident since the last budget. It was regressive step. Will the Minister recognise that because of competing demands, the circumstances of carers are getting worse and a reversal of this policy is now needed?
I note the Deputy's comments.
The Minister has reaffirmed the long held position of the Department of Social and Family Affairs that only one payment can be received by social welfare recipients. However, this principle was rejected when the Government relented on the widow's and widower's pension half payment. In his parliamentary question, my colleague, Deputy Gogarty, asked to what degree the Minister's Department has influenced payments made by other Departments. Lone parents find themselves caring for children with special needs but are precluded from availing of the domiciliary care allowance from the Department of Health and Children. This is due to the ongoing Government policy enunciated through the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Will the Minister assure us that he is not placing barriers against social welfare recipients receiving due entitlements from other Departments? If so, it will go some way to relieving the burden of many people involved in caring for loved ones and denied what should be a right.
It is a general rule that only one social welfare payment is payable to an individual. Those qualifying for two will always receive the higher payment. That is the general rule but I believe there is room for exceptions and I am prepared to examine this. If there are rules which affect people by causing them hardship, instead of standing by the rule we need to amend it to deal with the hardship. If that breaks a general dogma or headline, so be it. We will have to find a way around it.
The focus should be on sorting out the individual's problem. If that breaks a golden rule, there is something wrong with the rule and we must find a way to amend it which does not open the floodgates by attracting either more fraud in the system or spurious claims, all of which reduce the resources available for the people who really need support and help. That is the type of approach we must take. We must focus resources where they are needed, not let silly rules get in the way in individual cases where people must be helped, and ensure there is no wastage, fraud or spurious claims which reduce the amount of money we can focus on genuine cases. That is the general approach. I have not examined many of these issues in detail yet but I will approach them against the background of that philosophy, if one can call it that.
I thank the Minister for being so forthright and I hope he can follow through. Can the Minister accept a situation in which a widow or widower who is left to care for somebody receives no carer's allowance, yet the same person can take up a full-time job and retain a widow's or widower's pension? That is a fact. Deputy Penrose spoke about extending carer's benefit to 30 months. Recently, I had a telephone call from a friend who told me about the mother of a two and a half year old child who had to give up her job. She is no longer able to get carer's benefit. Her husband is in an ordinary job but his wages are too high to meet the criteria, so she is paid nothing. There is enormous financial pressure on that family. Half of the carer's allowance would be of benefit in either of those cases.
I am learning a great deal from what is being said today. I hope I am a fast learner and I will deal with those issues as well and as quickly as I can.
We do not even know how many people are cared for. One issue that has not been referred to in this debate is the children who are caring for a relative or some other person. The Disability Federation of Ireland put forward its submission today and is asking the Minister to examine this area. Countless numbers of young people are looking after relatives or neighbours and this should be examined by the Minister and his Department.
I will do that.
I support the remarks of previous speakers about carers. The Department should be complimented on the removal of anomalies in the system, as social welfare is so wide-ranging and so many people are affected by it. Nevertheless, people still encounter obstruction. While progress has been made, we look forward to meeting the Minister to discuss this area. The committee has devoted a great deal of time to this issue and we are aware of the importance of carers. In some instances, they do not get the recognition they deserve.
In one case, a lady returned from the United States to look after her father. She had to rent out her house because its accessibility was unsuitable. She then rented another house. However, she was debarred from getting the carer's allowance. She was told that had she been working here in Ireland, she would have been given the carer's allowance but because she returned from the United States to care for her father, keep him at home and out of an institution, she was debarred from receiving the allowance. This is the type of anomaly we must examine.
I am conscious of the tremendous progress and changes that have been made. However, we must continue to keep an eye on the system. I have given one example and could give others but there is not enough time. We look forward to working with the Minister. There is tremendous potential for progress and I believe the Minister will be sympathetic in that regard.
I thank the Deputy for his remarks, which I will consider.
