Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 25 April 2012
9Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for Social Protection the changes that have been implemented in the eligibility for disability allowance; if additional tests are being undertaken by her Department; the numbers affected by changes; the numbers refused in 2010, 2011 and to date in 2012 as a percentage of total applications; the savings involved; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20546/12]
Amharc ar fhreagraNo changes have been implemented in recent years to the underlying eligibility conditions for disability allowance. The budget 2012 proposals relating to disability allowance have been referred to the independent advisory group on tax and social welfare, under the chairmanship of the barrister, Ms Ita Mangan. I expect the review will be completed by September 2012.
Disability allowance is a means-tested payment for people with a specified disability whose income falls below certain limits and who are aged more than 16 and less than 66, and are habitually resident in the State. Expenditure in 2011 was more than €1 billion in respect of some 103,000 recipients.
A person's means are assessed to determine the rate of payment he or she is entitled to receive. The requirement to be habitually resident in Ireland was introduced as a qualifying condition for certain social assistance schemes, including disability allowance and child benefit with effect from 1 May 2004. A person who does not satisfy the habitual residence condition is not eligible for specified social welfare payments, including disability allowance, regardless of citizenship, nationality, immigration status or any other factor. The purpose of this condition is to safeguard the social welfare system from abuse by restricting access for people who are not economically active and who have little or no established connection with Ireland.
The number of claims for disability allowance refused for any reasons in 2010, 2011 and to end of March 2012 was 10,316, 14,116 and 3,458 respectively. The percentages of claims refused in 2010, 2011 and the first quarter of 2012 were 54%, 58% and 60%, respectively. These statistics refer to initial decisions only and do not reflect cases that were subsequently allowed following a deciding officer's review of additional information or evidence supplied, or following a determination by an appeals officer of the Social Welfare Appeals Office. The appeals office tells me that a total of 4,758 disability allowance appeals were determined by appeals officers in 2011, of which 1,830, or 38%, were successful or partly successful and 2,928, or 62%, were not successful.
The Minister has actually given us the answer that most people wanted to know, even though she said officially there was no additional test. She has proved the point I wanted to make in the question by saying that in 2010 the percentage of disability allowance claims that were refused was 54%, in 2011 it was 58% and in the first three months of this year it has risen to 60%. The figure is obviously rising. In a two-year period the percentage of claims being refused has risen from 50% to more than 60%. That is the change I am talking about. She did not change the rules, but she changed the method used to make the decisions.
Some of these were summary decisions. What category of staff members made these decisions? Were they made by medically qualified people? It is a medical issue. How many medical staff are dealing with claims of this nature, such as disability allowance and invalidity pension? Are these medical staff qualified doctors, occupational therapists or similar? Could the Minister specify the categories of staff that have increased the number of claims refused by 20% in the last two years?
As I said to the Deputy earlier, the number of applications has continued to rise, particularly over the past six or seven years. Obviously the major increase in the volume of applications has put the system under pressure. The people who carry out assessments are medical assessors, who are qualified medical personnel, generally with training and experience in occupational medicine. It is open to anyone to submit an application for disability allowance; each application is examined by the Department and a decision made based on its merits. The OECD has international statistics showing that in times of recession and high unemployment, although the incidence of absenteeism through illness tends to fall - perhaps reflecting a more precarious labour market - people may make more applications for disability allowance because of long-term unemployment and certain medical problems. This is recognised internationally.
The illness and disability schemes have seen substantial rises in both recipient numbers and expenditure over the last decade. Total expenditure on short and long-term illness and disability schemes has increased from €1.1 billion in 2001 to €2.1 billion in 2006 and €2.7 billion in 2011, while the number in receipt of these payments has increased from 173,000 in 2001 to 216,000 in 2006 and 242,000 in 2011. There has been an enormous increase in the number of people participating in the different schemes.
The Minister mentioned that 38% of refusals were overturned on appeal. That is a large figure which the Department should be concerned about and should attempt to address.
When will the Minister confirm she is not going ahead with the changes to the disability allowance for 18 to 24 year olds? She pressed pause at Christmas but did not say it definitely would not go ahead.
The purpose of the change was as follows. Under the current system, eligible 16 year olds begin to receive disability payments in their own right. I know the Deputy supports that, but my view is that between the ages of 16 and 18 the child is still dependent and therefore the payment should be made to the parents. I know the Deputy disagrees with me on this. Many parents who have a child with a disability have expressed the view to me that it is not the best thing for a child of 16 to receive a full disability payment in his or her own right, and that it should be made to the parent. The Deputy has a different view, but I think it is far better to make the payment to the parents until the child is 18. In fact, some children with severe disabilities are reliant on their parents far beyond that age. It is important that we recognise the authority and role of parents with regard to their under-18 children. When the report is presented by the advisory group, I will bring it to the Government and then to the House.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.
