Wednesday, 25 May 2016

Written Answers Nos. 182-193

Carer's Allowance Appeals

Ceisteanna (182)

Michael Ring

Ceist:

182. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Social Protection when an appeal under the carer's allowance scheme will be held for a person (details supplied) in County Mayo. [11908/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

The Social Welfare Appeals Office has advised me that an appeal by the person concerned was registered in that office on 5th April 2016. It is a statutory requirement of the appeals process that the relevant papers and comments by or on behalf of the Deciding Officer on the grounds of appeal be sought from the Department of Social Protection. These papers were received in the Social Welfare Appeals Office on 3rd May 2016 and the case will be referred to an Appeals Officer who will make a summary decision on the appeal based on documentary evidence presented or, if required, hold an oral hearing. I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.

The Social Welfare Appeals Office functions independently of the Minister for Social Protection and of the Department and is responsible for determining appeals against decisions in relation to social welfare entitlements.

State Pension (Contributory)

Ceisteanna (183)

Richard Boyd Barrett

Ceist:

183. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Social Protection the status of the case of a person (details supplied) in County Wicklow. [11911/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

The person concerned is in receipt of state pension (contributory), paid under an agent arrangement by direct transfer to the account of the nursing home in which he resides. The agent he nominated for the purpose of administering his pension is an employee of the nursing home. This arrangement has been in place since 13 February 2015.

I have asked my officials to contact the Deputy to discuss the matter in more detail.

I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.

State Pensions

Ceisteanna (184)

Denise Mitchell

Ceist:

184. Deputy Denise Mitchell asked the Minister for Social Protection the reason a person (details supplied) had pension credits ceased from September 2015 to January 2016. [11973/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

The person concerned attended their local Intreo Centre on 20th April 2016 with a letter from their college stating that they were attending college on a whole-time basis. They had stated that they were attending the course part-time. The person concerned was advised to get confirmation from their college that the course is part-time and return it to the Intreo Office by 28th April 2016. To date this confirmation has not been returned to the Office and accordingly their jobseeker’s benefit credits claim has been closed retrospectively from 16th September 2015. The person concerned has a pending credits claim from 29th January 2016. To ensure that the claim is not closed the requested letter should be provided by close of business on Friday 27th May.

Employment Support Services

Ceisteanna (185, 210)

Michael Collins

Ceist:

185. Deputy Michael Collins asked the Minister for Social Protection to release the Indecon report that was commissioned by his Department over a year ago (details supplied). [12006/16]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Ceist:

210. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Social Protection the amount of money allocated to the EmployAbility service; the number of persons availing of this service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12147/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

I propose to take Questions Nos. 185 and 210 together.

The EmployAbility service is a national employment service dedicated to improving employment outcomes for people with disabilities who wish to take up employment. The budget for 2016 provides €9.6 million to run the service.

EmployAbility participants are people with a disability who are "job ready" (typically able to work a minimum of 8 hours per week and motivated to work) and need the support of a job coach to obtain employment in the open labour market. There are currently around 3,000 people with disabilities participating in the EmployAbility service.

An evaluation of the EmployAbility Service, undertaken by Indecon International Economic Consultants, was completed in January 2016. The evaluation examined the effectiveness and efficiency of the service and its reporting structures with the Department. The report sets out a range of proposals for the future delivery of the service so as to maximise progression outcomes for participants in a cost-effective manner. Since the completion of the report earlier this year, it has been under active consideration within my Department. It is envisaged that the report will be released to the directors and co-ordinators of the EmployAbility Service at a briefing session on the findings of the evaluation, which will take place in the near future.

I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputies.

Question No. 186 withdrawn.

Youth Unemployment Measures

Ceisteanna (187)

Bernard Durkan

Ceist:

187. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection the progress to date in addressing the issue of youth unemployment; the extent to which he expects to meet targets in this regard in the course of 2016; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12041/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

The Government’s primary strategy to reduce youth unemployment is through policies to create the environment for a strong economic recovery by promoting competitiveness and productivity. Economic recovery will underpin jobs growth and the availability of productive employment for young people. This strategy has been succeeding; by Q1 2016 the level of employment is up by 159,000 from the lowest level reached in 2012.

Youth unemployment was estimated at 15.3% (28,300 persons) in April 2016 and has fallen from a peak of 31.2% in July 2012.

The Government recognises that as the recovery takes hold, there is a need for additional measures to ensure that as many as possible of the jobs created are taken up by jobseekers and young jobseekers in particular. This is the rationale behind the Government’s Pathways to Work strategy and the Youth Guarantee Implementation Plan (YGIP).

Within this framework, the Youth Guarantee sets a medium-term objective of ensuring that young people receive an offer of employment within four months of becoming unemployed. The main plank of the guarantee is assistance to young people in finding and securing sustainable jobs. In 2015 monthly engagement by case officers with all young unemployed people was implemented. For those who do not find employment, additional offers are provided for. Most such offers (over 70%) are in further education or training. Others are in community-based employment programmes such as CE, Gateway and Tús, or through the JobsPlus employment subsidy for private employment.

Pathways to Work 2016 to 2020 sets specific targets in relation addressing youth unemployment by continuing to implement the actions set out in the Youth Guarantee implementation plan. In addition it commits to four additional actions: 1) increase the relative share of workplace-based interventions (Gateway, TÚS, Positive to Work etc.) for youth unemployed; 2) to ensure the frequency of engagement with all young unemployed people is a minimum of one case officer meeting per month; 3) restructure the First Steps programme for young unemployed people to improve take-up by offering a higher level of support to jobseekers and employers - these consolidate reforms undertaken in previous Pathways to Work strategies; and the fourth action, to implement the Defence Forces Skills for Life employment support programme, is a new programme. Actions are in progress and on target, or in the case of restructuring the First Steps programme, will be taking place shortly.

Social Welfare Appeals Waiting Times

Ceisteanna (188)

Bernard Durkan

Ceist:

188. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection the sections of his Department currently affected by longer than average appeal waiting times; the extent to which he expects to address this issue in the future and during the course of 2016; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12042/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

The average appeal processing time for appeals determined by summary decision and following an oral hearing in 2015 and to date in 2016 broken down by all social welfare scheme types is as outlined in the following tables. The table also contains numbers of appeal decisions broken down by scheme type for those years. The average processing time by scheme is impacted by the number of decisions involved and in some cases by the complexity of the issue under appeal.

The unprecedented increase in appeal receipts since 2009 placed considerable pressure on the appeals office and impacted adversely on processing times. The overall number of appeals received increased from an average of 15,000 per year up to 2009, to a peak of 35,500 in 2012, reducing annually thereafter to just below 25,000 in 2015.

Significant effort and resources have been devoted to reforming the appeals process in recent years:

- Additional appeals officers were appointed to the office

- An overhaul of the operating model was undertaken

- New technology to support appeals officers was introduced

- Work was undertaken with the Department to reduce delays in responding to requests from the appeals office for appeal submissions.

This resulted in a marked improvement in overall appeal processing times. The average time taken to determine an appeal requiring an oral hearing reduced from 52.5 weeks in 2011 to 25.5 weeks in 2015 and the average time taken to finalise an appeal decided by way of a summary decision dropped from 25.1 weeks in 2011 to 18.1 weeks in 2015. This downward trend in overall appeal processing times has continued to date in 2016 to 24.3 weeks for an oral hearing and 17.3 weeks for a summary decision.

The quasi-judicial nature of the appeals system means that there are inevitable time-lags involved. The system is designed to be flexible and fair and allows for review and submission of further information up to and including the oral hearing. The time taken is proportionate to the complexity of many of the issues under appeal, which require a high level of judgment and often involve complex legal questions.

A number of elements within the process are time-consuming including the need to ensure due process, natural justice and compliance with the statutory obligation to obtain the Department’s appeal submission. If an oral hearing is requested by the appellant or is required to resolve conflicts, the processing time is prolonged

The Chief Appeals Officer assures me that appeals processing times are continuously monitored and that, although significant progress has been made in reducing appeal processing times in recent years, continued improvement in this area remains a priority.

Appeals processing times by scheme 01/01/2015 – 31/12/2015

		Summary Decisions		Oral Hearings
	Number of appeals decided	Average processing times (weeks)	Number of appeals decided	Average processing times (weeks)
Blind Pension	12	21.1	4	30.7
Carers Allowance	1,512	20.6	1,350	25.9
Carers Benefit	24	19.7	33	21.8
Child Benefit	371	24.8	78	34.7
Disability Allowance	3,129	15.8	2,091	21.4
Illness Benefit	223	26.3	203	33.1
Partial Capacity Benefit	21	25.7	5	43.4
Domiciliary Care Allowance	506	21.7	331	28.7
Deserted Wives Benefit	5	19.7	11	26.2
Deserted Wives Allowance	-	-	1	16.2
Farm Assist	67	21.0	67	28.6
Bereavement Grant	18	65.7	2	26.0
Death Benefit (Pension)	-	-	1	22.6
Family Income Supplement	199	19.4	38	27.7
Invalidity Pension	967	26.2	606	28.4
Homemakers	1	167.5	-	-
Liable Relatives	21	22.8	1	31.2
Maternity Benefit	25	22.6	6	17.5
One Parent Family Payment	126	22.9	142	33.9
State Pension (Contributory)	115	26.0	39	46.0
State Pension (Non-Contributory)	135	20.4	98	30.8
State Pension (Transition)	6	80.1	2	53.4
Occupational Injury Benefit	20	20.3	17	35.0
Disablement Pension	162	23.7	143	35.3
Incapacity Supplement	6	41.2	5	51.5
Guardian's Payment (Con)	23	18.2	13	27.5
Guardian's Payment (Non-Con)	11	18.7	5	31.0
Jobseeker's Allowance (Means)	1,246	15.8	482	26.0
Jobseeker's Allowance	1,130	15.2	491	21.9
JA/JB Fraud Control	-	-	3	46.1
BTW Family Dividend	15	14.1	-	-
Jobseeker's Transitional	6	12.9	1	21.3
Recoverable Benefits & Assistance	10	21.0	1	30.3
Jobseeker's Benefit	414	14.3	101	21.2
Pre-Retirement Allowance	1	15.0	-	-
Treatment Benefit	1	17.9	-	-
Respite Care Grant	58	21.2	33	23.6
Insurability of Employment	40	47.6	51	69.4
Supplementary Welfare Allowance	1,362	13.1	418	23.5
Survivor's Pension (Con)	23	24.1	6	46.6
Survivor's Pension (Non-con)	10	23.7	6	38.3
Widows Parent Grant	6	18.4	1	-*
All appeals	12,027	18.1	6,886	25.5

*As this Widowed Parent Grant appeal has been re-opened, the average processing time no longer refers.

Appeals processing times by scheme 01/01/2016 - 30/04/2016

		Summary Decisions		Oral Hearings
	Number of appeals decided	Average processing times (weeks)	Number of appeals decided	Average processing times (weeks)
Blind Pension	6	17.4	1	34.8
Carers Allowance	404	18.4	476	22.7
Carers Benefit	5	18.4	5	23.4
Child Benefit	114	22.5	21	60.1
Disability Allowance	939	15.3	632	20.7
Illness Benefit	43	28.7	46	31.9
Partial Capacity Benefit	7	17.3	5	23.9
Domiciliary Care Allowance	185	22.7	127	28.5
Deserted Wives Benefit	-	-	5	40.5
Farm Assist	32	15.8	27	22.6
Liable Relatives	1	7.9	-	-
Family Income Supplement	77	15.6	20	25.0
Invalidity Pension	217	27.9	186	31.0
Maternity Benefit	13	17.5	6	28.1
One Parent Family Payment	45	20.4	34	25.0
State Pension (Contributory)	75	28.2	14	37.9
State Pension (Non-Contributory)	49	21.1	41	30.9
State Pension (Transition)	1	67.7	2	36.8
Occupational Injury Benefit	9	15.9	2	17.1
Disablement Pension	48	19.9	61	26.4
Incapacity Supplement	1	-	2	44.0
Guardian's Payment (Con)	10	16.9	5	23.1
Guardian's Payment (Non-Con)	3	20.2	2	28.5
Jobseeker's Allowance (Means)	409	14.1	130	25.0
Jobseeker's Allowance	394	14.8	169	19.8
BTW Family Dividend	25	21.3	-	-
Jobseeker's Transitional	4	15.1	2	11.8
Recoverable Benefits & Assistance	8	33.6	-	-
Jobseeker's Benefit	143	14.0	35	18.3
Treatment Benefit	1	15.0	-	-
Respite Care Grant	26	15.2	16	21.8
Insurability of Employment	20	35.2	15	101.5
Supplementary Welfare Allowance	365	16.7	104	28.4
Survivor's Pension (Con)	12	15.7	7	23.0
Survivor's Pension (Non-con)	5	20.3	3	31.5
Widows Parent Grant	1	21.4	-	-
All appeals	3,697	17.3	2,201	24.3

Live Register Data

Ceisteanna (189)

Bernard Durkan

Ceist:

189. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection the extent to which the age profile of those persons on the live register continues to be monitored with a view to making any adjustments necessary to assist those most in need; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12043/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

The Live Register, which captures those registering for unemployment benefits (including those working part-time and in casual work who draw partial unemployment payments), is an administrative record. It is not the official measure of unemployment, but can give indicative trends. The official measure of unemployment is sourced from the Quarterly National Household Survey (QNHS). Measures of unemployment from the QNHS are based on International Labour Office (ILO) definitions. To be ‘ILO unemployed’ a person must in the week before the survey be without work but available for work and have recently taken specific job-search steps.

My Department uses both Live Register and QNHS data for reporting and monitoring trends and adjusting policies accordingly at national level. This includes providing data and trends broken down by age categories. The QNHS data, being prepared as part of the EU-wide Labour Force Survey, also allow Irish trends to be compared with international developments.

The Youth Guarantee Implementation Plan and the Pathways to Work strategies, key policy documents to facilitate the young unemployed and the long-term unemployed, respectively, back into work, are underpinned by analyses of the labour market situation based on the statistical sources mentioned above.

By allocating activation resources to persons on the Live Register, the Government’s policy tends to focus on those areas and age-groups in which unemployment is most concentrated. The focus on those most in need is further reinforced by the use of profiling to identify, among the newly unemployed, those most likely to face severe difficulties in re-entering employment. People identified as having a low PEX (probability of exit from unemployment) score are prioritised for intensive engagement and support from the Intreo employment service.

State Pension (Contributory) Data

Ceisteanna (190)

Bernard Durkan

Ceist:

190. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection the number of women or men who have failed to qualify for contributory old age pension due to insufficient contributions throughout their working lives, with particular reference to those who may have taken time off to rear their families and may have taken up employment later in life in respect of each of the past five years to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12044/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

The State pension contributory is a very valuable benefit and is the bedrock of the Irish pension system. Therefore, it is important to ensure that those qualifying have made a sustained contribution to the Social Insurance Fund over their working lives. To ensure that the individual can maximise their entitlement to a State pension, all contributions paid or credited over their working life from when they first enter insurable employment until pension age are taken into account when assessing their entitlement and the level of that entitlement.

One of the conditions of the State pension contributory is that a person needs a minimum of 520 weekly contributions (i.e. 10 years) paid since entering insurable employment. If a person does not have this minimum number of contributions paid, they will not generally have an entitlement to this particular pension, either at a full or reduced rate.

There are others who, while satisfying the minimum requirements for a State pension contributory, do not qualify for the full rate, and as a result claim an alternative support to which they have a higher entitlement.

Since 1961, when contributory pensions were introduced, the average contributions test has been used in calculating the rate of pension entitlement. Entitlement is banded, with the maximum rate payable to those with a yearly average of 48-52 contributions, and the minimum rate payable to those with a yearly average in the range of 10-14 contributions per year. Even if someone has only 10 years (520 weeks) of paid reckonable contributions between their 16th and 66th birthdays, they would generally qualify for a State pension (contributory), although the rate payable would vary depending on their circumstances, and it will not always be their most advantageous payment to claim.

The homemaker’s scheme makes qualification for a higher rate of State pension (contributory) easier for those who take time out of the workforce for caring duties. The scheme, which was introduced in and took effect from 1994, allows up to 20 years spent caring for children under 12 years of age (or caring for incapacitated people over that age) to be disregarded when a person’s social insurance record is being averaged for pension purposes, subject to the standard qualifying conditions for State pension contributory also being satisfied.

Where people who were unattached to the labour market during most of their adult lives cannot qualify for a contributory pension in their own right as they have paid few or no contributions, or cannot qualify for a full rate as a result of an intermittent PRSI record, the social protection system provides alternative methods of supporting such pensioners in old age. Therefore, if their spouse has a contributory pension, they may qualify for an Increase for a Qualified Adult amounting up to 90% of a full rate pension, which by default is paid directly to them. Alternatively, they may qualify for a means-tested State Pension (non-contributory), amounting up to 95% of the maximum contributory pension rate.

There are a number of reasons why someone might not have sufficient contributions paid to qualify for a State pension (contributory). Some would have been employed in the public service for a significant period, others would have worked abroad during their working life and qualified for a foreign pension based on foreign contributions, and some would have spent significant periods out of the labour force altogether for a number of reasons, e.g., caring for children or elderly relatives, prolonged periods of unemployment or incapacity and other circumstances. If such people do not claim a State pension (contributory), their circumstances are not part of the statistics generated by management of that scheme. Of those who did make such a claim, it is not possible to determine contribution history patterns of those claimants who were disallowed entitlement to State pension (contributory) without examination of their individual social insurance records. However, the following table provides the overall number of claims made, awarded and disallowed over the past 5 years.

State Pension (Contributory)

Year	Claimed Received	Claims Awarded	Claims Disallowed
2015	37,902	24,662	9,727
2014	40,212	27,591	8,205
2013	39,215	28,129	7,877
2012	35,198	25,586	7,049
2011	36,281	25,964	7,778

Work is underway to replace the ‘yearly average’ system with a ‘total contributions approach’. Under this approach, the number of contributions recorded over a working life will be more closely reflected in the rate of pension payment received. It is expected that the total contributions approach to pension qualification will replace the current average contributions test for State pension (contributory) for new pensioners from 2020, although that date is subject to change, as this is a very significant reform with considerable legal, administrative, and technical elements to be considered in its implementation. The position of women who were homemakers will be considered very carefully in developing this reform.

Youth Unemployment Measures

Ceisteanna (191)

Bernard Durkan

Ceist:

191. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection the extent to which his Department continues to be in the position to avail of European Union support to alleviate youth unemployment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12045/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

The Government’s primary strategy to reduce youth unemployment is through policies to create the environment for a strong economic recovery by promoting competitiveness and productivity. Economic recovery will underpin jobs growth and the availability of productive employment for young people. This strategy has been succeeding; by Q1 2016 the level of employment is up by 159,000 from the lowest level reached in 2012.

Youth unemployment is estimated at 15.3% (28,300 persons) in April 2016 and has fallen from a peak of 31.2% in July 2012.

The Government recognises that as the recovery takes hold, there is a need for additional measures to ensure that as many as possible of the jobs created are taken up by jobseekers and young jobseekers in particular. This is the rationale behind the Government’s Pathways to Work strategy and the Youth Guarantee Implementation Plan (YGIP).

Within this framework, the Youth Guarantee sets a medium-term objective of ensuring that young people receive an offer of employment within four months of becoming unemployed. The main plank of the guarantee is assistance to young people in finding and securing sustainable jobs. In 2015 monthly engagement by case officers with all young unemployed was implemented. For those who do not find employment, additional offers are provided for. Most such offers (over 70%) are in further education or training. Others are in community-based employment programmes such as CE, Gateway and Tús, or through the JobsPlus employment subsidy for private employment.

The Government’s Youth Guarantee Implementation Plan (YGIP) details how the Youth Guarantee is to be funded through the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) and European Social Fund (ESF). The YEI is being delivered in Ireland as a dedicated priority axis within the ESF Operational Programme for Education, Inclusion and Learning (PEIL) 2014-2020, for which the Irish Managing Authority is the Department of Education and Skills.

I am informed that the total amount allocated to YEI under PEIL is €204,436,257. This allocation is comprised of €68,145,419 of specific EU funding for YEI, with matching amounts from Ireland’s ESF allocation and from Exchequer funding.

It is intended to claim funding in respect of expenditure on certain programmes which make up Ireland’s response to the EU Recommendation on a Youth Guarantee, including Youthreach, the JobsPlus Incentive Scheme and Momentum. The overall range of such programmes is set out in the Youth Guarantee Implementation Plan, which estimated annual expenditure on the core programmes involved of approximately €336 million, with a further expenditure on other relevant programmes (Apprenticeship and PLC courses) of €192 million.

Exceptional Needs Payments

Ceisteanna (192)

Bernard Durkan

Ceist:

192. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection the degree to which adequate resources continue to be made available to his Department to meet exceptional needs payment requirements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12046/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

Under the supplementary welfare allowance (SWA) scheme, the Department may make a single exceptional needs payment (ENP) to help meet essential, once-off and unforeseen expenditure which a person could not reasonably be expected to meet out of their weekly income. The Government has provided €30.3 million for the scheme in 2016.

In 2012 a Departmental working group made up of staff from the Community Welfare Service reviewed the existing ENP guidelines with a view to, in so far as possible, achieve standardisation and consistency of treatment of applications across the country. This review has been used as a basis for revised guidelines that issued to staff in 2012 and 2013. These guidelines assist departmental staff administering the scheme and do not affect the discretion available to officers in issuing an ENP to assist an individual or household in any particular hardship situation which may arise.

While expenditure under the scheme has reduced in recent years, the scheme is demand led and continues to provide assistance to those with exceptional needs taking into account the requirements of the legislation and all the relevant circumstances of the case in order to ensure that the payments target those most in need of assistance.

People who require an ENP should contact the local officials in the Community Welfare Service administering the scheme.

Social Welfare Payments Administration

Ceisteanna (193)

Bernard Durkan

Ceist:

193. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection the extent to which backlogs have been addressed in respect of various headings and payments operated by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12047/16]

Freagraí scríofa

Minister for Social Protection

The Department is committed to ensuring that claims are processed as expeditiously as possible. Processing times vary across schemes, depending on the differing qualification criteria. Schemes that require a high level of documentary evidence from the customer, particularly in the case of illness, disability and caring schemes, can take longer to process. Similarly, means-tested payments can also require more detailed investigation and interaction with the applicant, thereby lengthening the decision making process. Delays can also arise when the application form is not competed fully or supporting documentation is not provided at claim stage; if information is required from social security organisations in other jurisdictions and where additional information has been requested from the applicant but remains outstanding.

For example, pension claims on hand for more than three months typically occur in the case of EU/bilateral pensions where information from other jurisdictions is awaited or, in the case of self-employed, there may be outstanding PRSI liabilities. These delays impact on the award of household benefits in many cases as these secondary payments are linked to the award of the primary benefit.

My Department’s Intreo service integrates employment and income supports and provides for a streamlined and personalised service to clients in accessing job opportunities and availing of supports to enable them to get back to work at the earliest possible opportunity. The Intreo centres also include a single integrated decision-making team that integrate and streamline the processes formerly undertaken by the different agencies now amalgamated into my Department. Already clients are seeing the benefits of the integrated decisions process in the form of shorter decision times and in the reduced recourse to supplementary welfare payments.

There is no backlog in family income supplement (FIS), new claims are processed promptly within 2/3 weeks and renewals are processed in advance of the previous claim period ending.

Treatment benefit is also processed without delay, usually within 1 to 1.5 weeks of receipt.

Both carer’s allowance and disability allowance, which are means-tested schemes, are experiencing some delays presently. Delays are also occurring in domiciliary care allowance. This primarily is due to an ongoing increase in new claim intake over the past few years to all three of these schemes and the complexity attached to processing of these applications. In addition, there is sometimes a reluctance on the part of applicants to give full information at application stage thereby slowing down the processing of their application and in some cases necessitating a visit by an departmental investigative officer.

Reducing these waiting times is a priority for my Department. As part of its programme of service delivery modernisation, a range of initiatives aimed at streamlining the processing of claims, supported by modern technology, have been implemented by my Department in recent years. Operational processes, procedures and the organisation of work are continually reviewed to ensure that processing capability is maximised.

In addition, staffing needs are regularly reviewed, having regard to workloads and the competing demands arising, to ensure that the best use is made of all available resources.

I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.