Mark Wall (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome all our guests and thank them very much for their time, as well as for the report, which I read last night. There are a couple of issues. I think it was Dr. Cullen who spoke about worth and value. I deal with carer's allowance on a daily basis and I think in the last statistics I saw that 77% of those who are on carer's allowance are actually women. Many of those women tell me they feel degraded and that they are not worth anything in this system. I have spoken previously to Ms Cox about the means testing, and recently there was a Commencement matter in the Seanad on the whole area of the carer's experience. Did the effects of the fact there are so many women - 77% - come through in the study? That is affecting women more than any other gender.

Dr. Cullen mentioned the form. I did not pick up on the name of the country she mentioned that had a four-page form. As I said, I deal with carer's allowance regularly, on an almost daily basis. We had a 34-page form, which is now 28 pages. To me, it is way too prescriptive, it is way too much and it is off-putting. That is the big question and I know many of the representatives said that. It is off-putting to people to have to fill out 28 pages. Have the representatives looked at that as part of the report, and specifically the issue of the four-page form versus the 28-page form? What is the difference between the four-page form and the 28-page form? It is something I deal with daily.

The big issue is regarding those who are refused carer's allowance and who do not appeal. Unfortunately, I also come across this too regularly. First, they do not have the time because they are caring 24-7 and they just do not feel it is worthwhile to actually appeal it. However, it is worthwhile because it includes, as I have said many times at this committee, the whole idea of oral hearings. It involves actually getting in front of an inspector and telling them exactly what you are doing 24-7 and putting that human story across. This is rather than submitting a 28-page form. It must be done and it must continue to be done. In the witnesses' findings, have they seen why more people do not appeal when their carer's allowance is refused?

A big issue we touched on this morning regarding the carer's allowance relates to those who are over the age of 65. I deal with a lot of people on this. In the last set of statistics we had, I think it was one in five who are actually over 65. The big worry they have is regarding who will look after their loved one when they are no longer here. It is a huge worry. I will go back to what Family Carers Ireland continues to say every time I meet it, which is regarding the €20 billion that is being saved by the State. For me, the State needs to recognise that. It needs to recognise the fact that that €20 billion is there. When we talk about the €397 million that it would cost to abolish the means test, it is something that we obviously support.

As well as that, Deputy Ó Cuív was right regarding the big bang theory versus the instalment. I know Family Carers Ireland have the instalments over a period of time. Thankfully, the €900 income disregard that was announced yesterday is a step in that direction. There is no doubt about that. One case I am dealing with at the moment involves a lady whose husband is a garda. She is down the country and is not in my area. She is distraught because she cannot qualify for carer's allowance. She does not understand. She is caring for her child 24-7, as Ms Thyne is doing, and she has been refused carer's allowance within the last two months because she is over the limit. I could not get back to her until yesterday because I did not know where the new boundary was going to be. I am sure it will help her a little, but not to the extent that it should. We welcome the difference in the means test. We are trying to abolish it, and yesterday was a step in that direction.

Ms Thyne is right that the carer's benefit is only for a certain cohort of people. I welcome it going to five years as well, but it will only affect a certain cohort of people. At the end of the day, I always refer to the fact that this figure of €20 billion must be reflected by us looking after people.

To finish for the moment, I will go back to the issue of worth and value. Every time I meet somebody who has been turned down for carer's allowance, of whom there are too many, they ask me if the State does not value what they are doing for it. Obviously, if they do not look after that loved one, they will end up in State care. That is something we do not want, and no State wants it. I do not want to go into housing adaptation grants, which is crazy at the moment. In my area of Kildare, there are issues being brought up about families who are trying to apply for those. I continue to ask for the housing adaptation grant to be changed. However, the issue here is that we have to recognise those who are going above and beyond to look after their loved ones. This is something they want to do, which must always be said, but they feel that their worth and value are not being recognised by the State at the moment. It is something we need to do more of. I welcome the report from Maynooth University. I would welcome some replies to those few queries.