Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I support the amendment. The people coming through the door of my office week in and week out seem to confirm the perception which is out there that there is a default position, or even an instruction, whereby if any excuse can be found to refuse a payment, then it will be refused. The perception is that the Government hopes that a significant number of people will simply give up and go away, while those who are willing to persist for the very lengthy period it takes to go through the appeals process, including oral hearings and so on, may eventually be granted a decision in their favour. That has been my experience and it is forcing large numbers of applicants into the appeals process. People are completely flummoxed as to why they were refused particular allowances, often, as Deputy Catherine Murphy observed, to do with disability. We, as local representatives, are just as flummoxed as to the reasons for such refusals. We write letters on their behalf and submit parliamentary questions and, in many cases, their entitlement is eventually acknowledged and granted. This must stop.

The amendment is an attempt to force the hand of the Department to ensure appeals are dealt with quickly. This would also act as a discouragement to any tendency that is developing to refuse people on a default basis, whenever and wherever officials believe they can get away with it. Some of the cases I have encountered are truly awful. This week, for example, a woman came to see me whose respite care grant has been withdrawn. She has a severely disabled daughter who is going to Canada for three weeks to receive treatment. Her payment was withdrawn because the three weeks happen to coincide with the date on which applicants must be performing a caring role, which apparently is a particular day in June. In other words, because this woman's daughter will be in Canada on that date, her respite care grant is being withdrawn even though she cares for her daughter throughout the remainder of the year and will be caring for her for all the years ahead. That is astonishing. This person will now have to appeal the decision and I will make representations to the Minister on her behalf and so on. It makes absolutely no sense and is utterly unfair, unjust and unacceptable. I mentioned on a previous occasion - one of my amendments deals with such cases - a person whose children are paying his mortgage because he cannot manage himself and would otherwise lose his home. That money is being assessed as means by the Department, with the result that the individual's jobseeker's allowance has been reduced. That decision is also being appealed and will take just as long as all the other appeals.

I urge the Minister to accept this very reasonable amendment. The current delays in appeals are unacceptable and the level of refusals is frankly suspicious. Something must be done to prevent this unfairness being inflicted on people.

See this speech in context