Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I want to make two points regarding this provision. The first is that people have paid into this. If a person passes away before reaching their 66th birthday this may be the only entitlement claimed in respect of them in terms of PRSI after their years of contributions. The Ceann Comhairle has ruled my amendment out of order, but I ask the Minister to consider it. I believe she is creating a serious anomaly here that will lead to significant overpayments. The bereavement grant is €850 and it is paid out in respect of 20,000 people a year. If account is taken of those who receive the widowed grant of €6,000, that leaves approximately 19,000 claimants who only receive the bereavement grant. More than 200,000 people are in receipt of electronic payments of their contributory old age pension. Up to now those people, or their next of kin, would have been entitled to the bereavement grant. I cite the example of an elderly person, who has been receiving their pension payments electronically and has no assets and no savings, who passes away and has no surviving souse. The funeral takes place and the undertaker sends out the bill for €5,000 or €6,000 six or eight weeks after the funeral. The family members then decide they had better sort out everything. They do not have access to the deceased's bank account because the proceeds are frozen on the person's death. In the intervening period €230.30 is being paid into the deceased's account every week. There is no trigger mechanism for the Department to indicate that this person has died. Money continues to be paid into the bank account until the solicitor eventually contacts the Department two or three months down the road notifying it that this person has died. When the accounts are settled priority is given to the funeral expenses before the Department gets its money refunded. Instead of paying the €850 towards the funeral costs, the Department will end up paying the full cost of that funeral before it gets the balance back in a repayment. I believe the Minister is causing a serious anomaly because this grant causes a trigger within the Department to suspend the contributory pension that is being paid electronically. There is no other mechanism in place currently to make that happen, or is it the case that the Minister will have Department officials listening to the local radio stations, contacting undertakers on a regular basis to find out has die?

See this speech in context