Noel Grealish (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I support the amendment which would require social welfare appeals to be decided within 60 working days of receipt and that this could only be extended in exceptional cases.

The main issue dealt with in my constituency office each day is social welfare. This takes the form of advice on payments, assisting with applications and assistance with appeals. On social welfare appeals it is taking five months for a summary decision to be made and seven months in cases in which an oral hearing must be held. This is the average waiting time, but in many cases decisions take much longer. Given that 50% of cases appealed are successful and that the success rate is even higher when an oral hearing takes place, this delay is unacceptable. Unfortunately, while some people can qualify for supplementary welfare allowance while an appeal is being processed, in other cases it is not possible, perhaps owing to family circumstances. That leaves people suffering financially while awaiting a decision on their case.

In my experience, the majority of applications for certain payments, for example, carer's allowance, disability allowance, domiciliary care allowance and invalidity pension, are refused by the Department of Social Protection, with the decision subsequently being overturned by the appeals office. In some cases, applications are refused, despite comprehensive medical evidence supporting them. There should be greater transparency in how the initial decision is reached by the Department. All of the payments I mentioned relate to the physical or mental illnesses of individuals or close family members and initial refusal of these payments is a source of huge stress and anguish.

I wish to refer to a specific case involving domiciliary care allowance, a payment for a child with a severe disability who requires care and attention substantially over and above the care and attention usually required by a child of the same age. When the allowance is refused, it can delay a family in being able to purchase extra resources or services for a child with complex needs. My office recently dealt with a case in which a family had two children who needed care. The application was constantly refused by the Department, despite numerous appeals. As a last resort, we had to contact the Taoiseach's office which, in turn, contacted the Minister's office. Eventually the case was resolved, but the anguish and distress caused for the family were unacceptable. We should not have to go to the Taoiseach's office to get a decision by the Department overturned. If the family was entitled to the payment, they should have received it in the first place. They should not have been obliged to go through that experience. It took almost one year to resolve the matter. Then, when we contacted the Department in March, we were told the oral hearing would be held in October. It was wrong that the family suffered such distress and hardship.

The fact that there is no set time for dealing with appeals adds to the stress caused by the initial refusal, especially for families who are struggling to cope with a recent diagnosis and the care of sick child.

An oral hearing should be a mandatory part of the appeals process, rather than at the discretion of the Social Welfare Appeals Office. Appeals have a better success rate when an oral hearing takes place. It is much easier to overcome misunderstandings about cases and incorrect assumptions about an individual when he or she has an opportunity to explain the case to an appeals officer in person. The complex nature of the applications process for social welfare entitlements can be daunting and difficult, particularly for older people or those who are unfamiliar with the social welfare system, and without assistance these applications can often end in failure. People must be afforded an opportunity to explain their cases verbally in order that they can correct decisions and ensure they are not left without vital and appropriate payments because they are not apt at completing the application form. Putting a 60 day limit on the waiting time for an appeal and a decision to be made, unless there are exceptional circumstances, would greatly improve the appeals process and help to address the stress and anguish faced by those who are refused vital social welfare entitlements.

See this speech in context