Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

These amendments relate to the obstacles that have to be overcome by a person in order to qualify for and receive carer's allowance or carer's benefit. Every Deputy in the House will know from his or her experience in his or her constituency that people do not apply for carer's allowance lightly. I accept that some people do not meet the criteria. People do not apply for it lightly. Deputies will also be aware that in practice, it is extremely difficult to get carer's allowance. That is not to say that many people who apply for it do not ultimately get it. As the Minister of State told us on Committee Stage, the figures with regard to people qualifying may have improved. The number of hoops through which applicants now have to jump to get carer's allowance is not measured. It is probably not possible to measure it.

On Committee Stage, I instanced cases in which people who were extremely ill - in some cases, they died before a final decision was made - were refused carer's allowance in the first instance because they were deemed not to be sick enough. In fact, it was brought to my attention this morning that an unfortunate constituent of mine, in respect of whom I have been making representations for carer's allowance, is being removed from a funeral home this evening. I was told initially that he was not sick enough. That was a couple of months ago. The man died yesterday. It is difficult. People who are ultimately determined to have been entitled to carer's allowance all the time, having gone through the appeals system and the review, etc., are experiencing inordinate delays and terrible stress as they wait for the their applications to be finalised. I could also mention the stress on their family members who have to support them in the meantime.

The legislation governing carer's allowance that is on the Statute Book at the moment - the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 - is pretty neutral. Obviously, it puts the onus on applicants to apply and produce certain documentation with regard to medical conditions in order to satisfy the Department that the person being cared for fulfils the requisite criteria. It is now proposed that our legislation will, for the first time in history, put the burden of proof very firmly on the unfortunate applicant. I suggest we should stand back from all the technicalities and look at the effect of this proposal. I suggest it can only make it more difficult for somebody to qualify for carer's allowance. To look at it the other way around, it can only make it easier for the Department to say "No". That is the net effect. It cannot have any other possible effect. If one looks at the way this Bill is written, one will see it provides that a person will "not" qualify "unless" he or she meets certain conditions. The onus is firmly on the applicant.

The Minister of State said something I found quite extraordinary during the Committee Stage debate. He said "it has always been the case that the onus has been on the claimant", but I believe that if one examines the wording of the 2005 Act, one will see that this has patently not been the case. He suggested that the provisions of this Bill will retrospectively justify what has always been the reality and what has been happening all the time. That is tantamount to saying that the Department has been misapplying the original legislation all the time, and that an amendment must be passed to retrospectively justify that misapplication. It is difficult to get carer's allowance. It is difficult for the unfortunate ill people who are waiting for the money to come through. It causes great stress to such people because they feel they are a burden on their relatives. In my experience, it causes enormous financial stress for the relatives in many cases. The last thing we want is legislation that makes it more difficult to qualify, or easier for the Department to say "No". I earnestly entreat the Minister of State, even if he makes no other amendments to this legislation, to withdraw this section of it or to adopt the wording of the amendments as outlined. As I have said, it is difficult enough already. There is no point in making it any more difficult. Only the vulnerable will suffer.

See this speech in context