David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 1: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the direct consultation his Department has had with the community welfare service in respect of the transfer of functions to his Department; the forum he will provide to community welfare officers to respond to the findings of the report of the working group on the review of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme phase II; the way he will enhance the role of the community welfare officer in the context of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme or otherwise; his plans regarding the transfer of functions; the timescale for same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43567/06]

Willie Penrose (Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 4: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his view on proposals that community welfare officers should be transferred from the Health Service Executive to his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43407/06]

Séamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 4 together.

The decision taken by the Government to transfer certain functions from the Health Service Executive to my Department came on foot of recommendations made by the Commission on Financial Management and Control Systems in the Health Service. I am fully in favour of and support that decision. The decision will involve the transfer of responsibility for the delivery of the supplementary welfare allowance, SWA, scheme and of certain costs of disability and caring payments, as well as responsibility for the General Register Office, which currently comes under the aegis of the Department of Health and Children.

An examination is also being conducted into the mechanics of transferring responsibility for the treatment benefit scheme, which is operated by my Department currently, to the HSE.

Following the Government decision, a number of implementation working groups were established. One such group oversees the implementation of the SWA element of the transfer of functions programme. The group's work to date has centred mainly on providing the necessary foundation for the successful transfer of the scheme. This includes identifying all of the functions currently carried out within the community welfare service for the purpose of identifying appropriate arrangements for the continued administration and management of these functions in the context of the transfer.

Separately from the process which led to the decision to transfer responsibility for the scheme, my Department had undertaken a review under the expenditure review programme of all aspects of the SWA scheme, the report of which was recently published. The report acknowledges that the SWA scheme has moved beyond its original role as a safety net and plays a more extensive role than was originally intended. The report makes a number of recommendations for change in the context of ensuring a more streamlined delivery of income support through the social welfare system generally, including active case management to deliver immediate and flexible solutions to individuals' needs. The report was presented to superintendent community welfare officers at a briefing seminar on 29 November 2006. Arrangements are also being made to have a copy of the report circulated to all community welfare officers early in the new year.

The transfer of functions will present fundamental reform and developmental opportunities for an integrated and enhanced income support system, including a restructuring and integration of support services within my Department, while facilitating the HSE in concentrating on its core health and personal social services functions. The SWA review is timely in that it addresses all the major issues facing the scheme that can be addressed effectively in the context of the transfer process.

The existing mechanisms of delivery by the community welfare service allow the service to be responsive, flexible and outcome focused. These are attributes for which there will be a continuing need into the future and there will be no diminution in the existing role and responsibility afforded to community welfare officers. The transfer of functions is an opportunity for an enhancement of the support role that community welfare officers currently provide to those disadvantaged in society.

The implementation of a change programme of this magnitude involves organisational, human resource and service delivery issues. Throughout the change programme both the HSE and my Department will give a very high priority to involving the community welfare service in the planning and implementation of the changes and providing clear and precise information on all elements of the change process. Staff in my Department who will be impacted by the change will also be involved and kept informed throughout the process.

A comprehensive information process is being put in place through newsletters to staff, briefing sessions and discussions with representative groups. A series of information seminars will be held by the HSE and my Department on a regional basis for all staff of the service early in 2007. These fora will provide further opportunities for those working within the service to comment on the implementation programme and the recommendations contained in the SWA review. At the same time, staff and unions within my own Department will also be kept informed and consulted as the implementation programme progresses.

The HSE unions have indicated a wish to meet with officials from my Department to discuss the transfer of functions and my Department would welcome an early opportunity for such a meeting. While no date has been set for the completion of the transfer process, I propose to bring forward necessary enabling legislation to give effect as early as possible next year and I would intend that the transfer would take place as soon as possible thereafter.

During the period of transition, my Department will continue to give a high priority to supporting the delivery of the very high standard of service currently provided by staff in the community welfare service.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for his response. Am I correct in stating that the decision has been made? If so, why did no direct consultation or discussion take place with the community welfare officers prior to the decision being made? Is the Minister aware of the community welfare officers' concerns, for instance, that they maintain that their role is more a personal social service than welfare supports, and regarding the possible diminution in the transfer of their personal social service role?

Is this move more about financial management and control, as the Minister mentioned early in his reply, than anything else? If the transfer goes ahead, will the community welfare officers remain headquartered in the health services, as owned by the HSE, or will they be moved to some other location? Does the Minister see the community welfare officers' existing discretionary payment process being changed in any way?

The Minister indicated he would bring forward legislation. Could he enlighten us as to whether this will be a stand-alone Bill or an addition to another Bill, such as the social welfare and pensions Bill, which is expected in February? Will the decisions on the discretionary payments be based on legislation, standing operating procedures, as with other social welfare claims, or guidelines? Will changes be made there?

Is the Minister aware that the community welfare officers have had no opportunity to provide an input into this process to date and that the first time they had one was at the meeting of the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs on 22 June last where they had an opportunity to give a formal viewpoint on the process to transfer the community welfare service from the health sector to the remit of the Department of Social and Family Affairs? Most importantly, is he also aware of the community welfare officers' important link with the health service and could he guarantee that this link will be maintained? Is he also aware of the advocacy, pseudo-counselling role performed by the community welfare officers, that their role involves much more than giving out money to people and that people go to them for more than just that?

Séamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I greatly acknowledge and thank the 701 community welfare officers throughout the country and the 183 supporting clerical staff, including, for example, porters. The service is delivered through 1,000 locations throughout the country. There are nine appeals officers in the community welfare service who deal with SWA appeals and there are 59 superintendents.

This has been discussed over many years. It has arisen at conferences, it has been the subject of many discussions between officials and it is no surprise. It has been in the system for a long time. The Government has finally copperfastened its thinking on it and taken the decision to move ahead with it now.

In thanking all of those community welfare officers, I want to give an absolute assurance that there will be no diminution in their discretion, that there will be full consultations with them as we go through this process and they will be listened to carefully, that, obviously, terms and conditions and employment issues will be worked out with the unions who will be kept fully involved in the process as it progresses, and that they have nothing to fear from this move. It is an opportunity in many ways to enhance the service which they give.

When this service started it was a fairly small safety net. It has now grown into a €700 million scheme and it has moved far beyond its original intention. It is helping welfare customers and the welfare Department is the line Department that should have the responsibility for helping welfare customers. It is for those reasons that this makes sense.

The main message I want to send in answering these parliamentary questions is that the community welfare officers have nothing to fear. It offers the chance for enhancement. Full terms and conditions of course will be guaranteed.

I see no great need for changes of locations. Those locations will always be needed, but the detail of that must be worked out with management. I see there being no interference in the community welfare officers' flexibility and discretion because they are at the coalface and help so many people. Their tangential work for the Department of Health and Children can continue.

I have spent much of my time in office over the years fighting major battles trying to move civil servants out into agencies. On at least three or four occasions I fought considerable battles, on the floor of this House and elsewhere. I was told that I was diminishing their Civil Service status and pushing them into agencies and further away from the centre. We are doing the opposite here. We are taking them back from an agency into a Civil Service Department in which they have a bright future. They will be fully consulted and all the issues with the unions will be fully thrashed out in good time to proceed with this.

Willie Penrose (Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The impetus for this arose, not with the community welfare officers or their representatives, but at official level. It is nothing more than a diktat. Imagine imposing something, then calling for the referee to decide something and then calling in the players without having any consultation with them. The first time that SIPTU and IMPACT were given an opportunity to respond was before a committee when I invited them in to make their presentation.

The Labour Party is deeply alarmed at this proposal to subsume the community welfare service into the Department of Social and Family Affairs. We strongly believe that this service, catering for the most vulnerable in society and operating at the cutting edge of the link between health and poverty, is best left where it is within the health service. If it is not broke, why does the Minister and his officials set out to break it?

Is this little more than a craftily disguised cutback, an attack on a vulnerable community? Will this plan proceed under the 2007 Social Welfare Bill? Will community welfare officers ultimately be reined in and prevented from providing information, advice and advocacy to vulnerable people in our communities as their link to statutory health and personal social services would be effectively severed?

What is the Minister's game? I realise that the interdepartmental review group's Core Functions of the Health Service report recommended the transfer. There is no difficulty with the objective focusing of the HSE's resources on core health functions. Does the Minister agree that the community welfare service performs a core health function? I put it to the Minister that it is a profound misunderstanding to characterise the community welfare service as being limited to the administration of cash benefits from the social welfare allowance system.

The late Frank Cluskey introduced this in 1977 and the administration of the CWS scheme is obviously an important and integral part of the work of CWOs. Mr. Cluskey said that the CWO system was more than a mere cash response. Is it the position that the service was deliberately placed within the community care structure and under the auspices of the Department of Health and Children with the intention of delivering a local response to individual needs, including providing clients with access to a range of health and personal social services? The importance of the relationship between income maintenance and effective personal and health services, as well as the safety net separate from other social welfare payments, was clearly and specifically identified in the debates in this House that led to the establishment of the service. These factors are as important and as real today as they were when the scheme was introduced.

Even if this is not the Minister's intent, we are concerned that the proposed transfer will inevitably mean an end to the discretionary SWA payments and that this will have a direct and damaging effect on the ability of clients to access health services. I accept the Minister's bona fides, but we must look at what the end result would mean. Does the Minister agree that CWOs are in a position to deal with people out of hours and in all sorts of emergencies? How will this function within the remit of the Minister's Department? Will the discretion be eliminated, abolished or curtailed? If someone requires an ambulance but finds there is none available, they can turn to a CWO to get funds to pay for alternative transport. Who will administer such a scheme in the future? Where are we going with this? Why is it happening? Is this a crusade by someone to curtail CWOs?

The Labour Party supports the view of the unions representing CWOs that there must be a full study of the service and wide consultation about the likely effects of the changes with those who manage, deliver, use and interact with it before any change is proposed or implemented. There has been no consultation with the people who use and benefit from the service and the great work being carried out by the 700 CWOs. Why should something that is working so well be changed? If it is not broken, the Minister should not set out to break it.

Séamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This recommendation was made by a commission on financial management and control systems in the health service. It follows on from the reorganisation and restructuring of the Health Service Executive. Community welfare officers administer, for example, the rent scheme which runs to between €400 million and €500 million annually. It is an enormous scheme and must be seen as a welfare scheme which must be connected and interrelated with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. It is means tested, connected to other schemes in the Department and comprises more than half of the community welfare officers' budget. The salaries and expenses of all 700 community welfare officers come through the HSE but are paid by my Department.

This is a restructuring to take account of what has happened in recent years. The HSE has come on stream, the rent scheme has grown dramatically and the argument has moved on from Frank Cluskey's original idea to have a basic safety net with discretion. It has moved on because the budget administered by the CWOs, who do a superb job, now stands at €700 million annually. I hope to include this in the next social welfare Bill. I will ensure their flexibility is assured and that there is maximum consultation, especially with the trade unions involved.

There is no agenda other than ensuring that the Department of Social and Family Affairs, that spends more than €15 billion annually and is ultimately responsible for the other €700 million, continues to employ the CWOs. They are excellent staff and look after the welfare of the community, and they must work directly for the welfare Department rather than for the Health Service Executive. It will not affect the customer one whit.