Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 3: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if he will address the anomaly that exists in relation to the difference between rural social scheme and community employment scheme payments for widows and widowers, one parent family allowance recipients and those receiving disability allowance in order that the RSS payment is made in addition to the person's pension payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26321/07]

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy will be aware, the rural social scheme, RSS, is a supplementary work scheme for self-employed farmers and fisherpersons who earn an inadequate income from their farm holdings or fishing. The scheme aims to provide income support for farmers and fisherpersons who are in receipt of certain long-term social welfare payments and to provide certain services of benefit to rural communities by harnessing the skills and talents of participants.

In this context, it is important to note that the RSS is not a training scheme. The community employment, CE, scheme, on the other hand, is an employment and training programme which helps long-term unemployed people to re-enter the active workforce by breaking their experience of unemployment through a return to work routine. The programme assists those participating to enhance and develop their technical and personal skills, which can then be used in the workplace.

As the RSS is an income support scheme rather than a training scheme, it is, therefore, not appropriate that comparisons be made between it and FÁS and CE schemes regarding conditions and the level of allowances that are payable.

Participants on the RSS who qualify through one-parent family payment, widow or widower's pension, either contributory or non-contributory, or disability allowance, continue to receive their weekly social welfare payment from the Department of Social and Family Affairs, with a top-up payment under the RSS.

Although two separate payments are made to participants, the total amount paid is roughly equal to, or slightly above, the amount that would have been paid had the RSS made one payment.

The Deputy should note that currently there are 46 participants on the scheme who are in receipt of disability allowance, a further five who are receiving the one-parent family payment and one who is in receipt of a widow or widower's contributory pension.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Some people have contacted me regarding this anomaly and I know that most of the Leader companies have made representations to the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív. The rural social scheme has been excellent and with FÁS does more work than the county councils in this regard. I compliment these schemes and hope they last a long time because if people in some areas had to depend on the county council to get work done it would not happen.

This scheme is good and it works but if so few people are being affected by the anomaly, I request that the Minister correct it. The anomaly relates to people on FÁS schemes who are widows or widowers, lone parents or on disability allowance who are not eligible for social welfare allowance in addition to the FÁS payment. The Minister rightly said that a person in receipt of disability allowance on the rural social scheme will only receive the allowance plus a top-up, bringing the total to €210. I request that the Minister correct this anomaly because it will not cost the Department a great deal and should not be allowed to develop. It has created problems and I know that the national organisation running the scheme has made representations to the Minister and his Department to have this anomaly corrected. What would it cost the Department to do this and is it possible?

The rural social scheme is rural while the FÁS scheme is based in urban and rural areas, and the same rules that apply to the FÁS scheme should apply to this. Rectifying this anomaly would not cost a great deal.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is a case where the grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence. A couple with one child on this scheme gets the flat rate and loses social welfare payments. Deputy Ring is suggesting that widows, widowers and single parents should be an exception to this rule and should keep receiving their social welfare payments.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As they do on the FÁS scheme.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Many couples and single people think that is grossly unfair and cannot understand why they are not allowed hold on to social welfare payments while receiving money through the rural social scheme. Deputy Ring suggests that this is the case on FÁS schemes and he is correct, but it is done to encourage lone parents and so on back into the workforce.

The difference with the rural social scheme is that there is a third source of income that the Deputy is ignoring. A person on the rural social scheme must by definition either own a farm, be a fisherperson or be closely connected to such a person. This third source of income makes the rural social scheme very different from FÁS because very few people on CE schemes have an income beyond what they receive through FÁS.

The Deputy asked how much it would cost to implement his proposed change and that is the $64,000 question because the number of people on the scheme is small. However, the Deputy's proposal, allowing an individual to retain his or her full social welfare payment with the full RSS payment and farm income, could prove very attractive and could lead to many people joining the scheme under the relevant category. I do not know how much this would cost but such payments to lone parents, widows and widowers constitute a large part of the cost of CE schemes.

The matter of the widow's or widower's contributory pension has been raised and, again, this depends on which side of the fence one views it from. No means test is involved so, technically, one could receive a widow's or widower's contributory pension while owning 1,000 acres of land and receive a large occupational pension. We took the view that there are so few such people that they should be allowed on the scheme despite the lack of a means test but this is the only such group and it could be termed an anomaly.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister knows that a farmer husband who pays PRSI will receive a contributory pension but his wife will not receive a contributory pension. This situation mostly affects women and aggravates those caught in the anomaly. I am asking the Minister to address the situation because the cost would be small and unfair policies should be corrected. The figures the Minister has mentioned today suggest that addressing this anomaly would not cost the Department a great deal of money so I request that he examine the matter because Leader groups are affected.

Martin Mansergh (Tipperary South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Deputy ever reaches this side of the House he will learn that Leader companies, county councils and other authorities are always very generous when spending other people's money.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government is not bad at spending other people's money either. Ministers did not do too bad last week with pay increases of €38,000.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That was decided independently.

Any Leader company that can get more money will not say no, but this issue depends on one's perspective as one can argue both sides. I should not be asking the Deputy questions but can he see the argument of a single person or a couple with a child who will receive less from the scheme than a single parent with a child?

There is another aspect to this that demonstrates the rural social scheme is entirely different from the CE scheme.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a good scheme and I accept that.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I provided that where one member of a couple has a part-time job that pays less than €12,500 the allowance will not taper because the idea was to benefit families that engage in farming. I am open to the Deputy's idea but there are two sides to the coin. I hope the Deputy is equally open to the argument that 2,500 people will put to me if I introduce double payments, suggesting what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. The rural social scheme is not the same as the CE scheme because there is the matter of a third source of income. We can debate this matter again when we come to Estimates because there are merits to both arguments.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is not a debate and we are well over our allotted time.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am trying to be helpful to the Deputy.