Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 38: To ask the Minister for Social Protection the average time it took to process social welfare appeals in 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27931/10]

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 67: To ask the Minister for Social Protection the current average and longest waiting times respectively for the outcome of appeals against decisions to refuse supplementary welfare allowance [27964/10]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 38 and 67 together.

I am informed by the social welfare appeals office that 26,000 appeals were received in 2009. This compares to the average number received over the previous four years of 15,000. At the end of 2009, 16,000 appeals were on hand and that figure has now risen to 20,300. In previous years, that number would have been in the region of 5,000 to 6,000.

I understand that during 2009, the average time taken to process all appeals, that is those decided summarily and by way of oral hearing, was 24 weeks. However, if allowance is made for the 25% most protracted cases, the average time falls to 15.8 weeks. This represents an increase of two weeks in the time taken to process appeals when compared to 2008.

Supplementary welfare allowance is a payment of last resort and, therefore, appeals for this scheme are given priority by the social welfare appeals office. The average time for processing these in 2009 were 6.5 weeks for cases dealt with on a summary basis, and 10.5 weeks where an oral hearing was required.

During 2010, changes have been made to the organisation of an appeals officer's work with a view to having a greater number of appeals dealt with by way of summary decision and in a more speedy fashion. As a result of these changes, the average time to deal with summary decisions on supplementary welfare allowance cases has reduced to 4.7 weeks, while the time taken to deal with oral hearings for this scheme has increased to 13 weeks.

While the significant growth in the number of appeals is clearly impacting on processing times, it must also be remembered that the processing time for appeals covers all phases of the appeal process, including the submission by the Department of its comments on the grounds for the appeal, further examination by the Department's medical assessors in certain appeal cases and further investigation by social welfare inspectors where required. Circumstances may also arise where further information is sought from the appellant. Delays can also occur where the appellant submits new information or evidence, often at an advanced stage in the proceedings. In some cases adjournments may be sought by appellants or their representatives.

A number of initiatives are under way which are designed to enhance the capacity of the office to deal with the current caseload and inflows. In that regard, two additional appeals officers were assigned to the office in 2009; a number of additional staff are being assigned to the administration area of the office; the organisation of the work of the appeals officer has been changed so as to increase productivity; a project to improve the business processes in the office is under way and a number of improvements have already been implemented; and significant enhancements are being made to the office's IT and phone systems.

Notwithstanding these measures, it is clear that additional staff are required in the short term to address the backlog that has developed. It has been decided to use experienced retired staff strictly on a short-term basis to supplement the current resources and the services of eight retired officers have now been secured on a part-time basis. To facilitate this initiative, the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2010, which is on Committee Stage, includes an amendment to allow these retired officers to decide appeal cases. The chief appeals officer is closely monitoring the situation.

Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Whoever wrote that answer should leave the Civil Service and get a job as a spin doctor. I asked a question on the average processing time. The Minister then said if one takes out the most protracted cases it is not as bad as it looks. The Minister gave us the figure for the overall average processing time, which is the issue. The protracted cases are part of the problem. The Minister cannot take them out and then tell us things are not as bad as they look because they are.

Which payment types attract the most appeals? Are they also the ones which are the most successful? For example, what percentage of carers allowance appeals are successful? The Minister pointed out yesterday on Committee Stage of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill that only 2% of cases are appealed. My concern is that almost 50% of appeals are partially successful or are successful. That means there is a real problem with the initial decisions which are made. Sometimes there more information is provided, but we need to have a system in place which ensures that people know what information to give in the first place.

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

I have a lot of information here but unfortunately I do not have information on that aspect. It is available in the appeals office report, a copy of which I am sure the Deputy has seen. I have examined this a few times. Off the top of my head, means tested cases tend to be a large number and are protracted. Medical cases apply to carers allowance, illness benefit and so on. It is fair to say that the shortest cases involve things like whether the person concerned has enough contributions because they tend to be fairly black and white.

Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I referred to payment types, such as carers payments or jobseekers-----

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

If one considers payment types one probably finds that those with the largest case load are assistance payments, carers allowance, unemployment assistance and so on, and illness cases. One could be eligible for illness benefit as well as disability allowance but means testing always applies to assistance cases.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The average processing time for social welfare appeals is now 24 weeks, almost six months. Unlike delays in other areas such as the passport office, getting redundancy payments and so on, delays in social welfare appeals are costing the State money because some 40% of appeals are disallowed and in the meantime people receive a payment.

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

That is not necessarily true.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They receive a supplementary welfare payment in most cases.

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

No.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In most cases it is true, and the Minister gave us that reply when we asked about it.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Allow the Deputy to put the question, Minister.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At a conservative estimate the delays in processing social welfare appeals is probably costing the State approximately €10 million per year. What is the Minister going to do about that? He told us he will take on part-time retired social welfare appeals officers, which amounts to three additional staff in the office. Why is the Minister not making the case to the Minister for Finance that recruiting more staff for the appeals office would result in savings to the State? These delays are costing the State dearly. Why does the Minister not present a business case to the Minister for Finance and let him know that by recruiting the additional staff that are necessary he will be saving the State money?

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

It is not just a question of the number of appeals officers; a lot of other issues and fronts are involved. We have appointed extra appeals officers and are taking on temporary ones. Medical officers are an issue because in some case medical examinations are involved.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister is appointing three extra officers. That will not deal with the problem.

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

That is only a small part of the issue. For example, as the Deputy is probably aware, in a lot of cases where further information is provided there is a short circuit system which goes back to the Department. The Deputy can be assured that I will be working with the appeals office to try to address this issue on all fronts, including information technology, better work methods and so on. I am determined to rapidly decrease the amount of time it takes to process appeals. Deputy Enright made a very valid point in asking if there was any way we could reduce the number of appeals in the first place and have our decision making process such that fewer people would feel they wanted to appeal. That is the first step in the whole process. We will work through every step to try to make it more efficient and deliver a better service.