James Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am glad to see that the Minister for Social Protection is here this evening to take this very important Adjournment matter on carer's allowance.

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

I try always to take my own Adjournment debates.

James Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Often, Ministers send in somebody else to deal with issues of importance, and I take Adjournment matters seriously and as being important to my constituents.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for affording me time to discuss this important matter, namely the need for the Minister for Social Protection to resolve the impasse on the carer's allowance which is, it appears, being deliberately withheld in certain cases to meet cost-cutting targets through a broadening of the eligibility parameters set for those who provide full-time care and have done so for a number of years.

While I do not want to point the finger at anyone in the administrative side of the Department as they merely follow orders, it appears to me that people who have given up a large part of their lives to look after elderly or infirm relatives, neighbours or friends are being very shabbily treated. These selfless workers, who perform a valuable service for the community and the State by saving the cost of residential care or home nursing, fail to get reasonable acknowledgement for their work. They are victims of cutbacks or deliberate stalling when it comes to payments.

I read an interesting comment, which sums up the feeling of the ever-increasing number of those who for no discernible reason have been refused a carer's allowance, and that comment is that the recession demands nothing less. Added to that could be the comment that the Government is a hard taskmaster when it is clawing back the money it squandered.

We still have a health sector that is top heavy. The excess layers remain, and will remain, untouched. They are the ones the system protects, the ones who have a strong union presence behind them. Not so the carers of this country; there is no protection for them.

At present, an estimated 350,000 people provide paid or unpaid care to those who are unable to care for themselves. A Central Statistics Office report on carers published in July this year shows that 8% of those over 15 in this country are providing unpaid care to dependent, disabled or chronically ill people. This percentage has risen from 4.9%, or 161,000, in 2006.

Interestingly, a Social Welfare Appeals Office report highlights that of the 25,963 appeals registered in 2009, 48% were decided in favour of the appellant. This figure would indicate a lack of reasonable criteria being issued to front line staff or, worse still, a deliberate policy of refusal and delay.

This worrying trend was recently highlighted by the Carers Association when addressing the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. Claims that would have been passed two years ago are now being refused. The basis of these refusals is the health of the people receiving care, even if their doctor has signed off on their ill-health.

It is particularly worrying that those coming off carer's benefit are being rejected for the allowance. Carer's benefit is paid for up to two years to people who leave the workforce to care for a person full-time but what happens then? If they are refused carer's allowance do they leave the person they are looking after without care or do they continue the care unpaid? This is hardly practical.

I am puzzled as to how the payment of a couple of hundred euro a week to a relative, friend or neighbour who is prepared to put his or her life on hold to look after an elderly parent or other person is not considered cost effective or efficient. Irish people returning from abroad to look after elderly relatives are being refused a carer's allowance because of the habitual residency condition. This is ridiculous and must be reviewed.

With 4% taken from carers in last December's budget, it is frightening to think what a Government in hock to the tune of €50 billion to Irish banks will cut from the entitlements of the elderly and vulnerable and their carers in the forthcoming budget. I urge the Minister to look at the broader picture and balance care for the carers with short-term gain for the Exchequer at the cost of fairness and transparency. I would welcome a favourable reply from the Minister this evening. When I see him here, I hope it is with good news.

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

It is with very good news because, as Deputy Bannon knows, decisions made in the Department are made by deciding officers who act absolutely independently of me and if one is not happy with a decision one goes to a independent appeals office, so the allegation that in some way a directive on the application of the rules went from the top of the Department is utter nonsense and I assure the Deputy of that.

If this country could not borrow money on international markets, the effect on the social welfare budget, which is 38% of the current spend, would be absolutely devastating. The Government is focused on ensuring that we can borrow money to provide the top-class services we do through our social welfare system.

I will now deal with the question on people transferring from carer's benefit to carer's allowance and I think Deputy Bannon knows how the schemes work. Carer's benefit was introduced in October 2000. It is a social contribution payment made to people who have left the workforce to look after somebody in need of full-time care and attention.

To qualify for carer's benefit and carer's allowance, the person being cared for, namely, the caree, must require full-time care and attention. A decision on medical eligibility is made based on the medical evidence supplied at the time of the relevant application. A decision on medical eligibility would have been made at the time of an application for carer's benefit based on the medical evidence supplied. When a person is no longer eligible for carer's benefit and subsequently applies for carer's allowance in respect of the same care recipient, a new application must be submitted. The Department's medical assessor gives an opinion, based on the latest medical information supplied. In a small number of cases, the assessor will advise that the caree no longer requires full-time care and attention.

It is important to remember that the maximum time a person may receive carer's benefit is two years. However, this may be spread out over a longer period with episodes of employment in between. The medical circumstances can change over time.

There is no difference in the medical eligibility criteria between the two schemes. The medical evidence supplied by the claimant in support of the initial application for carer's benefit and the subsequent application for carer's allowance may differ and it is upon this medical evidence that the medical assessor's opinion is based.

Practical experience as a constituency politician will tell one that often the reason an appeal succeeds is because the evidence given at the appeal is far more substantial than the evidence in the initial application, and we all know this. A very small number of decisions, approximately 2%, are appealed so we are discussing 48% of 2%, which is 1%. Removing the number of cases where if the information provided on appeal had been provided originally they would have succeeded leaves a very small number of social welfare applications where the basic decision is overturned by the appeals office.

Claims for either carer's benefit or carer's allowance may be reviewed by the Department at any time to establish continuing eligibility and a claimant may be requested to furnish up to date medical evidence. When applicants are refused carer's allowance on medical grounds they are notified of this decision, the reasons for it and their right of review or appeal to the social welfare appeals office. I understand that there were a total of 78 cases in the year June 2009 to May 2010 which were refused carer's allowance on medical grounds following a carer's benefit claim. Most of the schemes administered by the Department of Social Protection, including carer's benefit and carer's allowance, have qualifying conditions established by legislation. There is no question of valid claims being deliberately withheld to meet cost-cutting targets. While the economic situation is difficult, any changes to the qualifying conditions for carer's benefit and carer's allowance would require legislation and would only be introduced as part of the normal budgetary process.

If one takes the figure of 80, or even 100, at an average of €10,000 a year, that would work out at approximately €1 million. When one considers that my Department spends €200,000 a minute, that is the equivalent of a five-minute spend. I assure Deputy Bannon that the numbers issues in my Department far exceed that and if anyone thinks there is some policy other than objectively examining every file on its merits, they are wrong.

Deputy Bannon also raised the issue of the habitual residency claim. I hear all this talk about Irish citizens but under EU law it would be illegal for us to differentiate between a Polish, French, British or Irish citizen or any citizen of any other part of the EU in terms of habitual residency, and that is the nub of the issue. In making decisions on habitual residency, the fact that they are Irish as opposed to any other nationality cannot legally be taken into account. As Deputy Bannon will be aware, the position is that people must have their centre of interest within this country. I will give Deputy Bannon the figures, if the Acting Chairman allows me. I am trying to be helpful to the Deputy.

Michael Kennedy (Dublin North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister is over time but I will give him half a minute for Deputy Bannon's matter.

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

Deputy Bannon is getting a bonus today because this was not in the official reply but I want to clarify the matter.

In 2006, out of 5,813 carer's allowance applications awarded, 27 were refused on the habitual residency condition; in 2007, 32 out of 9,000 were refused; in 2008, 44 out of 15,000 were refused; and in 2009, 126 out of 10,000 were refused. To date in 2010, 139 out of 4,150 were refused. Therefore, the numbers are relatively small. It is a difficult issue and I have found as much myself. The real challenge is that one cannot treat the citizens of any EU country differently and, therefore, the Irish person must be treated the same as a citizen of any other state. It is also fair to say that one could not do away with habitual residency condition because the consequences to our very good social security system would be horrendous.