Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)

I thank Senator Browne for giving me the opportunity to speak about the disabled persons grant scheme. He will be glad to learn that a review of the scheme is well advanced in my Department. The grant scheme serves a useful purpose in helping to meet the housing needs of disabled persons. The grant is available for the provision of additional accommodation or the carrying out of adaptation works which, in the opinion of the local authority where the house is located, are reasonably necessary to make the house more suitable for a disabled member of the household.

The operation of the grant scheme at local level is a matter for the local authorities. I accept the Senator's point that some local authorities are more efficient than others in their operation of the scheme. Part of the problem is that some authorities will not meet one third of the cost of renovation works as they are obliged to do. It is most unfair on those who need renovated facilities that some local authorities are prepared to drag out the scheme.

The framework for the operation of the scheme is laid down in regulations. It is designed, as far as practicable, to give an appropriate degree of flexibility to local authorities. One of the strengths of the scheme is that the regulations are framed in a manner that gives maximum flexibility to local authorities. That also makes it more difficult to manage, however, and I accept that it leads to variations in performance standards among local authorities. The Department would receive complaints if it were to make all the rules, thereby telling local authorities what they can do, how they can do it and when they can do it. It believes in giving as much power as possible to local authorities, which have housing as one of their main functions.

Demand for assistance under the scheme has increased enormously in recent years, mainly as a consequence of the significant improvements the Government has made to it. The increase in the grant to its present level of €20,320 in 2001 led to significantly increased activity under the scheme, as did the increase to 90% of the percentage of the cost payable. I listened with interest to Senator Browne's suggestion that the Department should pay 100% of the cost of renovation works, but I do not agree with such a proposal because it would lead to demand going through the roof. The rate of recoupment to local authorities has increased from half of the cost before 2001 to two thirds of the cost now. A disabled persons new house grant of up to a maximum of €12,700 has also been introduced.

The number of grants paid increased significantly over five years, from 2,455 in 1998 to 5,739 in 2003. Expenditure on the grants in that period totalled over €200 million and over 25,000 grants were paid. That over 25,000 projects were completed means that a large number of disabled persons and their families were able to remain in their homes, which is important. Such people now enjoy improved housing conditions which many of them would not otherwise have been able to afford.

I am aware that the unexpected increase in applications in recent years has posed problems for the local authorities which are administering the scheme. This has led to delays in approval and payment, not always related to the level of funding available. The majority of authorities have reviewed their schemes in recent years to streamline their operation. The introduction of systems of medical prioritisation, standardisation of costs and improved arrangements for the use of occupational therapists have enabled the authorities to manage the schemes more efficiently and to tackle the backlog of applications.

The Department does not insist on an occupational therapist's report, although it is recommended if major renovations are being undertaken and it can be worthwhile if someone has an illness that may get worse. Delays can occur while waiting for reports for genuine reasons but sometimes a report is demanded when it is not necessary to delay people. A number of local authorities hire an occupational therapist rather than waiting for the health board. There is nothing wrong with that as it is more efficient and keeps the system moving instead of fobbing it off to a health board in the hope that it will take nine months to come back. Some applicants have been delayed unnecessarily this way over the years.

A combined capital allocation of €70 million is being made to local authorities for the payment of the disabled person's and essential repair grant schemes this year. Individual allocations, which will notify to local authorities soon, will be based on their requirements as notified to my Department. Last year, Cork County Council requested €8 million and we allocated 90% of that figure. In November, however, the council told us it only needs €2.75 million because it had not provided its own third. It deprived other counties of that money. There is no point in telling someone in November to go ahead with the disabled person's scheme. Local authorities must give approval early in the year so clients can get the builder in.

Another local authority divided up its allocation by the number of applications it would approve and each quarter authorised a certain number of jobs. What is he point of telling someone in October that he or she can do a job when it will not be completed by the end of the year? I hope Cork County Council has budgeted for its third this year. That is the only way to do it. Last year that local authority told us it wanted €8 million and we gave it 90% of the figure. However, in November it told us it could not use it. It is ridiculous.

It is a matter for authorities to decide on the level that will be provided for the disabled person's grant scheme from within the combined total. One or two counties do not bother with the essential repairs grant scheme, although it is valuable. It is up to the local authorities, however, to decide how they divide the funding.

While two thirds of expenditure on the scheme is recouped from the Department, authorities are required to fund the remaining one third from their own revenue sources with amounts provided for that purpose in their annual estimates.

The Government is aware of the importance of the disabled person's grant scheme in meeting the accommodation needs of disabled persons in the community. The focussing of the scheme on real needs, both financial and accommodation-related, and its operation by local authorities in an efficient manner, will be critical in ensuring it achieves its aim. The outcome of the review of the operation of the scheme that is under way will significantly contribute to this achievement. Local authorities will, however, have to provide one third of the grant.

We are looking at standard costing, occupational therapists, speeding matters up and deciding if the grant should be related to means or medical need. We are introducing those measures that efficient local authorities have already put in place to standardise the operation of the scheme. We have reviewed the scheme and it has probably worked to the benefit of some but not others. We have all heard the urban legend about a lady who sold her house for €700,000 and moved in with her solicitor's son, who then applied for a grant to build an extension for the mother or the grandmother and qualified for it under the present scheme. If a person is poor and on a pension or has sold an existing property and moved in with a family member, he or she still qualifies under the existing scheme. In some cases they build very fancy extensions to their homes. That is fine if the house remains in the family for years to come but if the house is sold within three years because the grandmother has died, it is arguable that there should be a claw back. It is all taxpayers' money. It is a case of helping those in genuine need while not allowing the scheme to be milked. We are looking at this issue and hope to come to a conclusion soon.