Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators Zappone and van Turnhout. On this amendment, it basically is introducing a facility for a notice of attachment for the recovery of social welfare overpayments in respect of, and I stress this point, people who have substantial overpayments outstanding but who no longer are in receipt of social welfare benefit, assistance or any other payment from which the overpayment could be recovered directly by the Department or who have other sources of incomes, such as earnings, deposits or debts due. Where there is a reason to believe that a third party, including a financial institution, has an amount of money due to an overpaid person, the Minister can direct it to recover the overpayment. The reason for this is that we have a problem in the Department, as I explained in the context of the Second Stage debate, whereby successive reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General have stated the Department should have mechanisms in place to recover amounts that are overpaid through error, fraud, misstatements or mistakes. Consequently, we can do that and did that by way of amendment in last year's legislation to recover it from social welfare payments. The purpose of this provision is to attach it to other payments, such as in the case of someone who is employed.

This process is based on the Revenue process of recovery and it will be set out in regulations. The Revenue regulations are extremely detailed and I stress this is a last resort because when approached about overpayments, many people make reasonable arrangements with the Department of Social Production and with the Revenue Commissioners to refund or repay such overpayments.

In total, the Department has overpayments outstanding, which we should be able to recover, of approximately €350 million. The timeframes specified are similar to the timeframes that are applied by the Revenue Commissioners, which are considered reasonable, especially having regard to the fact that there will have been communication with the overpaid person on a number of occasions prior to any notice of attachment being initiated or undertaken. For instance, if someone is deemed to have an overpayment, there is a process for the Department of Social Protection, as there is with the Revenue Commissioners, where the overpayment is identified and the person is notified that there is an overpayment. The person has a right to appeal the overpayment and to maintain that they do not owe the money and that a mistake has been made. In practice, the Revenue Commissioners and the Department rarely make a mistake with the numbers. We have all handled situations where a person was hopeful a mistake had been made but that was not the case. However, the individual concerned has the right of appeal. Once an overpayment is determined, a person can enter into negotiations with the Department on how to arrange for the repayment. That negotiation can take some time. In response to Senator Zappone, until we achieve the power set out in the Bill, the only alternative the Department has is to take civil court proceedings. One can understand that the process is extremely cumbersome and expensive. Accordingly, we have decided to copy the procedures of the Revenue Commissioners so as to be able to make attachment orders to recover the earnings.

Senators will recall that with overpayments from the Department of Social Protection, it is 15% of the principal individual social welfare payment of the person who has been overpaid. It does not relate to payments to a partner, spouse, dependent children or other dependants. The approach in this case will be similar. Once the legislation is passed, we will develop regulations which will set out the position in detail. I assure Senators that the procedure will be a very careful one. It is open to an individual to voluntarily make and enter into an arrangement with the Department. I do not propose to accept the amendment.