John Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Cathaoirleach for selecting this Commencement matter and the Minister of State for taking it on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, who is unavoidably at an event in Wexford. This is a topic on which we need to make further progress. I strongly believe that self-employed persons need to have a safety net if they become seriously ill. In recent years, we have made great strides by expanding access to a range of social insurance benefits to self-employed contributors. The payment of class S PRSI now gives contributors access to adoptive benefit, guardian's payment, the contributory invalidity pension, self-employed jobseeker's benefit, maternity benefit, parent's benefit, partial capacity benefit, paternity benefit, the contributory State pension, treatment benefit and the widow's, widower's or surviving civil partner's pension. The benefits to which class S PRSI does not provide access are carer's benefit, health and safety benefit, illness benefit and occupational injuries benefit.

For the purpose of today's Commencement debate, I will focus on illness benefit, the eligibility criteria for which need to be changed as soon as possible. To demonstrate the need for changes to the eligibility criteria for illness benefit, I will highlight the case of a constituent of mine who has been diagnosed with cancer. Their partner is the sole carer for their child, who has significant additional needs, and my constituent was the sole earner for the family until their recent diagnosis. This individual has worked all of their life as an employee paying class A PRSI and has an unblemished record of 15 years in employment. However, during the Covid-19 pandemic, they became unemployed for a short period of time and took up self-employed work for a period of more than six months because they could not afford not to be in work. They paid class S contributions over that period but, at the moment, these do not count towards eligibility for illness benefit and the 22 weeks of class A stamps that were paid in 2021 fall four contributions short. As a result, this person's claim for illness benefit has been refused. It is important to note that enhanced illness benefit was extended to self-employed persons during the Covid-19 pandemic. I believe now is the time to extend it further. Independent of the argument for extending illness benefit to self-employed persons who pay class S contributions, there is a strong case for building further flexibility into the system and allowing Department of Social Protection officials to look back over a longer period of time than the two years currently assessed for eligibility.If someone becomes very ill in 2023, as in the case I outlined, the two years which are examined are 2021 and 2020. If 26 contributions are paid in each of those two years, people have eligibility for illness benefit once they have paid 104 contributions in their lifetime. However, if they have 52 relevant contributions in 2020 and 22 relevant contributions in 2021, they are assessed as being four contributions short and have no eligibility. Equally, if people have 52 relevant contributions in every year preceding 2021 but only have 22 contributions in 2021, they are assessed as having no eligibility. That is an anomaly that needs to be addressed as soon as possible. Officials in the Department of Social Protection should be able to look back over a three-, four- or five-year period at the cumulative contributions made during that period when assessing eligibility.

In summary, I am looking for an extension of illness benefit to class S contributions. I am also looking for a new system of eligibility which examines cumulative contributions over a longer period than the two-year period currently in place.

Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Seanadóir as an ábhar seo a chur ar chlár oibre an tSeanaid inniu. Illness benefit is the primary short-term income support provided by the Department to those who cannot work due to illness of any type and who are covered by social insurance. Eligibility for illness benefit depends on the person's PRSI record and class. People must have made the required number of contributions of class A, E, H or P to qualify. In general, self-employed people make PRSI contributions in class S, which does not count towards eligibility for illness benefit, as the Senator has outlined. However, self-employed contributors who cannot work due to an illness or disability may apply for disability allowance and means-tested social assistance payment or invalidity pension, a social insurance payment.

Illness benefit is funded by the Social Insurance Fund through PRSI contributions. The fund is central to our social protection system and the Government needs to make sure it can provide adequate and sustainable social insurance pensions and benefits for a growing and ageing population. Self-employed people pay contributions to the fund at a lower rate of 4%. This is over 11 points lower than the combined employer and employee contribution of 15.05% made in respect of employed contributors. Since 2017, self-employed contributors have gained access to a number of social insurance benefits such as invalidity pension, treatment benefit, jobseeker's benefit, self-employed paternity and parents' benefit without any increase in their rate of contribution.

Self-employed contributors now have access to over 90% of benefits available from the fund. The Senator outlined these. They are adoptive benefit, guardian's payment contributory, invalidity pension, jobseeker's benefit, benefit payment for 65-year-olds, maternity benefit, parent's benefit, partial capacity benefit where in receipt of invalidity pension, paternity benefit, contributory State pension, treatment benefit, and the widow's, widower's or surviving civil partner's contributory pension. The only benefits in class S that are not provided are carer's benefit, health and safety benefit, illness benefit and occupational injuries benefits.

The actuarial review of the Social Insurance Fund, published in March, found that if illness benefit was extended to self-employed contributors on a cost-neutral basis, an increase of 12% to the class S PRSI rate would be required. Extending the other remaining benefits to the self-employed would require the class S rate to increase by 15%. The review also found that self-employed contributors already have materially better value for money from the Social Insurance Fund when compared with their employed counterparts despite not having access to all the benefits. I am aware that we do not have the specific circumstances of the individual case the Senator outlined today, but if he wants to pass on those details, we will make sure the Department can look into them fully. The Minister has given the Senator that commitment and expresses her regrets that she cannot be here.

John Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State. I appreciate the actuarial review that was done, which needs to be considered. If there is to be an increase in benefits, while I would not necessarily agree with the 12% increase in the rate outlined, people would be willing to support a modest increase in PRSI to adjust towards paying for that.While the S class is a problem, not being able to look at cumulative contributions is a wider issue in the context of the case I outlined. It is definitely not the only case where that has happened. I am asking that cumulative contributions, albeit for a different class, namely, class A, can be looked at over a three, four or five-year period, rather than just looking at 2020 and 2021. This individual and others have a long track record of contributions but because of the issues in 2021 they are being penalised for getting ill in 2023.

Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge the circumstances the Senator's constituent is undergoing and I wish that person the very best of luck with their health challenges. As I have said already, if he could outline them in more detail to the Minister I am sure she would be very happy to get her officials to look at the matter.

The Government in recent years has already extended a number of social insurance benefits to the self-employed without any increase in their PRSI rate. It is well known that the Social Insurance Fund will face significant financial challenges in the years ahead. Therefore, any changes have to be considered in an overall policy and budgetary context, including the contribution rates for the self-employed. It is worth pointing out that the Government has already decided to keep the State pension age at 66. This in itself will require increases to PRSI in the future and Government has been very upfront and honest with people about the need to increase PRSI to pay for that. I take the point the Senator has made but we need to be straight with people on this. If we are going to pay for extra benefits from the Social Insurance Fund, that will require increases to PRSI.