Written answers

Thursday, 10 February 2005

Department of Social and Family Affairs

Social Welfare Benefits

5:00 pm

Tony Gregory (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 177: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if the arrears of deserted wife's benefit of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 3 will be reviewed. [4322/05]

Photo of Séamus BrennanSéamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

An earnings "ceiling" was introduced for deserted wife's benefit as and from 31 August 1992. The ceiling, which applied only to new claims after that date, is currently €12,697.38 a year gross earnings. Where earnings are in excess of this amount, there may be entitlement to a continued payment at a reduced rate up to maximum earnings of €17,776.33 a year gross.

The person concerned was awarded deserted wife's benefit from 1 April 1993. She subsequently took up employment under her name prior to marriage and using a different personal public service number but failed to notify my Department of her earnings. This only came to light in March 2003, following inspection of her employer carried out by an officer of my Department.

On foot of this information, the person concerned was written to and afforded 21 days to respond. Having failed to receive a reply, a formal decision issued to her on 10 February 2004 informing her of the termination of her claim and a resulting overpayment of €18,747.94. She was given 21 days to appeal the decision, which she failed to do.

The person concerned subsequently contacted my Department by phone querying the stopping of her payment. It transpired that she had not received any of the aforementioned correspondence as she had changed address and had not notified my Department of this event. Copies of the original correspondence and decision letter were re-issued to her at her new address and she was again afforded the opportunity to appeal the decision but no appeal was lodged by her.

In all cases, there is an onus on people to notify my Department of the fact that their earnings have increased or where there is a change of address. Claimants are advised of this when the payment is initially awarded. Notice of this is also included on the payable order book, the payment method chosen by the person concerned in this instance.

My Department recently issued a reminder to the person concerned with regard to her obligation to put arrangements in place to repay the overpayment which is still outstanding as a debt due to be repaid to the State.

Under social welfare legislation decisions on claims must be made by deciding officers and appeals officers. These officers are statutorily appointed and I have no role in regard to making such decisions.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 178: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way in which earnings from work as a home help are treated in the means test for social welfare entitlements; and if changes have been made in the concessions relating to home help earnings in recent years. [4334/05]

Photo of Séamus BrennanSéamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy will be aware, the home help service is administered by the Health Service Executive which comes under the aegis of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children.

In the social welfare system, home help earnings are generally disregarded or treated more favourably than earnings from other insurable employment. No substantial changes have been made in these arrangements in recent years.

From January 2000, home helps were successful in securing equivalent status to non-nursing employees in the health service and are broadly in line with rates for equivalent health service staff. It is understood that these new pay rates also apply to the various agencies contracted by the HSE to provide home help services.

Home helps employed directly by the HSE now have full employee status, with all the rights of other health service employees, including annual leave, premia payments and mileage allowances.

The treatment of earnings from employment as home help vis-À-vis earnings from other insurable employment for social welfare purposes is under review within my Department.

Photo of Michael RingMichael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 180: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason a person (details supplied) in County Mayo has had unemployment assistance discontinued; and if he will give a complete and detailed breakdown of the situation over the past number of months. [4440/05]

Photo of Séamus BrennanSéamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person concerned was employed in the construction industry from 22 November 2004 until 10 December 2004, when he left this employment.

He applied for unemployment assistance on 14 January 2005. Based on the information supplied in his application regarding his job seeking efforts, a deciding officer disallowed his claim on the grounds that he is not available for or genuinely seeking work. It is open to the person concerned to appeal this decision to the social welfare appeals office and a form for this purpose was issued to him on 7 February 2005.

Under social welfare legislation, decisions on claims must be made by deciding officers and appeals officers. These officers are statutorily appointed and I have no role in regard to making such decisions.

Photo of Bernard DurkanBernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 181: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if a person (details supplied) in County Kildare qualifies for rent support or the back to education allowance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4441/05]

Photo of Séamus BrennanSéamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With the exception of those participating in my Department's back to education allowance scheme, people in full-time education are excluded in legislation from receipt of rent supplement which is provided for under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme.

The back to education allowance is a second chance educational opportunities scheme designed to encourage and facilitate certain groups — particularly people who have been unemployed for a substantial period of time and are having difficulty getting a job — to improve their skills and qualifications and, therefore, their prospects of gaining employment. To qualify for participation in the back to education scheme, an applicant must be in receipt of a relevant social welfare payment for a period of at least 12 months immediately prior to commencing an approved course of study.

The person concerned does not satisfy the eligibility criteria for participation in the back to education allowance scheme. Consequently, as a full-time student she has no entitlement to rent supplement under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme.

Photo of Bernard DurkanBernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 182: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason rent support has been refused in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 8; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4442/05]

Photo of Séamus BrennanSéamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With effect from 27 May 2003 rent supplement is no longer payable in respect of a person who is awaiting the outcome of his or her claim for asylum. The accommodation needs of people in these circumstances are provided for through the system of direct provision operated by the Reception and Integration Agency of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

The Dublin and mid-Leinster region of the Health Service Executive has advised that the application for rent supplement was refused on the grounds that the family in respect of whom the application was made includes a person seeking asylum who arrived in the State after 27 May 2003. The family was unsuccessful in appealing against this decision. The executive has further advised that it informed the family that their accommodation needs fall to be catered for through the direct provision service operated by the Reception and Integration Agency.

I understand that the family has applied recently to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform for permission to remain in the State on the basis of having an Irish born child. The question of their entitlement to rent supplement can be reviewed if necessary depending on the outcome of this application.

Photo of Bernard DurkanBernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 183: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the basis on which he has concluded that recovery of overpayment of dietary allowance by instalments of €10 per week is unlikely to cause hardship in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; the conditions under which the dietary allowance was awarded to this person in the first instance; the extent to which the qualifying rules were explained to this person; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4444/05]

Photo of Séamus BrennanSéamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At the time of application for a diet supplement the person concerned declared his sole source of income as being invalidity pension. The application form which he completed concludes with a declaration that the information given is complete and accurate and that the applicant undertakes to advise of any changes in circumstances, including income levels.

As the Deputy is aware from my previous replies regarding this case, the overpayment of diet supplement occurred owing to the failure of the person concerned to notify the community welfare officer that he had commenced employment. The Health Service Executive is obliged to seek to recover any overpayment of supplementary welfare allowances, which scheme it administers through the community welfare service on my behalf. Arrangements for recoupment of the diet supplement overpayment in question is a matter for resolution between the executive and the person concerned and I have no function in this regard.

In the opinion of the officers dealing with this case, recoupment of the overpayment by instalments of €10 per week is reasonable and will not cause hardship to the person concerned in view of his financial situation. His income comprises full rate invalidity pension and his earnings from part-time employment.

The person concerned has been assisted previously in respect of outstanding funeral expenses by way of a supplementary welfare exceptional needs payment.

Photo of Michael RingMichael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 184: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the increases which have been made to the electricity allowance in the household benefits package over the past four years; and the amount his Department pays to the ESB per unit. [4471/05]

Photo of Séamus BrennanSéamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The cost of the electricity allowance to my Department over the last four years has been as follows: 2001 —€51.3 million; 2002 —€62.6 million; 2003 —€75.4 million; 2004 —€88 million. It is estimated that the allowance will cost the Department €102.26 million in 2005.

The allowance covers the normal standing charges, urban or rural domestic, the public service obligation levy and 300 units of electricity per two monthly bill. The related VAT at 13.5% is also covered. Customers can carry a maximum of 900 unused units forward on their bill.

My Department has made a number of changes to the electricity allowance over the past four years. In 2002, the number of free units was increased to 1800 units per annum from 1500 and this applied from February of that year. From April 2004 the number of units applying to each of the six two monthly bills was set at 300 per bill. Until then 250 units applied to the three summer bills and 350 applied to the three winter bills. At the same time, the number of unused units which could be carried forward increased from 600 to 900.

To date, the Department has met all ESB increases in full, including the two most recent in October and January last which amounted to a total increase of 12.6%. From January 2005 the cost of a domestic unit of electricity is 12.20 cent and the Department pays this in respect of the 1,800 free units per annum.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.