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

Question 187: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of non-contributory pension applications received in the past 12 months; the number approved, refused or pending; the way in which this figure compares with the previous year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6266/05]

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

The figures required by the Deputy are as follows:

These figures refer to the total of claims for old age non-contributory pension, widow/er's non-contributory pension and blind pension.

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

Question 188: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of applications for the carer's allowance received in the past 12 months; the number refused, approved or pending; the way in which this figure compares with the previous year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6267/05]

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

My Department awarded 4,739 and refused 2,728 carer's allowance applications in 2004 compared to 3,984 and 2,335, respectively, in 2003.

There were 7,817 applications for carer's allowance in 2004, compared to 7,233 in 2003. Despite the 8% increase in the number of claims submitted, the number of claims pending decision fell from 1,440 at the end of 2003 to 1,053 at the end of 2004.

The number of persons receiving a carer's allowance has increased from 21,326 at the end of 2003 to 23,049 at week ending 31 December 2004. Expenditure on the scheme, has increased from €183.3 million in 2003 to €210.3 million in 2004.

Support of carers has been a priority of Government since 1997. Payments to carers have been improved over that period and qualifying conditions for carer's allowance have been significantly eased, coverage of the scheme has been extended and new schemes such as the respite care payment have been introduced and enhanced. The further development of support for carers continues to be a priority for me and for Government.

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

Question 190: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason his Department claims that a person (details supplied) in County Mayo is not suffering a loss of earnings and will not allow their claim for additional unemployment benefit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6293/05]

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

The person concerned applied for unemployment benefit on 12 January 2005.

One of the conditions for receipt of unemployment benefit is that a person must have sustained a substantial loss of employment and a reduction in earnings.

Information provided by the employer, in this case, indicated that although there had been a reduction in the average number of days per week worked by the person concerned, there had been no reduction in earnings. Accordingly, a deciding officer disallowed the unemployment benefit claim of the person concerned from 12 January 2005, on the grounds that he had not suffered a loss of earnings.

This position was outlined in my reply to the Deputy's previous question in relation to this case on 16 February 2005.

On receipt of the Deputy's current question, further inquiries were made in the case. From contact with the employer it now transpires that the person concerned may have suffered neither a loss of earnings nor a loss of employment.

It is open to the person concerned to appeal the deciding officer's decision and a form for this purpose may be obtained from his social welfare local office.

Under social welfare legislation, decisions in relation to 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.

Mary Upton (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 191: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will review the way in which his Department awards pensioners the back money they are issued following a budget increase in order to provide a breakdown of the way in which this single, relatively large amount is made up [6298/05]

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

Increases in pensions are announced in the budget in December each year. This leaves my Department just four weeks to adjust its payments system before the increases are due to be paid in January.

Pensioners who receive their payments by electronic funds transfer, EFT, into their bank accounts or by electronic information transfer, ETT, at their local post office receive their increases on time and no arrears arise.

Pensioners who receive their payments by personalised payable orders, PPO, are treated differently. Because of the nature and the volume of payments involved, books containing 26 orders issue to them. In general these books are issued in bulk each April and October.

It would not be feasible to recall all of these books in December and to replace them with books containing orders with the increases. In order to minimise the delay in issuing the increases to these pensioners my Department issues a lump sum each February which covers the increase due for the period January to April.

Because of the large variety of rates which are paid to different pensioners, it is not possible to provide a detailed breakdown of the components that make up the total amount of back money paid in each individual case.

However, each December my Department issues a press release in which details of the social welfare increases are announced. Information is also included of how the increases will be paid in the case of our customers.

My Department has a policy of reviewing procedures on an ongoing basis to identify potential for improvement. In this regard, the existing arrangements for payment of budget arrears to pensioners using the PPO book payment method are being kept under review.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 193: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number receiving the child dependant allowance at the various rates; the amount it would cost to award the full rate to all recipients; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6321/05]

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

There are currently three different weekly rates of child dependant increases payable to social welfare recipients, €16.80, €19.30 and €21.60, depending on the type of payment. Half rate child dependant increase may also be paid in respect of a child in certain circumstances, for example where both of the child's parents are receiving a social welfare payment, or where one parent has earnings over a prescribed amount.

To standardise the three main rates of increases at the highest rate of €21.60 would mean that approximately 243,000 full rate payments and 93,000 half rate payments would be increased at a cost of approximately €60 million annually.