Gay Mitchell (Dublin South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 132: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when the living alone allowance was last increased; and if he will now index the allowance. [6372/05]

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

The living alone allowance is an additional payment of €7.70 per week made to people aged 66 years or over who are in receipt of certain social welfare type payments and who are living alone. It is also available to people under 66 years of age who are living alone and are receiving payments under one of a number of invalidity type schemes.

The allowance was last increased in 1996. For many years, the policy in relation to support for pensioners has been to commit resources to improving the personal pension rates for all pensioners, rather than supplementary payments such as the living alone allowance. This approach ensures that the position of all our pensioners is improved. Any change in policy in relation to the living alone allowance would have to be considered in a budgetary context.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 133: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will report on the actual number of women aged 70 and over who have no independent means, property or pension; if he will consider in view of this unacceptable situation, the introduction of a guaranteed basic income which would be an entitlement on the basis of being a citizen of the State, as recommended by the Conference of Religious of Ireland. [6380/05]

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

Data from the Central Statistics Office show there were 180,800 women aged 70 and over in the State in 2003. Almost 157,000, or 87%, of those women received social welfare payments in their own right, with further numbers of women being paid as qualified adults on their spouse's pension. This means that the majority of women over 70 years of age and resident in Ireland are receiving social welfare support.

Where the payments being made are contributory pensions, no reference is made to any additional income or assets a person may have, as it is not assessable. In the case of assistance based schemes or receiving a payment as a qualified adult, the payment is made subject to a means test and levels may be reduced by reference to means. However, given the disregards before income or capital are assessed as means, many people may have additional income or assets without affecting their rate of payment. No person in the State, without means, would be left without necessary financial support.

A Green Paper on basic income was published in 2002 by the Department of the Taoiseach to contribute to an informed debate among the wider community on the benefits of basic income, while also identifying the effects of such an approach.

The introduction of a basic income system in Ireland would represent not only a fundamental shift in the way in which we organise social protection in this country, but would also imply a radical overhaul of the taxation system. The Green Paper summarises those implications together with identifying the main advantages and disadvantages associated with the proposal.

The key test in any radical proposal of this nature is whether or not the gains which are claimed can be achieved through a more gradual reform of the existing system. The Commission on Social Welfare in 1986 briefly considered a basic income type approach but rejected these in favour of a reform of the existing systems. Proponents of a basic income system would have to make a convincing case as to why such improvements cannot continue to be made in the context of the current system, instead of opting for the uncertainties and risks of a basic income approach.

In this context, the Government has committed, under An Agreed Programme for Government and Sustaining Progress, to increasing the payment for qualified adults age 66 or over to the same level as the personal rate of the old age non-contributory pension at an estimated cost of €44 million. Considerable progress has already been made in this regard with the qualified adult allowance on the contributory payment now standing at €138.50 or 83% of the maximum rate of old age non-contributory pension, currently €166.00 per week. Overall, increases in the qualified adult allowance on the old age contributory pension amount to €56.47 per week since April 2000. At the same time, the qualified adult allowance on the old age non-contributory pension has increased by €44.05 per week and now stands at 66% of the full personal rate.

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

Question 134: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo will be approved for the household benefits package. [6405/05]

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

The person concerned applied for an electricity allowance and a free television licence on 1 December 2004. As her spouse was already in receipt of both these allowances since April 2000 her application was refused.

The household had a telephone which was in the name of the applicant's son until 12 January 2005. When my Department was informed that the name had been changed on the bill to that of the person concerned, she was awarded a telephone allowance from that date. Eircom will be notified shortly of the award of the allowance so it can apply the allowance to her account.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 135: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will review his Department's policy in respect of the procedures for applying for unemployment benefit for workers who lose part of their week for a temporary time only due to seasonal or other factors; if he will lift the compulsion on such applicants to seek another full-time post while they await for their existing employment to return to full-time, in view of the fact that they are very unlikely to find a full-time post with equivalent or better wages lasting for only a few weeks and that there are few circumstances in which it would be in their interest to move; and if he will examine the case of a person (details supplied) as an example of the way in which this over-bureaucratic procedure works in practice. [6438/05]

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

The unemployment benefit scheme is designed to provide income support for people who have lost employment and who are unable for find alternative employment.

Social welfare legislation provides that, in order to be entitled to an unemployment payment, a person must prove, inter alia, that he or she is available for full-time employment and genuinely seeking work. There is an onus on each person to demonstrate, on an ongoing basis, that these conditions are met by showing that he or she is making reasonable efforts to secure full-time employment or self-employment.

In the case of a person who suffers a temporary reduction in his or her working week, he or she must be available for and seeking work for the period in which he or she is not employed. A person who, for example, is put on a three day week, must be making efforts to find work for the other days of the week. Each case is decided on its own merits within the framework of the relevant legislation.

The person concerned made a claim for unemployment benefit on 11 February 2005 as her working week was reduced from six days to three days. Her claim was allowed by a deciding officer subject to her continuing to satisfy the qualifying conditions including, in particular, that she is fully unemployed for at least three days in any period of six consecutive days.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 136: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if a person (details supplied) in Dublin 11, in receipt of one-parent family payment, would lose income as a result of taking up a job offer on a community employment scheme of €190 per week or an hourly wage rate of less than €10; his views on whether the impact on this person's rent supplement constitutes a major disincentive to take up employment; and if, in view of this, he will immediately review the €317.43 limit on earnings rule in respect of rent supplement and abolish this poverty trap. [6439/05]

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

The policy on one-parent family payment is to encourage and facilitate lone parents in moving into the paid labour force so that they may avoid long-term welfare dependency. The main element of this policy is an earnings disregard of €146.50 per week. This disregard is designed to help towards expenses incurred from taking up employment such as travel, child minding etc. In addition, only half of any earnings above this threshold are assessed as means, up to the maximum earnings of €293.00 per week. In the case of the person concerned, as her earnings will exceed the disregard of €146.50, her one parent family payment rate would be reduced. On the basis of the information supplied by the Deputy, the person concerned would have a reduction of the order of €15 on her weekly payment.

Rent supplements are provided for under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. Supplementary welfare allowance is payable to people on community employment, subject to the standard means test. Under standard assessment rules, rent supplements are calculated to ensure that an eligible person, after the payment of rent, has an income equal to the rate of supplementary welfare allowance appropriate to his or her family circumstances, less a minimum contribution of €13 which each recipient is required to pay from his or her own resources. Up to €60 in respect of additional income from part-time employment is disregarded in the means test, thus ensuring that a person is better off as a result of taking up such an opportunity. Community employment is regarded as part-time employment for these purposes.

On the basis of the information supplied by the Deputy, the person concerned would have a reduction in rent supplement of the order of €115 per week. Taking this and the reduction in her one-parent family payment into account, she would be €60 per week better off overall if she takes up the CE place.

The current eligibility thresholds and disregards, together with improvements in the standard rules of the SWA scheme, are designed to ensure that people have a financial incentive to take up employment opportunities, and that there is a safeguard in place to provide rent supplement in any exceptional hardship that may arise. The effectiveness of these arrangements will be considered further in the context of a review of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme, which my Department is undertaking during 2005.

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

Question 137: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason rent support has been reduced in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6467/05]

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

In my reply to previous parliamentary questions from the Deputy on 26 January 2005 on this case, I informed him that the Health Service Executive had advised that the rent supplement in payment to the person concerned was due for review to take account of the fact that she had begun a second year of her community employment scheme. This was necessary because her entitlement to rent supplement derived from the rules governing retention of the payment for people on community employment schemes. Those rules provide that a person may retain 75% of their payment for one year and 50% in the following year.

This review has been completed. The level of her household income now exceeds the €317.43 limit which allows people on approved employment schemes to retain a portion of their rent supplement on a tapered basis. Nonetheless, as a community employment participant the person concerned is entitled to be assessed for rent supplement under standard supplementary welfare allowance rules.

The executive has informed my Department that, on further examination of the case, it has found that amount of rent supplement issued to the person concerned in respect of February 2005 was incorrectly calculated. Under the standard assessment rules which should have applied in her case, she is entitled to a monthly rent supplement of €322.50. A higher amount was issued to her in error. The executive is arranging to contact the person concerned to ensure that the correct amount of supplement is paid to her in future while her community employment continues. Her rent supplement will be further reviewed when that employment ceases in due course.