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

Question 538: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if the grant of the orphan's allowance for two persons (details supplied) in Dublin 10 will be backdated to the date of the original application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10716/05]

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

The grandmother of the children concerned made a claim for orphan's (non-contributory) pension on 7 November 2001. The claim was disallowed by a deciding officer on the grounds that the children were not orphans within the meaning of the relevant social welfare legislation.

Following the death of the grandmother the person concerned made an application for orphan's (non-contributory) pension on 4 September 2003. The application was initially disallowed by a deciding officer but, following an oral hearing of an appeal against the decision, an appeals officer awarded the pension in respect of two qualified children with effect from 6 June 2003. The person concerned is in receipt of €242 per week in respect of the two children. The circumstances pertaining to her claim differ from those that pertained during the period 2001 to June 2003. Therefore, there are no grounds for back-dating the payment to the person concerned for a period prior to June 2003.

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

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 539: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if his Department proposes to raise the household income limit of €317.43 for retention of secondary benefits to those on back to work schemes to bring it in line with inflation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10733/05]

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

Social welfare programmes aim to be responsive to the needs of those who depend on income maintenance support while providing incentives to assist people to become more independent financially, particularly through employment. A number of measures have been introduced in recent years to remove disincentives to taking up employment and to assist in the transition from welfare to work. These measures include special means disregards and tapered withdrawal of benefits as earnings increase, and employment support schemes such as the back to work programme.

The income limit referred to by the Deputy applies to people who take up employment under approved employment schemes and relates only to retention of secondary benefits, such as rent supplement. Such people are entitled to retain certain social welfare and other secondary benefits in total or in part for the duration of the employment scheme, subject to certain conditions. There is no income limit on the back to work allowance scheme itself.

For most people the most significant secondary benefit is rent or mortgage interest supplement, which is paid under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. An income limit of €317.43 per week applies to the retention of these supplements. While this income limit has not changed since its introduction, significant other improvements have been made to the means test. Back to work allowance and family income supplement, in cases where one or both of these are in payment, are now disregarded in the assessment of the €317.43 weekly income limit. PRSI and reasonable travelling expenses are also disregarded in the means test. In effect, this means that people who had been unemployed and who commence employment through the back to work scheme can have a weekly household income significantly in excess of the €317.43 limit in question and still qualify to retain 75% of their rent or mortgage interest supplement. For example, in the first year of their participation in the back to work scheme, a single person can have combined income from the back to work allowance and wages of €429 per week while a couple with two children can have a weekly income of €528.25.

Other improvements have also been made to the retention arrangements. The period for which rent or mortgage interest supplement may be retained has been extended to four years on a tapered basis, that is, 75% in year one, 50% in year two and 25% in years three and four. In addition, the maximum payment limit of €317.43 per month on the amount of supplement payable has been abolished for people on approved schemes. As a consequence of these improvements, many families retain more of their rent or mortgage interest supplement than had been the case prior to these changes taking place.

People availing of an employment support scheme may opt to be assessed under either standard supplementary welfare allowance rules or under the special retention rules, and will be entitled to receive payment under whichever is the more favourable option for them. A person on a community employment scheme or other back to work scheme whose household income is above the €317.43 limit for retention of secondary benefits may still qualify for rent supplement under the standard rules. In that context, I introduced amending regulations in January 2005 to increase the income disregard in the standard rules of the scheme from €50 to €60 per week.

Overall, I consider that the current eligibility thresholds and disregards, together with improvements in the standard rules of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme, ensure that people have a financial incentive to take up back to work opportunities. 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.

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

Question 540: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the origin of the anomaly whereby persons with a disability entering residential care before 1999 lost most of their disability allowance and their disabled persons maintenance allowance and those entering care post 1999 retained the full allowance. [10754/05]

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

Question 541: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he has plans to repay disabled person's maintenance allowances and disability allowances to persons who, prior to 1999 lost their allowance on entering residential care. [10755/05]

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

I propose to take Question Nos. 540 and 541 together.

Responsibility for the disabled person's maintenance allowance, DPMA, scheme was transferred from the Department of Health and Children and the health boards to the Department of Social and Family Affairs in October 1996. On the transfer of the scheme the existing qualifying conditions were retained and the scheme was renamed disability allowance.

One of the qualifying conditions applying to the former DPMA scheme was that the payment could not be made to people who were in residential care where the cost of the person's maintenance was met in whole or in part by a health board. Since 1999 the restrictions on payment to persons in residential care have been progressively relaxed. From August 1999 existing disability allowance recipients living at home can retain their entitlement where they subsequently go into hospital or residential care.

A wide-ranging review of illness and disability payment schemes completed by my Department in September 2003 recommended the removal of the residential care disqualification for disability allowance purposes. The working group which oversaw the review recognised that the removal would have a range of implications, and that, in the absence of reliable data on the numbers involved and the actual funding arrangements currently in place, it was not possible to fully assess the likely impact or cost of such a move.

Budget 2003 provided for the take-over by my Department of the discretionary "pocket money" allowances paid to people with disabilities in residential care who are not entitled to disability allowance and for the standardisation of the level of these allowances. My Department then undertook an information gathering process with the health boards with a view to arranging for the transfer of responsibility for the payment of these allowances and of the funds involved.

In budget 2005, I announced that, as an interim measure, a payment of €35 a week will be payable to the persons with disabilities who are affected by the current restriction with effect from June 2005.

There are a number of practical and administrative issues to be resolved with the Department of Health and Children, including the question of the appropriate contribution to be made by residents of institutions towards care and maintenance. It is my intention that the outstanding issues will be progressed as a matter of urgency. The issue of repayments does not arise in this instance.

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

Question 543: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when rent allowance will be awarded to a person (details supplied) in County Galway; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10839/05]

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

Rent supplements are provided through the supplementary welfare allowance scheme which is administered on my behalf by the community welfare division of the Health Service Executive. The western area of the executive has advised that it is awaiting details of a housing needs assessment being undertaken by Galway City Council in respect of the person concerned. When the outcome of this assessment is known the executive will be in a position to make a determination on her application for rent supplement.