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

Question 147: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when it is intended to ensure equity of treatment in respect of the disability allowance for all disabled clients in residential care. [12527/05]

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

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.

Effectively, persons who would otherwise have qualified for disability allowance continued to have their maintenance costs and, in certain cases, an element of spending money met separately rather than through a disability allowance payment. Since the take-over of the scheme by my Department, the restrictions on payment to persons in residential care have been progressively changed. From August 1999 existing disability allowance recipients who are living at home can retain their entitlement where they subsequently go into hospital or residential care. A review of illness and disability payment schemes completed by the 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. The Department 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, as an interim measure, a payment of €35 per week will be payable to the persons with disabilities who are affected by the current restriction with effect from June 2005. It was noted that there were a number of complex practical and administrative issues remain to be resolved with the Department of Health and Children and the health boards, such as the determination, as appropriate, of what proportion of the allowance could be retained by the institution as a contribution towards the resident's care and maintenance and the need to avoid any duplication of funding. It is my intention to progress the outstanding issues as a priority, so that all persons with disabilities can become entitled, as soon as possible, to the full rate of disability allowance irrespective of their residential status.

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

Question 148: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the cost of extending the fuel allowance for a further month; and if he will consider making such a change in view of the rapidly escalating cost of fuel and the very targeted nature of this allowance. [12572/05]

Pat Carey (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 153: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if the period of the free fuel allowance will be extended by a period of three weeks at the beginning or end of the periods involved; the cost of such an extension; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12616/05]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 148 and 153 together.

The aim of the national fuel scheme is to assist householders who are in receipt of long-term social welfare or health board payments with their additional heating needs during the winter season. Under the scheme an allowance of €9.00 per week —€12.90 per week in designated smokeless fuel areas — is paid to eligible households during the 29-week period from mid-October to the end of April each year. About 274,000 households will receive fuel allowances during 2005 at an estimated cost of some €84.5 million. Some 300,000 pensioner and other households qualify for electricity or gas allowances through the household benefit package, payable towards their heating, light and cooking costs throughout the year. There is also a facility available through the supplementary welfare allowance scheme to assist people in certain circumstances who have special heating needs. If the duration of the winter heating season for fuel allowance purposes was to be extended for a further three weeks it would cost an extra €8.7 million. Extending the scheme by one calendar month would cost an estimated €12.6 million extra. The initial extra cost of any such extension in the scheme duration in the year of introduction would depend on whether it was to be applied at the start or end of the existing winter heating season.

An important ongoing policy objective of this Government is to provide real increases in payment rates each year for people who depend on social welfare income support, to ensure that they can experience some improvement in their quality of life, including provision of adequate heating. In this regard, the significant increases in primary social welfare payment rates for pensioners and other groups this year and in recent years have improved their income situation considerably in real terms relative to fuel cost increases and to price inflation generally. On this basis, I have no plans at present to extend the annual duration of the fuel allowance scheme. Any such change to the scheme would have to be considered in a budget context, and in the light of other priorities.

Michael Noonan (Limerick East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 149: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if the arrangements described by him in reply to Question No. 528 of 12 April 2005 also apply to ancillary staff in schools such as caretakers, general operatives and secretarial staff who are not party to the arrangements made by the teaching unions; if full social insurance credit is given to such workers who earn leave by service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12575/05]

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

I understand from my colleague, the Minister for Education and Science, that there are two schemes dealing with the provision of caretaking and secretarial duties. Ancillary staff employed by schools whose salary costs are paid directly, or recouped from the Department of Education and Science and who work for the full year, including during school holidays, are entitled to agreed levels of annual leave. The ancillary staff who work in schools in receipt of grant aid from the Department of Education and Science are employees of the individual schools and that Department has no role in determining their terms of employment and pay. It is a matter for individual schools to decide how best to apply the funding to suit a school's particular needs.

With regard to the entitlement for annual leave and related social insurance issues, the employment of any employee, including those providing ancillary support in schools, must be in compliance with general conditions set down under both employment rights and social welfare legislation. I am not aware of any special arrangements for annual leave in place for these staff affecting social insurance. A day for which an employee either receives, or has an entitlement to holiday pay is not regarded as a day of unemployment. Annual leave is counted as additional periods of insurable employment.