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

Question 208: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will review the decision to reduce the disability allowance of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 3. [15995/05]

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

Under the legislative provisions that apply to disability allowance all income which the claimant has, subject to certain exceptions, is assessable as means. Following a review, the person concerned was assessed with means of €7.74 per week derived from an occupational pension. Occupational and private pensions are assessable as means in determining entitlement to disability allowance. Her disability allowance was reduced to €143.80 per week with effect from 11 May 2005. She was notified of her revised entitlement and of her right of appeal to the independent social welfare appeals office. Her case has been forwarded to the appeals 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.

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

Question 209: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will consider increasing the family income supplement payment to persons whose income has decreased since first being awarded FIS and who still qualify for FIS; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16052/05]

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

The family income supplement, FIS, scheme is designed to provide an incentive for low paid workers with families to take up or remain in full-time employment. An integral feature of the scheme is that once the level of the FIS payment is determined, it continues to be payable at that level for a period of 52 weeks provided that the claimant remains in employment. However, the rate of payment can be amended where an additional child is born in the course of the 52 weeks.

A key advantage of this approach, which is unique to the FIS scheme, is that claimants can be certain that they will receive a guaranteed level of income support throughout the period. This certainty is important to the success of the scheme in providing a real incentive to workers with families to avail of employment opportunities.

On balance, the net impact of the present approach is likely to be significantly positive for workers, given that wage movements are likely to rise rather than fall in the majority of cases during the year. The impact of more regular reviews would most likely be lower payments for most FIS recipients, employers and my Department.

Any change in the existing arrangements would require legislative change. Given the nature and purpose of the FIS scheme, I am not convinced that any such change would be appropriate.

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 210: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason the supplementary rent allowance has been stopped for a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; the way in which this person has declared all income to his Department had they been assessed as having an overpayment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16102/05]

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. Neither I nor my Department has any function in relation to decisions on individual entitlements.

The Dublin-mid Leinster area of the executive has advised that, during a recent routine review of this case, it became aware that the person concerned was in receipt of one-parent family payment. The previous non-disclosure by her of this additional income has given rise to a significant overpayment of rent supplement to her over a six-month period.

The executive has written to the person concerned confirming her reduced rent supplement entitlement and the amount of the overpayment involved. She was informed that payment of her rent supplement would be suspended until she contacted the community welfare officer to agree a repayment schedule for the overpayment amount. She has not made contact with the officer to date. Payment of her rent supplement remains suspended accordingly.