Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 307: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the steps he intends to take following the recent claim by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul that high fuel costs mean many lower income persons often have to choose between health and food. [37623/05]

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

A representative of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul was quoted in the press last week stating that the society's big concern was that some people would need to juggle between paying for heat and eating this winter. He called for a doubling of the social welfare fuel allowance.

Fuel allowances are supplementary entitlements payable over the winter months to people in receipt of pensions and other qualifying social welfare schemes. Some 274,000 people receive this allowance at an aggregate cost of €85.4 million this year. Fuel allowances are incorporated in weekly pension and other basic payments. The adequacy of the total amount paid each week to an individual is what matters most to them, that is, the total value of the basic pension plus the fuel allowance.

The Government's objective is to ensure that a social welfare recipient's total weekly income is sufficient to meet all of their basic living needs, including food and heating costs. In recent years, very significant budget resources have been concentrated on providing real increases over and above inflation in all primary social welfare pension, benefit and assistance rates. This is a more costly approach than increasing fuel allowances because the increase is paid for the full year and not just for the 29 weeks of the winter heating season. This approach delivers a better outcome for pensioners and others by substantially increasing their income in real terms over the whole year, to better assist them in meeting their normal basic living costs, including heating.

In addition, the household benefit allowances for electricity or gas, costing €109 million in 2005, have also been increased fully in line with electricity and gas prices in the period. They are payable all year round to assist eligible pensioners, carers and disabled people with their heating and related costs. I acknowledge that some home heating costs generally have increased significantly over the past year in particular. For that reason, I am keeping the adequacy of the overall system, including the fuel allowance scheme, under close review. Given the significant potential extra scheme costs involved, any increases in fuel allowance rates are matters that have to be considered in the context of the forthcoming budget and the scale of general social welfare rate increases to be provided then.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 308: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will examine the situation of a job initiative worker (details supplied) whose deserted wife's benefit has been removed due to the operation of a very low income disregard; if this disregard will be increased to encourage women to be able to provide better for their families by taking up work. [37628/05]

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 309: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will investigate the situation of job initiative workers who hold a deserted wife's allowance and who are losing a portion of all of their deserted wife's allowance due to the failure to increase the income disregard for eight budgets and who believe they are being treated very unfairly due to the income limit which is not applicable to deserted wife's allowance recipients who claimed before 30 August 1992. [37629/05]

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 310: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will examine the situation of a job initiative worker (details supplied) whose deserted wife's benefit is being cut due to the operation of a very low income disregard for deserted wife's benefit recipients after 30 August 1992; if this disregard will be increased to encourage women to be able to provide better for their families by taking up work. [37630/05]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 308 to 310, inclusive, together.

The job initiative programme is one of a number of FÁS schemes in which lone parents may participate. Under the programme full-time employment is provided in the social economy for individuals who are over 35 years and fulfil certain criteria. With effect from 1 January 2005, job initiative employees earn a minimum of €346.40 for their 39-hour week, which is substantially more than the national minimum wage. In addition to their basic income earned, job initiative employees with families may be entitled to family income supplement, a weekly payment for families, including one-parent families, at work on low pay. All employees working a minimum of 19 hours per week and with at least one qualifying child are entitled to apply, provided the family income is below the qualifying income limit. For the current year, qualifying income limits for families start at €446 per week for a family with one child and increase to €623 per week for families with eight or more children.

The Deputy is correct in that job initiative employees who were in receipt of deserted wife's benefit and whose initial claim for benefit was made after 30 August 1992 will lose entitlement to their social welfare payment from 1 January 2006 provided their employment income for 2005 is more than the upper income threshold of €17,776.33 per annum. This income limit in itself is higher than that currently enjoyed by recipients of the one parent family payment.