Pádraic McCormack (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 61: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the plans he has to amend the back to work allowance; the changes to same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23105/06]

Damien English (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 106: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of people availing of the very long term unemployed programme; the numbers participating in the programme each year respectively since the year 2000; the cost of the scheme for same; if he has conducted any reviews of the scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23093/06]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 61 and 106 together.

The Back to Work Allowance Scheme is part of my Department's programme of initiatives designed to assist long term unemployed people, lone parents, people with disabilities and other social welfare recipients to return to the active labour force. There are two strands to the scheme, the Back to Work Enterprise Allowance for the self-employed and the Back to Work Allowance for employees. The allowance was introduced in September 1993 when long term unemployment stood at 8.9%. In its early years the scheme proved very effective in helping people who had been long-term unemployed to return to the labour force.

The scheme reached its peak in October 2000, when there were 39,343 participants, compared to 8,659 at the end of last month. The lower numbers on the scheme now reflect our success in reducing long-term unemployment to historically low levels.

An independent evaluation of the BTW programme was conducted on behalf of my Department by Indecon International Economic Consultants in 2000. In recognition of the difficulties being experienced by some people returning to the labour force after 3 or 5 years of attachment to the live register, the qualifying period for access to both the employment and self-employment strands of Back to Work was reduced to 2 years with effect from March 2006. Also with effect from March 2006 periods spent on Supplementary Welfare Allowance or in the Direct Provision System count towards the qualifying period for Back to Work Allowance.

My Department will monitor the effect of these changes on the take up of the scheme. In addition the scheme will be monitored to ensure its relevance to current labour market conditions and to ensure that it continues to assist those furthest from the labour market to gain a foothold into sustainable employment or self-employment. In the meantime, I have no plans to make further changes to the scheme at this time.

Details of the numbers of participants and of expenditure on the scheme in the period 2000 to 2005 are set out in the table.

Damien English (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 62: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his views on allowing participants of the part-time job incentive scheme to retain secondary benefits; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23092/06]

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

The part-time job incentive is a weekly in-work income supplement which provides an allowance for people who are in receipt of long-term unemployment assistance and employed on a part-time basis for up to 24 hours per week, provided they continue to make efforts to find full-time work. The allowance is not taxable or subject to PRSI. There is no income limit to continued receipt of the allowance. At present, there are 239 recipients countrywide.

The low take up of this allowance is primarily due to the introduction and improvements in alternative, more favourable employment support measures over the years, in particular the back to work programme and the family income supplement. For instance, if the employment is likely to develop into a lasting job for at least 20 hours per week, the back to work scheme is a better option than the part-time job incentive, as it enables the recipient to keep a substantial part of the unemployment payment, tapered over three years. Also, as the back to work programme is a time-limited transitional payment, arrangements are in place for the retention of secondary benefits, subject to certain income limits.

A further alternative to the part-time job incentive is the family income supplement, where low-income employees with children who work more than 19 hours per week or 38 hours per fortnight receive an in-work income support. This is currently paid to 18,647 recipients at an average weekly payment of EUR102.32.

Retention of secondary benefits applies for a limited period in specified circumstances, such as where a qualified person returns to full-time work after twelve months unemployed, or while participating in certain educational or training programmes. There is no provision for such an arrangement where a person is in receipt of an ongoing in-work income support such as the part-time job allowance or the family income supplement.

I have no plans at present to introduce any change in these arrangements. Any such change would have to be considered in a budgetary context and in the context of competing priorities.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 63: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if, in view of the difficulties experienced by grandparents looking after their addict son or daughter's children, he will review the access criteria for these grandparents in relation to the orphans allowance and increase same to be in line with the foster allowance. [23026/06]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 115: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the difficulty grandparents looking after the children of their addict sons or daughters have especially regarding the area of abandonment; and if he proposes to review the criteria and the amount paid by the orphan's allowance. [23027/06]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 63 and 115 together.

The primary objective of the orphan's payments administered by my Department is to provide income support in respect of children whose parents are deceased or who are unable and have failed to provide for them. The definition of an orphan for the purpose of the allowance was extended in 1995 specifically to include children where the parents are still alive but have abandoned or refused or failed to provide for them. This was seen as a necessary response to changes in family and social circumstances.

Current figures indicate that there are approximately 1000 recipients of the orphan's contributory allowance and a further 600 recipients of the orphan's non-contributory pension. Grandparents can and do claim for their children in the circumstances outlined by the Deputy. Indeed, informal statistics compiled by officials in my Department suggest that grandparents may make up between 40 and 50% of all claimants in respect of these schemes. My Department's orphans' payments provide a rate of payment of €138 per week. This is a substantially higher rate compared with other payments made by my Department in respect of children.

Foster carers, on the other hand, operate within a very specific framework and the foster care allowance is intended, not only to provide income support, but to recompense foster carers for the expense incurred in relation to looking after a child who would otherwise be in institutional care. Foster carers are therefore subject to rigorous scrutiny and ongoing monitoring by the health boards, and the children in their care are subject to a care plan.

There are no plans to review either the eligibility criteria in relation to the schemes, or standardise the rates of payment under these schemes.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 64: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he has intentions of making the tapered withdrawal of rent supplement available to all claimants. [23007/06]

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

The supplementary welfare allowance scheme, which is administered on my behalf by the community welfare division of the Health Service Executive, provides for the payment of a rent supplement to assist eligible people who are unable to provide for their immediate accommodation needs from their own resources and who do not have accommodation available to them from any other source.

My Department is very conscious of the need to facilitate persons in receipt of social welfare payments to take up employment and other progression opportunities. There are currently two separate types of tapering arrangements in place to ensure that rent supplement is structured to support this objective. The first of these tapers the amount of rent supplement by reference to the household's overall income. This applies under the standard means test, which is available to all persons in part-time employment including people on approved employment schemes. The amount of rent supplement payable is reduced as the person's earnings increase.

The other tapering arrangement tapers the amount of rent supplement over time rather than by reference to income. This benefits people participating on certain approved employment schemes or those returning to full-time employment after a period of twelve months unemployment. Under this arrangement, the amount of rent supplement payable is reduced out over a four year period, subject to certain conditions.

In cases where a person qualifies for both tapering arrangements, they can take up the arrangement that is most beneficial to them. Increasingly, this is the taper based on income which applies under the standard rules of the rent supplement scheme. Under those rules, rent or mortgage interest supplements are calculated to ensure that an eligible person, after the payment of rent or mortgage interest, has an income equal to the rate of supplementary welfare allowance appropriate to his or her family circumstances, less a minimum contribution of EUR13 which each recipient is required to pay from his or her own resources.

Where a person avails of an employment opportunity and the employment is less than 30 hours per week, up to EUR60 per week is disregarded and 50% of additional income between EUR60 and EUR90 per week is also disregarded in the means test thus ensuring a tapered withdrawal of assistance as a person's earnings increase. In addition, any amount of family income supplement payable is disregarded in the standard means test, ensuring that a person is better off as a result of taking up such an opportunity. For those participating in approved employment schemes, any lunch or travel allowances that are paid may also be disregarded. In addition, certain training courses now provide a childcare allowance to participants, Budget 2006 provided that these childcare allowances are to be treated in the same manner as a lunch or travel allowance and disregarded.

For those participating on certain approved employment schemes or to those returning to full-time employment after a period of twelve months unemployment they may retain a proportion of their rent supplement payment on a tapered basis over a four year period subject to a household income limit of EUR317.43 per week. Under these arrangements 75% of the supplement is retained in year one, 50% in year two with 25% retained in years three and four. Significant improvements have been made to the means test subsequently.

Back to work allowance and family income supplement, in cases where one or both of these are in payment, are disregarded in the assessment of the EUR317.43 weekly income limit. PRSI and reasonable travelling expenses are also disregarded in the means test. In effect this means that people who commence employment through a back to work scheme, following a period of unemployment, can have a weekly household income significantly in excess of the EUR317.43 limit and still qualify to retain 75% of their rent or mortgage interest supplement.

Overall I consider that the current tapered withdrawal arrangements for the rent supplement ensure that people have a financial incentive to take up both training and employment opportunities, but I will continue to keep the issue under review. I would also mention that these arrangements are being considered further in the context of a policy review of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme which is due to be completed shortly.