Seymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 422: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will provide increased funding to old age pensioners and disabled persons in order that they can afford to buy heating oil for their homes; his views on whether it is impossible for some of these people to fund the €200 delivery by oil distributors; his further views on whether without such a gesture many of those people could finish up in limited hospital beds at a much higher cost; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32082/06]

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

The aim of the national fuel scheme is to assist householders on long –term social welfare or health service executive payments with meeting the cost of their heating needs during the winter fuel season. Fuel allowance as paid for 29 weeks from mid-September to mid April. The allowance represents a contribution towards a person's normal heating need.

Budget resources have been concentrated on providing significant real increases over and above inflation each year 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 the 29 weeks of the winter heating season. I consider that 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 those associated with heating.

A detailed review of the fuel allowance was carried out in 1998. This review looked at alternatives to the weekly payment method including a single lump sum payment. A survey of recipients with the allowance on a customer panel showed that the majority (58%) preferred weekly payment, 22% wanted a once-off lump sum payment, 12% favoured direct debit to a supplier while 8% would rather have two lump sum payments during the fuel season. The review recommended continuing with the weekly payment method.

It is estimated that some 274,000 people (151,000 with basic fuel allowance and 123,000 with smokeless fuel supplement) will benefit in 2006 at an estimated annual cost €125.1m. In addition to the fuel allowance, some 340,000 pensioner and other households qualify for electricity or gas allowances through the household benefits package, payable towards their heating, light and cooking costs throughout the year, at an overall cost of €119 million in 2006. The annual value of the Natural Gas Allowance per household is currently €313.17. This covers the supply charge and up to 1674 Kilowatt hours per annum. From October 1st the annual value has been increased to €516 per household. This will cover the recent 33.8 % increase in Natural Gas and also increase the kilowatt hours per annum from 1,674 to approx. 3,600 for each household.

The Electricity Allowance covers normal standing charges and up to 1800 units of electricity. The allowance also covers the VAT applicable to these charges. In the light of the recent increase in electricity charges the allowance will be increased to cover increased standing charges and the units will also increase from 1800 to 2400 with effect from January 2007.

If a person has an exceptional heating cost by virtue of a particular infirmity or medical condition which he/she is unable to meet out of household income, it is open to him/her to apply to the local community welfare officer for a special heating supplement under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme.

The purpose of the fuel allowance scheme is to provide an additional contribution towards heating costs throughout the winter months for those who most need it. While I am satisfied that the present payment arrangement is adequate in that regard, I will continue to keep the matter under review.

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

Question 423: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the basis on which occupational injury benefit is payable with particular reference to the actual period in employment and the extent of injury or disablement suffered; if he will consider [i]ex gratia[/i] payments in the case of persons suffering from pneumoconiosis to the extent of less than 20%; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32124/06]

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

Question 424: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he proposes to undertake a review of the medical qualification guidelines for occupational injury benefit in respect of former miners suffering from pneumoconiosis; the way in which compensation will be made payable having regard to other recipients of disablement arising from employment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32125/06]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 423 and 424 together.

Employment under a contract of service is insurable for Occupational Injuries Benefit under the Social Welfare Acts. A person must be insurable at PRSI class A, B, D, J or M on the day of their accident or the date of development of a prescribed disease. There are no conditions requiring a minimum number of contributions to have been paid as is the case with other Social Welfare contributory schemes. Disablement benefit, payable under the occupational injuries scheme, is a compensation payment for loss of faculty arising out of or in the course of insurable employment. The legislation provides entitlement to benefit for persons suffering from certain prescribed diseases which are listed in the legislation and where that person has contracted that disease in the course of their employment.

Where an insured person has developed a disease prescribed in the legislation and they were employed in any occupation prescribed in relation to that disease, within certain time limits, it will be presumed that the disease was due to the nature of the employment unless there is evidence to prove that the disease was contracted in some other way. In cases of prescribed diseases other than tuberculosis and pneumoconiosis the employment must have been within one month immediately preceding the date on which the person is accepted as having the disease. With regard to tuberculosis, the disease must have developed not less than six weeks after the date on which the person was first employed and not more than two years after the date on which they were last employed in a prescribed occupation associated the disease. There is no time limit set in respect of pneumoconiosis except that the person must have been employed in an occupation set out in the legislation for a period of two years. Periods in several qualifying employments may be aggregated. Periods prior to 1 May 1967, the commencement date for the Occupational Injuries Benefit Scheme, in similar employments may also be counted for this purpose.

The minimum employment period is required because pneumoconiosis is a lung disease caused by prolonged exposure to inorganic dusts. Usually it takes some years for this condition to develop and cause symptoms. By comparison, exposure to toxic fumes or smoke inhalation would usually cause immediate or rapid onset of symptoms. It has been the administrative practice to pay disablement benefit to pneumoconiosis and byssinosis customers by way of a pension only for assessments of 10% and less than 20%. I now propose to arrange for the necessary legislative change so that in future payment by gratuity will be an option available to customers claiming disablement benefit in respect of the prescribed occupational diseases pneumoconiosis and byssinosis where loss of faculty is assessed as being under 20% percent and not less than 10% in line with all other recipients of disablement benefit.

The medical qualification guidelines in respect of former miners are regarded as being acceptable and no review is considered necessary at this time.

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

Question 425: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he intends to provide for improvement in dental benefit in the context of the forthcoming budget; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32126/06]

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

The dental benefit scheme administered by my Department provides assistance towards the cost of dental services to people who satisfy certain statutory PRSI conditions, and to their dependent spouses. The PRSI contribution classes which qualify for dental benefit are A, E, H and P.

The scheme is a contributory social insurance scheme and the qualifying conditions are set at a level which maintains a reasonable balance between social insurance contributions received and the cost of the benefits concerned, which amounted to some €50m last year.

The operation of the dental benefit scheme is subject to ongoing monitoring by my Department. Any changes in the scheme would have financial implications which would have to be considered in a budgetary context having regard to the overall availability of resources.

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

Question 426: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he intends to provide for improvement in optical benefit in the context of the forthcoming budget; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32127/06]

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

The optical benefit scheme administered by my Department provides assistance towards the cost of optical services to people who satisfy certain statutory PRSI conditions, and to their dependent spouses. The PRSI contribution classes which qualify for optical benefit are A, E, H and P.

The scheme is a contributory social insurance scheme and the qualifying conditions are set at a level which maintains a reasonable balance between social insurance contributions received and the cost of the benefits concerned, which amounted to some €12m last year.

The operation of the optical benefit scheme is subject to ongoing monitoring by my Department. Any change in the scheme would have financial implications which would have to be considered in a budgetary context having regard to the overall availability of resources.

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

Question 427: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he proposes to adjust upwards income qualification limits for means-tested payments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32128/06]

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

I approached the last Budget with a number of key priorities in mind. In particular, I wanted to ensure that the Budget reflected the evolving new social agenda that has at its core a social welfare support system that is active instead of passive, that assists people to live with dignity and enables them to make a valuable contribution towards society. A key objective of this reform agenda is the removal of employment disincentives and the avoidance of welfare dependency.

In this context, I was pleased to be able to announce a number of significant and focused improvements to a range of means testing arrangements including: income and means disregards and the extension of tapered assessment as such; the introduction of a tapered withdrawal rate for disability allowance and blind pension recipients who engage in rehabilitative employment or self employment and have a weekly income over €120 and under €350; an increase in the income disregards for entitlement to carer's allowance, thereby fulfilling the commitment in the Programme for Government to enable all those earning up to average industrial earnings to qualify for carer's allowance; an increase in the upper income limit for the one parent family payment from €293 to €375 per week; the introduction of a 50% tapered withdrawal of earnings between €60 and €90 per week for persons in receipt of rent and mortgage interest supplement thereby increasing the incentive to take up employment or training or to pursue maintenance payments; an increase in the spouse's income disregard for entitlement to the qualified adult allowance (QAA) from €88.88 to €100 a week, as well as an increase of €30 per week to €250 for entitlement to a tapered QAA rate; significant changes to the family income supplement (FIS) thresholds designed particularly to boost child income support for larger low income families, and a weekly means disregard of €20 per week for non-contributory pensioners aged 66 or over, up from the €7.60 per week dating back to the 1970s as well as an innovative special earnings disregard of €100 per week.

The measures I have just outlined constitute a significant reform of the means assessment arrangements. I remain committed to modernising and simplifying the social welfare system and any further improvements will be considered in the context of the next Budget.

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

Question 430: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his views on offering payment of non-contributory pensions to Irish missionaries who have served overseas on the basis of establishing nominal domicile here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32131/06]

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

Question 431: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the extent to which he has examined further the possibility of paying non-contributory old age pensions to Irish missionaries who have served abroad but who only qualify for pensions if they return home; if an examination has been done into the number of such persons who might qualify for such payments in the event that they remain overseas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32132/06]

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

I propose to take Question Nos. 430 and 431 together.

My Department operates two main types of pension scheme; contributory and non-contributory payments. Contributory payments are paid on the basis of social insurance contributions made over a person's working life. Missionaries who have made sufficient social insurance contributions can qualify for an old age contributory pension. These pensions are payable abroad and so missionaries who qualify and who choose to settle overseas can receive a payment.

Non-contributory pensions are only payable where a person is resident in this country. Accordingly, missionaries who return here and who satisfy the habitual residence condition and a means test can qualify for a pension. Any move to pay the old age non-contributory pension outside the State could cause difficulties in the context of EU Regulations on social security arrangements for migrant workers generally.

The question of paying pensions to missionaries who remain abroad was first raised in the context of a submission to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Foreign Affairs by the Irish Missionary Union. In this submission, they estimated that there are approximately 800 missionaries who could receive a pension immediately, although this may be an underestimate as it is difficult to establish exactly how many missionaries would qualify.

Subsequently, officials of my Department made a presentation to the Committee on the issue. Following that presentation, the Chairperson of the Committee decided to form a working group to look at the issues raised in more detail.

A background report is currently being finalised between my Department and the Department of Foreign Affairs. The report examines the question of pensions for missionaries and the wider issue of social insurance for volunteer development workers in general. This will be forwarded shortly to the Joint Committee to inform the discussion. The options for providing pensions for missionaries will be looked at in the context of the final report of the Joint Committee.