Written answers
Tuesday, 7 November 2006
Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government
Services for People with Disabilities
8:00 pm
Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Question 521: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the amount of funding returned to his Department by local authorities in 2005 from the disabled persons and essential repairs grant funds in each county; the local authorities that impose an income test to these grants schemes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36658/06]
Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Question 522: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if the review of the operation of the disabled persons grant scheme has concluded; if it is intended that his Department will fully fund the scheme rather than relying on part funding by local authorities; when he will publish the results of the review; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36660/06]
Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I propose to take Questions Nos. 521 and 522 together.
The tabular statement gives details of the combined capital allocation for disabled persons and essential repairs grants notified to each local authority in 2005 and the combined out-turn expenditure on the schemes by each local authority. In 2005, the capital allocation for these schemes was €74.5m and out-turn expenditure notified to the Department by local authorities was €64.6m.
The combined capital allocation to local authorities for the disabled persons and essential repairs grant schemes represents not a capital grant, but the total amount which authorities are authorised to spend on the schemes in the year in which the allocation is made. Expenditure on the grant schemes is funded by the two-thirds recoupment available from my Department together with the one-third contribution from the revenue resources of the local authority. The allocations were made on the basis of local authorities' best estimate of the likely level of grant approvals during 2005.
The out-turn reflects the expenditure by local authorities on approved applications. However, some grant approvals by local authorities may not subsequently be taken up by applicants. In addition, if there are delays in applicants completing the approved works, either due to a delay in getting contractors or for other reasons, the ultimate spend may arise in later years.
In the light of the high level of demand for these grants, my Department requests each local authority to examine the level of payments and approvals on both schemes throughout the year with a view to establishing the adequacy or otherwise of their allocations. Requests for increases from authorities whose allocations are proving inadequate are dealt with in the context of the surplus funding available from authorities whose allocation may emerge to be surplus to their requirements.
The administration of the Disabled Persons Grant scheme is delegated to local authorities within the framework laid down in statutory regulations; as far as is practicable, this is designed to give an appropriate degree of flexibility at local level. In light of the increased demand for grant assistance, the majority of local authorities have reviewed their schemes over recent years in order to streamline their operation and have introduced a variety of mechanisms to ensure the available resources are targeted to those in most need, including medical prioritisation, means-testing and/or cost control. My Department does not have detailed information on the number of local authorities which currently have means-testing in place.
The review of the Disabled Persons Grant scheme, which incorporates the conditions governing the Essential Repairs Grant scheme and the Special Housing Aid for the Elderly scheme, was recently finalised within my Department. The issue of means-testing and the requirement that local authorities make a contribution from their own resources towards the financing of the scheme have been considered in the context of the overall review. My Department is currently preparing proposals for the future operation of the schemes, in conjunction with other public agencies concerned, and I expect to be in a position to announce these shortly.
Table: Disabled Persons & Essential Repairs Grants allocations and expenditure 2005 | ||
Local Authorities | Allocation 2005 | Expenditure 2005 |
County Councils | ||
Carlow | 960,000 | 515,696 |
Cavan | 1,800,000 | 1,585,078 |
Clare | 1,660,000 | 1,645,704 |
Cork (n) | 1,500,000 | 1,701,530 |
Cork (s) | 2,500,000 | 2,308,450 |
Cork (w) | 1,000,000 | 819,518 |
Donegal | 4,300,000 | 3,084,367 |
Dún Laoghaire/Rathdown | 2,250,000 | 1,638,240 |
Fingal | 1,520,000 | 1,202,990 |
Galway | 2,880,000 | 2,819,084 |
Kerry | 1,760,000 | 1,891,276 |
Kildare | 1,500,000 | 1,564,003 |
Kilkenny | 780,000 | 613,612 |
Laois | 2,100,000 | 2,094,136 |
Leitrim | 2,600,000 | 1,297,009 |
Limerick | 1,140,000 | 1,199,756 |
Longford | 900,000 | 619,533 |
Louth | 1,120,000 | 1,478,965 |
Mayo | 1,600,000 | 1,476,252 |
Meath | 2,880,000 | 1,780,302 |
Monaghan | 1,450,000 | 1,463,683 |
North Tipperary | 1,740,000 | 1,481,116 |
Offaly | 1,255,000 | 1,765,695 |
Roscommon | 1,800,000 | 1,792,614 |
Sligo | 505,000 | 308,826 |
South Dublin | 3,600,000 | 4,218,987 |
South Tipperary | 3,100,000 | 1,826,794 |
Waterford | 1,020,000 | 994,021 |
Westmeath | 1,350,000 | 994,142 |
Wexford | 1,050,000 | 841,891 |
Wicklow | 2,000,000 | 1,631,735 |
City Councils | ||
Cork | 1,800,000 | 759,801 |
Dublin | 13,500,000 | 13,053,836 |
Galway | 1,300,000 | 809,829 |
Limerick | 900,000 | 433,838 |
Waterford | 650,000 | 648,752 |
Borough Councils | ||
Sligo | 700,000 | 222,330 |
Town Councils | ||
Bray | 30,000 | 60,198 |
Total | 74,500,000 | 64,643,589 |
No comments