James Breen (Clare, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 229: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will request that farm income will be allowed to be disregarded on the same basis as PAYE farmers income, which has a disregard of €100 per week in assessing eligibility for State non-contributory pensions; if he will stop discrimination against farmers in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36806/06]

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

Budget 2006 contained a number of important measures designed to target resources at particular groups of older people, including farmers. In considering these measures I was anxious to target resources at those who are at the greatest risk of poverty, to encourage saving, and to simplify the system of income support for older people who do not receive contributory pensions.

One of the key measures that I was pleased to announce on Budget day, was the establishment of a single standardised pension scheme with a greatly enhanced means testing regime. In September, the State Pension (Non-Contributory) replaced the old age pension and, for recipients aged 66 and over, blind pension, widow/er's pension, one parent family payment, deserted wife's allowance and prisoner's wife's allowance.

All the schemes in question featured a common means disregard of €7.60 per week, which was not increased since the 1970s. The means disregard for the new non-contributory pension is now €20 per week, an increase of €12.40 per week. Over 30,000 pensioners who were in receipt of a reduced rate of payment gained from this change with increases of up to €12.50 per week in the personal rate of payment and increases in the qualified adult rate, where applicable, of up to €8.30 per week. I should point out that these increases were in addition to the increase of €16 per week in the rate of old age non-contributory pension which took effect from January 2006. Furthermore, the new State Pension (Non-Contributory) also features an innovative disregard of €100 per week in respect of earnings from employment. These measures benefit all those farmers who were in receipt of an old age (non-contributory) pension, as well as entitling some to a means tested pension for the first time.

Consequent on the increase in the means disregard to €20 per week, a single person, with no other means, is now able to have up to €35,000 in capital and still qualify for a pension at the maximum rate. This figure is doubled in the case of a pensioner couple.

By any standards, the levels of increases and revised means test arrangements announced in Budget 2006 are exceptional. The modernisation of these arrangements through the introduction of the new state pension is also a further demonstration of our commitment to all those who are elderly including farmers.

Further improvements will fall to be considered in the context of the forthcoming Budget.

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

Question 230: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the cost involved in means testing for eligibility for the non-contributory State pension. [36762/06]

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

My Department administers a wide range of means-tested social assistance schemes provided for in Part III of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 2005.

The assessment of means is carried out by local social welfare inspectors and in certain circumstances by other staff of the Department where referral to an inspector is not warranted.

My Department currently employs 372 social welfare inspectors throughout the country. They undertake a range of duties including the assessment of means for all social assistance payments, including the State pension, PRSI compliance inspection, control activity and in some cases, specialist control work.

In the circumstances it is not possible to estimate the costs involved in the assessment of means for the non-contributory State pension.

Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 231: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the cost of doubling the €51 maximum of income over the contributory pension rate which is used to decide eligibility for the fuel scheme; and if he will consider such a measure in the forthcoming budget in view of the increase in the cost of heating fuels. [36800/06]

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 season. Fuel allowances are paid for 29 weeks from end-September to mid-April. The allowance represents a contribution towards a person's normal heating expenses. 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.

Eligibility to the fuel allowance scheme is subject to means and other conditions. People in receipt of contributory pensions which are not means tested, may have a combined household income of up to €51 per week or savings/investments of up to €46,000 or, over and above the maximum rate of state pension (contributory) and still qualify for fuel allowance. This income limit was increased to €51 per week with effect from 1 June 2005. The fuel allowance income limits increase each season in line with the increases in the rate of the state pension (contributory).

The cost to the exchequer from raising the qualifying threshold as outlined in the Deputy's question would depend on the extra numbers who would apply and qualify for the fuel allowance as a result of the measure. An accurate quantification of these numbers is not readily available but it is estimated that it could cost approximately €4 million. Any such proposal will be fully considered in the context of other priorities and of the resources available for social welfare improvements generally.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 232: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if, in view of the evidence that the extent of the rent support falls far short of that needed by applicants in certain parts of the country, he will review the cap on rent support; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the current cap is leading to homelessness among individuals and families that cannot obtain private rental accommodation at a price within the specified limits; if his attention has further been drawn to the extent of topping up that is occurring resulting in families getting into debt; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36963/06]

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.

Rent supplements are subject to a limit on the amount of rent that an applicant for rent supplement may incur. Setting maximum rent limits higher than are justified by the open market would have a distorting effect on the rental market, leading to a more general rise in rent levels. This in turn would worsen the affordability of rental accommodation unnecessarily, with particular negative impact for those tenants on lower incomes.

Notwithstanding these limits, under existing arrangements the Health Service Executive may, in certain circumstances, exceed the rent levels as an exceptional measure, for example:

where there are special housing needs related to exceptional circumstances for example, disabled persons in specially-adapted accommodation or homeless persons,

where the tenant will be in a position to re-assume responsibility for his/her rent within a short period,

where the person concerned is entitled to an income disregard AND has sufficient income to meet his or her basic needs after paying rent, taking into account the appropriate rate of rent supplement that is otherwise payable in the case.

This discretionary power ensures that individuals with particular needs can be accommodated within the scheme and specifically protects against homelessness.

In November 2002, when the Central Statistics Office Privately Owned Rent Index first showed evidence of continued reductions in rent levels, regulations were introduced to set the maximum amount of rent in respect of which a rent supplement is payable. These limits remained in place to the end of December 2003. Further Regulations introduced in December 2003 and prescribed the limits to be used between January 2004 and June 2005. The current rent limits cover the period July 2005 to 31st December 2006.

Despite recent increases in rent levels the Central Statistics Office Privately Owned Rent Index shows that rent levels for September 2006 were in line with those which applied in November 2002.

My Department is in regular contact with the community welfare staff of the Health Service Executive regarding the various elements of the scheme. In the course of these ongoing contacts, the prescribed upper limits on rent levels supported under the rent supplement scheme have not emerged as having a detrimental impact on the ability of eligible tenants generally to secure suitable rented accommodation to meet their needs.

My Department are currently reviewing levels of rent limits in order to develop proposals regarding what limits should apply from January 2007 onwards. The review is taking account of prevailing rent levels in the private rental sector generally, together with detailed input from the Health Service Executive on the market situation within each of its operational areas.

The review will also include consultation with the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Private Residential Tenancies Board. In addition, a number of the voluntary agencies working in this area have made detailed submissions. This process will ensure that the new rent limits reflect realistic market conditions throughout the country, and that they will continue to enable the different categories of eligible tenant households to secure and retain suitable rented accommodation to meet their respective needs.

The introduction of rent limits by regulation has had a positive impact on the rental market in general by limiting unjustified increases in rent tenants.

It is not necessary for tenants to make up shortfalls in rents, given that the limits are reasonable, they have been reviewed regularly and there is provision for exceptions to be made where necessary.