Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 378: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason in May 2004, the habitual residence condition was introduced when assessing families for child benefit payments depriving children of non-EEA workers resident here of this support; if there are proposals to re-establish the universality of this child benefit payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38101/06]

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

Question 379: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if he will review the decision to refuse child benefit under habitual residence condition as a vital step in guarding against child poverty and preventing inequality amongst children living in the State; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38171/06]

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

Question 401: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if, in view of the recent decision by the Government to support a constitutional amendment on the rights of children, he will consider restoring the universality of child benefit and end his Department's discrimination against children on the basis of their parents' immigration status. [37851/06]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 378, 379 and 401 together.

Since the introduction of the habitual residence condition in May 2004, some 14,600 claims to child benefit have been decided following a detailed examination of the habitual residence aspect. Of these only 10% were refused, while in 90% of the cases the condition was found to be satisfied.

The EU Regulations provide that migrant workers who are EEA nationals, i.e. EEA nationals who have been employed since coming to this country, are entitled to payment of family benefits under the same conditions as Irish nationals and the habitual residence condition does not apply in their case.

The effect of the condition, therefore, is principally in relation to claims by non-EEA nationals. Approximately 15% of such claims, received in the period May 2004 to October 2006, were refused on the grounds that the habitual residence condition was not satisfied.

Those who are refused are mainly persons whose claim to asylum has not yet been decided, who do not have a work permit or who have a minimal attachment to the workforce in Ireland. The original reason for the introduction of the habitual residence condition in May 2004 was to ensure that persons who have not worked in Ireland or who have not established their habitual residence in Ireland cannot take advantage of our assistance schemes or child benefit, and this continues to be its purpose.

The NESC report entitled "Migration policy", released on 22nd September 2006, acknowledges that "A delicate balance must be struck between protecting the rights of EU workers and their families to necessary social provision while at the same time avoiding qualifying criteria which may act to distort migration decisions." This applies with equal relevance to migrants and asylum seekers from non-EEA countries. A balanced co-ordination of employment policies, asylum policies and social welfare policies assures the best conditions for stable economic growth which will in turn enable this country to provide the optimum environment for the support and social protection of all children residing in Ireland.

A review of the operation of the habitual residence condition was completed by my Department in July this year and, following consultation with other relevant Departments, is being brought to the attention of the Government. There are no proposals to remove the habitual residence condition from the child benefit provisions and I am satisfied that to do so would conflict with the above goal.