Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 332: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason a rent subsidy is refused entirely when the landlord raises the rent above the prescribed level; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39929/06]

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

Rent supplements are subject to a limit on the amount of rent that an applicant for rent supplement may incur. The objective is to ensure that rent supplement is not paid in respect of overly expensive accommodation.

Rent supplement is not normally paid where the rent is in excess of the limits because the personal contribution to rent made by the tenant should not be such that their post rent income is less than the relevant SWA rate minus the minimum contribution to rent prescribed in legislation and, as a consequence, insufficient to meet their other daily needs after paying their rent.

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, it specifically protects against homelessness and it ensures that people have an adequate post-rent income.

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 October 2006 were in line with those which applied in October 2002.

My Department is currently reviewing 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.

Tony Gregory (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 333: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason for the delay in repaying back money on disability allowance due to a person (details supplied) in Dublin 7; and when repayments will be made. [39983/06]

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

The person concerned applied for disability allowance on 21st February 2006. His case was considered by the Department's medical adviser who expressed the opinion that he was not medically qualified for the allowance. The person concerned appealed this decision and was subsequently found to be medically qualified. He was awarded disability allowance in August 2006, backdated to 22nd February 2006 and he received his first payment on 13 September 2006.

The person concerned had been in receipt of unemployment assistance up to 29th April 2006 and, accordingly, details of the amount of money paid to him during the overlapping period had to be ascertained. Due to an oversight there was a delay in establishing these details. They have now been established and an arrears cheque issued to the person concerned on Thursday 23rd November. The delay which occurred is regretted.

Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 334: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the fact that recipients of the deserted wife's benefit have not been given an increase in their earnings threshold since 1992; and his plans to reform same. [39993/06]

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

An earnings limit was introduced for deserted wife's benefit in 1992. The limit, which applied only to new claims after August 1992, was set at €12, 697.38 a year (gross earnings). Where earnings are in excess of €12,697.38 a year, there may be entitlement to a reduced rate of payment of deserted wife's benefit, provided gross earnings do not exceed €17,776.33 a year.

Following the introduction of the one parent family payment in 1997, the deserted wives benefit scheme was discontinued with effect from January that year. Existing entitlements already acquired in August 1992, when the earnings limit was introduced for new claimants, and in 1997, when the one parent family payment scheme was introduced, have been preserved. The upper income ceiling applying to deserted wife's benefit of €17,776.33 (gross) in 1997 has not changed since then.

With over 80,000 parents with caring responsibilities receiving support under the one parent family payment, I was glad to be able to increase the earnings ceiling for the one parent family payment in this year's budget from €293 to €375 per week or €19,500 a year (gross earnings). Recipients of deserted wife's benefit with dependent children may transfer to the one parent family payment if it is beneficial for them to do so.

In March of this year, I launched a major Government discussion paper, "Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents" which addresses the difficulties faced by low income families and their children.

The report puts forward radical proposals for reform of the income support system for all parents on a low income. The report proposes the expanded availability and range of education and training opportunities for lone parents, the extension of the National Employment Action Plan to focus on lone parents, focused provision of child care, improved information services for lone parents and the introduction of a new Parental Allowance for low income families with young children.

A range of views has been expressed as this report is debated and I will give very serious consideration to all of them. Once I am convinced that we have reached conclusions that are equitable, with a fully workable implementation strategy, it is my intention to bring forward proposals for legislation. Any further changes to the deserted wife's benefit scheme will be examined in an overall budgetary context.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 335: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when an unemployment assistance or jobseekers allowance appeal will be finalised for a person (details supplied) in County Mayo. [39998/06]

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

The person concerned claimed jobseekers allowance on 19 October 2006. The Deciding Officer disallowed the claim on the grounds that the person was not genuinely seeking employment. He appealed against this decision to the Social Welfare Appeals Office on 25 October 2006. In accordance with the statutory requirements the relevant departmental papers and comments of my Department were sought. These are now to hand and the case has been referred to an Appeals Officer for early consideration. The person concerned is currently in receipt of Supplementary Welfare Allowance. Under Social Welfare Legislation decisions in relation to claims must be made by Deciding Officers and Appeals Officers. These officers are statutorily appointed and I have no role in regard to making such decisions.