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

Question 270: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if pensioners will be forced to operate an exclusively card based-system for collecting payments of social welfare from the post office; and if he will ensure that persons who wish to retain the traditional book based system, where a physical record of payments due and received is maintained, can be allowed to do so. [15067/08]

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is government policy to facilitate the greater use of electronic payment systems in the economy in the interest of developing a world class payment environment in Ireland. In this context, the National Payments Implementation Program Advisory Group, under the aegis of the Department of An Taoiseach, monitors the growth in electronic payments, the reduction in cash transactions and any new payment mechanisms which come on the market. My Department is represented on this group.

The current range of payment options offered by my Department to customers' includes payment via local post office, or certain credit unions that have been authorised by the banking and credit union regulators; bank or building society account, including post bank. Customers opt for a particular payment method having regard to their own personal circumstances. Currently some 54% of customers receive their payment electronically direct to their bank or financial institution, or by using a Social Services Card at their post office. The remaining customers are paid by paper-based payment instruments — cheques, post drafts or personal payment order books.

The Department is implementing a three-year strategy to move from paper-based payment instruments to electronic payments at financial institutions and to using a Social Services Card at post offices. The programme is being implemented on a phased basis to coincide with book renewal and as personalised payable order books expire. The objective of the Department's payment strategy is to ensure that cost effective arrangements are in place for making payments to social welfare customers using a range of payment options and that new payment facilities are made available to customers as they become available. A range of measures are underway to inform customers of the change in payment methods. Each customer is being informed by letter of the change in their payment arrangement. A Social Services Card, along with a covering letter explaining how to use the card, is being issued to them. An Post and the Irish Postmaster's Union (IPU) are committed to assisting customers in the use of cards for collecting their payment.

Groups representing a broad range of customers, including the elderly and the disabled, have already been consulted and have indicated that they will support the move to using cards at post offices. Posters are being displayed in all post offices, citizens information centres and throughout my Departments local office network. When a pensioner receives their payment at a post office using a social services card they are given a receipt. The receipt shows the amount paid and the make-up of the payment.

Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 271: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when he will publish proposals for a second tier one-parent family payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15086/08]

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The principal child-centred income support is child benefit (CB). Others include the increase for a qualified child (IQC), paid in addition to social welfare payments and family income supplement, paid to low-income employees with children. In addition, the early child care supplement also makes a significant contribution to recipient families.

For a number of years, government policy has been to invest additional resources in child benefit. This policy focus was driven, in part, by the recognition that the loss of IQC's by social welfare recipients on taking up employment could act as a disincentive to availing of work opportunities. In terms of tackling work disincentives, the shift towards child benefit has been significant. For example, in 1994 child benefit represented 29% of the total child income support payment for a four child family and is now 64%. In other words, a family will now only lose 36% of their child income support when a welfare recipient loses entitlement to a primary social welfare payment.

Under the terms of an earlier Social Partnership agreement the National Economic and Social Council was asked to examine the feasibility of merging the family income supplement with IQC with a view to creating a single second tier child income support. The commitment to examining such a change was subsequently embodied in the current social partnership agreement, Towards 2016. Dr John Sweeney was commissioned by NESC to examine the issues and develop proposals for a second tier child income support scheme. His research paper on this issue was received towards the end of 2007.

The broad objectives of the provision of child income supports are to bring about an improvement in the relative overall position of families with children compared with single persons or childless couples and to alleviate child poverty. In considering the future direction of child income support policy, it is important to keep in mind these multiple aims and to maintain the correct balance between child benefit and more selective measures. Dr Sweeney's research paper, which is an important contribution to the debate, is being examined at present. The Government discussion paper, Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents, put forward proposals for 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 social assistance payment for low income families with young children.

Under the proposals, the contingency of lone parenthood would no longer exist. Instead, a new payment would be made to all parents (living alone or with a partner), with young children, on low income. This new payment is currently being developed in my Department, taking into account the various issues raised in the consultation process. As I have stated before, any proposed new payment scheme can only be introduced when the necessary co-ordinated supports and services are put in place on the ground by other Departments and Agencies. This is why the Senior Officials Group on Social Inclusion has been tasked with bringing forward a plan on the key issues of child care, education, training and activation measures. The testing phase of the non-income measures contained in the discussion paper has ended and the outcome of the process is currently being considered in my Department. This will inform the further development of the proposals. I have asked that a number of issues be examined and I hope to bring the matter to the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion in the coming months.

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 272: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of times per year that the rent subsidy payment is assessed as to its value in meeting the overall cost to the recipient of their rent payments; if this assessment varies from area to area; the way it is determined in the Kildare west and Wicklow areas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15166/08]

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Rent supplement, which is administered on my behalf by the Health Service Executive (HSE) as part of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme, is subject to a limit on the amount of rent that an applicant may incur. Rent limits are set at levels per county that enable different eligible household types to secure and retain basic suitable rented accommodation, having regard to the different rental market conditions that prevail in various parts of the State. The objective of rent limits is to ensure that rent supplement is not paid in respect of overly expensive accommodation having regard to the size of the household. Rent limits have been reviewed on four occasions since 2002.

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, including people in low wage employment.

In January 2007 a review was completed of the maximum levels of rent which a person may incur and still be eligible to receive rent supplement. The purpose of the review was to inform the process of setting new limits, applicable from January 2007 until 30 June 2008. The review included consultation with the HSE, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Central Statistics Office, the Private Residential Tenancies Board and voluntary agencies working in this area. This process ensures that the new rent limits reflect realistic market conditions throughout the country. Arising from the review, rent limits were adjusted upwards, from January 2007, for a number of household types in 14 counties, including Kildare and Wicklow.

Notwithstanding existing limits, the HSE may exceed these rent limits in certain circumstances e.g. where there is special housing need related to exceptional circumstances. The discretionary power ensures that individuals with particular needs can be accommodated within the scheme and specifically protects against homelessness. I have arranged to have the current rent limits reviewed this year for all counties with a view to implementing any revision found to be necessary, from 1 July 2008. As in 2007, a consultative approach is being used to conduct this review.