Thomas Gould (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

118. To ask the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection whether her Department has produced a report on the unpaid carers identified in Census 2022; and whether she intends to expand the carer’s allowance to provide payment to these people. [33091/23]

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The key role of my department is to provide income supports where an income need may arise due to unemployment, illness/disability and caring responsibilities.

The main income supports to carers provided by my department are Carer’s Allowance, Carer’s Benefit, Domiciliary Care Allowance and the Carer’s Support Grant. Spending in 2023 is expected to amount to almost €1.6 billion on these payments.

The two principal conditions for receipt of Carer’s Allowance are that full time care and attention is required and provided, and that a means test is satisfied.

My department has not produced a report on the carers identified in Census 2022 as the Census figure includes all unpaid carers providing care from 1 hour a week and upwards. For the purposes of Carer's Allowance however, a carer must be providing full-time care and attention to a relevant person, where the number of hours providing such care is not less than 35 hours in a period of 7 consecutive days, and care is provided on any 5 days, whether consecutive or not, within a period of 7 consecutive days.

The Carer’s Allowance is a demand led scheme. There are currently 93,609 recipients of Carer’s Allowance. I would encourage any carer who feels they may be eligible to apply for this income support.

I have a proven track record in providing significant enhancements to social welfare benefits for carers, including the first increase in the disregard for 14 years, an increase to the Carer's Support Grant to its highest ever level of €1,850, as well as lump sum payments and increases to core rates.

I hope that this clarifies the issue for the Deputy.

Holly Cairns (Cork South West, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

119. To ask the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the steps she is taking to support family carers. [32539/23]

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Government acknowledges the important role that family carers play and is fully committed to supporting carers in that role. This commitment is recognised in both the Programme for Government and the National Carers’ Strategy.

The main income supports for carers provided by my department are Carer’s Allowance, Carer’s Benefit, Domiciliary Care Allowance and the Carer’s Support Grant. Spending in 2023 is expected to amount to almost €1.6 billion on these payments.

Since my appointment as Minister, I have made a number of significant improvements to the supports available for our carers, including increasing the Carer’s Support Grant to €1,850, its highest ever rate.

In Budget 2022, I announced significant improvements to the means test for Carer's Allowance.

• The capital and savings disregard for the means assessment for Carer’s Allowance was increased from €20,000 to €50,000.
• For carers who are working, I increased the weekly income disregard to €350 for a single person, and to €750 for carers with a spouse/partner.

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

120. To ask the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the extent to which a more personalised approach might be given to applicants who are being refused on various grounds in respect of applications they have made in the genuine expectation that an appeal or a review would be beneficial to their case reasons; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [33078/23]

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand that the Deputy's Office has clarified that this question relates to cases where an applicant has been refused a payment on medical grounds, and whether when reviewing or appealing that decision, an oral hearing would be given rather than summary decision as it may be viewed as more beneficial to the appellant.

As part of the statutory appeals process, the appeal papers are in the first instance forwarded to the Department. It then carries out a review of the decision and will take into account any new evidence provided as part of the appeal. In many instances, particularly with decisions relating to medical schemes, the appellant makes an early claim to establish an entitlement date as soon as they are diagnosed and while they are still awaiting detailed consultant reports. They then provide the additional consultant reports as part of the appeals process. This additional information is considered by the Department and, in many cases, the original decision will be revised.

If the Department finds no reason to revise the original decision, the file papers are submitted to the Appeals Office. Under the governing legislation the decision on whether or not to hold an oral hearing is at the discretion of the Appeals Officer to whom an appeal has been assigned. Neither I nor any other person can direct an Appeals Officer as to the course of action they should take. It is not the case that every appeal warrants an oral hearing; in general, an oral hearing is only essential if it appears to the Appeals Officer that a question arises that is not capable of being addressed though the documentary evidence available to them.

The Deputy may be aware that we are looking to make some changes to the appeals process including setting timelines for decisions; giving a person a right to request an oral hearing and a right to be given a reason if an oral hearing is not granted. We have recently consulted on these changes and the responses to the consultation are currently being reviewed.

Separately, I have asked my officials to examine the possibility of allowing people to delay submitting a claim until they have all of the medical evidence necessary to substantiate their claim and to then have the effective date of payment backdated to a date of diagnosis rather than the date of claim.

These measures will, I believe, go some way to addressing the Deputy's concern.