asked the Minister for Social Welfare when disability benefit will be paid to a person (details supplied).

The person concerned claimed disability benefit from 7 February 1981 and was paid from 11 February 1981, fourth day of incapacity. All disability benefit, and pay-related benefit due, less the amount reimbursed to the health board of supplementary welfare allowance advanced, has been paid to 21 March, after which date he was certified fit to resume work.

Payment was held from 11 February pending clarification of the amount of supplementary welfare allowance due for refund to the health board. When the amount advanced was established the balance of benefit due was paid. Cheques issued 12 March, 1 April and 3 April 1981.

Is the amount advanced not something that is capable of being established on a standard basis in view of the fact that under the supplementary welfare provisions there are clear criteria as to the amount which may be advanced to people under the Act? Would the Minister not agree that he had already available to him sufficient information whereby he could have determined the amount that ought to be deducted without delaying the payment of the balance which was certainly due?

The amount of money granted under the supplementary welfare allowance varies in accordance with the family circumstances. The problem, from the point of view of the social welfare officers is that the legislation of this House passed by Deputies on the far side and Deputies on this side, is that that money can only be deducted from arrears. They must, therefore, determine what the amount is to deduct it from any arrears that are paid.

Would the Minister not agree that the amount of social welfare benefit is also based on family circumstances? As the Minister has information as to the family circumstances which determines the amount of social welfare benefit surely he has similar information available to determine the amount of supplementary social welfare benefits which might be paid to the health boards?

It depends on the individual cases and the circumstances in each individual case. In some cases certain amounts of money are paid by the employers in the first instance. It varies from case to case and the amount of supplementary welfare paid through the health boards certainly varies.

Would it not be possible to change this?

We make the policy and I agree it needs to be reviewed in future. We will continue to do that.

Has the Minister made it clear to the health boards, where there are no means whatsoever, that the maximum unemployment assistance rate is granted to such a person and his family?

Earlier this year I asked the health boards to give the maximum amounts allowable.

Some of them did not do that.

I appreciate that, but there are eight different health boards.

4.

asked the Minister for Social Welfare when disability benefit will be paid to a person (details supplied).

The person concerned claimed disability benefit from 7 February 1981 and was paid from 11 February 1981, fourth day of incapacity. All disability benefit, and pay-related benefit due, less the amount reimbursed to the health board of supplementary welfare allowance advanced, has been paid to 21 March, after which date he was certified fit to resume work.

Payment was held from 11 February pending clarification of the amount of supplementary welfare allowance due for refund to the health board. When the amount advanced was established the balance of benefit due was paid. Cheques issued 12 March, 1 April and 3 April 1981

When was the balance paid?

They were the balances. The last one was 3 April. All those questions were put down before Easter and have been left on the Order Paper until now.

In determining the means of an applicant how comparable are the means assessed by the Minister's Department and those of the health boards?

They are not directly comparable. The officer in the health board has discretion in relation to the means which he makes available under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. The amounts payable in the Department under social welfare are either under benefits or assistance. If they are benefits, which we are talking about in this case, they are directly related to agreed sums with pay-related supplements.

Would the Minister not agree that it is a strange situation that a person working under the Minister in his capacity as Minister for Health and another person working under him in his capacity as Minister for Social Welfare can investigate the means of an applicant and arrive at different conclusions?

In the benefits there is no investigation into the means of the applicant so there is no comparison between the two.

Can the Minister not say——

These are individual cases. We cannot have a discussion about social welfare on those.

5.