asked the Minister for Social Welfare the steps she is taking to clear the large backlog of arrears in payments left by the previous administration; how soon she expects payments from her Department to beneficiaries to be brought generally up to date; and if she will make a statement on the matter.

The only area in which there were arrears of social welfare payments was that relating to payment of disability benefit and associated benefits. During recent months considerable progress had been made in reducing these arrears and it had been hoped that the situation would now have been reached where such payments would be made as they became due. However, since 29 June 1981, staff who are members of the Civil & Public Services' Staff Association have, in pursuance of a grade claim, placed a ban on overtime working and have refused to operate certain items of computer equipment. The effect of this action is that, while payment of disability benefit to existing claimants continues to be made reasonably promptly, new claims cannot be dealt with due to inability to obtain from the computer details of the contribution records on which entitlement is based.

It is regretted that while the present impasse exists there is no prospect of an improvement in the position regarding disability benefit payments. In fact, as already indicated, the processing of new claims is seriously affected and is likely to deteriorate if the industrial action by the staff continues.

Will the Minister of State accept my compliments to her and the Minister on the speed with which they have improved matters and our hopes that the payments will not again deteriorate to the scandalous level of delay which occurred under the previous administration? Is the Minister in a position to say what savings resulted to the Department on a monthly basis over the last year or so as a consequence of delay on the part of that Department in paying out benefits and whether, in relation to the recent calculation of the State's deficit, account is taken of the volume of arrears and considerable payments which still have to be made to those long suffering people who have not yet received payment? Can the Minister explain how in the case of an industrial accident which occured in early May the family have not yet received any payments and have had difficulty in obtaining supplementary benefit from the local authority?

I do not have the figures of costings. In the Supplementary Estimate produced by the Department account was taken of the outstanding debts of the Department or commitments in relation to increases which had not been foreseen of unemployment and so on. If the Deputy would like to give me details of the case he cited I will have the matter examined.

Thank you.

Would the Minister agree that following special measures which were taken the position within the Department was normal at the time when the Government took office despite the fact that industrial action was still in progress? Would she further agree from her experience that the staff of the Department have done an incredible job in the light of that situation and despite the difficulties presented by the industrial action?

Industrial action began on 29 June and by that stage the position was almost back to normal. Delays had been brought up to date by the staff working overtime and weekends for a number of weeks prior to the period before industrial action began. All credit is due to the staff involved for their efforts to improve the situation and all thanks must go to them. The situation was a long-standing one. The problems began in January 1981 and from then until June there was serious disruption. We hope such disruption will never again occur.

Has the Minister any plans to decentralise the Department to allow for the payment of social welfare benefits at local level in urban areas as a means of overcoming the delays?

I expect that is a separate question and one that was dealt with on the occasion of a recent sitting of the House. There is a commitment to decentralisation. Obviously, the problems are arising in the centralised areas, in the area of disability and associate benefits rather than in the area of unemployment benefit. An extension of the decentralisation programme of the previous Government is part of the commitment of this Government and I agree that that should be the ultimate direction of all advances in this area.

Is the Minister aware that the backlog referred to in the question created great hardship and that for some applicants it was a question of being able to survive? Some applicants found it necessary to call at social service centres, convents and such places in order to be able to eat while that dispute was going on. Is the Minister prepared to devise contingency plans in order to ensure that there is no recurrence of that sort of situation in the event of further problems arising in these days of precarious industrial relations?

I assure the Deputy that consideration is being given to this matter. It is a matter of great concern that persons can be deprived of their only source of income, especially people who are so vulnerable. We are considering contingency plans in order to be prepared for any deterioration in the situation as a result of the industrial dispute.

The Minister has told us that no new claims can be dealt with and that has been the position since 29 June. That was the time at which the industrial action was escalated, but I should like to inform the House that industrial action existed for some time before then. It is apparent from what the Minister has said that no new claims for disability benefit have been dealt with since 29 June. This will result in a very serious situation. Is the same position applying also to unemployment claims? I ask the question because a number of people have expressed to me their concern about not being able to get unemployment benefit. This week there was a very alarming situation to the extent that a large notice appeared at one of the health centres in Dublin to the effect that those being refused unemployment benefit would not be able to get supplementary welfare. Apparently, this is related to the industrial action. In these circumstances what special measures are to be taken to deal with the situation, a situation which is extremely alarming at this stage?

I thank the Deputy for his advice.

The potential gravity of the situation is understood equally by everybody on this side of the House and particularly by the Minister and the Department. Because of this we are going ahead with contingency plans, but obviously we are not in a position to specify such plans at this stage. As yet there is no full extension of the dispute to the unemployment exchanges. A situation in which claims can not be dealt with is obviously very serious. The supplementary welfare scheme was intended to cover emergency situations only, but that scheme is under stress. However I assure the Deputy that the whole situation is under consideration and that plans will be ready in the event of any further breakdown to deal with cases of hardship arising out of the present circumstances.

From what I have heard this week there are some 4,000 people in Dublin affected by the dispute in terms of unemployment benefit.

This is a matter that has been well ventilated.

25.