asked the Minister for Social Welfare the basis on which a person (details supplied) in County Monaghan was refused an increase in small farmer's unemployment assistance.

Following reinvestigation of the unemployment assistance claim of the person concerned he was assessed with means of £96.15 weekly, derived from the profit from his holding.

In calculating this amount, the deciding officer took into consideration the gross yearly value of the holding at £12,848, less expenses amounting to £7,848 incurred in earning that income, leaving a net profit of £5,000 per annum or £96.15 weekly.

The person concerned appealed against the amount of means assessed against him and an appeals officer on 17 September 1986 also assessed him with means of £96.15 weekly. He is, accordingly, in receipt of unemployment assistance of £5.80 weekly, being the appropriate maximum rate payable in his case of £101.95 less means of £96.15.

The basis of the calculation of means for the holding in this case was the net income from the holding over the 12 months preceding the investigation of means on 24 June 1986. It was considered that this assessment reflected the net income from his farm in a normal year.

If the person concerned is now of the opinion that his circumstances have changed to the extent that he considers the assessment does not reflect his income from farming in a normal year, it is open to him to apply for a review of his case. A form for this purpose may be obtained from his local office.

Is the Minister aware that this is a married man with a wife and six children? He is living on a holding of 33 acres which has been described by the social welfare officer as fair land. Is she aware that from the report of the social welfare officer this man's income from the sale of milk was £7,800 and his expenditure was £7,700 giving him a profit of £100? The basis which was used to calculate that he had £96 a week was the sale of livestock last year which amounted to £5,111. In fact the man's operating profit is £100. He spent the £5,000 last year and he does not have a realistic income at this stage with which to keep his wife and family. That is the reason he appealed. The appeal was decided on the basis of the £5,000 he got last year for the sale of stock. It bears no relation to his income at present. We can assume that because his income last year was £7,800——

We cannot have a rehearing here.

——and his expenditure was £7,700, he is on the poverty line. Yet the Minister is giving him £5 a week.

I am sure the Deputy is aware that the Minister cannot tell the appeals officer what to do. The appeals procedure is independent of the Minister. If the person is not satisfied with the present position and if there is evidence he feels has not been properly taken into account he should apply for a review of his case. That is as far as a Minister can go in the circumstances.

There are many similar cases. Can the Minister instruct appeals officers and other officials in the Department to assess people on their present income? It is grossly unreasonable to expect someone to survive on the amount of money they made last year which they may now have spent.

As the Deputy is aware the only reasonable calculation that can be made is on the net income over the 12 months preceding the investigation of means. That is what has been assessed in this case.

A final supplementary.

We are not making as much progress today as we did yesterday. We had a number of questions to the Taoiseach yesterday which usually take more time. I am moving to the next question.

9.