asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason payment of a free fuel allowance was refused in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare who is in receipt of a retirement pension with an allowance for his dependent wife and with no allowance for his dependent son, who is aged 18 and in receipt of full-time second level education.

To qualify for a fuel allowance under the national fuel scheme a pensioner must be living either alone or only with a qualified dependant, another qualified pensioner or a person providing full time care and attention where the pensioner is incapacitated.

Payment of a fuel allowance was refused in the case of the person concerned because his son, who resides with him, is no longer a qualified dependant for retirement pension purposes and does not, therefore, come within the excepted categories for the purpose of the "living-alone" condition.

In view of the particular anomaly that arises in this type of case and the small number of such cases, would the Minister consider making an order to allow payment in this and similar cases and would he inform the House of the number involved and what the extra cost might be?

The case refers to a particular person. I cannot allow any extension of the subject matter.

The Minister might have the information available.

I have said all I should say about this particular case. Regarding the question of 18-year olds continuing in education, I think that would be a separate question. I have made an arrangement this year whereby if a person reaches the age of 18 during the course of the season — in other words, if they are under 18 at the start of the season and reach 18 during the season — the allowance will not be stopped during the season. It will continue for the remainder of the season.

We are dealing with an 18-year old without any income who receives no payment from the Department of Social Welfare through his parent's income and is totally dependent on his parents. I would ask the Minister to make an order to end this disgraceful anomaly, one which causes very real hardship to a very small number of people and not to use such tricks and traps in the social welfare scheme to exclude such people from payment.

This is what he has done all over the place.

Order, please, let us hear the Minister.

This has been a condition of the scheme for a long time. It is part of the living alone——

Mr. Stagg rose.

Please, Deputy Stagg, the Minister is replying to your question. Please be good enough to listen to him.

The fact that in some particular cases it may not have been implemented is a separate question.

The Minister is not correct in what he has said.

If the Deputy does not want to hear the Minister that must be the end of the matter. I am calling on Deputy Austin Deasy.

Deputy Stagg, please desist. I have called Deputy Deasy.

I was hoping that the Minister would take Question No. 21 in conjunction with Question No. 8 because Question No. 21 is the more generalised form of Question No. 8 which is specific.

He has deliberately avoided it.

This is the most disgraceful anomaly that exists.

We are dealing now with Question No. 8. We shall deal with Question No. 21 later if we come to it.

Would the Minister like to answer Question No. 21?

Not now, Deputy. Please desist.

On that issue, because it raises broader issues as in the case highlighted by Deputy Stagg, which I agree with him is one of the most disgraceful anomalies I have ever come across, would the Minister accept that in the case outlined by Deputy Stagg — indeed, there are a number of such issues arising in my own constituency — that not alone does the family lose the winter fuel allowance but, in addition, because they are keeping that son or daughter in full-time education, they also lose the child dependency allowance of £10.20 a week and the mother loses the child benefit allowance. The overall weekly cost to that household is £18 odd because they want to keep that son or daughter in full-time education. Is that not a disgrace and totally contrary to all social policy?

Order, please. There is a deviation from this question now.

There is indeed and it has widened very much but, nevertheless, this has been the situation in the various schemes continuously. The Deputy is raising the issue of the child dependant allowances which is a very important element — it is the other element which is very important. In fact, it is a much wider element but unless it is a widow, a deserted wife or an unmarried mother it does not continue up to the age of 21. That is a matter to be considered in the context of the budget. It was considered by budgets while the Coalition were in office but nothing was done at that stage. It will be considered further in the current budgetary situation but it has been——

Did not the health boards have a discretion in this matter?

I am calling Deputy Stagg for a final supplementary.

Can the Minister confirm that the previous system relating to the area to which this question refers was operated by the health board? In that case, can he agree or confirm that the health board could examine each case on its merits? Can he also confirm that there is no discretion in his Department to look at individual cases and to deal with them on the evidence presented and that they are bound by this ridiculous rule which states that somebody who is over 18 and who is totaly maintained by his parents is no longer a dependant?

That has been the situation all the time. I do not deny what the Deputy has said that some health boards may have operated differently. What I would like to make clear to the Deputy is that the health boards still have discretion in relation to fuel schemes if there are special needs. While there is not a principle across the board that everybody over the age of 18 is covered, the health boards still have discretion.

The fuel allowances have been virtually withdrawn.

That is not true.

Question No. 9, Deputy Bell's question. This is unnecessarily disorderly.

I have called the next question.

I wish to give notice that I wish to raise on the Adjournment the subject matter of Question No. 21 on today's Order Paper.

I will communicate with Deputy Deasy in respect of that matter.

That is quite extraordinary since we have not even got to that question yet.

I wish to raise on the Adjournment the issue of the national fuel scheme.

I will communicate with Deputy Stagg in respect of that matter.

I want to raise on the Adjournment the whole area of the national fuel scheme.

I will communicate with the Deputy, also.

Maybe we should have the Adjournment here now?

An tAire to reply to Question No. 9, please.

I would have taken it. I can tell you, a Cheann Comhairle, for nothing, that the number of extra people coming along who never claimed before — because it is handled by the Department of Social Welfare and because they can get it as a right — is very considerable. That is what is actually happening. That is the reality.

Thousands have lost it.