Statement on medical certificates regarding date when patient is incapable of work

1240/5(3232)

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER

ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 13th MARCH 2007

Question 1

Does the Minister consider that the statement signed by General Practitioners on medical certificates "that in my opinion his/her incapacity is valid until...[a specified date]" indicates that the patient is incapable of work on that date and , if so, does he agree that by treating this date as the date on which the claimant can return to work, the department is in effect saving the payment of one day's sickness benefit?

Will the Minister give consideration to either treating the dates given on sickness certificates as inclusive, or to changing the wording to clarify the payment period?

Answer

No, I do not think that the date described as the "valid until date" indicates that the patient is incapable of work on that date. The incapacity continues until that date, but on the date entered the incapacity is no longer valid and the claimant will return to work or, if the incapacity continues, another certificate will be submitted. Therefore, there is no "saving" of benefit payment.

When the current medical certificates were introduced in 2004, thought was given to the words used to avoid unnecessary misunderstanding, before deciding upon the term valid until and general practitioners were advised. If general practitioners are confused, although I am not aware of any confusion, I would be happy to instruct the Department to re-issue guidance as to how a medical certificate should be completed to comply with the Law.

Question 2

Would the Minister inform members what "options for reducing or limiting expenditure on supplementation" mentioned in his answer of 27th February 2007 are under consideration in the ongoing review of the underlying reasons for the unforeseen rise in these costs and, in particular, will these options include the removal of the one third division of funding between employer/employee/taxpayer or the abolition of the contributions ceiling altogether?

Does the Minister intend to report the total 2006 supplementation figure to members and will he also report the findings of the review to the States?

Answer

It would be a strange review if I were able to consider any options for supplementation before the detailed analysis was undertaken. Options will be put forward on the completion of the analysis. The fundamental question of Social Security funding, including the proportion of funding and the earnings ceiling will be part of the review of Social Security outlined in RC 49/2004 which is due to begin after the income support system is implemented and will also inform the Triennial Actuarial Review for the period ending December 2006 .

The 2006 Supplementation figure will be published in the report and accounts which is presented to the States each year. The review of supplementation will also be reported to the States as clearly this is a fundamental feature of the scheme driven by law.

Question 3

1. H as the Minister yet received the report on Long Term Incapacity Allowance (LTIA) commissioned from Professor Stafford andcanhe yet say when he will release its fi n d i ngs to Members

and the public?

2. In an answeron 19th April 2005, the Minister stated that itwaspossibletoassesshow m a n y recipients ofLTIAwerein work but pointed said that an evaluation of a full year ( 2 0 0 5) would be undertaken inorder to establish meaningful trends. Whatmeaningful tr e n d s, if any,have so far been identified in respect of -

(i )  T h e p roportion of LTIA recipients in work?

(i i)  T h e p roportion of recipients requiring assistance from parish welfare?

3. F ig ures revealed in parts (a) and(d)ofhisresponseon 19th April2005, indicated that a wards had been assessed on average at around 60 per cent of the maximum benefit p r e v iously awarded under previous schemes,and this amountedto £5.1 million in 2005. Whatsum,ifany, has been factored into the funding ofincome support to supplement the m i ss i ng40percent produced by the partial awards?

Answer

1. P r ofessor Stafford will be presenting his report to melater this month and it will be released to members and the public after that.
   2. L TIA has only been inplace for twoyears. The Department's experience of new benefits is that it generally takesup to five years for any true trends to emerge from claim data. However, a snapshot assessment of the 2005/06 data showed that around 30% of LTIA claimants paid some contributions. Those with long-term illnesses would nothave been permittedto work under the previous benefit system.

(b)(ii)  I am unable to give any figures regarding the proportion of LTIA recipients receiving Parish Welfare as

the Department does not have any data regarding individuals receiving assistance from the Parishes. In my answer to the Deputy 's question on the 27 February this year I explained that the data gathering exercise for Income Support would provide more information on all claimants.

(c) It i s wrong to assume that all LTIA recipients will require Income Support. As indicated above some may be working and able to support themselves. Those who are not able to work at present, will likely to already be receiving support from the Parish and the budget for Native Welfare transferred to the Social Security Department in May 2006. The whole of the Welfare budget (Native and Non Native) has already been factored into the funding of income support.

Question 4

1. F o llowingthepublic consultation over income support, is it theMinister's intention to withdraw benefit from recipients, especially single parents with children aged over 11years,whoarejudged to benot actively seeking full-timework, as is now proposed in the UK?
2. D o es the Minister consider that people are more likely to return to the workplaceorwork more hours if there are greater financial incentives, and, ifso, will heseek to ensure that the frameworkforincome support he brings totheAssembly later this year achievesthis?

Answer

1. It i s notmy intention to simply withdraw benefit from recipients. The whole purposeofIncomeSupport is to consider the circumstances of householdsandifat all possible help them find genuineemployment. This wouldapplytosingle parents as much as it would apply tonuclear families. TheIncomeSupport system would also provide supportwhilst they look for work,but it wouldnot support thosewho have the opportunity and capability to work but refuse todoso.

2. I d o not necessarily agree that financial incentives are the only driver for people to return to work. I do recognise however, that financial incentives are important particularly to those seeking to extend their working hours. A balanced system has to have both incentives to betterment and penalties for those who do not work when they are perfectly capable ofdoing so. The Income Support system provides rights to individuals butalso requires them to be responsible citizens and the framework I am developing will achieve this principle whichwas agreed inthe States when the IncomeSupport system wasproposed.