Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare entitlem

J

justsally

Registered User
Messages
743
Can someone advise me on this. If regulations are being changed in relation to Social Welfare entitlement must reference be made in the amending Act to the specific part of the Act or Statutory Instrument which is being amended.


if this is posted in the wrong forum please move it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Amendment to an Act or S.I.

Im not an expert on Social Welfare Acts, so not going to comment on their contents.

Sometimes authority to make regulations is delegated to a Minister in an Act of the Oireactas. The Minister makes these regulations by way of Statutory Instrument (S.I.). When an S.I. is signed by the Minister, it becomes law from that point forward. Regulations do not amend an Act, they are usually an additional layer of more detailed rules.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or S.I.

justsally said:
Can someone advise me on this. If regulations are being changed in relation to Social Welfare entitlement must reference be made in the amending Act to the specific part of the Act or Statutory Instrument which is being amended.
Click to expand...
Presumably so or the amendment would hardly make any sense out of context! But as mentioned above perhaps you are referring to a situation in which the higher level rules and not the actual underlying legislation is being changed?
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or S.I.

Thanks for the replies.

That's what I thought I understood to be the case. An Act was brought in, in 1997 which amended, by way of a subsection clause, an earlier Act.
In between the said first Act and the later Act amending the previous Act a S.I. was introduced through the Oireachtas and signed off in 1996. I cannot find any reference anywhere to the S.I. in the 1997 amendment. The said S.I. was benefical to some, including us.

The amendment (1997 Act) is beneficial to others in a different category, but not our category, yet it is being applied in our case. The S.I. would entitle us to a part pension, whereas the amendment would bar us from same. So it's an important matter for us.

As far as I was aware, all Legislation, be it Statutory Instruments or Acts, has the same authority, the only difference being their methods of introduction. I may be wrong.

Is there anywhere one can have an Act intrepreted for a lay person. (that will not cost an arm and a leg) It takes a very clear and focussed mind to follow through on these acts, what with all the referrals to previous Acts, amendments, and S.I.s etc - which I don't possess. Hope I'm making myself clear.
 
Last edited:
Re: Amendment to an Act or S.I.

As far as I was aware, all Legislation, be it Statutory Instruments or Acts, has the same authority, the only difference being their methods of introduction. I may be wrong
Click to expand...

Statutory Instruments are secondary legislation, minister's use them to give effect to provisions in legislation. Where there is a conflict between a S.I. and an Act of the Oireachtas the Act will always take precedence. If you are looking for legal advice then the best bet is to go to your solicitor. If you don't want to pay for the advice you could always try a free legal aid clinic (FLAC).
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

The S.I. may have referred to the original Act, or been brought into effect because the original Act allowed for an S.I. to be introduced. It may then have no authority when the original Act was amended.
Read the start of the S.I. and it may clarify matters.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

So to clarify.

The Primary Act dates from 1996. S.I. was made under delegated authority shortly afterwards. An Amendment Act was introduced in 1997.

The big question is whether the Amendment Act changed the part of the Primary Act that the S.I. depended upon.

If the changes introduced by the Amendment Act were to an unrelated part of the Primary Act (to the S.I.), then the S.I. is still in force. If the Amendment Act changed to Primary Act to the effect that the S.I. becomes meaningless or redundant, then the S.I. is no longer in force.

In the event of conflicts between Acts, the latest Act is the one in force. In the event of conflicts between an Act and a S.I., the Act is the one in force as the Act is Primary Legislation voted for in the Dail and so has precedence over an S.I. which is only Secondary Legislation.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

if you post the exact acts and statutory instruments you're talking about, people will be able to help.

csirl has stated the relevant facts, however the original Act from my reading of the OPs post was made prior to 1996.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or S.I.

justsally said:
Is there anywhere one can have an Act intrepreted for a lay person. (that will not cost an arm and a leg) It takes a very clear and focussed mind to follow through on these acts, what with all the referrals to previous Acts, amendments, and S.I.s etc - which I don't possess. Hope I'm making myself clear.
Click to expand...

The Irish Taxation Institute (and this forum) were brilliant to me when I was trying to make sense to amendments to Finance Acts on behalf of a charity.

If you are approaching on behalf of a charity/interest group, the Law Society may point you in the direction of some-one who can do this pro-bono.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

Thanks for all the very helpful replies. Sorry for the confusion. I referred to 2 Acts instead of one Act and 2 Statutory Instruments.. Having read and re-read the various documents this is the best I can come up with:-

In this order

S.I. No. 417, 1994 Social Welfare (Consolidated Payments Provisions) Regulations 1994 amended by
S.I. No. 143/1996 - Social Welfare (Consolidated Payments Provisions) Amendment (No. 3) Regulations 1996.(Consolidation Act) 1993
Social Welfare Act 1997 amended Social Welfare (Consolidations Act) 1993.

My question is Can the 1997 Act or part of same be amended without reference to the two previous Statutory Instruments. My reason for asking?-

1997 Act.
"(1A) In the case of a person, other than a person, who on or before the 6th day of April, 1997, is a voluntary contributor paying contributions under Chapter 4 of Part II, who attained pensionable age on or after the 6th day of April, 2002, but before the 6th day of April, 2012, subsection (1) (b) shall be construed as if '260' were substituted for '156'


"Explanation" (footnote on 1997 Act)
These Regulations amend existing regulatory provisions so as to enable a person who has a mixed insurance record, that is periods of full and modified rate insurance, to qualify for a Pro-Rata Mixed Insurance Old Age (Contributory) or Retirement Pension where the rate of such pension is higher than the rate of other pension entitlement"

This is simply not the correct in all cases. In fact the amendment is detrimental to us - whereas the S/I. 143/1966 was beneficial.

S.I. 143/1996
(I) an aggregate of at least 260 contributions, reckonable for the purposes of the contribution conditions for entitlement to old age (contributory) pension, have been paid in respect of or credited to him,
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

I would imagine that the 1997 Act only has to mention that it is amending the 1993 Act. Does not have to refer to the S.I.s as these are only secondary legislation to the 1993 Act.

The "Explanation" footnotes should always be taken with a health warning - they are not 100% legally accurate, just a broad description of the contents of the Act.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

Yikes


That's what I was afraid of. I understand what you mean about the "health warning". I read the Minister's speech. which he made when introducing the Bill in the Dail,and understood it to mean that the regulation was being made to facilitate people who had broken contributions, not contributors with mixed but not broken contributions. When I e-mailed the said Minister in Europe with my query, he replied "As far as I know, paid and credited contributions can be totalled in order to meet the 260 contributions requirements for a pension".

Is it any wonder I'm confused.:(

Thanks again for your helpful and early response.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

As I have no legal expertise I cannot give an informed opinion but I have some experience of mixed rate pensions. It appears to me that a similar situation is likely to occur after 2012.

Do you have more than 156 class A/Ord contributions and less than 260 plus class D contributions. If so do you have the official records of all those contributions. I have come up against a stone wall on several occasions trying to obtain class D records.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

I was able to obtain contribution records from Pensions Forecast Section, both full and reduced contributions.

Why did u have problems obtaining the records you need.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

The central records records section supplied the Class A records and state that they do not have the class D (civil service records) and they referred me to the Department in which my colleague worked.
That department has no records of the PRSI paid but supplied all personal records which shows that the person worked there between the years x and y but still no actual PRSI records.

My doubts are that no PRSI was payable due to the regulations that pertained at the time but the assumption is being made that payments were made. This means that the persons (reduced pension) is being paid on an assumption that PRSI was paid even in the absence of records/proof.
As I'm sure you are aware pension is calculated from the first day of insurable employment. As the first day of insurable employment is being taken as the date on which the person entered the civil service. This gives the person a working life of 47 years whereas if the first day of insurable employment was taken as the date the person entered private employment that person would be entitled to a full rate of pension
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

Thanksin advance!!!!
Any chance that someone who understands Legal language can explain
the following to me - just can't handle the legal jargon:eek::-

"Social Welfare Act, 1997
Continuance of instruments. 36.—An instrument that is made under a provision of The Principal Act (other than section 205 (2)) that is amended by this Act and that is in force immediately before the commencement of the amendment shall continue in force as if made under the provision so amended."
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

Blacksheep

I think I hear where you are coming from. Is it possible to find out if was obligatory to pay modified contributions when employed in the institution where you colleague worked. Perhaps someone on these boards may have been employed by the same institution and would be able to guide you as to what contributions were generally paid in the specific years for which you cannot trace records. I realise the modified contribution years (if they exist) would militate against your colleague getting a full pension by reducing the yearly average etc., whereas a shorter contribution record of class A contributions may well get him a full pension. This is one of the S.W. anomolies that exists.

Good luck with your search.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

justsally said:
I read the Minister's speech. which he made when introducing the Bill in the Dail,and understood it to mean that
.....
Click to expand...

Don't rely on the Minister's speech for clarification, I know from experience, it can often be inaccurate.

justsally said:
When I e-mailed the said Minister in Europe with my query, he replied "As far as I know, paid and credited contributions can be totalled in order to meet the 260 contributions requirements for a pension".
Click to expand...

You really need to get this clarified from the Minister in question, "As far as I know" is really not good enough. Get your local TD to table a parlimentary question for clarification if necessary.
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

Justsally
I have tried many times in the SW records section and the pension office and read many regulations to ascertain if it was obligatory to pay reduced prsi. I have asked among others who were in a similar situation and all are quite adamant they did not pay prsi.
I have tried the freedom of information and to date no result. I have posted on this forum to find others who may be in a similar situation.
I have also made a submission to the Green Paper re this and other anomalies
 
Re: Amendment to an Act or Statutory Instrument SI in relation to Social Welfare enti

SarahMc

I will indeed be having a question tabled for a written reply. I did not intend accepting the nebulous reply received, and will in time be following it up. Re. having the matter raised in the House for a written reply just pondering whether to approach a local Labour TD whose party made the amendment, or a Fianna Fail TD whose party continues to promulgate the change. I'll probably check out all the local T.Ds to see their response.

Blacksheep
I've never come across a situation such as yours before. Have you considered having the matter raised in the Dail for a written reply. As far as I can recall, more substantial information is often given to the constituent even before the question is raised in the House. Sorry, if I'm suggesting something that you have already done this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top