Sinn Féin TD for Galway East, Louis O’Hara, has said that the large number of refusals on applications for the Humanitarian Assistance Scheme are deeply unfair on people who were left without electricity for extended periods during Storm Éowyn.

Deputy O’Hara said that there has been inconsistency in awarding of payments, particularly in recent days, and a failure to provide clear guidelines on the scheme.

Teachta O’Hara said:

“In the past few days many people who applied for the Humanitarian Assistance Scheme have been notified that their application has been rejected.

“This scheme was set up to assist people who were left without electricity and water during Storm Éowyn who had increased expenditure as a result. It was stated that the scheme would not be means tested and that food expenses would be covered without a need for receipts.

“Up until now, applications were being accepted from people who had claimed for loss of food, with flat rate payments being issued based on the size of households.

“It is now being suggested that loss of food is not covered under the scheme, or that individuals must specify that they had to spend money on eating out rather than just stating that they lost the contents of their fridge or freezer.

“There have also been issues with requests for receipts for items that don’t require receipts and refusals based on length of time without electricity.

“This is so unfair on people who went without electricity for days, and weeks in some cases, and spent huge amounts of money. Many have neighbours who have already been paid after making the exact same claim. It is petty and unnecessary, and the Department is almost making people beg for a payment.

“Several weeks after the storm there still haven’t been any clear guidelines issued on this scheme, despite repeated requests to the Minister. I’ve written to both the Minister and Department of Social Protection seeking clarity on these refusals and on what is covered by this scheme, and to express my concern at this inconsistency.

“It is a farcical situation and deeply unfair. I would encourage anybody who has received a refusal to request a review of the decision and specify the additional expenses they faced in the immediate aftermath, including costs of eating out.”