Introduction:

Action on Elder Abuse (South Africa) (AEASA) acknowledges the efforts of

Government to address the relief of poverty, especially in regard to older persons. However, it is via these very mechanisms that many older persons suffer the most

abuse. Callers to HEAL (Halt Elder Abuse Line) which is one of AEASA’s

objectives, tell of the problems experienced in the access and delivery of social

assistance. The report of the Ministerial Committee on abuse, neglect and ill-

treatment of older persons, "Mothers and fathers of the nation: the forgotten people"

26 February 2001, Volume 1, stated that "The loudest cry to reach the Committee

concerned the treatment pensioners received at pension pay-points." This was re-

iterated by the Taylor Commission report of March 2002 "Transforming the Present

Protecting the Future".

The bill, as it stands, will not meet its objectives as stated in Chapter 1 (3) (a) – (e),

and is "one sided" inasmuch as it focuses on the Department’s recovery of over-

payments and monies defrauded yet makes no provision for grants underpaid or

withdrawn or for beneficiaries that have been defrauded by staff of the Department.

A mechanism to address these and other problems experienced by beneficiaries needs to be put in place, which will resolve these issues effectively and quickly. At present appeals can take up to a year or more, even if the fault is on the side

of the Department, causing undue suffering and poverty.

The bill needs to focus more on service delivery to ensure a user friendly and

equitable system in all provinces and in both rural and urban areas. We suggest

that the issue of interim social assistance relief e.g. food parcels while waiting

for a grant application to be processed, should be written into the Act. At present this is given in some provinces, but not all.

The Bill does not address the matter of inter-Departmental collaboration. This is very important especially in regard to the Department of Home Affairs, which is

a key roleplayer in the accessibility of social assistance, and the Department of Health. ID documents, birth, death and marriage certificates as well as medical

reports are needed to access various grants.

"administrator" – this definition needs to include ‘administrator’ in the context of

a person who administrates a grant on behalf of a beneficiary who is unable to

manage his or her own money (grant). This administrator can be a staff member

from the Department or an NGO e.g. social worker.

An administrator differs from a procurator inasmuch as the procurator is appointed

by the grantee and an administrator is appointed by the Department to administer a

social grant if the procurator does not fulfil his or her function.

"primary care giver" – this definition should include …"to a child or older person.."

if the suggestion of paying the grant-in-aid to the primary care giver is accepted.

This section does not clarify the position of a person, especially an older person,

who is a permanent resident. Many older persons have lived and worked in South

Africa all their lives, and are permanent residents, not South African citizens. The

Act should state whether they are entitled to social assistance or have to become

South African citizens in order to do so. This would of course have a cost implica-

tion which would discourage older persons from accessing social assistance.

5 (2) Careful consideration must be given to the determining of a means test in

regard to the old age pension. At present, the means test discourages

older persons from earning any additional income as they could lose their

grants. For many older persons income opportunities are not regular or

secure e.g. an older person selling handmade items. It is therefore suggested

that additional income be assessed on an annual basis as this would give

a more realistic reflection of monthly income.

Grant-in-aid:

12. It is suggested that the grant-in-aid be paid to the primary caregiver rather

care for older persons yet do not receive the money from the grant-in-aid.

The definition of "primary caregiver" would then need to be expanded to

include older persons.

Financial awards to welfare organizations and persons

13. (a) and (b) This section of the Act needs to be broadened and re-written to

facilitate the partnership between the Department and the welfare sector.

Appointment of procurator

15.

Grant recipients need to be protected from procurators who abuse their function.

Numerous calls to HEAL tell of the financial abuse of older persons by their pro-

curators. It is our suggestion that there should be specific criteria for the

appointment of procurators and these should include limiting the number of

persons for whom one person can act as procurator. At present, bottle store or

shebeen owners are procurators, cashing grants for more than one grantee,

paying them in liquor. Family members appointed as procurators do not always

give the money to the beneficiary, using the money for their own needs or to buy

drugs and/or alcohol. Some older persons are not even living in the same province

as their procurator. It is difficult, if not impossible, for an older person, especially

one who is, for example, bedridden, to cancel the power of attorney.

15 (1) and (2) The "prescribed requirements" and "prescribed conditions" must

be defined.

In "Misuse of social assistance" it states that if a beneficiary, procurator, primary

care giver or applicant misuses a grant, the payment of the grant may be suspended.

While we agree that this is fitting in the case of a beneficiary or applicant, we feel

it is unfair to cause hardship to a beneficiary due to the dishonesty of a procurator

or primary caregiver. This needs to be treated as two separate issues, and while

the allegation is being investigated, interim social assistance made available to the

beneficiary.

We would like to see the legislation include some mechanism for accountability,

termination of the power of attorney and even recovery of the money misappro-

priated by procurators and administrators.

Inspectorate for Social Assistance:

While AEASA acknowledges the need for the state to recover moneys that have

been misappropriated, we question the cost effectiveness of the Inspectorate and

whether this function could not adequately be fulfilled by the Auditor General, the Department itself or the already established Scorpions Unit. In the case of

individual beneficiaries who have abused social assistance, the modus operandi

of the Inspectorate is rather draconian, and seen in conjunction with Chapter 3

"Recovery of sums overpaid" 17 (2) which states that the Minister may write off the amount owing if the recovery of such an amount would be uneconomical or cause

undue hardship to the debtor, is contradictory.

We therefore suggest that this Chapter be removed from the Act.

Action on Elder Abuse (SA) welcomes the introduction of this Agency and

embraces the objects of the Bill which should equalize the quality of service

delivery in all provinces and standardize benefits.

A national system of social assistance will streamline the transferring of grants

in the case of beneficiaries re-locating to another province.

Service delivery should be improved as staff of the Agency will be more focused

and better trained to attend to the needs of beneficiaries.

However, we have the following concerns:

The Bill does not provide sufficient protection for beneficiaries as there is no

formal body to which complaints of poor service can be addressed.

Timeframes are obvious by their absence. A set timeframe for the transition or

handover period and the maximum time allowed between application and payment

of grants should be stipulated. Failure to do so, will result in suffering and increased poverty for beneficiaries.

Pat Lindgren

Director

22^nd September 2003