Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 3 Jul 1975

Vol. 283 No. 3

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Training Grants.

24.

asked the Minister for Labour if certain Irish firms, qualified under EEC regulations, have been refused training grants from the European Social Fund because of restrictions under existing Irish regulations; and if he will endeavour to have such regulations altered to allow these firms to benefit from the fund.

I assume the Deputy is referring to the situation under which some types of training expenditure by Irish firms could be eligible for consideration for aid from the European Social Fund if such expenditure were first aided from Irish public funds. The types of expenditure at issue relate to rental or depreciation of materials and buildings used for training purposes and to certain types of teaching aids.

Under the Industrial Development Act, 1969, training grants payable by the Industrial Development Authority are limited to the amounts of trainees' remuneration and expenses and of similar costs relating to instructors, advisers, and so on. The question of amending this Act to allow grants in respect of additional type of training expenditure is a matter for decision by the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Is it true that a number of firms who qualify under European standards have already been refused aid under this scheme simply because of the Irish regulations which apply? Would the Minister consider that the 1969 Act should be amended as a matter of urgency? Will he press on the Government the necessity for its amendment so that these firms can benefit from money which is available within the European Social Fund? The country would also benefit as a result of their getting it.

This legislation is the responsibility of the Minister for Industry and Commerce. It would be a mistake to think that if there were a change in domestic legislation to permit of a wider interpretation of grants from the ESF there would be an automatic matching grants from the ESF to home expenditure in this area. While the amount of a firm's expected contribution is not set out in the fund's regulations it can be expected that an acceptable breakdown of expenditure would arise from any change in home legislation to permit participation by private firms in these wider areas. The breakdown of expenditure would be something like the firm contributing one-third, the European Social Fund contributing one-third, and the Exchequer contributing one-third. In view of the fund's regulations there would not be a 50-50 matching of contributions.

If a third of the expenditure was contributed by this fund would it not be an added income to the country as well as to the firm? Is it not true to say that some firms have not received financial assistance from Europe who would receive it if the 1969 Act were amended?

It is the opinion of the Minister for Industry and Commerce that the best national bargain is obtained under the present regulations and laws. The Deputy will probably agree with that if he looks at the regulations of the fund. Primarily this is a question for the Department of Industry and Commerce.

It is not possible that as a nation we are losing a certain amount of money?

A careful reading of the regulations would not suggest that is so.

That is hard to understand in view of the Minister's reply that money is possibly going abegging and it may be possible for some of our firms to use it.

I mentioned the breakdown of a third from the firm, a third from the fund and a third from the Government. A calculation of what we are getting at present would seem to suggest that the present legislation serves us quite well. If the Deputy wishes to pursue the matter he should pursue it with the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Top
Share