asked the Minister for Social Welfare the number of persons registered as unemployed in the employment exchanges in Dublin city; and the number of those listed as living in the Dublin inner city postal districts at the latest date for which figures are available and on the corresponding date in 1982.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Registered Unemployed.
15.
The number of persons registered as unemployed in the employment exchanges in Dublin city on 29 April 1983 was 51,593 and on 30 April 1982 was 40,300.
Statistics are not maintained which would enable the information requested by the Deputy in the second part of the question to be furnished.
Deputies are having problems in hearing replies because of the sound system. It is not only difficult to hear from the Minister's side, but from the other side of the House as well. Could the Minister repeat the figure and could we have a breakdown between the north and south inner city? Also, in view of scenes yesterday at a Dublin unemployment exchange, would the Minister take steps to ensure that no such activities are allowed — I am speaking on behalf of the people administering this scheme — and that there will be no recurrence in that area in the future?
That appears to be a separate question.
Does the Deputy want me to give the figures for north and south city?
Yes, I want the figures for the north and south side for 1983.
The figures are: Lower Gardiner Street — 10,336; North Cumberland Street — 11,985; Navan Road — 4,739. Those are the figures for the north side.
Townsend Street — 2,123; Victoria Street — 3,543; Thomas Street — 4,950; Werburgh Street — 13,917. That gives a grand total of 51,593.
Is the Minister satisfied that the exchanges are in a position to deal with the large numbers attending them at present?
In the Dublin area, as the Deputy is aware, we have opened up a centre in Thomas Street which has helped the situation and signing is not done as regularly as it could be done. Given the numbers there are difficulties, but we are looking at the situation all the time and there are no great problems within the city. There is, however, overcrowding and those suffering most are the staff within the exchanges, because of the volume of work there. At the moment all I can say is that the position seems to be reasonable, although it could be improved. There have been problems elsewhere which may be dealt with.
I certainly accept that the staffs are suffering because their number has not been increased in proportion to the increase in the unemployment figures. Does the Minister consider that the time has come to have a new look at the whole method of signing on, particularly in the case of young people? Is it appropriate to have numbers of young people attending exchanges to sign on and have them waiting for perhaps three or four months to have their claims processed? Is this desirable socially? I should like the Minister to make a statement on any plan the Department have for changing the system.
I would hope that this would be one of the areas at which the Commission on Social Welfare would be looking.
The question is really a statistical one.
I take the Deputy's point. The area in question is one that must be looked at. Something that has been the practice for a long time is not necessarily what is needed today, so I accept that the position should be looked at on an on-going basis.