asked the Minister for Labour if he will immediately consider properly funding the Teamwork scheme in view of the fact that the allocation for these schemes this year is only £5 million whereas last year it was £8.5 million.
Ceisteanna-Questions. Oral Answers. - Teamwork Scheme.
5.
Mr. Cowen
I am keeping the situation under review. I would point out that the allocation for Teamwork, as for any other scheme, must take account of other priorities for Exchequer funding and have regard to the general budgetary situation.
Mr. Cowen
Would the Minister not accept that the allocation for the Teamwork scheme this year has meant that only £500,000 is available for new schemes, that the amount allocated in 1986 is in respect of a carry-over project from last year and that any extension or projects begun in 1985 will be concluded in 1986? Would the Minister accept also that this represents a very bad mark against the Government in terms of their commitment to youth and youth employment in that this reduction of £3.3 million means that youth employment has been placed very far down the list of priorities as referred to by the Minister in his reply?
The initial amount allocated for the Teamwork scheme in 1985 was £6 million. There was a secondary allocation which brought the amount up to £8.476 million. The allocation for 1986 is, as the Deputy says, £5 million. There has been a carry-over of approximately £4.1 million from the commitments in 1985 so the Deputy can work out the logic of those figures. One of the reasons for this has been the phenomenal success of the Teamwork scheme. Having been appointed recently to this position with responsibility for the area of youth, I am well aware of the concern expressed by a large number of organisations and I am aware, too, of the inherent significance of the Deputy's question. It would be my intention to endeavour to have further funding made available later in the year, though I cannot give a commitment at this time that such money will be made available.
Mr. Cowen
Would the Minister not accept that, despite his claiming to be well aware of the success of this scheme and of the commitment of the Government to it, in a written reply to my colleague, Deputy Hyland, on 25 February last as reported at column 154 of the Official Report, the Minister for Labour stated that it had been possible to approve grants for only a limited number of projects in 1986. He went on to say that:
As the money available for new projects has now been allocated, it will not be possible to consider further applications under Teamwork.
That would indicate that in February 1986, only one month into the year, the Minister was in a position to say no further applications could be considered under the Teamwork scheme for this year. Therefore, if the Government are serious in relation to the so-called success of this scheme, would the Minister of State undertake to the House to arrange immediately for an allocation to fund this scheme properly?
The scheme has been a phenomenol success. In one of the later questions the Teamwork scheme is placed in context in relation to the various other schemes which the Government are operating for those under and over 25 years. There were 39 projects approved for assistance in 1985. While the allocation was over £8 million last year approximately 500 applicants were refused assistance in that year, many of whom have since gone on to gain assistance under the social employment scheme. It is also fair to note that when the Teamwork scheme was set up originally it assisted in many areas which were strictly outside its brief. As it stands now, the allocation of £5 million has a carry over of £4.1 million and 39 projects have been assisted to date.
Mr. Cowen
Is it not the case that in a written reply to me on 5 March last in relation to the 500 applications which could not be assisted in 1985 the Minister said that the best estimate for the allocation of funds to allow those applications go ahead would be in the region of £15 million? Therefore, the carry over which the Minister of State refers to is totally inadequate. In relation to any supplementary estimate for the purpose of funding the 500 applications in 1985 and any new projects in 1986, would the Minister of State not require a significant investment of some £20 million rather than the £4.1 million?
The Deputy is differentiating. The position is that when applications come in initially for schemes such as this, the costings are difficult to estimate. The £15 million quoted by the Minister in his reply of 15 March includes a greater number of schemes which would not be strictly related to the Teamwork scheme brief but which were assisted in the initial years of the scheme. Many of those would be difficult to estimate. At this stage I could not give the Deputy an accurate figure of what it would cost to put through all the applications which have come in.
Could I ask the Minister of State how his Department decide on which schemes will not receive continued funding? Is the deprivation of a particular area taken into account? I am thinking in particular of the SUSS Centre in Ballymun which the Minister visited. Does the Minister of State not consider a refusal to continue funding a centre like that is a destruction?
That seems to be a separate question.
It relates to the money available.
It involves a complete discussion of the scheme and its working.
It involves trying to tease out whether the money that is available will be allocated on the basis of need rather than on the basis of first in, first served.
Deputy, that is about the working of the scheme. It is widening the question very much.
Could I ask the Minister of State if he would indicate whether or not he is prepared to reconsider the refusal to continue the funding for the SUSS Centre in Ballymun?
That is a specific project but I can assure the Deputy the factor which he raised is taken into account in relation to the allocation of funds under the scheme.