asked the Minister for Labour if he is aware that AnCO are planning to reduce the allowance paid to trainees aged under 18 from a maximum of £30 per week to about £20 per week; if ministerial approval was sought for such a move; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - AnCO Trainee Allowances.
10.
There is need for a greater degree of uniformity between the allowances payable to participants in the training and temporary employment programmes. It is proposed, therefore, to review the allowances payable in the context of the 1987 Estimates. The council of AnCO have agreed to defer their decision to introduce a revised allowance for trainees under 18 years of age until this review is completed.
Would the Minister explain what he means by regularising these payments? Is he aware that some trainees have already been informed that their training allowances would be reduced unless they could prove that they were entitled to more on social welfare? The majority of these trainees are not entitled to any social welfare because they cannot claim it until they are 18 years of age. Can the Minister tell the House what exactly is going on?
Training allowances payable under the various programmes vary considerably. For instance, participants in some of the Department of Education programmes receive £30 a month whereas a person in a similar programme run by AnCO would receive £29.75 a week. The council of AnCO at a meeting on 24 June agreed to defer the decision to introduce a revised allowance for trainees until the review is completed. I am not aware of information being sent to participants that their allowances would be reduced. That may have happened before the council decided to defer their decision until the review was completed.
Would the Minister not admit that what is involved is a cost cutting exercise and that the proposal was to reduce allowances to £20 a week simply as a means to save money? This would be totally unacceptable since these schemes were set up to assist young people and ensure that they had some money in their pockets.
The point has been made that the high allowances paid on some courses attract people out of education before their time. It is possible that young people will be attracted to the programmes with the highest allowances rather than to the programme which might be of most benefit to them.
It might be better to ensure that people who want to continue in education receive an allowance rather than reducing the allowances to trainees.
The council of AnCO have agreed to defer their decision until the review in the context of the 1987 Estimates has taken place, and I am sure the point the Deputy made will be borne in mind.
I am glad AnCO are reviewing this matter. Would the Minister agree that people between the ages of 15 and 18 years who are on these courses are normally from deprived backgrounds and are encouraged by community leaders and others to avail of these courses? They are the last people who should be affected by these cuts and whoever was responsible for making this suggestion should be brought to account.