Vol. 397 No. 5
22 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Labour if he will outline the matters discussed with the joint ICTU/British TUC delegation at their meeting on 12 February 1990; if, in particular, he will outline his proposal for a special initiative for the long term unemployed during the course of his Presidency of the Social Affairs Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
At my meeting with the joint ICTU-TUC delegation, I outlined my programme of work as President of the Social Affairs Council.
The implementation of a Community Social Action Programme as a follow-up to the adoption of the Community Social Charter by the European Council in Strasbourg in June 1989 was also discussed. In that connection, I indicated that one of my main priorities was to draw up a concrete timetable for implementation of the action programme. I referred to particular proposals which I expected the Commission to bring forward as part of the action programme during 1990. I was informed of the preoccupations of the ICTU and the TUC in relation to proposals under the action programme.
As regards the long-term unemployed, I advised the joint delegation of my intentions during the Irish Presidency to give priority to the problems of the 7.5 million in the Community out of work for over a year. I prepared a paper on this question for discussion by Social Affairs and Labour Ministers at the informal meeting in Dublin on 1-2 March. Following the Dublin meeting, a draft resolution on action to assist the long-term unemployed was prepared for adoption by the Council in late May. The draft resolution is at present being discussed in the Council at official level.
I intimated at the Social Affairs Council in May that I would also hope to have proposals dealing with continuing vocational training, draft directives on visual display units and carcinogens and a resolution on sexual harassment at work adopted.
For their part, the trade union representatives underlined their concern to ensure that sanctions against South Africa are maintained.
I should like to thank the Minister for his reply. Does he accept that people who are long-term unemployed have become so demoralised that there is now an unemployment culture? Will he agree that as a result some of the aspects he has raised seem very academic to them? Does the draft resolution the Minister referred to propose to address in any practical way that demoralisation and debilitation of people who have been out of work for more than one year, and in many cases five years and more?
We are attempting in our resolution to take the black spots that the Deputy has referred to, where there is a lack of morale, and try to tackle the unemployment problems in them in a different way by using the statutory agencies, the educational institutions, the voluntary bodies and so on. It is our intention to help to fund them in their efforts to attack the root causes of unemployment in those black spots. In our resolution we propose a range of measures and we are asking the Department of Finance to have a number of pilot schemes throughout the member states using the ERGO and LEDA programmes to tackle unemployment. Apart from all the other schemes envisaged this is in an attempt to tackle unemployment in the black spots.
Can the Minister distinguish between his role as a Minister in the Government and as President of the Council of Social Affairs Ministers and tell us what policies he is proposing for Europe that will solve long-term unemployment in Europe that he cannot propose and give effect to here in this country as Minister for Labour? In making these proposals he should know that in Europe he is the subject of laughter and mirth as the Minister for Labour of a country that has the highest percentage of long-term employment in the European Community.
In actual fact I have been congratulated on the improvements we have made since the last Irish Presidency.
Can the Minister outline for us the specific proposals, as President of the Council, that he has not implemented as Minister for Labour in this country?
The Deputy is repeating the question.
But I did not get an answer.
Would the Minister consider abolishing the upper age limit as a special initiative, thus taking into account the plight of people who have been made redundant and who are now over the age of 50 years? That could be done rightaway in Government Departments. If there is a vacancy in any Government Department, people who have worked for the greater part of their lives find that they are ruled out, simply because they are over the age of 50. There is no justification for having an upper age limit in the present climate, and would the Minister be prepared to give some consideration to this matter?
I think this is a slightly different question but let me say that the age limit does not apply except where there are superannuation regulations. Ancillary staff members, in certain grades, are not affected. It is only where there is a superannuation scheme that the age bar of 25, 26 and 27 applies in different categories.
I am sure there are ways and means of addressing this issue. If superannuation is the only reason the matter could be resolved by changing the pension code. If we want to wipe out unemployment we must protect the jobs we have. The redundancy payment scheme was very good initially but eventually it became a means of shedding jobs. The time is now ripe to have a second look at the redundancy payments scheme as at present constituted.
The Deputy is bringing in a lot of extraneous matter.
The Pensions Act is being looked at and the redundancy and insolvency Acts are being reviewed on an annual basis.
