Vol. 423 No. 2
7 Mr. McCartan asked the Minister for Labour if he has satisfied himself with the level of training provided by Irish industry, especially in view of the fact that over half of the employees receive no training of any sort in any year; the steps, if any, he is taking to increase the level of training; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I am on record as stating that the level of training being provided by Irish industry is inadequate. The Cullition report identified the existence of a skills gap in the Irish workforce when compared with their EC counterparts. I have had discussions with employer representatives in the context of the review of manpower policy on the need to increase training within firms and discussions are continuing at official level.
Assistance is available to small and medium-sized enterprises through the training support scheme administered by FÁS to help them improve their competitiveness through the training of their employees. I would again emphasise to employers the importance of a well-trained workforce for the competitiveness and viability of their firms.
In view of the fact that more than half of Irish employees receive no training of any sort — only one in five receives off-the-job training and only one in five receives on-the-job training — would the Minister agree that this is a serious indictment of employers, taking into account that in recent years substantial changes and technological development have been made in various industries?
Certainly the report to which the Deputy has referred, which was one of the reports submitted to the Culliton committee, points out that training has not been as much an integrated part of our work culture as has been the case in other countries with whom we compete. Unless we bridge that gap we will put at risk not only our prospects for creating new jobs but for maintaining existing jobs. I have had discussions with employer organisations — discussions which are ongoing at official level — to try to find a mechanism by which funding can be increased for on-the-job training and employers can consider training as an investment rather than a cost, as is the perception at present.
Given the failure to date of the scheme put in place by the Minister to promote employment in the workplace, does be believe that training should be considered along the lines undertaken by CERT where there was a clear linkage of training to the specific sector? Would he consider that that might bring a greater consciousness to individual sectors of the need to upgrade training?
The placement rates in CERT, now known as FÁS, are very high. They are a very successful organisation and I pay tribute to them. In relation to on-the-job training, there is a prospect that this will become a permanent feature of the training system as distinct from the ESS which, by its nature, is a temporary response for which there is no guaranteed funding for the future. I have impressed upon employers the need for them to consider on-the-job training as an investment rather than a cost. While I appreciate that Irish employers are operating under difficult trading conditions at present, particularly those selling to the UK market, it would be short sighted in the extreme not to take up the challenge put to Irish industry by Culliton — that unless training here is put on the same footing and given equal status to that in other countries we will lose out, given the rate of technological change and product development outlined by Deputy Sherlock. Basically, it is a matter of persuading employers that to spend money on training is the right road to travel. I would not like to pre-empt the outcome of the discussions and I hope we can quickly reach agreement on the matter.
In accepting that the scheme introduced by the Minister was a disaster may I ask him not only the reason he believes the take-up was so poor but why his own target of 10,000 was so much off the mark? In view of the fact that the scheme was a disaster has the Minister had further consultations with the employers and has he any proposals to modify this scheme or to introduce another scheme?
I would point out that funding was made available to provide that a maximum of 10,000 people could take up the scheme. I have already met employers and modified the scheme. I dealt with the concerns they raised, taking into account their claim that this was a bureaucratic problem. I would point out that at all times I require the consent of the Commission in respect of any changes I introduce; I am not a master of my own destiny in that regard. All requests by employers have been dealt with and I now look to them to see in what way they can take up the excellent advantages available under this scheme.
