Dick Spring
Question:1 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the unemployment crisis, including the measures already announced by the Government.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Jobs Policy.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:2 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed by him with the social partners at their meeting on 3rd September, 1992; the progress made so far on the implementation of the various initiatives announced by the Government in recent weeks arising from the unemployment situation; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Jim O'Keeffe
Question:3 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach whether he has any new proposals to make to counter the continuing rise in the number of unemployed.
Jimmy Deenihan
Question:70 Mr. Deenihan asked the Taoiseach the steps that he has taken since he took office to reduce unemployment in the under 25 age group; and if he has satisfied himself that these measures are adequate.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 70 together.
As Deputies will be aware, these questions were originally to have been taken on Wednesday last and have since been overtaken, of course, by my statement on the economy in the House on Thursday last. In that statement, I dealt comprehensively with the issues raised in the questions. I do not, therefore, propose to repeat all that I said on Thursday last but I will highlight the following key points.
Since 1987, as a result of the policies we have been so successfully pursuing, we have managed to restore the public finances and the economy to their present strength while, at the same time, we succeeded in increasing employment at an annual average growth rate that is seven times faster than the average for the past 30 years. The numbers in employment now are higher than at any time over the past ten years, but that is not enough. We need to do much more. We need to take heart from these considerable achievements and not allow ourselves to be overcome by self-defeatist attitudes.
The Government has taken a wide ranging series of employment initiatives in recent weeks. I provided details of these in my Statement in the House on Thursday last. The Government has in this way shown its commitment and clear determination to take all possible measures to accelerate employment creation and reduce unemployment.
I already dealt with the useful meeting which we had with the social partners on 3 September. Copies of the agreed press statement which was issued after that meeting have been laid before this House.
One of the more important conclusions from this meeting is that the Central Review Committee of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress are now examining, at my request, new strategies and measures within the framework of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress to increase employment and will be submitting their recommendations to the Government by the end of this month. For my part, I have given an undertaking to the social partners that these recommendations will be fully, carefully and quickly considered by the Government as soon as they are received.
The Government is, therefore, actively engaged in complementing and reinforcing all existing employment creation measures with new concerted efforts and strategies. However, this must be and is being firmly set within the framework of the budgetary disciplines and policies we have been pursuing so successfully with the agreement of the social partners and with such good results since 1987.
There can be no question of increasing Government borrowing, as has been suggested in certain quarters. All of us in this House are aware of the disastrous consequences associated with such policies. I would hope that we are all resolved that these mistakes will never be repeated.
In view of the very serious position facing every family in this country vis-à-vis unemployment would the Taoiseach clarify for the House in regard to the £100 million — in relation to which an announcement was made in early summer — and also in view of the deteriorating position occasioned by the currency crisis in recent weeks what, if any, amount of those £100 million have been drawn down, by whom and on what basis those sums of money will be made available to industry? In view of the concern expressed yesterday by the EC Competition Commissioner, Sir Leon Brittan, perhaps the Taoiseach would say whether he is satisfied that the £50 grant per worker to exporting companies will be sustainable on the basis of the Government announcement?
I understand that the marketing development fund set up last week comes within the rules and regulations of the EC; at least that was my information as of the other day. In relation to the enterprise fund which was announced, not in early summer but on 26 August at the first meeting of the Government after the summer recess, that is to be decided on and distributed as projects are brought forward through the enterprise partnership boards that will be set up in every county. I might add that in some counties there will be more than one to ensure local community focus thereon. I should say the whole structure has been worked out in consultation with the social partners, Departments and agencies concerned. I expect that the first enterprise partnership boards will be set up early in November. As I have said already, that timetable stands.
Would the Taoiseach indicate what steps the Government has taken to ascertain how the jobs training and subsidy schemes announced by Government a number of times can be improved so that the expected places will be filled? I understand that to date a tiny fraction only of those places have been taken up. Would the Taoiseach indicate what steps have been taken to improve those schemes and what has been their take-up compared with their targeted take-up?
In relation to the training scheme I and the Minister for Labour had a meeting with all the social partners when both sides put forward their views on how the overall position could be improved, and it was pointed out that bureaucracy was standing in the way in certain circumstances. We have already cleared that matter with Brussels. The scheme is now being implemented on the lines suggested by both sides. Consequently, I expect its up-take will improve. The subsidy scheme for employment is progressing fairly well. There was a quiet period in late July and the month of August, in the holiday period, but the uptake is accelerating. I will obtain details later on and send them to the Deputy. I should say that the employment take-up is in the region of 4,000 at present.
Does the Taoiseach accept that we are at present confronted by an unemployment crisis of unprecedented proportions? Would he say whether he has so far received any advice on the number of extra jobs that will be lost as a result of the recent 3 per cent increase in interest rates? Does he accept that if we are to hold out any hope of turning the tide, a comprehensive approach to jobs is necessary and I should like him to comment on two aspects. First, does he see the need for a jobs Bill which would trawl through various previous Bills to remove unnecessary regulatory restraint on enterprise?
Secondly, there is an appalling situation in regard to investment in enterprise. Virtually tax-free investment in special deposit accounts will be available from 1 January, meaning that anyone who wants to invest in enterprise would be lunatic, because of the attractions of these special accounts.
The Deputy has asked about seven questions. I will try to deal with them.
His question was as good as the Taoiseach's long reply.
The Deputy can see the size of the brief.
And still no jobs.
That is not correct. The Deputy must not have been listening to what I said. The numbers in employment now are higher than at any time in the past ten years.
They are all part-timers.
We have succeeded in increasing employment at an average annual growth rate which is seven times higher than the average for the past 30 years. As I said, that is not enough, we must do more. That is a recognition of the size of the problem. I always recognised it. Every possible initiative — we have a list of them — will be taken. Surely I do not have to go through them again. The Minister for Finance has announced two years free from PRSI for employers to try to give some impetus to job creation. We have implemented recommendations in the Culliton Report. There are increases in community development and vocational training and education schemes. We are going through every Department to find what new initiatives can be taken and to take out any obstacles or hurdles or any over-bureaucratic procedures in creating a single job. We have the enterprise fund which is filling a vacuum. There was never a supportive environment for local enterprise to help people who want to create a small business that would give five or ten jobs. There was consistent criticism that there was no equity in the supportive environment. There will be, under the new partnership boards. If any Member has any new ideas we would be only too delighted to have those ideas examined. We would like to see the party opposite participate in the Oireachtas committee. If they do not wish to participate, let them send any ideas they have to the committee for examination.
I will if you will. Will the Taoiseach answer the questions I asked?
The Deputy asked seven questions. I must have covered four or five already.
What about the jobs Bill and investment?
In relation to interest rates, I am glad to say that sterling has stabilised again in the past couple of days. Today at lunchtime it was down to about 103.45 and it is continuing in the right direction. The way to get down interest rates is the way we have been pursuing and no other way. We must take a firm stand on our exchange rate policy, convince the markets and the investors that that is the way it is and that is the way it is going to be. That is beginning to show results in the past few days. In relation to mortgage holders, the Minister for the Environment is engaged in continuing discussions with the building societies and banks to ensure that customers may be able to have additional payments capitalised. I expect the Minister will make an announcement in that regard in the next few days. The number of jobs that may be lost due to the effects of the currency crisis is not determinable at this stage. We will help exports in every way possible. I do not have numbers, as I am sure the Deputy has not.
Investment in equities.
Given the negative impact which the increase in interest rates has on employment creation, is the Taoiseach sticking to his original view that the increase in interest rates is temporary? Can he give an outline as to when they might be reduced? Will he confirm whether it is his view that Irish interest rates will not be reduced until German interest rates are reduced? Is he aware that in his statement to the House last Thursday he referred to semi-State companies like Coillte as being active in job creation. The opposite is correct. Bodies like Coillte are shedding jobs and have been doing so for a number of months.
I was well aware that there were temporary lay-offs in various areas and many of those jobs will return again in the future. In regard to interest rates, I have available to me only the information which is available to everybody else in trying to forecast where interest rates will go. I have said that the decisive policy adopted by the Government is beginning to show signs of results this week. If that continues we will get to the point where interest rates can be reduced. It is unlikely that Irish interest rates can be reduced until the Germans bring down theirs, but if a situation arises where it is possible the Central Bank will undoubtedly take the opportunity.
Would the Taoiseach agree that he is being selective in the quoting of figures? Does he agree specifically that in three of the past four years employment has fallen? Does he agree that unemployment has risen for 25 consecutive months? Does he accept that youth unemployment has grown by 55 per cent in the past two years? In reply to Question No. 70, will he specifically indicate what initiatives he proposes for the young unemployed, apart from the 143 people in the youth training scheme?
I reject totally the impression the Deputy is trying to give.
Is the Taoiseach saying that it is not true?
We all recognised during the summer that there would be increases relating to students. That proved to be correct. We saw what happened in last month's figures and it is not in accordance with the picture the Deputy is trying to paint.
That is not true. Look at the figures again.
I am saying what the actual figures are. The Deputy can devise any system he likes to interpret them.
Confuse him with facts.
Is the CSO not accurate?
These are only temporary little details.
More needs to be done and if the Deputy and the party opposite have any ideas they are welcome to put them before the Oireachtas committee. I do not think they have any ideas to offer.
Would the Taoiseach accept that many of us feel that what he is saying on behalf of the Government about the jobs crisis is merely giving the appearance of activity rather than actual constructive action to cope with the crisis? If he is so confident about what he is doing, would he tell us his projections for unemployment for the next six or 12 months? Then we might have some confidence or otherwise in this programme he puts before us as an answer to the crisis.
Such a stupid question.
I do not know whether the Deputy thinks I am an astrologist or a crystal ball gazer. There is nobody in the world today who would make any projection as to when the present international currency crisis will abate. That has to have an effect on what might happen over the next six, 12 or 18 months.
What figure is to be included in the Estimates for Social Welfare next year?
There are too many Deputies offering. There are many questions tabled to the Taoiseach today and I want to deal with as many as possible. I apologise to Deputy Burke, I did not observe him. I will call him.
Notwithstanding all the evidence of the unemployment register, the Taoiseach claims, without the benefit of facts, that more people are at work than four or five years ago. What percentage of those at work are in part-time employment and could he translate that information into man weeks?
That seems to be a separate question.
It is a totally separate question. The Deputy knows that.
The Taoiseach is misleading the House about numbers in full-time employment.
I welcome the Taoiseach's statement and the recognition of how much has been achieved in the past five years. I also welcome the fact that the Taoiseach is inviting ideas as to where employment could be created. In taking up that invitation, I suggest that we could tackle two major social problems, unemployment and inadequate local authority housing, if we were to divert some of that £100 million mentioned by the Taoiseach, and also some of our savings in borrowings this year as a result of the very good budget brought in by the Minister for Finance——
(Interruptions.)
——to be used for badly needed local authority housing. This would tackle the housing need and unemployment as it would create jobs in the construction industry which at the moment is in a very bad state.
The question of local authority housing is being addressed by the Minister for the Environment in consulation with the Minister for Finance in the context of the Estimates for next year's programme. On the question of diverting some of the savings from the National Treasury Management Agency into job creation, we have already directed £50 million from such savings into the enterprise fund so the suggestion is being taken up in that regard.
I have a number of Deputies offering. I will call them for a final question — Deputies John Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny), Belton and Seán Barrett.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Since the Taoiseach does not accept CSO figures, is his philosophy based on Shakespeare's idea that there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so?
(Interruptions.)
That does not need any comment from me.
I do not see very much thinking from your Front Bench.
If that is the level of contributions towards creating jobs and giving ideas, so be it.
Has the Government any plans to start a campaign of Army recruitment? During the past four years nobody has been taken into the Army. The Taoiseach should restart Army recruitment.
It is an excellent question. I would advise the Deputy to put it down in the ordinary way.
(Interruptions.)
Question No. 3 relates to what plans the Taoiseach has to create employment. I am asking a question and I want an answer.
The Deputy will get an answer at the appropriate time.
It is not fair.
It is clearly a matter for the Minister for Defence.
(Interruptions.)
I take it the Taoiseach has no plans for recruitment to the Army.
That is a matter for the Taoiseach.
Is the Taoiseach aware of a recent announcement by An Bord Telecom of a reduction of 1,500 in the staffing level and of a recent announcement by Aer Lingus of a reduction of 1,000, giving a total of 2,500 people to lose their jobs? Has the Taoiseach any proposal to examine the whole area of commercial State companies with a view to allowing them to develop and expand into the area of employment?
The Deputy is raising a rather specific matter worthy of a separate question. However, I am calling on the Taoiseach.
A Deputy
Surprise, surprise.
Deputy Belton need have no worries about the future of Connolly Barracks in Longford.
(Interruptions.)
In reply to Deputy Barrett's question, the question of employment and the development of State agencies is under scrutiny by various Departments and the Ministers concerned and undoubtedly their views will be included in job creation proposals.
The Taoiseach would want to keep a close eye on it.
A final question from Deputy John Bruton. We have spent 25 minutes on these three questions. There is little chance of getting through many more if we continue like this.
Is the Taoiseach aware there is widespread concern about the possible loss of jobs in many firms which have been affected by depreciation not just of sterling but the Italian lira and the US dollar? Is the Taoiseach further aware that there is concern at the indication by the Minister for Industry and Commerce that the proposed £50 per week scheme to help just those affected by sterling is possibly contrary to EC law? Will the Taoiseach check the conflict between what he said today about that and what the Minister for Industry and Commerce said when he was announcing it?
I thought I had made it clear that the most recent advice I have, which is some days old, is that the market development fund is in accordance with EC policy. I will certainly check it again to see if there are any further developments in relation to it. The market development fund does not specifically refer to sterling. It also refers to the devaluation of the lira and the peseta or any other areas which have caused problems for exporters as a result of devaluation.
Will the Taoiseach confirm that even though the European Commission might have no objection to the market development fund, it is possible for any exporter in another country who feels unfairly treated by our £50 per week scheme to complain to the European Court and that that can be a potential risk for us?
I do not regard it as a serious risk at the moment although it is possible for anyone to complain to the European Commission about any policy being pursued by a member state. I would draw the attention of the Deputy and the House to the fact that there is an employment subsidy scheme already approved by Brussels and the Commission to pay £54 per week to people in employment. The criteria having been fulfilled, it is difficult to see how the market development fund might be outside the criteria.
It is not difficult to see if one studies it. One is discriminatory and the other is not.