Vol. 430 No. 8
20 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment the way in which the proposed early warning system, which is to be the main function of the employment protection unit, differs from the early warning system already in his Department in the Sectoral Industries Division, involving regular meetings of all relevant agencies with knowledge of firms likely to have difficulties.
45 Mr. Boylan asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment the way in which the proposed early warning system, which is to be the main function of the employment protection unit, differs from the early warning system already in his Department in the Sectoral Industries Division, involving regular meetings of all relevant agencies with knowledge of firms likely to have difficulties.
60 Mrs. T. Ahearn asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment the way in which the proposed early warning system, which is to be the main function of the employment protection unit, differs from the early warning system already in his Department in the Sectoral Industries Division, involving regular meetings of all relevant agencies with knowledge of firms likely to have difficulties.
77 Mr. Barrett asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment the way in which the proposed early warning system, which is to be the main function of the employment protection unit, differs from the early warning system already in his Department in the Sectoral Industries Division, involving regular meetings of all relevant agencies with knowledge of firms likely to have difficulties.
84 Mr. Bradford asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment the way in which the proposed early warning system, which is to be the main function of the employment protection unit, differs from the early warning system already in his Department in the Sectoral Industries Division, involving regular meetings of all relevant agencies with knowledge of firms likely to have difficulties.
92 Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment the way in which the proposed early warning system, which is to be the main function of the employment protection unit, differs from the early warning system already in his Department in the Sectoral Industries Division, involving regular meetings of all relevant agencies with knowledge of firms likely to have difficulties.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 20, 45, 60, 77, 84 and 92 together.
The early warning system to be operated by the employment protection unit, when established, will draw on the information available to all the relevant agencies and bodies that provide advisory services to firms in difficulties.
I envisage that the new arrangements will lead to a strengthening of the existing early warning system through the implementation of improved co-ordination and consultation procedures under the direction of my Department.
Is it not the case that for the last 20 years at least the sectoral industries division of the Minister's Department has brought together all the relevant agencies to discuss firms which may be under threat and pool confidential information in that regard? How will the job protection unit represent an advance?
The Deputy is correct but his information is out of date. With the abolition of Fóir Teoranta, for which the old Department had responsibility, the sectoral industries division, with its early warning system to which the Deputy referred, was disbanded. Apart from the Industrial Development Authority there is no equivalent body and it is, therefore, our intention to re-establish such a body.
Is the Minister telling us therefore, that the establishment of a job protection unit announced by the Government amounts to a reversal of one of the most foolish decisions made by the Taoiseach when Minister for Finance to abolish Fóir Teoranta and a long established procedure, whereby we got an early warning of potential job losses, involving many other agencies?
The Deputy may have misunderstood the intention in regard to the employment protection unit; it will not operate an early warning system in regard to jobs at risk, it is a much broader proposal which is currently being developed in consultation with a number of agencies, including the social partners. Regard will be had to changes in technology, work practices and markets as distinct from the narrow based early warning system whereby we focused exclusively on financial difficulties.
Does the Minister have any sympathy for Members on this side of the House who have been bombarded with information about consultations and discussions during Question Time today? In practical terms, what does this mean to those who feel their jobs are threatened? Does the Minister accept what is implicit in Deputy Bruton's question, that the main function of the employment protection unit is the early warning system? As a former Minister for Labour, is he familiar with the effective early warning system which was in place and which, depending on a person's point of view, had a limited impact on job protection? Does the job protection unit about which he is still engaged in consultation deserve its name? What will it do, in practical terms, for those whose jobs may be at risk?
I draw the attention of the Deputies to the fact that there are 1.1 million people in the labour force. The entire complement of personnel of the Department of Enterprise and Employment, FÁS and the Industrial Development Authority amounts to fewer than 5,000 persons. In gathering information on changes in the labour market and in identifying employment at risk rather than individual jobs, the co-operation and active participation of people in the business world will be required. They must be allowed to feed into the system on a confidential basis. In the first 120 days of this Administration we could have rushed ahead and set up such a unit without first entering into consultations but there would have been howls of protest from the other side of the House that we were not taking into account the contributions which people in the labour market could offer. We are trying to establish, with limited resources and against a background where employment in the public sector must be curtailed or maintained at its present level, the most effective and efficient system. We are very close to putting such a system in place.
Is the Minister aware that the sectoral industries division of the Department of Industry and Commerce did all those things before it was abolished by the Taoiseach, Deputy Reynolds?
First, the Department of Industry and Commerce no longer exists. Second, before it was abolished it did a number of things——
I am talking about when it existed.
Even then it did not carry it out very well given that the level of redundancies in the early 1980s was appalling. In many cases the change in technology, work practices and markets were not properly or accurately conveyed to the unit because it had been focusing exclusively on the monetary difficulties of companies, not on the changing technologies which are at the root of job displacement and employment-loss threats.
That concludes Question Time for today.
On a point of order, I wish my Question No. 144 to be post-poned until the next day on which the Minister will take oral questions.
