Vol. 434 No. 5
1 Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will make a statement on reports that he intends to introduce a compulsory work programme for school leavers similar to the summer scheme that was introduced for third level students.
5 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will outline the details of his proposed training scheme for school leavers; if he will confirm that it will be voluntary and that those who do not participate will not lose any entitlement to unemployment assistance or related benefits; if he will outline the type of training that is envisaged; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 5 together.
The students summer jobs scheme, which was introduced earlier this year to provide work for students who were no longer eligible for unemployment assistance, proved to be an outstanding success. Over 9,000 job opportunities were offered by more than 2,100 sponsors throughout the country.
It is clear that there is a reservoir of jobs, particularly in the voluntary and community sectors, which could be available to school leavers who may not have other options open to them.
To broaden the range of options available to young people and to make use of the job opportunities which are available in this area, I have received the approval of the Government for a new school leavers jobs scheme. This will operate along similar lines to the students summer jobs scheme and will be open, on a voluntary basis, to school leavers who wish to take up these job opportunities. Working on projects within their communities will provide invaluable work experience and practical on-the-job training for those concerned which will enhance their prospects of gaining sustainable employment afterwards.
The details are being finalised at present. I wish to explain there will be no element of compulsion involved in the scheme.
If this new scheme is similar to the summer work scheme I should point out that that was a compulsory scheme, despite what the Minister says, because if people did not take up the option they did not receive unemployment assistance. Would the Minister accept that this initiative, if we can call it that, constitutes another attempt to massage the unemployment figures, now well in excess of 300,000? Would the Minister further accept that this proposal is just another one of a number of uncoordinated and overlapping schemes within the overall social welfare, education and training areas? Would the Minister also give us the views of his junior Minister and confirm that the Labour Party are agreeable to the provisions of this scheme?
For the record I should make it quite clear that unemployment assistance had been taken from summer students before I introduced that scheme. That is the chronological position; the scheme was introduced as an option for the summer. That is now in the past and will be a matter which will arise for discussion again in relation to next year. I am particularly concerned about the demoralising effects of the dole and social exclusion, the exclusion of unemployment assistance to young people who do not have the advantage of further educational opportunities or training courses. After the leaving certificate certain numbers of students are taken into third level educational institutions, in training courses with FÁS and on other schemes. After all of those, there remain approximately 5,000 or 6,000 with nothing, with no opportunity. In these circumstances I wanted to provide them with the option which arose from our experience gleaned from summer students. I am convinced of the potential of this voluntary option for new school leavers who are about to join the dole queues. In that respect we are discussing and preparing final details with the Department of Enterprise and Employment the possibility of having a training module attached to that scheme, because there is no doubt but that jobs of that kind are available within the community in areas we have witnessed following work carried out under the summer jobs scheme.
Deputy Allen mentioned also the overlapping of schemes. They are not overlapping schemes but separate schemes for different segments of the overall 290,000 people unemployed. Not all of those people are the same; they do not all have similar circumstances. Some want second chance education, which is why we introduced second chance education schemes. Some want training schemes; some can benefit from the "back to work" allowance which I introduced recently. All of these are options available to people who are unemployed. I am sure Deputy Allen and other members of his party on that side of the House would not want to see the removal of these options which are much valued by unemployed people.
I am fully supportive of the idea of having guaranteed training and/or job opportunities for school leavers. My concern is with the nature of the current scheme the Minister is introducing. When he says that this scheme will be similar to the summer jobs scheme, would he say whether school leavers who have less than the £15 per week eligibility for unemployment assistance will be excluded from availing of these wonderful opportunities the Minister believes he has for them? Furthermore, would he say whether if a student is not eligible at all for unemployment assistance, he would be eligible to participate under the provisions of this latest scheme? In addition, would the Minister say what type of training will be provided? For example, will students have access to FÁS courses? Will there be some kind of accreditation for training? Will there be an obligation on employers, whoever they may be, to have a particular training process undertaken and how will that be monitored? Those are a few only of the questions remaining to be answered about this scheme.
Obviously, people in receipt of only £15, £16 or £20 a week would be receiving the £40 anyway, so it will be of benefit to very large numbers in terms of the actual money they will receive if they take the option. But people who would be in receipt of under £15, as the terms are set, would not be eligible to participate in the scheme but obviously would be eligible for their payment in the normal way. That will continue to be the case.
With regard to people who would not qualify or be eligible at all, I should say they would not be coming to me; they would not be the people about whom I am talking in these circumstances. On the question of whether they would have access to FÁS training courses, I should say that yes, of course they will have access to FÁS training courses. I should point out that, as we become more computerised and more in control of our business in social welfare, I want to provide a better service to everybody involved. In this case we are talking about people who are unemployed. I want to be able to ensure there is good linkage to FÁS, that people are given access to FÁS and to opportunities. Of course, they will have such access. My problem is a very practical one. It is this. When all this access to FÁS and other opportunities are taken into account, I am left with approximately 5,000 to 6,000 school leavers who are given no opportunity, who have nothing but who have merely to sign on for the dole. I want to endeavour to provide other options for such 18-year-olds leaving school. I think Deputy Allen understands that is what I am endeavouring to do.
We are discussing with the Department of Enterprise and Employment a module which might ensure a training element and also that they would be interviewed at certain intervals to ensure that they are aware of the other options in FÁS and where possible that they pursue longer term training courses.
I propose to call the two Deputies again but I wish very much that they would be brief for obvious reasons.
Would the Minister accept that the overlapping of schemes, to which I referred, were not my words but rather the words of the Minister for Finance in the memorandum he sent to Government? Also would the Minister accept that these jobs will create a permanent underclass in the whole employment area where Government sponsored jobs will be creating this underclass? I am asking the Minister to drop this proposal and to seriously consider the CMRS proposals put forward at their conference recently. I would urge the Minister to scrap this daft proposal and take on a proposal that will create real jobs in the community.
That should be adequate.
I would like to assure the Deputy that the CMRS proposals are being fully considered by the Department of Finance. This is a good scheme and I have no intention of dropping it. Although the Deputy asked me to drop the summer jobs scheme I did not and it has been quite successful. Deputies should have a little patience and approach it on the lines suggested by Deputy De Rossa when he said "There is some good in this but we want to try to shape and develop it." The problem is that last week and this week students who have finished school are coming onto the live register. There are all kinds of categories involved, including people who have as yet no incentive to go for training courses. Obviously, we want to build up that incentive. There are also people who would avail of training courses if they could get them. I want to assist those and I want to do it now. That may be inconvenient and awkward, but it is timely. The Deputy talked about massaging the register. I wish Deputies would stop that nonsense. If we are going to do things for people it will have the effect of reducing the number of people sitting on the sideline permanently.
They are not my words, they are the words of the Minister for Finance. Shall I read them out?
The Deputy is repeating words. I trust the Deputy has not got a Government memorandum.
He has.
Under the Official Secrets Act the Deputy is bound to hand it in.
My concern is that this scheme if it is to be introduced — and obviously the Minister is determined to do so — should actually provide real training for the school leavers concerned. I want some guarantees that that will be the case. When the Minister says this is a voluntary scheme can he clarify if school leavers who would qualify for £15 or more per week unemployment assistance and do not apply for this scheme will be denied unemployment assistance?
No.
I am trying to clarify these things. Is it a totally voluntary scheme?
Yes.
The second point I wish to raise concerns people who may have a disability of one kind or another or be unfit for work but who in the normal course would qualify for this scheme on the basis that they are in receipt of £15 or more. Will they be denied assistance because they are not in a position to take up a place? Finally, can the Minister indicate to the House what rates will be paid? Will they be paid the same rate as if they were taking up a FÁS course, that is approximately £55 per week, or will it be £40 per week?
The rate will be £40 for 16 hours; that is the rate at which the summer students were paid. I can only give the money I have. When we talk about FÁS funds and FÁS courses we are talking about courses that have 65 per cent EC support. I do not have that support. I have the money and I have got approval to spend a little more on this scheme, but beyond that I cannot go at this stage. If Deputies are patient with me we may be able to develop something worthwhile from it.
The Deputy asked about training. As I have already said, we are discussing with the Department of Enterprise and Employment the question of a training module which would be appropriate to the situation. There are three matters to be considered. First, some of the groups are very professional and have training. Second, there is the question of ensuring that people see a pathway as well as the other opportunities. As I see it, that is one aspect which would be part of a package. Third, experience is crucial. All the studies carried out over the years revealed that two things mattered to unemployed people: training and experience. We can at least give people experience. If we build a module of training — even though it is a simple one — and if we can then through our facilitators keep in touch with FÁS and ensure a better linkage between training and experience, then I think we will see in time a transformation in the way we approach these people.
Is it voluntary?
It is totally voluntary.
Three questions remain to be resolved and brevity must be the keynote of our proceedings. I am calling Question No. 2——
In regard to the voluntary aspect——
Sorry, the Deputy will have to raise that some other time.
Does it apply——
The Chair will be obeyed. Deputy De Rossa, please desist.
If an unemployed person does not apply will they be ruled out of unemployment assistance?
No.
Question No. 2 please.
