Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 22 Feb 1994

Vol. 439 No. 2

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Projected Labour Force Growth.

Mary Harney

Question:

6 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach the impact, if any, he expects the 60,000 growth in the labour force he predicted by the end of 1997 at the launch of the Programme for Competitiveness and Work will have on the unemployment crisis.

I stated in my speech at the launch of the new national Programme for Competitiveness and Work on 14 February 1994, that the total at work should increase by more than 60,000 in the three years of the programme. That increase would be broadly equivalent to the best three-year performance achieved in the past. I also stated that the increase would not fully match the expected labour force increase in the years 1994 to 1996.

I pointed out that the recent measures announced in the budget, in addition to their direct impact in 1994, are intended to provide for more substantial increases in jobs in the years ahead, especially in developing small business, start-up enterprises and service firms. I also pointed out that given even a slight increase in jobs in a reasonable percentage of the 100,000 small businesses in Ireland — as indicated in recent reports and surveys — unemployment would be further reduced. In addition, if growing areas of the services sector perform well, this would help reduce unemployment to more acceptable levels.

The Government and social partners have agreed to reinforce these budgetary measures for the development of small business and start-up enterprises, and for the development of the services sector over the period of the PCW and, in particular, to increase the numbers on community-based work, work experience and training to 100,000 people, who would otherwise be unemployed.

The Government and social partners have also agreed that these reinforced policies for work will be pursued continuously and actively by the Central Review Committee throughout the period of the PCW. The committee will take account of the views expressed and the positions agreed upon by the National Economic and Social Forum and the National Economic and Social Council in providing updated recommendations to Government as required in the light of the emerging trends in employment and unemployment. The committee will oversee the development of effective, regular measures to monitor the numbers at work based on CSO data, FÁS sources, Revenue and social welfare information supplemented by new inquiries if required.

I believe this hands on approach can be a key part of successfully applying the same national determination in creating work, as we did in 1987, in restoring financial stability.

Will the Taoiseach state specifically from where the increases will come? Will he accept that even in the best years of employment, namely, during the period of the Programme for National Recovery, we only managed to increase net employment by 15,000 per annum? Does the Taoiseach not consider his figure is very optimistic? Is it a “top of the head” figure or a properly calculated one?

I do not operate like the Progressive Democrats in regard to statements on employment and job creation by giving "top of the head" figures.

The Taoiseach should answer the question.

When the national plan was being launched we were accused of being pessimistic in regard to figures. As a result of the improvement in the economy and the new projectins from various bodies we are able to project an increase. We introduced a number of measures in the budget which will help the operation of small businesses. The results of a survey published yesterday showed that 65 per cent of small businesses hope to employ more people this year. Therefore, with a combination of budgetary measures and an improvement in overall international trade we believe those figures are realistic. We also propose to increase substantially the number of people on community development work. I am sure most Members will agree that we should maximise community development work as far as possible because it is better that people be employed in such schemes than drawing social welfare payments.

The Taoiseach did not answer my question. Is he talking about a growth in the services sector or in manufacturing? From where will the great growth to which he referred come?

I am talking about the services sector, the small businesses sector, the private sector and increases in community development schemes.

Will the Taoiseach agree that one of the great prospects for growth in employment is in the services sector? Has the Government any proposals to reduce to a more reasonable level the present 40 per cent penal rate of corporation tax to allow an opportunity for reinvestment in the economy?

The Deputy is raising a rather specific matter which is worthy of a separate question.

It relates to the predicted growth in the labour force of 60,000.

It is a clear-cut issue which relates to a separate question.

With respect, Sir, the Taoiseach is anxious to reply.

I will allow the Deputy to ask a pertinent question.

A report on the services sector was published recently. I agree with the Deputy that there are more opportunities and capacity for employment in the services sector and we will continue to take action on the recommendations in the report on the services sector.

Will the Taoiseach reduce the corporation tax rate?

May I refer the Taoiseach to his predecessor, who transformed job targets in the Programme for National Recovery from net new jobs to new jobs as the period of the programme progressed? I ask the Taoiseach to confirm that the figure is 60,000 net jobs.

That is not what I said at the launch of the programme and on other occasions. I made it abundantly clear so that Deputy Rabbitte would have no doubt that this is the gross figure.

Now who is in the net?

That is not the figure the trade union leaders understood they agreed to.

Are they talking to the Deputy again?

We will have to debate this matter some other time. I will hear a pertinent question from Deputy O'Donnell.

A Deputy

They will not be talking to the Deputy for long having regard to the way things are going.

Deputy Rabbitte raised the issue of the difference between gross and net jobs. Will the Taoiseach comment on the fact that net or gross figures of employment and unemployment take for granted that 20,000 young people emigrate every year? Is it not a deplorable tragedy in modern Ireland that this trend goes without comment?

I do not know the Deputy's source for the net emigration figure.

It is gross.

The most recent figure I have seen for emigration is considerably lower than that given by Deputy O'Donnell. I ask Deputy Rabbitte if he can assist in making projections as to the number of jobs likely to be lost in the economy over the next few years and if he will indicate if his figures are net or gross.

I am sure the Taoiseach met some emigrants when he was at the match at the weekend.

I want to move to priority questions.

I want to assist the Taoiseach——

I have heard the Deputy earlier. I will hear a final question from Deputy Harney.

I am astounded by what the Taoiseach has just said. Everybody understood the figure to represent net new jobs. That figure indicates that we will not perform as well as we did under the Programme for Economic and Social Progress. Will the Taoiseach indicate how many job losses he anticipates during the same period?

The Taoiseach should correct the record before we go down this road any further. The Minister for Finance and the Tánaiste are alarmed.

Stunned.

They are not at all alarmed. We are not alarmed by Deputy Rabbitte's response. I have no projections before me in respect of net new jobs or net job losses. I will check the latest projections and forward them to Deputy Harney.

Will the Taoiseach indicate if there will be fewer people employed at the end of the programme than there are now?

We now come to deal with priority questions to the Minister for Equality and Law Reform for which 20 minutes only is provided.

Top
Share