Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Oct 1995

Vol. 456 No. 7

Private Members' Business. - Vocational Training Opportunities Scheme.

The following motion was moved by Deputy Martin on Tuesday, 10 October 1995:
That Dáil Éireann calls on the Minister for Education to fulfil her promise to provide 1,000 additional places on the Vocational Training Opportunities Scheme in the 1995-1996 academic year.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:
"Dáil Éireann
—commends the Minister for Education for doubling the number of places on the Vocational Training Opportunities Scheme from 1992 to the current year;
—Notes the various initiatives taken by the Minister to tackle problems of disadvantage, such as the Early Start programme, additional resources for schools in disadvantaged areas, smaller classes, extra resource teachers, more home-schools links teachers, additional places for early school leavers on the Youthreach programme and substantial increased funding for adult literacy and numeracy programmes; and
—reaffirms the commitment of the Government in line with the Programme for a Government of Renewal to take various measures to enhance the prospects of the long term unemployed by continuing to increase their access to educational opportunities".
——(Minister for Education)

Deputy Noel Ahern was in possession when the debate was adjourned. The remainder of his time is being utilised by Deputy Brendan Smith.

And Deputy Gregory.

I am sure that is satisfactory.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. This motion highlights Fianna Fáil's concern about the shortfall in the number of places on the vocational training opportunities scheme. The VTOS programmes, in which participation increased from 247 in 1989 to 4,600 in 1994, were a very positive development and the work of the various Ministers for Education and Governments during that period should be recognised. It is very disappointing that the Minister has not fulfilled the promise she gave in early 1995 to provide 1,000 additional places on the VTOS. I have spoken to people who participated in the courses and teachers and others involved in delivering the service and all of them were fulsome in their praise of the scheme.

By and large our educational system has served the country well. There have been substantial developments over the years and access to education has also been improved. However, there is obviously still much room for improvement; no education system can stand still. It is important for the education system to adapt to changing needs and to reflect the new needs of society. Unfortunately many people have not enjoyed the full benefits of education and have been disadvantaged as a result. The provision of an opportunity for all to develop their educational potential to the full is not realised for many students because of their social and economic backgrounds. Unfortunately, there is not a level playing pitch for all students.

Last night Deputy Martin quoted from many reports which have praised the VTOS. The decision to cut back on this year's original provision of an additional 1,000 places is a retrograde step. Instead of curtailing the programme, provision should have been made to considerably expand it in the future. To say that the Government's decision is extremely short-sighted is an understatement.

The long term unemployed in our society face particular problems. The 1992 Labour Force Survey indicates that more than half of the long term unemployed have been unemployed for more than five years. Very long term unemployment continues to be growing feature. In its report Ending Long-Term Unemployment the National Economic and Social Forum produced data which shows that the long term unemployed have lower levels of qualifications compared to other groups. The reality is that the education attainment of the long term unemployed is relatively low. The National Economic and Social Forum report clearly states that the VTOS represents a useful and beneficial model and welcomes the Government's proposals to provide additional resources and places on it. If the long term unemployed and other groups are to have any chance of acquiring employment then they must have adequate qualifications. The long term unemployed have relatively low education and skills levels and approximately half of them have no formal educational qualifications. Naturally long term unemployment makes it more difficult for a person to find employment.

The NESF report indicates that people who are unemployed for more than two years have a 74 per cent chance of being unemployed a year later. That is a harrowing and frightening statistic and the Government's decision to cut back on the number of places on the VTOS defies common sense. This decision means 1,000 people, a large percentage of whom are probably young, will be denied the opportunity to get off the live register.

This scheme has undoubtedly been very successful in giving people the opportunity to acquire additional educational qualifications. I know from my county vocational education committee that there has been a high success rate among those who have completed a VTOS programme in proceeding to further education or gaining employment. Deputy Martin gave statistics on the employment levels achieved in some schools and I think these are borne out in other schools throughout the country. I support this motion.

I feel disadvantaged because of the limited time made available to Independent Deputies.

The decision to remove the small benefit made available to the long term unemployed through the VTOS during the same year it has been decided to abolish third level fees for the children of the rich and affluent says much about the Government and whether its members are genuinely concerned about the issues which led them into politics in the first instance.

This issue was brought to my attention by groups of long term unemployed people, mainly disadvantaged women from the Cherry Orchard-Ballyfermot and inner city areas of my constituency. The Minister was short on argument and, therefore, had to quote many statistics. I wish to balance those statistics by quoting the statistics given in reply to my Question No. 97 on 27 September last. These statistics make interesting reading. In the Cherry Orchard A ward 46.7 per cent of people are unemployed while in Cherry Orchard C ward 50.5 per cent of people are unemployed. I do not have time to read all the statistics but the VTOS was invaluable in such areas. It is amazing how the good schemes always get the chop. The reason for this is that they attract people and cost money. The Government decides to get rid of them because they are too good.

A group of women in the Ballyfermot vocational education committee and another group of women in the North Strand vocational education committee asked me to mention their plight. These women secured places on a course but following the cutback they were told that it would not go ahead. This is an absolute disgrace and I ask the Minister to honour the commitments given to people. I strongly support the motion calling on the Minister to provide an additional 1,000 places that are badly needed under this scheme.

(Carlow-Kilkenny): Ba chóir go mbeadh an t-oideachas is fearr ag gach éinne más féidir é sin, agus go mór mhór ag na daoine atá dífhostaithe. Tá sé tábhachtach go mbeadh sé ar a gcumas postanna a fháil in a mbeadh oideachas riachtanach, agus go mbeadh siad in ann na gnáth rudaí a dhéanamh, fiú amháin léamh.

Uair amháin nuair a bhí mé ag cabhrú sa chóras seo, bhí aithne agam ar fear go raibh post maith aige agus ní raibh sé ábalta léamh a dhéanamh; bhí sé ag brath ar chompánach san áit in a raibh sé ag obair chun go mbeadh a fhios aige cad a bhí ag teastáil nuair a tháinig na fógraí isteach.

Ba cheart go mbeadh deis ag chuile dhuine tairbhe a bhaint as an chóras oideachais, ní amháin ó thaobh obair a fháil ach ó thaobh saol níos fearr a bheith acu i leith caitheamh aimsire agus pléisiúr a bhaint as staidéar agus leabhair a léamh. Tá an-suim agam i VTOS ach tuigim nach féidir go mbeadh an deis sin ag gach éinne fiú amháin dá mbeadh i bhfad níos mó seansanna le fáil. Mar sin féin tá 4,000 áiteanna ann faoi láthair.

When I heard of this motion I took it for granted there was a cutback in the provision of educational services. The Minister has contributed greatly to the increased expenditure on and expansion of educational services. In 1995 she maintained the 4,000 places allocated under the scheme in 1994. She has been reminded that she made a promise to increase that number of places but in these days when we are encouraged to cut back on services the Minister for Education is in the same position as most Ministers, and somebody must bite the bullet.

When she encountered difficulties regarding the provision of special assistance for students in disadvantaged schools, she was successful in making an important decision in that regard. I would welcome it if the Minister could increase the number of places under the scheme from 4,000 to 8,000. One does not need to have an interest in education but an interest in the human race to appreciate that the more people who are encouraged to participate in education courses the better.

It is important that the unemployed who have a leaning towards education should be encouraged to participate in education courses. The VTOS, which enables the unemployed to continue their education without suffering financially, is a marvellous scheme.

It is easy to understand why the Opposition tabled this motion and it is easy for them to say that the Minister should increase the number of places under the scheme but she has done a great deal of work in this area. She gave figures which Deputy Gregory did not want to hear; I suppose there are some things we do not like to hear.

Three years ago 1,920 places were provided under that scheme and during the past two years that figure has doubled to 4,000. I, and I am sure, the Minister will accept that it would be better if 6,000 places were provided and that the number of places were increased annually as long as people want to participate in such courses. Unfortunately, we have heard cries that we must introduce cutbacks, control spending and so on even from the Leader of the Opposition.

Priorities.

(Carlow-Kilkenny): That is the difficulty. Members of councils will be familiar with the views that itinerants should be housed. While various suggestions are made in that regard, people always want them housed on the opposite side of the town to where they live. I am not suggesting that there should be a cutback on the VTOS but the Minister when making a decision must weigh up all areas of education.

I checked the increased allocation of places under various schemes. The number of places under the Youthreach programme, which deals with adult and continuing education, has increased from approximately 1,600 to 2,400, a major increase in three years. The expenditure on the adult literacy and communication education scheme has increased from £1 million in 1992 to £1.9 million in 1995. That scheme relates to adult education also. The number of adults categorised as disadvantaged has increased almost fivefold, from 273,000 to 1.210 million. The Minister is spending a great deal of money on adult education. I was fascinated by the level of increases.

The number of pre-schools has gone from none in 1992 and 1993 to eight in 1994 and 33 in 1995. The basic rate of capitation grant has increased from £28 in 1992 to £40 in 1995. The disadvantaged grant rate has increased from £45 to £65 in three years. The pupil-teacher ratio has also increased. The disadvantaged fund for primary schools has increased almost threefold, from £1.14 million to £3.38 million. Education is very important but it is a high expenditure Department. As I am aware from my earlier career, teachers will continue to look for more money. I am sure when Deputy Martin was teaching he was not interested in a salary increase, he taught for the love of it.

Correct.

(Carlow-Kilkenny): The maximum class size in disadvantaged primary schools decreased from 39 in 1992 and 1993 to approximately 28 or 29. In three years the number of remedial teachers has increased from 947 to 1,188. The increased allocation of teachers costs money. There are not enough childcare assistants but the number has more than trebled, from 70 in 1992 to 229 in 1995. The number of home-school-link co-ordinators increased from 45 to 105. I could continue but I gave those figures to explain why any Minister who is increasing expenditure and expanding facilities in so many areas of education will reach the stage where there is not sufficient money to fund additional increases.

Given that the number of places under VTOS has increased from 2,000 to 4,000 and will be maintained at that figure this year and while we would all consider it better if the number of places were increased, the Minister must be defended for the role she has played, particularly in regard to the various adult education schemes, including literacy training. Those schemes are important. Everyone recognises his or her need as the most important and people prioritise, but what a Minister considers a priority may not be perceived as such by others. It is difficult to do what is right when one has limited resources.

We are lectured regularly by the Leader of the Opposition about the importance of balancing the budget. This is part and parcel of what the Government has to do. In this case there are no cutbacks. The scheme is continuing. However, cutbacks will be necessary and we will have to bite the bullet on that although people will say that cutbacks are being made in the wrong areas and priorities are wrong. Cutbacks involve subjective decisions and judgements.

The Minister cannot be condemned when she has retained in 1995 the 4,000 places which existed in 1994; this is double the number of places available in 1992. The Opposition should be reasonable. I accept why they make the case for more places and one could argue that the Minister should have increased the number of places, but we must be practical and realise there is a limit to what she can do. She has done an extremely good job as the figures I gave show. While I regret there is not an increase in VTOS places, I accept the Minister has managed to retain existing places and for this she deserves our thanks. May I share my time with Deputy Crowley and Deputy Brian Fitzgerald?

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I thank Deputy Browne for sharing his time with me. Last night I listened intently to what Deputy Martin and his colleagues said on this motion. I could not help but think that Fianna Fáil was never in power. However, it is not long since it was in power and at that time there were 2,000 places in this scheme while now there are 4,000.

We only left office last December. There were then 4,000 places in the scheme.

We are lectured by the leader of Fianna Fáil and by that party's Deputies about the need to balance the books by reducing expenditure. How we can do this is a mystery to me and I would like somebody to tell me how it can be done. For the past six or eight months, during Private Members' time Fianna Fáil have said we must spend more money on various schemes but it did not say where we can cut back. We have had crocodile tears from that party for some time.

I am not denying that the scheme is good. However, there is a shortage of builders, carpenters, plumbers and block layers. Is it because many young people are going to universities and regional technical colleges to be awarded worthless pieces of paper? They would be far better looking for jobs in the trades rather than attending third level institutions and finishing up with nothing.

A local authority in north Cork requested from the local employment exchange some months ago a list of names of the unemployed so that they could select people for the social employment scheme and were given a list of approximately 150 persons. Local staff interviewed 100 of them and offered positions on the scheme to 20 but only eight accepted. Were the other 12 people working or drawing unemployment assistance? The social employment scheme is not the best paid scheme but it is better than receiving unemployment assistance. Perhaps it is time the Minister looked at this and other schemes.

The number of people on the VTOS scheme has increased substantially in the last year or two. When Fianna Fáil was in power there were 2,000 places, now there is twice this number and the Minister has no doubt this will be the case next year. It is hypocritical of the Opposition to say the number of places should be doubled and there should be no cutbacks when there were only 2,000 places when it was in power. This is hypocrisy. I wonder what the public thinks when it reads what is said here.

The provision of a proper education system is an obligation which is part of the State's role in achieving economic prosperity, social wellbeing and a good quality of life in a democratically structured society. Education is an inherent aspect of the State's economic success and prosperity as it contributes to and actively promotes innovation and adaptability. It is well documented that many foreign multinationals choose Ireland as a centre of investment because of our highly educated workforce. The Labour Party is acutely aware of the role education plays in the current success of the economy and it is committed to continuing this role.

The community as a whole benefits from a proper education system. Individuals also benefit. Education helps to empower communities and to empower individuals. It is the latter empowerment which is the source of the collective good. Education is an important part of each individual's personal development and that is the main aim of education.

Since 1993 the first Labour Minister for Education, Deputy Bhreathnach, has brought about the most fundamental changes in education in the history of the State. Change is taking place at pre-school, primary, second and third levels. This is an illustration of the Labour Party's dedication to the provision of a proper and modern education system.

The importance of education is most fundamentally borne out in the correlation which exists between it and employment. Numerous studies have shown that the lower a person's level of education, the more likely he or she is to be unemployed. Almost 85 per cent of the long term unemployed do not have a leaving certificate. It was due to the realisation and acceptance of this correlation that the VTOS, which focuses on the development of employment related skills, was established. The scheme has been an unprecedented success in the field of adult education. It gives a second chance to attain a level of education to thousands of people who missed out on this opportunity the first time round. This second chance empowers the individual and helps many to get out of the rut they may be in. Individual empowerment facilitates the collective empowerment of the community and, indeed, the nation towards which we are all working.

We in the Labour Party are committed to the success of the VTOS. Neither the Minister for Education nor the Labour Party wishes to undermine the success of the scheme. We recognise the invaluable contribution the scheme is making in the fight against unemployment and every effort is being made to ensure that this positive work will continue. It should be remembered, as the Minister has duly noted, that through her commitment to the VTOS the number of places available under the scheme now stands at 4,000. When the debate commenced the impression was given that the scheme had been discontinued.

It was not.

As Deputy Martin will be aware, the number of places has doubled in three years. In addition to the increased number of available places, funding for the scheme has also increased substantially under the present Minister from £7 million in 1992 to £18.5 million in 1994. The Labour Party is aware of the contribution the VTOS makes and will make to society and the role it plays in the fight against long term unemployment, a cancer which has afflicted society for far too long. This year 611 VTOS students, 1 per cent of the total number of students, sat the leaving certificate. The Labour Party is committed to consolidating this figure and expanding it in the future. The VTOS will not be allowed to fall by the wayside. Its contribution is far too valuable for such a fate.

It is unfortunate that we have to address the problem of the lack of education among the unemployed. The old saying "prevention is better than cure" is particularly relevant in the area of education. While previous Ministers for Education neglected the full and effective role education has to play in the personal development of every individual, they also failed to realise its potential in the fight against unemployment. It is up to the present Minister to try to undo some of the damage that has already been done and also to ensure that such neglect of education never happens again.

I know from experience in my own constituency at successive elections that there were always letters from Fianna Fáil Ministers informing constituents they would get their school the following week or the following month, that the extension to the school would be sanctioned or the number of teachers would be increased. If they were reelected they went back to the Department of Education only to find that no money was available. That was the case in my constituency until the present Minister was appointed. Fianna Fáil colleagues in County Meath will bear me out on that.

De Valera once said the Labour Party would have to wait. The people have had to wait too long for a Labour Minister for Education. The record will bear testimony to the fact that no other Minister for Education has been as dedicated to the disadvantaged in education and to adult education as Deputy Bhreathnach. No other Minister for Education has provided such an amount of resources to these two groups.

While the announcement of the postponement of the extra 1,000 places has caused much concern and anger, not only within Fianna Fáil but among every party, it should be remembered that not all vocational education committees have been able to fill their existing allocations. I understand the Department of Education has asked vocational education committees to provide information on the number of places they currently offer in order to spread the reductions as evenly as possible. It is hoped that this will enable the Department to facilitate as many people as possible and to alleviate any upset that might otherwise be caused.

The Economic and Social Research Institute has described the VTOS as a high quality programme which attempts to provide a bridge back into education and a training system for long term unemployed. The Labour Party is committed to ensuring that the VTOS maintains its reputation.

Economic growth and success is, to a large extent, due to the availability of suitably qualified and adaptable personnel with the necessary personal and vocational skills. This has been incorporated into the recently published White Paper on Education and it will continue to be the guiding principle of the Government and the Minister in our ongoing fight against unemployment in Ireland.

Opposition parties should have realised when they were in Government the invaluable contribution education can play in the fight against long term unemployment — they controlled this country for a considerable period from 1987-92 when the real damage was done——

We started the programme.

——instead of making major cuts in education. Now Fianna Fáil is demanding further cutbacks in public expenditure. It cannot have it both ways and had better be a little more honest with the people than in the past.

Do not hit the poor.

Priorities.

The Deputies would not know what the word meant because they never had a priority other than themselves. They forgot altogether about the people who were disadvantaged.

We worked quite well together in our day.

Yes, when we changed Fianna Fáil because we saw what that party did between 1987-92 when it decimated the public service.

It was only a temporary little arrangement.

The high moral ground can be a very lonely position.

Due to neglect of the education system by previous Governments, this Government is involved in the vocational education of the long term unemployed. This Government is committed to ensuring that they will not lose out and, particularly, that our young people will not be forced into the same trap as these people had been forced by Fianna Fáil for many years, with the aid of the Progressive Democrats who helped it do an even better job at slashing public expenditure, affecting the most needy in our society.

I wish to share my time with Deputies Killeen and Power.

I am sure that is satisfactory and agreed.

I am disappointed there is not a greater interest in this debate. We have had some exciting times in the Chamber recently. It has been described as a star Chamber because of various events when we have had a packed public gallery and a packed press gallery. As we debate the fundamental issue of social justice and equality, there is a number of people in the public gallery but there is no great interest. Perhaps this is because other things are happening in our capital city tonight. It is a sad reflection on how the media treats issues of this nature.

I support this motion and I am directly asking the Minister to change her mind on this issue. We have heard much rhetoric from the Government about the need to protect and support the vulnerable, the marginalised and the less privileged in our society. These objectives and policies would find widespread support without question across party lines in the House. I would like to think that during our period in Government with the Labour Party we strived to achieve those objectives of equality wherever possible, across a wide range of Departments. In the Department in which I worked much of our work was related to issues outside this country but equality was one of our objectives.

The Minister, in her speech at the UN conference in Beijing, recently reaffirmed this principle in spelling out to the international community that education was the most fundamental of human rights. She was right in saying that. She told the world she was working on equal access to education in Ireland and she referred especially to the position of women and I support her strongly in doing that. It was a great pity that she did not tell her audience in Beijing that she was cutting back on the only education programme run by her Department for the long term unemployed, namely the vocational training opportunities scheme. She omitted to report to her audience, which consisted mainly of women, that at a time when education spending had increased by 25 per cent in the past two years she had singled out for blatant discrimination the participation of the long term unemployed, many of whom are women, in second chance education.

The Minister's decision to cut £5 million from this scheme is nothing short of disgraceful and indicates the Government has turned its back on the long term unemployed. The VTOS is the main second level adult education programme designed for people who are unemployed. This Government cannot claim to have any sense of social justice or understanding of the plight of thousands of unemployed who have benefitted — and should continue to benefit — from this scheme.

The link between educational qualifications and opportunities of getting a job are universally recognised. A leaving certificate will not automatically get you work but it will provide the individual with some hope of doing so. The VTOS scheme has proved to be a great success and in some cases where participants did not get work immediately they benefited greatly from the experience. This Government has no option but to rescind its decision to cut back on this very valuable scheme, otherwise it can never claim to represent the interests of the most vulnerable sectors of society.

The Government's response to the motion tabled by my party colleague, Deputy Martin has been pathetic. We heard the predictable reaction tonight which shows total disregard for the strong case made by many Deputies on this side of the House. The Minister and her colleagues have stubbornly refused to budge and have reverted to the now predictable option of amending the motion, patting herself on the back and asking the House to agree that she is doing a great job. The sad reality is that the Minister is not listening. We have heard a great deal from this Government about the need to accommodate and to listen, the need to recognise the committee process and the need for openness and inclusiveness — fantastic jargon. We are told that if Opposition Deputies come up with good ideas the Government will be glad to listen. What we have heard is a simple rejection, which I deeply regret. This is a very serious matter and in terms of the overall budget, it is not a huge demand on our part. The Minister is not only ignoring our views, she is not listening to the representatives of the Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed, the INOU, and to The Irish Times journalist Fintan O'Toole who spoke of the Minister's action in the following terms:

This is frankly a disgrace not just to the most left wing Government in the history of the State but to any Government. Politicians are in Government to bring a sense of social values to bear on the often irrational machinery of bureaucracy. That this has not happened in this case says a great deal about the corrosive effects of mass unemployment on those very social values by which a society brings order and reason to its decisions.

Fintan O'Toole certainly made his point very succinctly and I ask the Minister to take note of that and not to fudge the issue. I am asking her to agree to the Fianna Fáil motion tonight, it will not be seen as a climb down if she does so but a response to the Private Members' motion tabled in the public interest. If the Minister does not decide to change her mind I appeal to the backbenchers — though sadly from what I have heard tonight we would not have much hope in that area — to voice their views. I appeal especially to Labour Party and Democratic Left Members who claim to represent left wing politics to convince the Minister that she should agree. Deputy Kemmy, among others who have problems with their conscience, raises his head when there is a whiff of scandal — the Lowry affair is another example — and issues an ultimatum. Mr. Charlie Bird from RTE gets his soundbite. We hear such comments so I will be watching carefully and waiting to hear what the Minister has to say or to Government backbenchers saying they will reserve their position. When it comes to the unemployed there are no ultimatums and Charlie Bird can twiddle his thumbs on the plinth because no backbencher from this cosy arrangement will put his head on the line on behalf of a vulnerable sector. Sadly, the unemployed do not count when it comes to taking an honourable stance on a vital national issue.

I ask the Minister to do the honourable thing and support this motion. I now ask for the opportunity to share my time with Deputies Killeen and Power.

Tá áthas orm go bhfuil deis agam cuidiú leis an rún faoin líon áiteanna ar an scéim ghairmoiliúna agus an gá práinneach atá leis an méid sin áiteanna a mhéadu. Gheall an tAire féin 1,000 áit sa bhreis agus is léir go gcreideann sí féin go bhfuil gá leo agus go bhfuil fiúntas sa scéim. Nach mór go trua nach féidir léi an tAire Airgeadais a mhealladh chun aontú léi?

It is clear that the Minister has a commitment to the VTOS and she announced her intention to provide an extra 1,000 places this year. I was surprised at some of the previous speakers who claimed credit for the doubling of places from 1992-94 but apparently they have forgotten that the Fianna Fáil Party was party to that Government and supportive of the Minister's wish and intent to increase the number of places. If there is a problem about the number of places it clearly is not with Fianna Fáil, it is either with her own colleague, the Minister for Finance or with the new partners in Government, Fine Gael or Democratic Left. As my colleagues said, this scheme has been enormously successful, its need is substantial and proven and it is a scheme with the potential to deliver enormous benefits.

The whole role of education has changed very substantially and the way people look on education has changed and developed. This particular scheme has given unemployed people an opportunity not only to return to full-time education and improve their job prospects but also a sense of personal worth and achievement. It is a scheme which clearly has the support of the people at whom it is directed, the unemployed. It suits them for a number of reasons and they clearly see that it benefits them. Surely this is the type of scheme which any Government and this Government in particular with its claimed commitments should look at and seek to develop.

The loss of the 1,000 additional places is of considerable significance but perhaps of even greater significance is the message being sent out by the refusal to provide these places. It is clearly being read by the Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed as a negative message directed at them. It is telling them that this scheme is dispensible because it caters for the unemployed. I do not believe that we can stand over that. Politicians of all hues stand sufficiently indicated for their failure to address the problems of the unemployed without coming up with a scheme that provides in some sense a solution for a certain number and then deciding to jettison it. That is a message which no Government ought to give out and get away with it.

The Minister could still persuade her colleagues to allow the places she promised to be filled. I believe that is her wish and she has an opportunity tonight to vote for the Fianna Fáil motion and allow these places to be filled during this year.

The vocational training opportunities scheme is one of the great success stories in education. Success cannot be measured in numbers, but in this case the numbers tell their own story. In 1989, 247 people took part in the scheme. That number increased to almost 2,900 in 1993, and last year the figure was 4,600. The Minister recognised the obvious increase in demand for the scheme and promised to provide 1,000 additional places in the 1995-96 academic year.

People who have participated in these schemes can vouch for their worth. Many of those people were unemployed, suffered from low self-esteem and an inferiority complex and had little hope for the future, but the vocational training opportunities scheme has changed their lives in a positive way. It has given them new confidence, and the proof is there for all to see. In the majority of cases the participants subsequently took up further activities, some going on to further education and others going straight into employment.

Study after study has demonstrated the direct relationship between lack of educational qualifications and the chance of being unemployed. The VTOS was an investment in people, giving them a second chance of obtaining an education. This is about people, not figures. This scheme was needed, and it was working, but the Minister has cut funding by £5 million. That decision is incredible and I cannot understand how a Minister could have taken it.

When the Minister first took office, we were all told about her involvement in education and her great understanding of the disadvantaged. Although I do not doubt her understanding, she certainly does not give the impression that she is willing to take the necessary action. Here is a Minister who promises free third level education while at the same time telling the unemployed that there are not sufficient funds to fulfil the promises she made to them. The Minister should recognise her responsibilities, but she seems to have her own agenda and to be playing to her own sector. I am surprised that Fine Gael colleagues tolerated her antics. They should know better.

We read in Democratic Left newsletters how annoyed their members are about this measure and that their Deputies will do their best to have the decision reversed. If the Democratic Left Deputies really want to change the decision they have an opportunity to do so by supporting the Fianna Fáil motion. Henry Ford put wheels under America, but the wheels changed many of the Democratic Left policies.

The Government has spent a fortune analysing the problem of unemployment. The vocational training opportunities scheme was one of the few programmes to make a real impact in this area. I call on the Minister, therefore, to reverse her decision and show that she does not want to be remembered as the Minister for elite education, which is how she is perceived. I realise that in Government tough decisions have to be made and that it is important for a Cabinet to stand united. However, I question the Government's priorities. The unemployed have been neglected by the system for a great many years. Thousands of them were prepared to enrol on VTOS courses and many found doing so very worthwhile. We were getting real value for money. The decision to reduce funding by £5 million is despicable.

Last night my colleague, Deputy Martin, spoke about the manner in which this cutback was relayed to the chief executive officers of the vocational education committees, with the Minister advising them to deal confidentially with the matter. When we make popular decisions we love to have press conferences and razzmatazz, but we hate to have to give bad news. It says much about the Government and its opinion of chief executive officers when such conniving goes on that it expects them to treat their boards in that fashion. We on this side of the House have made a strong case for the retention of places on the scheme, as have a number of organisations around the country. I hope the Minister listens to our call.

I am happy to support Deputy Martin's motion. Had Deputy Martin not tabled this motion this week, I would have tabled it next week because this matter should be debated. Perhaps it is because of the match being played this evening, or perhaps it is just lack of interest generally, but I am sorry that this debate does not seem to have generated the amount of interest it warrants. I am glad the spokepersons were reported in the media today because it is important that people should be aware what is going on.

The action taken by the Minister to reverse the decision to offer 1,000 additional VTOS places is extraordinary, particularly considering the view expressed in the section on further education in chapter IV of the White Paper on Education. At the beginning of that chapter it is stated that there is a need to ensure the future development of vocational education and training, most of which is under the aegis of the Department of Education, takes place in a more cohesive and systematic manner and in a way which is responsive to the needs of students and society. The Minister has turned that on its head. Practically everything we have heard from the Minister underlines the need for an approach such as that outlined in the White Paper. This makes her actions in this regard much more difficult to understand.

The Minister has been operating a policy of stepping in and stepping out again in regard to education. Her original decision to curtail the promised 450 additional places in the Youthreach scheme was rescinded, thanks to the political and public outcry. The same uncertainty was evident regarding the child care assistant scheme. Originally 100 new posts were approved, but it was decided to limit the increase to 70. Then, thanks to pressure on the Minister, she changed her mind and sanctioned the 100 posts. The result is wholesale confusion. One has to wonder who is making the decisions and on what basis. What about people who were told first that they had and then that they had not a post? Even as I speak legal cases are pending in relation to this. If the Minister is causing such confusion in a relatively minor part of education policy and management, how can we have confidence in her overall management and policy?

Regarding management — perhaps I should say mismanagement — why were the chief executive officers of every vocational education committee only informed on 23 August of this year of the reduction in the number of places, and why were they told this matter was to be worked on confidentially? Why were they not informed until that late stage? What kind of planning by the vocational education committees would allow their expectations to be dashed? This is an extraordinary and inefficient way to manage education policy.

I often referred to the success, of which I am sure the Minister is aware, of the VTOS in the Dún Laoghaire constituency. A total of 240 VTOS places were sanctioned for that area this year but, unfortunately, because of the cutback, only 180 could be offered. I am sure many people believe Dún Laoghaire is a relatively prosperous area but in large parts of it the unemployment level has reached 87 per cent and many unemployed people are long term unemployed. There is an air of deprivation and hopelessness in many parts of my constituency. I assure Deputy Brian Fitzgerald that the extra places would have been taken up. The scheme offers an incredible range of subjects and training and has been an enormous success.

The so-called Government of renewal document states that the vocational training opportunities scheme will be expanded from its current level. That is part of the stated policy agreement between the three parties in Government who are now reneging on it. It is incredible that at a time of increasing unemployment such a sensible programme is not being given the additional 1,000 places promised by the Minister for Education in the wake of the budget. That does not make sense.

The success and achievements of the vocational training opportunities scheme are widely recognised in the White Paper on Education and Members on all sides acknowledge that. In its evaluation of the Community Support Framework from 1989 to 1993, the Economic and Social Research Institute described the scheme as a high quality programme which attempts to build a bridge to allow the long term unemployed back into the education and training system. That was further confirmed by the 1993 NESC's Report on Education and Training Policies for Economic and Social Development. We are not talking about anecdotel evidence from our constituents and the long term unemployed who were given hope under the scheme. The evidence is well documented by the Department and many other organisations. It is no wonder, therefore, that organisations such as the INOU and the Irish Trade Union Trust are outraged at the Minister's about-face on this issue. Using strong language the INOU stated last night:

The cuts on the VTOS programme present a blatant attack on unemployed people. The cuts also highlight the fact that the Minister for Education is not interested in providing an escape for unemployed people from long term unemployment and poverty. When members of the Dáil vote on the motion to reverse the cuts tomorrow evening, it is important that parties like Democratic Left whose representatives have openly and rightly condemned these cuts, actually nail their colours to the mast in opposition to these cuts.

That is straight talking by members of that organisation who today stated:

Members of the Coalition Government are preaching in favour of ending the jobs crisis but, in practice, they are voting and acting in favour of a pro-unemployment society. Before entering into Government, Democratic Left, Fine Gael and Labour outlined their commitment to tackling unemployment. The real test of this commitment will take place in the Dáil tonight when politicians vote on whether or not to reverse the cuts on the Vocational Training Opportunities Scheme.

The INOU is putting it up to those who claim to be the protectors of the unemployed and to be the ones who want to reverse trends. It is putting it up to Members to vote in favour of the motion before us and against the Minister's backclapping amendment. The Irish Trade Union Trust also voiced its opposition to the attack on education opportunities for unemployed people. The stong words of such groups underpin the absolute rage felt by those working directly with the unemployed, especially the long term unemployed. They are aware of the psychological effect on those who do not get a place on the scheme, their helplessness and hopelessness.

The cutbacks will further alienate people, frustrate their efforts and force them to remain on the dole. We need to maximise the return on our educational resources. Why not, therefore, invest in what has proven to be a successful scheme, in other words, invest in people? This scheme is arguably one of the most cost effective ways of getting a qualification. We are engaged in human "set aside" at a time when the number unemployed stands at almost 350,000. It is extraordinary that the Minister intends to embark on a huge bureaucratic transformation of our schools and universities, the cost of which is as yet unknown but must be enormous. She will not publish the costings produced by the Department of Finance. If she did, we could make considered judgments on her proposals. The cost of many of the Minister's proposals to control education rather than on education, will make the savings under the VTOS look like loose change.

The Minister should get her priorities right. I criticised her on a previous occasion for prioritising free fees at third level at a time when we do not have genuine free education at primary level and when it is necessary for parents to hold cake sales to help with the running of schools. The Minister should reverse her decision on this important scheme.

I welcome this opportunity to contribute to the debate on the vocational training opportunities scheme and on the wider issue of catering for the disadvantaged, particularly disadvantaged adults.

The Government is committed to the VTOS and the evidence of the Minister's commitment to it has already been recorded in the debate. I again place on record the fact that the numbers participating in the VTOS have doubled in the last two years, from 2,000 in 1992 to more than 4,000 this year and that is an incontrovertible fact. This is clear evidence that the scheme is held in high regard by the Government and its policy is to continue, as resources permit, not only to develop the scheme but to improve it in terms of support to participants.

There was a reference last night to the evaluation report on VTOS carried out on behalf of the Department by Work Research Co-operative — a firm of social and economic consultants. There is no question, as suggested last night, of "suppressing" this report. As indicated, the question of its publication is being considered, but that is not the important issue. What is important is that the findings of the report and its recommendations are carefully considered, taken on board and put into effect according as the VTOS is developed.

As the Minister said, the recommendations of the report include such things as pre-VTOS provision, guidance and counselling, training for those working in the area of adult education and certification. All these aspects will form part of the planning process aimed at improving the effectiveness of the scheme. In this way the evaluation report will form, and is forming, an important aspect of policy input in relation to the VTOS.

I again remind the House that the vocational training opportunities scheme is but one measure in the Government's policy of combating disadvantage among adults. There was a reference to the adult literacy and community education scheme which was designed to provide basic literacy and educational skills for adults who either did not acquire them at school or subsequently lost them. This scheme operated by the vocational education committees has been operating for some ten years, but has received a major boost by the Government through a doubling of the financial provision for it from £1 million previously to £2 million in 1995.

The scheme, as the title suggests, involves two strands — one of community education and the other relating to literacy. The community education aspects involve some important courses, such as parenting, personal development and life skills and health studies. The literacy programme also involves aspects of numeracy.

A striking feature of the adult literacy and community education programme is the involvement of women. Figures produced recently suggest that women outnumber men on the programme to a considerable degree, particularly on the community education aspect of it.

The White Paper on Education proposes that an important consideration in developing policy on adult education will be the recognition of the central importance of adult education for personal development, updating knowledge and skills and overcoming disadvantage suffered during initial education.

The White Paper provides that a policy priority in the area of adult education will be to ensure that suitable and effective programmes are in place for those with literacy and numeracy problems. This is not a pious platitude. The Government's commitment to this scheme, a most important one in helping disadvantaged adults, is borne out by the doubling of the funds available for it this year.

I now wish to deal with some of the issues raised during the debate. There was a reference to ESF funding in respect of the VTOS. The position is that ESF funding will support expenditure of £13 million on the scheme. At 75 per cent, this will leave the ESF contribution at £9.75 million. That is the extent of ESF funding and any sum in excess of that amount will have to be and is being found from the Exchequer. I have already dealt with the question of the publication of the WRC report.

Several Deputies referred to the VTOS course in metal sculpture which was planned to be held in the North Strand vocational college. It was stated by Deputy Haughey last night that during the summer, applications were made, interviews were organised and places offered for the course. The Deputy read a few letters from his constituents. Let me now say what I understand the position to be.

Discussions concerning this course between the VTOS centre and the City of Dublin vocational education committee are continuing. These are in the context of the centre not having filled the 80 places allocated to it. Only 67 have been filled to date. The vocational education committee will not be allocating additional places until these are filled.

The opportunity is there to provide the metal sculpture course instead of another group if the centre wishes, that is, within the 80 places available. I understand, too, that the vocational education committee considers it will be able to find a way of providing for the course if there is sufficient demand for it but there may well be a question mark over this.

There are two other matters to which I wish to refer. In relation to the Youthreach programme, there was some public agitation based on inaccurate reports that it was proposed to make cutbacks but there was never any intention to cut back on the scheme. Therefore, the question of restoring the cuts did not arise. There was a reference to child care assistants. The intention was to increase the number of such assistants by 70 from a base of 129, an increase of 54 per cent. The Minister, however, succeeded in having the number increased by 100, bringing the total to 229.

In the whole area of combating disadvantage the Government can stand proudly behind its record and will continue to discriminate positively in favour of the disadvantaged at every available opportunity.

I wish to share my time with Deputies Browne and Martin.

I am sure that is satisfactory and agreed.

As someone very much involved in the introduction of the educational opportunities scheme some years ago, I am glad to have this opportunity to contribute to the debate on the VTOS. I would like to clear up one matter. When my party left office at the end of last year there were approximately 4,000 participants on the scheme. The Minister mentioned the figures of 2,000 and 4,000, but this has only confused the issue, even for her own backbenchers.

There were between 5,500 and 6,000 participants on the educational opportunities scheme. These figures, however, included the number of participants, approximately 2,000, on the third level allowance scheme.

My party is calling on the Government to reverse its decision to reduce the number of participants on the VTOS during 1995-96 from 5,000 to 4,000. This is a mean and retrograde step as 900 long term unemployed people and 100 lone parents — it was agreed that lone parents should account for 10 per cent of participants on the scheme — will have their hopes dashed as they strive to re-enter the workplace. It is only when one sees the scheme in operation that one realises just how effective it has been.

On 23 August the vocational education committees were informed by fax that, because of the Government's decision to curtail public expenditure, the number of places on the VTOS was to be reduced by 1,000 or 20 per cent. This was a blow to a group of people in a most vulnerable position and least able to represent themselves. It was a blow especially for Dublin where almost half the participants on the scheme live.

Colaiste Íde in Finglas has been particularly successful. I am surprised that the Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy De Rossa, who is aware of its success did not make his presence felt and exert his influence in the interests of helping the long term unemployed whom he claims to represent. It should be remembered, however, that he granted old age pensioners and others an increase of only 2.5 per cent this year, which was extraordinary.

The educational opportunities scheme was introduced because studies showed that the long term unemployed lacked the necessary training and educational qualifications in their search for a job. The best thing to do was to provide them with an opportunity to undergo training.

There has been a tremendous response to the VTOS which has proved most successful. I deny what Deputy Crowley said as the long term unemployed are seeking opportunities to re-enter the workplace, and they are successful. Since its introduction more than 5,000 people have completed the scheme and that is encouraging. A few years ago no one would have believed that almost 2,000 people would participate in third level education. The Minister picked the most vulnerable section of society when making the cutback which will result in a net saving of £2.5 million. I asked where was the Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy De Rossa and the Tánaiste, Deputy Spring, when the unemployed needed them. Will Democratic Left and the Labour Party go through the lobby and support this unkind 20 per cent cut which is a cruel blow to the unemployed?

I call on the Minister to reverse this disgraceful and cowardly decision and support Deputy Martin's amendment.

(Wexford): The Minister's decision to decrease by 1,000 the number of places under VTOS is a disgrace and an insult to the long term unemployed. Every report over the last five years has shown that early school leavers who lack educational qualifications have little chance of getting a job. The VTOS is the essence of second chance education. It is highly recommended for those who wish to secure an educational qualification. The success of the courses speak for themselves. In 1989, some 250 people participated in the courses and this increased to 4,000 in 1994. In County Wexford, 200 people participated in ten courses. If the 20 per cent cut is implemented the number of places will decrease by 40. That is a disgrace in a country with one of the highest unemployment rates. Many people who attended the courses sat the junior certificate and leaving certificate examinations. This year three people will attend regional colleges and others are participating in City and Guild courses.

Why is the Minister targeting the most disadvantaged in society? It is unfortunate at a time when the Minister introduced a reduction in fees for the sons and daughters of millionaire and well heeled parents that she is abandoning the unemployed. Where is the voice of Democratic Left? Last year Deputy De Rossa and others were vocal on behalf of the long term unemployed and they are given recognition for that. However, when they got the ministerial perks such as a car they abandoned the less well off and went silently to ground on this debate.

I ask the Minister to reconsider her decision. We are talking about a net saving of £2.5 million. It is a small amount in the context of her Department's budget but it is an important amount to the long term unemployed who want to participate in second chance education. They want to better themselves and secure a job. Unfortunately if they do not have an educational qualification their chances of gaining employment are practically nil. The Minister should stand up and be counted on behalf of the less well off in society and not allow the Fine Gael-dominated Government to spoon feed the rich at the expense of the unemployed and the poor.

I am profoundly disappointed that the Minister for Education and the Government have not made any meaningful response to this well meaning and constructive motion designed to reverse the cutback and provide the extra 1,000 places. I am somewhat taken aback that Democratic Left did not contribute to the debate. We can take that to mean a number of things. Either it is a silent expression of that party's opposition to the cutback or the Deputies could not bring themselves to contribute to the debate without criticising and condemning the decision of the Minister for Education. They did that in their party bulletin. Yesterday their chairperson issued a statement to the effect that the decision should be reversed. I have often taken silence to mean acquiescence. There is little point in them saying that they do not approve of this cutback and consider it to be shameful if they are not prepared to do something concrete — put their participation in Government on the line and vote against the decision.

Deputy Woods said that when he was Minister for Social Welfare he was involved in the initiation of the educational opportunities scheme and VTOS and when Deputy Ahern was Minister for Labour he was primarily responsible for introducing Youthreach. Long before the Minister for Education, Deputy Bhreathnach, came to office Fianna Fáil was committed to the disadvantaged and to schemes and programmes designed to help those who, for whatever reason, were alienated from the mainstream education system. Youthreach was introduced as an intervention programme for teenagers and VTOS was developed to help the long term unemployed return to education and ultimately to employment and, in the process, restore their self-confidence and self-esteem. I am extremely disappointed that the Minister did not respond to the motion.

Deputy Gregory quoted alarming statistics and spoke eloquently about the number of people who could benefit from this scheme. Democratic Left and the Government could have chosen other options. In a full year £35 million will be realised from the abolition of tax covenants. The Minister for Education has that resource at her disposal. She tried to fudge and play games by saying it was put against undergraduate fees. It did not all have to be used that way. The Minister said she is saving £2.5 million net by going ahead with the cutback. That is not much money in the context of the £35 million that will be spent on the free education proposal.

Major funding is being advanced for the construction of a third level college in Dún Laoghaire. If one reads the steering committee's report it is clear that the area of greatest educational need is North Dublin. There is no dispute about that but having a Minister in your constituency overrides the studies and research carried out in the compilation of that report. I have been inundated with faxes from various unemployment centres expressing support for the motion and frustration at the fact that the Minister is not listening and that no concerted effort was made by the other parties in Government, particularly Democratic Left, to try to force a change and reverse the decision. It is extraordinary that Democratic Left did not contribute either tonight or last night.

I take that as a rather weak expression of disapproval. It is not good enough and that is how it will be seen outside the House. Deputy Currie's comment on the WRC consultant's report is insulting. He denied the report was suppressed. It was on the Minister's desk in February 1994 and its publication is still being considered. If the Government wishes to be open, transparent and facilitate Opposition Deputies who want to contribute to the education debate, why should that report not be made available? Why should it not be published so that all the people involved in the provision of VTOS can have access to those courses?

I remind the Minister that Fianna Fáil was in power with her until last December and played an active role in securing additional resources for Ireland during the negotiations on the Maastricht Treaty and the extra money from the Structural Funds which has made many of these schemes possible, as the Minister outlined yesterday. It also played an active role in the negotiations which led to the publication of the national plan and the allocation of resources on a continuing basis for an increase in the number of places on VTOS.

I commend the motion to the House and I appeal to Deputies on the Government side, particularly those in the Democratic Left party, to vote in accordance with their consciences on this matter and follow their public philosophy.

Amendment put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 69; Níl, 61.

  • Ahearn, Theresa.
  • Barrett, Seán.
  • Bell, Michael.
  • Bhamjee, Moosajee.
  • Boylan, Andrew.
  • Bradford, Paul.
  • Bhreathnach, Niamh.
  • Bree, Declan.
  • Broughan, Tommy.
  • Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Burke, Liam.
  • Byrne, Eric.
  • Carey, Donal.
  • Connaughton, Paul.
  • Connor, John.
  • Costello, Joe.
  • Coveney, Hugh.
  • Crawford, Seymour.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Crowley, Frank.
  • Currie, Austin.
  • Deasy, Austin.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • Doyle, Avril.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • Finucane, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Brian.
  • Fitzgerald, Eithne.
  • Fitzgerald, Frances.
  • Flaherty, Mary.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Gallagher, Pat.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Higgins, Jim.
  • Hogan, Philip.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Kavanagh, Liam.
  • Kemmy, Jim.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • Kenny, Seán.
  • McCormack, Pádraic.
  • McDowell, Derek.
  • McGahon, Brendan.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McGrath, Paul.
  • McManus, Liz.
  • Mitchell, Jim.
  • Mulvihill, John.
  • Nealon, Ted.
  • Noonan, Michael (Limerick East).
  • O'Keeffe, Jim.
  • O'Shea, Brian.
  • Owen, Nora.
  • Pattison, Séamus.
  • Penrose, William.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Ring, Michael.
  • Ryan, John.
  • Ryan, Seán.
  • Sheehan, P.J.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
  • Spring, Dick.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Taylor, Mervyn.
  • Timmins, Godfrey.
  • Upton, Pat.
  • Walsh, Eamon.
  • Yates, Ivan.

Níl

  • Ahern, Dermot.
  • Ahern, Michael.
  • Ahern, Noel.
  • Aylward, Liam.
  • Brennan, Séamus.
  • Briscoe, Ben.
  • Browne, John (Wexford).
  • Byrne, Hugh.
  • Callely, Ivor.
  • Clohessy, Peadar.
  • Connolly, Ger.
  • Coughlan, Mary.
  • Cowen, Brian.
  • Davern, Noel.
  • Dempsey, Noel.
  • Doherty, Seán.
  • Ellis, John.
  • Flood, Chris.
  • Foley, Denis.
  • Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
  • Gregory, Tony.
  • Haughey, Seán.
  • Hilliard, Colm M.
  • Hughes, Séamus.
  • Jacob, Joe.
  • Kenneally, Brendan.
  • Keogh, Helen.
  • Killeen, Tony.
  • Kirk, Séamus.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Kitt, Tom.
  • Lawlor, Liam.
  • Leonard, Jimmy.
  • Martin, Micheál.
  • McCreevy, Charlie.
  • McDaid, James.
  • Moffatt, Tom.
  • Molloy, Robert.
  • Morley, P.J.
  • Moynihan, Donal.
  • Nolan, M.J.
  • Ó Cuív, Éamon.
  • O'Dea, Willie.
  • O'Donnell, Liz.
  • O'Donoghue, John.
  • O'Hanlon, Rory.
  • O'Keeffe, Batt.
  • O'Keeffe, Ned.
  • O'Leary, John.
  • O'Malley, Desmond J.
  • O'Rourke, Mary.
  • Power, Seán.
  • Quill, Máirín.
  • Ryan, Eoin.
  • Sargent, Trevor.
  • Smith, Brendan.
  • Smith, Michael.
  • Treacy, Noel.
  • Wallace, Dan.
  • Walsh, Joe.
  • Woods, Michael.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies J. Higgins and B. Fitzgerald; Níl, Deputies D. Ahern and Callely.
Amendment declared carried.
Question put: "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 64; Níl, 59.

  • Ahearn, Theresa.
  • Barrett, Seán.
  • Bell, Michael.
  • Boylan, Andrew.
  • Bradford, Paul.
  • Bhreathnach, Niamh.
  • Bree, Declan.
  • Broughan, Tommy.
  • Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Byrne, Eric.
  • Carey, Donal.
  • Connaughton, Paul.
  • Connor, John.
  • Costello, Joe.
  • Coveney, Hugh.
  • Crawford, Seymour.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Crowley, Frank.
  • Currie, Austin.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McGrath, Paul.
  • Mitchell, Jim.
  • Mulvihill, John.
  • Nealon, Ted.
  • Noonan, Michael (Limerick East).
  • O'Keeffe, Jim.
  • O'Shea, Brian.
  • Owen, Nora.
  • Pattison, Séamus.
  • Penrose, William.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Deasy, Austin.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • Doyle, Avril.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • Finucane, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Brian.
  • Fitzgerald, Eithne.
  • Fitzgerald, Frances.
  • Flaherty, Mary.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Gallagher, Pat.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Higgins, Jim.
  • Hogan, Philip.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Kavanagh, Liam.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • Kenny, Seán.
  • McCormack, Pádraic.
  • McGahon, Brendan.
  • Ring, Michael.
  • Ryan, John.
  • Ryan, Seán.
  • Sheehan, P.J.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
  • Spring, Dick.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Taylor, Mervyn.
  • Timmins, Godfrey.
  • Upton, Pat.
  • Walsh, Eamon.
  • Yates, Ivan.

Níl

  • Ahern, Dermot.
  • Ahern, Michael.
  • Ahern, Noel.
  • Aylward, Liam.
  • Brennan, Séamus.
  • Briscoe, Ben.
  • Browne, John (Wexford).
  • Byrne, Hugh.
  • Callely, Ivor.
  • Clohessy, Peadar.
  • Connolly, Ger.
  • Cowen, Brian.
  • Davern, Noel.
  • Dempsey, Noel.
  • Doherty, Seán.
  • Ellis, John.
  • Flood, Chris.
  • Foley, Denis.
  • Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
  • Gregory, Tony.
  • Haughey, Seán.
  • Hilliard, Colm M.
  • Hughes, Séamus.
  • Jacob, Joe.
  • Kenneally, Brendan.
  • Keogh, Helen.
  • Killeen, Tony.
  • Kirk, Séamus.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Kitt, Tom.
  • Lawlor, Liam.
  • Leonard, Jimmy.
  • Martin, Micheál.
  • McCreevy, Charlie.
  • McDaid, James.
  • Moffatt, Tom.
  • Molloy, Robert.
  • Morley, P.J.
  • Moynihan, Donal.
  • Nolan, M.J.
  • Ó Cuív, Éamon.
  • O'Dea, Willie.
  • O'Donnell, Liz.
  • O'Donoghue, John.
  • O'Keeffe, Batt.
  • O'Keeffe, Ned.
  • O'Leary, John.
  • O'Malley, Desmond J.
  • O'Rourke, Mary.
  • Power, Seán.
  • Quill, Máirín.
  • Ryan, Eoin.
  • Sargent, Trevor.
  • Smith, Brendan.
  • Smith, Michael.
  • Treacy, Noel.
  • Wallace, Dan.
  • Walsh, Joe.
  • Woods, Michael.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies J. Higgins and B. Fitzgerald; Níl, Deputies D. Ahern and Callely.
Question declared carried.
Top
Share