Vol. 472 No. 3
12 Mrs. O'Rourke asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment the progress, if any, made in the talks on a successor programme for the Programme for Competitiveness and Work; and the specific proposals, if any, he has made as part of the talks for tackling long-term unemployment. [23191/96]
The discussions for a new national economic and social programme opened in Dublin Castle on 23 October 1996 with formal presentations from Government and a wide range of interests, many of whom were represented for the first time at such talks.
The Government has acknowledged that the NESC, and also NESF, have identified the issues for a new programme and have provided very useful suggestions and recommendations. To date the talks are centred on five key strategic areas: macro-economic policy, comprising public expenditure, pay, tax and PRSI; action to promote enterprise and jobs; action to modernise enterprise and further develop workplace partnership; action to modernise the public sector; and action for greater social inclusion and a focus on equality.
My Department's officials are making appropriate inputs to the discussions on each of these five areas, particularly in the context of the need to maintain and improve the competitiveness of Irish-based enterprise. A competitive enterprise sector is the key to raising living standards, maximising the number of self-sustaining jobs and improving social inclusion by, in particular, greater integration of the long-term unemployed into the labour market.
In respect of labour market policy, including action in respect of the long-term unemployed, my Department is promoting policies which support job creation and integrating the long-term unemployed into the active labour force. The Government's record to date is a good one on each of these matters. Under the type of policies this Government is promoting I expect this good record to be continued. The talks on a successor to the Programme for Competitiveness and Work are continuing and making progress.
In regard to tackling exclusion in society as well as long-term unemployment, are there specific plans to reduce the numbers of long-term unemployed in the programme currently under discussion?
I assure the Deputy that the continued reduction in the numbers of long-term unemployed will be a key objective of these talks. All the social partners recognise the crucial importance of this issue and we can be heartened by the reduction last year of 25,000 in the number of long-term unemployed and that was in sharp contrast to the four years before when there was an 18,000 increase in long-term unemployment. Progress is being made but there is complacency that this issue has been overcome. It will be an important part of the talks and their outcome.
The Minister is being disingenuous and is incorrect about the long-term unemployed. In the previous years to which the Minister refers the computation was on the basis of the live register and the number of long-term unemployed on that register has increased by 3,500 since this coalition Government was formed.
I support social programmes because my party has been involved in them. However, is it not becoming too cosy and does the frenzy about wages and conditions exclude people who cannot be represented? I emphasise the needs of small businesses and the long-term unemployed. If the talks are to mean anything, there must be definite objectives in reducing long-term unemployment.
The Minister has put great store by the Government's success in reducing long-term unemployment. How can it be a success when measures brought in by his Department have not got off the ground, as he admitted last week? Will there be a specific numbers element in the plan to reduce long-term unemployment?
I have no doubt that a key feature of the plan will be a continuing reduction of the number of long-term unemployed. I roundly reject the Deputy's suggestion that long-term unemployment has not been falling. The labour force survey is the authoritative evidence on long-term unemployment.
It is now.
I can quote the figures which are not very satisfactory for Fianna Fáil because they show a rise in the last four years of Fianna Fáil Government from 109,000 to 127,000 long-term unemployed, an increase of 18,000.
It is now 135,000.
That was followed by a decrease of 25,000 last year. That is the reality. The Deputy's concerns about the live register are also being addressed. The Minister for Social Welfare will be able to report an historic and unprecedented decline of over 20,000 in the number of people signing on the live register in the last number of months. There is continuing progress in this area.
I reiterate that we cannot afford to be complacent. There is no cosiness in these negotiations. We have clearly and explicitly included for the first time representatives of the unemployed, as represented both by the INOU and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions' unemployment centres. We have also representatives of small and medium enterprises. There will be explicit reference to the needs of small and medium enterprises in the outcome of the talks as well.
We must achieve a consistent reduction in long-term unemployment. The Deputy will have seen in the recent Forfás document a clear underlining of the potential to reduce long-term unemployment to a figure of 50,000 by 2010. We must consistently aim to bring down long-term unemployment figures. It is a key issue the Deputy rightly emphasises.
Could the Minister confirm that the figures he quoted for the Fianna Fáil Government were based on the live register and that the figures he now quotes are from the labour force survey? What is the Minister's Department doing about Mr. Tutty's report from the Department of Finance which suggests that unemployment will increase in 1998?
I confirm absolutely and categorically that the series I quote is a consistent series. It is the labour force survey series on long-term unemployment, the authoritative measure on unemployment which is internationally accepted.
As regards projections for unemployment in the future, it is an extremely difficult area to predict. Last year we had a significant fall in unemployment of 23,000. This year we had a reduction of only 1,000 as measured by the labour force survey. The trend in unemployment is influenced by variations in the number of people entering the labour market. This year substantial numbers of women entered the labour market for the first time. There were also substantial numbers of returned emigrants. In any given year it is difficult to predict.
This is a projection.
I saw the report to which the Deputy referred but it is hard to be clear at this stage. Government policy must continue to prioritise the increase in employment and the reduction in unemployment, especially the focus the Deputy rightly places on the reduction of long-term unemployment.
