Vol. 492 No. 2
31 Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Finance the level of take-up on the new job assist programme among unemployed people; the level of expenditure allocated to advertise the programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10095/98]
The new tax initiative introduced in the last budget to help the long-term unemployed has become known as the "job assist" scheme. The Revenue Commissioners have advised that, on the basis of statistics prepared up to 4 June 1998, the take-up in the job assist scheme was 209 cases; that is to say a total of 209 cases were issued with a tax-free allowance certificate in the period 6 April 1998 to 4 June 1998 which included the new job assist tax allowance.
The cost to the Revenue Commissioners of advertising the job assist scheme was £151,000, including VAT. The campaign consisted of advertising both on radio and in newspapers at national, regional and community levels. In addition, the cost of producing explanatory leaflets and posters for placement in tax offices, FÁS centres, employment offices and post offices came to £50,588, including VAT. I regard the take-up of 209 cases in the first seven weeks of operation of the job assist scheme as very satisfactory.
Does the Minister regard a take-up of a couple of hundred as disappointing given that there are approximately 11,000 on the back to work allowance scheme? Does he agree the job assist scheme, his initiative in the 1998 budget, favours employers more than prospective employees? Furthermore, does he agree the back to work scheme is a more attractive option for an unemployed person? For example, a single person who takes up a job under the back to work scheme would be better off by £40 per week. Does the Minister consider he is rejecting an approach based on tax reductions targeted at the low paid and as a result has had to introduce further subsidies and exert pressure for a relatively high national minimum wage? The Minister mentioned an advertising budget of £151,000. Is a similar level of information available on the back to work allowance scheme and did it have a similar level of funding and backing from the Department and relevant agencies?
As I stated on Committee Stage of the Finance Bill, I did not trumpet the job assist scheme as the be all and end all. I stated that the scheme would deal with the problem from another angle and would complement the other schemes in place. I regard the 209 job take-ups in the seven weeks of its operation as being very satisfactory. I stated this was another attempt at focusing on the long-term unemployed from two perspectives. It would give the long-term unemployed an incentive to take up employment and it would give the potential employer an incentive to employ a long-term unemployed person as opposed to someone else in the marketplace. I also stated it was a deliberate attempt at distorting the labour market. I do not regard it as being in competition with any other scheme. It is an attempt to address the problem of long-term unemployment that Deputy Broughan has highlighted more than any other Deputy in the House. A long-term unemployed person — a person unemployed for 12 months or more — receives an additional tax free allowance of £3,000, £2,000 and £1,000 for the first three years, with additional allowances for children, and the employer can write off double the cost of employing such a person in his or her accounts. This is another way to attack the scourge of long-term unemployment.
I accept the scheme has been in operation for a very short time. However, the back to work scheme is a better inducement for prospective employees. In fairness, the Minister has introduced a significant number of targeted responses to unemployment. However, in the past couple of months his colleague, the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, Deputy Ahern, has introduced, without reference to the House, a workfare programme whereby unemployed people are basically told to go to a building site or a security company and take up a job without training or back-up support. While I accept the Minister did not introduce a workfare scheme in the budget, is he concerned that the Minister, Deputy Ahern, has introduced workfare without even raising it at Cabinet?
Is it the case that one cannot apply for job assist and the back to work allowance scheme? The Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs would have weekly data on people who are 12 months or more unemployed and leave the register. Surely that would be an ideal way to identify those concerned and inform them of their rights under this scheme. Is there a system for doing that?
There is no such system in place at present. I would like greater co-operation between the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs, FÁS and the Revenue Commissioners in these matters, but that does not happen at present. The Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs are working towards achieving greater co-operation in that regard, which I am sure the Deputy will agree is long overdue.
I am not aware of any scheme introduced by my colleague, Deputy Ahern, which could be even loosely referred to as workfare. I am aware that some weeks ago he clarified the guidelines on availability for work. Perhaps that is what the Deputy is referring to, but I do not believe that could be even loosely referred to as resembling workfare. Perhaps the Deputy is suggesting he should introduce such a scheme.
He has introduced it.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
