John Bruton
Question:2 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the schedule of future meetings of the Interdepartmental Strategy Group on Employment and Unemployment; and if he will make a statement on the group's work programme. [21042/98]
Ceisteanna—Questions. - Interdepartmental Strategy Group.
The Interdepartmental Strategy Group on Employment and Unemployment meets on average every six to eight weeks and has met on 30 occasions since its inception in October 1995. The most recent meeting took place on 15 September and this was followed by a meeting with the social partners on 23 October to discuss labour market policy in the context of the forthcoming budget. These and other issues were explored further at the Partnership 2000 plenary meeting on 28 October. The next meeting will take place on Thursday this week.
The group is currently examining the operation of active labour market policies in the light of changing labour market conditions and the aims and strategies set out in the national employment action plan. This examination will also take into account the various reviews of labour market intervention measures either completed, under way or planned. It is envisaged that this work will determine the agenda for future meetings of the group, both for the remainder of this year and the early months of next year.
Does the Taoiseach believe full employment is an attainable objective?
It all depends on the meaning of full employment in terms of the live register. Given the make up of the live register I do not believe everyone will obtain employment. We are close to a position where people on the live register seeking employment, who take up training opportunities, will obtain work but maybe not in the area of their choice. In many areas, not only in areas of skill shortages, there is meaningful employment.
What is the Taoiseach's estimate of the number of people on the live register of unemployed who, in practice, are not employable in full-time employment? Will he agree there are many unemployed people who would be able to take up part-time employment, but not necessarily full-time employment, and that we need to work with employers to ensure part-time employment is made available to ensure we get as near as possible to having fully employed everyone who is currently unemployed?
I do not disagree with that statement. The most recent figure I have seen for part-time employed ranged from 22,000 upwards, some of whom work two days while others work three days per week. There is further scope in that area. That figure has grown throughout the 1990s. The employment action plan is geared towards helping people on the live register. It will assist them to seek training which, in turn, will assist them in obtaining employment. There are many industries which could benefit. More and more employers, not only in catering, leisure and tourism but in other industries, say that they could take on employees with a small amount of training. Although I have often sought it, I do not have the number on the live register who wish to take up work.
In regard to the decision in the Estimates to cut back the provision for community employment, has the strategy group assessed the likely impact both on the capacity to take people off the live register, given that this is a successful scheme with 40 per cent placement, and on the education sector where up to 6,000 people on community employment are providing services in education? These resources do not appear to be covered elsewhere in the Estimates.
The cutback in the community employment scheme is quite low. The committee, which has a co-ordinating role, and other studies have shown it should use the resources — this is the principle underlying the Estimate — for training, particularly in the social exclusion area. The Deputy is correct in saying that community employment is of benefit but the whole idea is to obtain sustainable full-time employment for these people. The unemployment figure is still enormous compared to what it was at the beginning at the decade. In 1993 as Minister for Finance I was responsible for making resources available to increase community employment dramatically which we did but we have not succeeded in reducing it even though the unemployment levels have changed from 16.5 per cent at that time to less than 9 per cent.
What will happen to the community, voluntary and public services that have become highly dependent on community employment schemes? There are no other financial budget lines they can draw down for the work they do.
Those schemes will hold. The Deputy is aware community employment schemes have been collapsing in many areas, including my own, because of a lack of people. This is happening in other parts of the country also. The cutback in community employment is quite small and I do not see it impinging on those involved in meaningful community employment.
Is much work being done by this group to encourage the principle of profit sharing and share options in view of the alarming increase in the rate of wages and salaries, which is well beyond the rate of inflation and could cause difficulties in the economy in the future?
Work is being done but not by this group as it is concerned with labour market initiatives. The tax strategy group and other groups have been involved in share option schemes. This group is endeavouring to find ways to reflect what is happening in the labour market, to get as close as possible to full employment and to train those who are unemployed.
In view of the group dealing with employment and unemployment, it should also look at the area of employment retention. Does the Taoiseach believe the group's remit should be extended to look at other areas, such as remuneration for those in employment or those who could come into employment if the conditions were enticing enough?
I do not know if the group discusses these issues but they are not within its remit. This group deals with the national employment action plan, Partnership 2000, the NAP scheme and other labour market areas. The issue mentioned by the Deputy is being discussed by the tax strategy group.
Does the Taoiseach support in principle the encouragement of part-time employment for people who want to avail of it? Is he aware that Departments, including the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation, are frustrating requests by full-time employees of Departments to get job sharing arrangements, which would open up labour market opportunities for other people?
I am not aware of the example cited by the Deputy but I am in favour of part-time employment. Approximately 25,000 people work on a part-time basis, although there is huge movement in and out of that category. I support part-time work because it is a reality of the labour market in 1998.
I welcome the Taoiseach's support. Will he ask the interdepartmental strategy group to look specifically at outstanding requests from civil servants for job sharing both at national and local level and, where possible, to give sympathetic support? My understanding from constituency queries is that this is not the case.
I will mention that to the group.
Does the Taoiseach accept that the target of full employment will not be achieved because of the Government's policy of excluding large parts of the country, such as the constituency of Cavan-Monaghan and other Border areas, from job creation? Not one industry has been announced for that region since this Administration took office.
Some 2,000 jobs were recently announced by Xerox which will be of great benefit to the Border region. Some of the key characteristics of the labour market performance can be seen from the labour force survey which shows that unemployment, which was 17 per cent, is now down to 9 per cent. The national employment action plan sets a target of 7 per cent, which is low by EU standards. The reduction has been achieved despite the most rapid growth in the labour force ever experienced in the State. There was an average annual increase of 32,000 people joining the labour force between 1992 and 1997 compared with an equivalent figure of 6,000 in the period from 1982 to 1992.
The number of people in the labour force increased by 203,000 or 15 per cent during the decade to April 1997. The underlying increase in the number of people in the labour force in the subsequent six months was 30,000 to 40,000. In other words, the number in the labour force increased by 203,000 in a decade and by 13 or 15 per cent of that figure in the subsequent period. There has been a more rapid decrease in the number of long-term unemployed than in the overall number unemployed in the past four years. Approximately 9 per cent of the labour force were long-term unemployed four years ago, but that figure has fallen to 5.6 per cent and the best guestimate for this year is below 5 per cent. In absolute terms total unemployment has fallen by 52,000 in the past three to four years of which 42,000 represents a decrease in the number of long-term unemployed. That is the position across all regions of the country.
It is estimated that just under two thirds of the 54,000 decrease in numbers on the live register over the past two years can be attributed to a decrease in the number of long-term unemployed. In the 12 months to April this year, more than 92 per cent, representing almost 20,000 people, of the estimated fall in unemployment was accounted for by the long-term unemployed, representing a 15.5 per cent decrease. Those figures show there has been a fall in the number of long-term unemployed and youth unemployment.
(Dublin West): Do the Taoiseach and the Government agree with the attempt by the bosses federation, IBEC, to undermine the concept of community employment and remunerated community employment schemes? Do they agree with its blatant effort to force workers to take up the lowest paid jobs, which employers may have some difficulty filling because of the virtual starvation scale wages being offered, or do they agree that community employment schemes are crucial to many community facilities? Do they agree the direction in this regard should be one that encourages workers to participate in those schemes under proper working conditions and with proper wages rather than one where employers seek to marginalise communities and cause further problems such as they are now attempting to do?
If one lives long enough, one gets to see everything come around. When I was Minister for Labour I tried my utmost to convince people to introduce community employment schemes.
(Dublin West): Social employment schemes.
Deputy Quinn's party introduced them.
They were introduced in the Department of Social Welfare before that.
Deputy Quinn will recall we found it difficult to convince people to introduce social employment schemes.
(Dublin West): That was because it was cheap labour.
The Deputy's question was whether I agree with the employers federation that the number participating in these schemes should be dramatically reduced. The figure of 11,000 or 12,000 was mentioned. I do not agree with that. It would not be wise to reduce the number in those schemes by either of those figures because that would result in what Deputy Bruton spoke about earlier. It would cut into areas where there are only social jobs. There is an argument for reducing the number to some extent because companies throughout the country are offering sustainable and fairly well remunerated jobs. Employers are seeking to recruit workers, although not those who are participating in community employment schemes. Those participating in community employment schemes get a basic level of training after which they can move to take up sustainable jobs. To cut the number participating in those schemes by the 30 per cent, as suggested, would decimate the community structures that have been built up, whether in education, the leisure industry, cre ches and other community activities, and I would not agree to such a cut.
Is the Taoiseach aware there is a disincentive for a person living in an inner city flat complex, who must pay rent on his or her gross income which is also used to calculate his or her eligibility for a medical card even though that person's income is much lower after tax is deducted, to take up a job compared, perhaps, to his or her neighbour? More than 200,000 people remain on the live register because of such inbuilt poverty traps. Is the Taoiseach aware that a well known Dublin restaurant group is recruiting staff from continental Europe because people in Ireland will not take up jobs as a result of those poverty traps? Will he ensure that resolution of this issue forms part of the central strategy to deal with the unemployment problem?
I am aware of a number of these difficulties and I assure the Deputy that the Government will continue to address them. Under certain schemes, people are entitled to retain secondary benefits and, therefore, I cannot accept that the issue to which the Deputy referred is the sole reason that people will not take up employment. There are many jobs which offer remuneration that is well above what could be classified as a "minimum wage" and employers find it difficult to encourage people to take them up, even when they can retain their secondary benefits.
Is the Taoiseach aware that there is a 50 per cent unemployment rate among refugees living in and entitled to work in Ireland? One of the reasons for this is that they are paid rent subsidy which they will lose on taking up employment. These people are available to work but are prevented from doing so by the sort of poverty trap to which Deputy Gay Mitchell referred. Will the Taoiseach investigate this matter not only from the perspective of refugees but also from that of Irish people who cannot take up employment because they may lose their entitlement to rent subsidy?
As Deputy Bruton stated, this problem is widespread. Partnership 2000 contains a proposal regarding the tapering of a number of these reliefs which is being examined at present.