Vol. 497 No. 7
7 Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will amend the regulations to address the anomaly whereby widows in receipt of contributory pension cannot be considered for FÁS schemes in view of the fact they are not on the live register and in many cases are technically lone parents; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [24642/98]
Although priority on access to FÁS programmes is given to long-term unemployed persons and the socially excluded, a wide range of FÁS programmes are generally available to anyone looking for a job. For women, and men, who want to return to paid work after time spent working in the home, FÁS runs return to work courses in each of its regions.
Within the range of FÁS programmes community employment is targeted at a particularly disadvantaged group of people, those whose principal or only source of income is an unemployment compensation payment or one parent family payment.
The recent review of community employment by Deloitte & Touche did not make any recommendations regarding expansion of eligibility to participate in the programme. However, a Partnership 2000 working group composed of all the social partners and chaired by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs is considering access by women to labour market opportunities. I have requested that access by widows to training and to jobs should be one of the issues considered by that group.
Given the labour shortage, will the Minister agree — in view of recent figures supplied by the Minister and the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, on the number of women between the ages of 16 and 65 now in the active workforce — that by comparison with Scandinavia and other countries where 55 per cent or 56 per cent of women are available for work, we are talking about a relatively small group, some of whom may be lone parents, who are denied the opportunity to take up community employment schemes? Will the Minister address this anomaly and ensure that whatever CE reform structure is adopted will cater for these women? Will she address also the dependent wives who are not on the live register. This issue was highlighted yesterday by the provision in the budget of £3 for senior women, the dependant allowances and so on. Should not those women who do not have stamps have the opportunity, through community employment, to enter full-time employment? The Minister has an obligation to do something about this.
I have a great deal of sympathy for what Deputy Broughan has said. The most effective way to deal with dependent spouses would be through the individualisation of payments. Unfortunately we are a long way from that because of cost implications. If the stay at home wife or dependent spouse takes up a job or goes into training her husband, as is frequently the case, has to pay more tax. I am aware from my work at constituency level that this can become a source of anger in the family. The only way round that issue is through the individualisation of payments. Moving down a tax credit route makes that achievable. I am not saying it will be achieved in the lifetime of this Government, but that is what we should aim for on the tax and welfare side.
Community employment was introduced at a time of high unemployment. Labour market conditions have changed enormously in recent years. The recent review by Deloitte & Touche provides the focus for making some changes. We should make some changes. Obviously we want to continue to target the long-term unemployed. Community employment, in addition to the experience it gives the long-term unemployed and lone parents, permits worthwhile work in the community to be done in schools and with voluntary bodies. We are committed also to developing the social economy and to allocating 5,000 community employment places during the next year. I intend to enter into discussions, if not before Christmas, shortly thereafter, with various interested parties. I would like to be more flexible about people who have been at home for years and who are aggrieved they cannot get involved in community employment. Obviously this includes widows and widowers. I would like to facilitate change with a view to bringing those on board. However, I cannot give a commitment on this until we see what changes can be made. As the Deputy is aware we are reducing community employment to about 37,500 places next year. The challenge is how to turn this around and how to concentrate our efforts over and above the long-term unemployed. There are difficult issues to be addressed in that context. I hope Deputies opposite will support the endeavours we will engage in shortly after Christmas.
Will the Minister undertake to have discussions with her colleague, the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, to look at the conditions for entry into community employment schemes, FÁS training and the plethora of back to work schemes, given that the conditions always specify that a person must have been unemployed for a fixed period, whether six months, 12 months or longer? Women working in the home will never qualify once that is the condition. Will the Minister make a recommendation whereby a certain number of years worked in the home would be the equivalent of 12 months being unemployed. I suggest six months given that six months working in the home is a great deal harder than many of the periods of unemployment which men have to endure. The problem will not be solved without taking a courageous step to change the conditions whereby women can re-enter training and community employment schemes. Will the Minister examine this area to ensure we meet the needs for more employees. It has been estimated we will need some 100,000 new employees. The only catchment for such employees is from women not already in the workplace.
There are many issues that affect women in the home wishing to return to work.
Child care.
Not all women who wish to return to work are influenced by community employment. There are other issues concerning taxation and child care.
What about those who want to go into training or FÁS schemes.
There are a number of training opportunities for women who wish to return to work. In the context of community employment, on which we spend more than £300 million, we have an active labour market and an unprecedented number of requests for work permits from abroad. Some 96 per cent of applications for work permits have been approved in the past year. Employers are experiencing difficulty in finding employees either in Ireland or in the EU. There are opportunities to change and community employment is one resource. In the context of making decisions on the Deloitte & Touche report I would like to examine how we can encourage those women in the home who want to return to work, to access, as a short-term measure, community employment opportunities.
I presume we can take it the Minister has encountered widows in the circumstances contemplated by the question. While I agree with much of what she has said, is it open to her to do something in respect of the eligibility of widows to participate in FÁS schemes. Does her backup brief contain figures relating to the number of widows likely to find themselves in the circumstances outlined?
Will the Minister indicate why she is reducing the number of people on community employment schemes to 37,500? Will she confirm that, in terms of the exceptional job performance up to April of last year, those on CE schemes are not included in the figure of 92,000.
In terms of new jobs?
Yes.
The number of people at work in the 12 months up to April increased by 96,000 over the previous 12 months. That figure does not include community employment statistics because these are, to some extent, artificial because CE schemes are created by the Government. The figure of 96,000 refers to people working outside the community employment sector.
We are scaling back the numbers of people on community employment schemes in order to invest more money in training schemes and encourage people to enter such schemes so that they can access the opportunities that are being created. The current situation in this area is very different to that which obtained when commitments were made under Partnership 2000 to create 41,000 places. We must respond to changing circumstances and it would be unrealistic not to do so. In light of changes that have occurred, we have an opportunity to revamp the scheme and redirect some of those involved into other areas of the social economy. We must learn from our experience in recent years in terms of the output from community employment. Up to 80 per cent of the participants on schemes have accessed jobs while in other schemes the take-up rate is very low. Community employment was always intended to be a bridge between unemployment and gaining a job. If it is not fulfilling that role for some categories of participants, it must be changed.
I do not want to make any changes in community employment until we put together the total package. Because of commitments made in Partnership 2000, that will involve discussions with the social partners, particularly CORI and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. I have had informal discussions with both groups and I look forward to more formal discussions in the near future. When that happens, we will be able to make changes.
There are approximately 44,000 widows and widowers in Ireland but I am not sure how many of them — I imagine it is relatively few — would like to access an opportunity of the sort to which Deputy Rabbitte referred. However, the few who might wish to do so should not be prohibited under the strict criteria in place at present.
