Vol. 506 No. 5
24 Mr. McDowell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if her attention has been drawn to the severe difficulties being created for many voluntary and community projects arising from the decision to cut 2,000 community employment places; the criteria being used to determine where cuts will be made; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15840/99]
60 Mr. Spring asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the contact, if any, she has made with relevant Departments to fund specific jobs which are currently filled by community employment, schools, vocational education committees and local authorities; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15856/99]
63 Ms Shortall asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will supply to the social partners the guidelines she is using to cutback places on community employ ment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15855/99]
64 Mrs. Owen asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she has completed her consideration of the report (details supplied) on community employment schemes; if so, the changes, if any, proposed to these schemes; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15774/99]
84 Mr. Gilmore asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if schools will continue to benefit from community employment schemes; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15800/99]
95 Mr. McGrath asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the major cutbacks, if any, she is proposing in the community employment schemes; the way in which she will implement these cutbacks; and the timescale and number involved. [16003/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 24, 60, 63, 64, 84 and 95 together.
As four of those questions are oral questions, there will be 18 minutes devoted to the question if necessary.
My Department has just completed a round of consultations with the social partners on the restructuring of community employment. Taking these discussions into account, I am now finalising my proposals for the restructuring of CE. As is standard practice, these proposals will be circulated to relevant Government Departments for observation prior to my bringing them to Government. I do not, however, intend to propose any changes in the eligibility criteria for community and voluntary bodies or schools.
This year there has been a reduction in the number of places in community employment, from a level approaching 40,000 at end-1998 to an average of 37,500 in 1999. The reduction is indicative of a strategic shift in supports for unemployed persons away from community employment towards mainstream training programmes, bridging programmes to mainstream training, and job clubs. An additional 10,000 places in these areas were provided for in the 1999 Revised Estimates.
FÁS has operational responsibility for project selection and appraisal. Priority is accorded to sponsors who provide good and relevant work experience, training and educational experiences, achieved good progression including placement results and have an approved and effective supervisor.
It is important to stress that a number of CE projects have a finite lifetime as opposed to those schemes that provide services which are rolled over and this, too, will be a criterion applied in any reduction in numbers.
Is the Tánaiste aware of the severe difficulties being experienced by many groups which are currently offering aid because they have CE schemes in place? Would the Tánaiste consider reviewing the situation whereby there must be a 65 per cent turnover in the people carrying out the CE schemes at the end of each year? They then have to end the scheme because there is not an appropriately qualified person available, when the person finishing the year could continue for another year. Will the Tánaiste display more flexibility in her approach to this scheme and instruct FÁS to desist from stopping projects from going ahead because of cuts in the CE schemes?
There are fewer people in community employment now than a year ago. Last year there were many more involved in it than in previous years. At a time when employment has fallen to 6 per cent, we cannot continue with community employment at the same level as when unemployment was substantially higher. The purpose of community employment, in the main, is to give unemployed people work experience and to help them back into the world of work and into a full job in the labour market. We have diverted some of the resources from community employment to more mainstream training, as recommended by the Deloitte & Touche report, particularly for young people, which seems to be more effective in helping people to access jobs.
A feature of community employment is that schemes end all the time. The Minister cannot make decisions on particular schemes. One must lay down criteria and expect FÁS to operate them in the most effective way possible. In addition to the worthwhile experience for the individuals involved, community employment fills a very useful role in the community, particularly in schools and in many voluntary bodies. That is why I said that, notwithstanding the recommendations of Deloitte & Touche, we will not change the criteria for community and voluntary bodies or for schools. It will remain a feature of activity in that area. It is a question of priorities and choices and given the current economic progress, we are, thankfully, in a position to offer people more jobs than was the case in the past.
Does the Minister consider that where community employment provides an essential service – for example, protecting school property – it requires a different solution than the type of scheme she said has a finite lifetime? Is there any sign of Government allowing the Department of Education and Science, in respect of school caretakers and classroom assistants, to take on that responsibility? Does she accept that damage would be done to many schools if they were to lose these people? All Members of this House have received representations to that effect.
Whatever about the number in particular schools – that changes from time to time, as has always been the case – there is no question of community employment being withdrawn from schools, which was one of the recommendations of Deloitte & Touche. It made the valid point that while very worthwhile work is done, it should be done on a full-time basis by full-time staff. Community employment serves a useful role in giving people experience of and involvement in the school. It is also much less expensive than creating full-time posts. I do not anticipate in the short-term that the Department of Education and Science will employ full-time assistants or caretakers.
Again, it is a question of choices and priorities. Obviously, people will not remain in the same school. I cannot give that guarantee. The only guarantee I can give is that schools will remain among the bodies which will qualify for community employment. It is a matter for FÁS to look at the options in relation to the people and projects. In particular, I am anxious that schools in disadvantaged areas have priority and that they maintain the levels they require because they have greater needs from a security point of view and in terms of assistance to teachers and caretaking. In regard to community employment generally – I already spoke to FÁS about this – the priority must be the most disadvantaged communities, both urban and rural.
I congratulate the Minister on the decrease in unemployment which has led to a reduction in the number of community employment schemes. I take this opportunity to compliment the work being done in the community by those on community employment schemes. What does the Minister think about the role of FÁS in schools, particularly in the case of classroom assistants who have only a limited amount of time on the scheme? Children, particularly those with a disability, are only getting used to their helper when they fall out of the scheme as they no longer fulfil the criteria set out by FÁS. The Minister is not going to change the criteria and that creates many difficulties for Deputies.
Is the Minister happy with the progression to full-time employment, especially in rural areas? There was a time when one could not get people onto community employment schemes but now one cannot get them off them until they are told they must leave. Will the remaining FÁS places be allocated to unemployment blackspots, such as my area which has had a rough time over recent months and which would qualify under the perceived unemployment levels criteria?
The answer is yes. The difficulties the Deputy highlighted are an operational matter. Clearly, it would be desirable that if children are getting assistance from classroom assistants under community employment, they would have it for the full academic year and there would not be a change in personnel. That may be easier said than done in terms of how one organises that, but it would be desirable from the point of view of the school and the student.
On progression to full-time employment, community employment satisfies the needs of many because of the 19 hours per week requirement. Perhaps there is a reluctance to move away from community employment. People get great satisfaction working in the voluntary and school sectors, and that is an aspect which encourages people to continue to participate. Sometimes one must be cruel to be kind in that there are others waiting to get into community employment schemes. If we continue to keep the same people in community employment, others will not have the same experience.
Malin Head and the surrounding area is very disadvantaged in terms of employment, particularly in light of the Fruit of the Loom decision. I hope that is one of the areas where community employment will continue to fulfil an important role.
Who sets the quota for each county in terms of the number of vacancies FÁS can promote? Often the level of new starts depends on the number of participants on the scheme at a given time. Deputy Rabbitte made the point about the importance of different categories for employment under community employment schemes. Deputy Keaveney correctly said that those receiving assistance in schools need continuity. In Sligo the number of schemes due to commence is very much dependent on the number taking part in the schemes.
The Government sets the budget and decides on the number who can participate in any one year. FÁS is expected to distribute the places on a fair and equitable basis in so far as that is possible and taking into account the needs of disadvantaged communities in particular because that is the priority. The numbers allocated to a particular region depends on a number of factors, including availability of a supervisor, the nature of the programmes offered, the prospect of progression into full-time employment and so on. It is a matter at regional level for FÁS to assess the various projects and to make choices.
There are always more projects than available funding so FÁS must make choices based on the information at its disposal. That is an operational matter which cannot be done centrally. It is a mammoth task to organise 37,500 people annually in addition to the number of trainees. There are 18,000 apprentices and a larger number of others involved in various training programmes. Even at an organisational level, FÁS must handle a large number of people.
When will we have clarity as regards the direction of the Government on the future of community employment because there is much uncertainty at the moment? Does the Minister consider that the training component of community employment is valuable generally across the schemes or does she agree it varies widely? Does she also agree that the training element in some cases is minimal and as a result it is difficult to expect people to acquire skills over 12 months which they did not acquire over 12 years in education and that they should be automatically expected to move into the labour market proper?
As the Deputy knows, the training element varies considerably from scheme to scheme rather than from area to area. It is dependent on a number of factors. The Deloitte & Touche report recommended a greater training element rather than community employment which it felt did not involve sufficient training, particularly for young people. It recommended more mainstream training in the case of young people. This year we have increased the training allowance to end the discrepancy between what one gets on community employment and on training. There was a large gap of almost £25. That now goes to encourage people into training. A number of problems have arisen, and clearly there is a high level of illiteracy. We are now trying to encourage that of the 19 hours, perhaps up to nine hours would be made available for people to return to education or to certified or recommended literacy programmes run in conjunction with the National Adult Literacy Association. This was one of the requests made at a seminar organised by the INOU which I recently attended. It is a sensible suggestion as many of the participants in community employment schemes do not have the skills necessary to access work and a significant education component in such cases is necessary.
A decision will be made by the Government on the Deloitte & Touche report before the summer. The memorandum to that effect will be circulated shortly to Departments for their observations. It is important that before the next session people know exactly the situation in relation to community employment.
Has a decision been made to cut 2,000 community employment places? Has the Minister considered changing the criteria to enable women and men who formerly worked in the home to enter the workplace through community employment schemes?
There will be a reduction of 2,000 based on the funding in the 1999 Estimates. However, additional funding was provided for 10,000 other labour market places, jobs clubs and training places. Therefore, an additional number of places is being provided, albeit in a different area.
I have given some consideration to widening the criteria to cover other categories of people. Today I referred to the criteria for groups which qualify for community employment schemes, including voluntary community bodies and schools. I also want to give consideration to changing the criteria for people who qualify for such schemes and to open opportunities for people who might want to return to the workplace.
Notwithstanding the Minister's commitment to the future of community employment schemes for schools, what is her view on the appalling situation regarding community centres? She is no doubt aware that the community employment component has been run down in her own constituency in recent times, something which is of major concern. What other recommendations in the Deloitte & Touche report does the Tánaiste not support? Does she agree there was a fair degree of criticism of the report concerning the amount of evaluation undertaken with the participants? Will she ensure the evaluation for the jobs initiative scheme is of a high standard?
I am anxious that as many as possible of the stakeholders in the jobs initiative scheme are contacted before the evaluation is produced. This is important as in different places people have different experiences and people can be of different age groups. For example, some people might only be five years out of employment while others could be longer. It is important that we have the widest possible consultation in drawing up the evaluation.
I am aware of the difficulties in relation to community centres. As I said earlier, there are 37,500 people around the country working on community employment schemes. Even if this figure were doubled, some people would still demand a community employment project. Clearly, the line must be drawn somewhere. There have never been more people on community employment schemes and unemployment has never been so low. Deputies constantly raise with me the difficulties employers experience in finding workers. Therefore, there must be a balance in the sector. In particular, we must continue to focus on helping unemployed people, particularly the long-term unemployed, to return to the world of work. Deputy Rabbitte asked earlier about the social economy. Community employment schemes include a mix of activities which cannot be commercial. Schemes can be categorised by people and activity. There are people who will probably never get a job in the so-called real economy but who can do very worthwhile work in the social economy. I hope the model we bring forward will be a mix of the two, namely, supporting worthwhile activity and encouraging the employment of people who might otherwise not be able to access employment.
Does the Tánaiste agree it will never be possible for community centres to provide full-time jobs for people to carry out the work done by community employment schemes? At the very least will she examine how the scheme in relation to community centres is operating? Will she provide flexibility so that where there is no person available to replace a person on a scheme, particularly in rural areas, the person already on the scheme can remain to keep community centres open?
It is always good to have flexibility. However, the downside of flexibility is that others who may be willing to participate might be excluded.
I am talking about situations where there is no one else to take up a position.
Flexibility must be the key where there is no one else to take up a position on a scheme. Nobody wants things to change suddenly. However, I do not want to say that everything will remain the same in all cases, as this will not happen. At regional level, FÁS will have to make the necessary choices.
Regarding community centres, in the past we tended to build a physical structure and forget about how we would run it. The new proposals announced by the Minister of State, Deputy Flood, for the disadvantaged areas in the context of the drugs taskforces is providing not only funding for new facilities but also funding for personnel. Both must go hand in hand. We must bear in mind who will run the worthwhile facilities we are building in communities many years down the road, when the initiators get tired or move on.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
