Vol. 518 No. 5
12 Mr. Bell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will make a statement on the progress of the discussions with social partners regarding the future of the local employment service; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11934/00]
The Government decided last year to implement new operational arrangements for the management, development and delivery of the national employment service function, including the assimilation of the LES under FÁS, as a discrete component of a more integrated, dual stranded national employment service, the other component being the existing FÁS employment service. The Government also decided on the establishment of an employment service advisory committee within FÁS which will have responsibility for advising on the operation and development of all components of the national employment service function, including the local employment service.
This integration between the FÁS employment service and the LES, apart from having been advocated in various evaluation reports in recent years, has been endorsed in the current new social partnership agreement.
FÁS has recently commenced a consultation process with the partnerships to identify the most appropriate arrangements for different areas, having due regard to their distinctive local characteristics.
Does the Minister consider that the LES as now constituted will have any role in respect of the continuation of the job initiative scheme? Is she in a position to tell us what that decision will be?
The Deputy seems to be well informed. I want to have the new criteria endorsed by the social partners and I am looking forward to their comments. I want flexibility, so that when somebody comes to the end of his or her three years, he or she will not go from a job initiative programme to nothing. That requires flexibility to be given to somebody to make the decision, which I propose giving to the LES. If an individual completes his or her three years on a job initiative and is not is a position to move into a regular labour market job or to get involved in a training programme, he or she will stay, subject to the endorsement of the LES, in job initiative or the social economy or whatever. That is the best outcome to the kind of uncertainties and difficulties that have arisen. That core group of people deserve flexibility and special arrangements.
Is the Minister in a position to put into the public domain her comprehensive conclusions on this matter? Is she providing any distinctive validating mechanism for those employed in social economy units, as distinct from more typical, run of the mill job initiative posts? Has she had any success in her discussions with the Minister for Education and Science on whether that Department, for example, might make a contribution towards the maintenance of employment in schools and so on, such as caretakers and class assistants?
The Minister got a warning of that this morning.
In relation to the second part of the Deputy's question, it would be desirable, particularly in the context of the buoyancy of the economy, if the line Departments were to take responsibility for the areas of social employment that fall within their remit. A high proportion of them are caretakers, teaching assistants and secretaries. It is not satisfactory that it is a stop-start situation, where schools do not know from one year to the next if they will have somebody. I hope that will be taken on board very quickly by the Department of Education and Science. It is obviously a resource issue which must be resolved. We also need to resolve aspects of this with the Department of the Environment and Local Government in relation to those on environmental projects.
I will put my comments into the public domain. Although I am asking the social partners for their views, I am quite happy to let Deputies Rabbitte and Owen have copies also for their comments in relation to the position on the jobs initiative.
Is the Minister aware that school secretaries and caretakers in the social economy/CE situation are being laid off as we speak because the dovetailing between the two Departments has not worked properly? The £30 million in relation to the Department of Education and Science is not in the system yet. Will the Minister, as a matter of urgency, instruct FÁS agents around the country not to end school caretaking and secretary schemes until the education one has come into force?
Has any decision been made by the group looking at the social economy, to which the Minister referred, to look at the sectors that need social economy workers rather than just the geographical areas? My fear is that five or ten areas throughout the country will be deemed eligible for social employment and other areas that have social employment needs, albeit not the most deprived areas, will not gain and that handicapped or sick people will lose out. Can that be done on the basis of job specification rather than totally on the basis of geographical areas?
In regard to community employment, I understand that one is to dovetail with another. I hope that will happen. I will pursue the matter with FÁS, in the light of what Deputy Owen has said, later today.
The intention is that the social economy scheme will be sectoral as much as regional. Obviously, the priority will be the most disadvantaged communities. However, clearly that does not mean it should be exclusively urban or that certain sectors, such as people working with the handicapped, should be excluded. We must cover both situations if possible. That is the intention of the review group examining this.
I have heard rumours it is not the intention, which I why I raised it. I heard rumours that the group will only look at geography. I want the Minister to ensure it understands that.
There is no doubt that the priority is high unemployment areas.
Will the Minister tell the House briefly what practical steps are required to be taken by, for example, a woman who presents in one's clinic at the weekend, says she has finished her three and a half years and her sponsor does not know what to do with her or where she is to go? To whom should such a woman report or where should she get advice?
That is the big question.
The first group to finish the three years was the December group, which we extended to the end of June. Therefore, the issue should not arise before then. They will not be just dropped from the jobs initiative but will be referred to the LES for a decision to be made.
The Minister is doing away with the LES – she is moving it into FÁS.
No, we are not; we are just co-ordinating the two schemes.
I take this opportunity, a Cheann Comhairle, to wish you a happy Easter.
Go n-éirí an bóthar agus an t-ádh leat, a Cheann Comhairle.
The Dáil adjourned at 3.50 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 10 May 2000.
