Vol. 1027 No. 7
80. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science if he has engaged with the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, and the Minister for Finance on extending the renters' tax rebate to students and parents as well as PhD researchers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [51723/22]
Last Tuesday the Tánaiste said he hoped the Government could extend the renter's tax rebate to parents who help their children with rent while they are studying. He added the Minister for Finance was examining ways this could be done. I ask the Minister to provide us with an update on the Government's work on this area.
I thank Deputy Conway-Walsh for the important and timely question. When the question was submitted and we were preparing our answer it was in advance of the Finance Bill being published. The Bill will be published later this week but the Minister for Finance has indicated today, as have I, that parents who pay rent for their children will now be covered by the rent relief. Let us look at the various scenarios in which students might be renting. A student might rent privately, register with the Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, and pay their rent. They are covered just as any renter in the general population would be. There are students who avail of the rent-a-room scheme and the Minister for Finance has been clear they are covered. Students who live in on-campus accommodation often have a licence agreement rather than a tenancy agreement. They will be covered. The final category is a student who is renting privately but whose parents are paying the rent. The Finance Bill will now ensure, quite rightly, that parent can avail of the rent relief. This is an area I think we agree on. It is right and proper that that is done and I very much welcome the work of my colleague the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, on this.
I welcome that move, which was absolutely necessary. We should never have put students in the situation of being excluded in the first place.
Will the Minister clarify the situation of PhD renters and whether they have been included? PhD students and researchers need action like everybody else. My follow-up question is whether there is any cohort of students paying out money for rent that will be excluded from this, or is everybody included?
I can only tell the Deputy those who are included because I am trying to think of various scenarios here. However, I am satisfied that the way the Finance Bill is now drafted will provide access to the rent relief tax credit for students in the four categories I outlined, namely, those living in on-campus accommodation, those renting themselves, those in the rent-a-room scheme and those renting where the tenancy is registered with the RTB but the students' parents are paying the rent for them, which I imagine is the scenario for many families across the country.
As for PhD students, I understand this issue relates to the fact the stipend is not taxed and this is a tax credit. Again, it is not possible for me on the floor of the Dáil to imagine all the various scenarios of individual PhD students. Some of them work and have an income that is taxable but it is a tax credit, administered by Revenue and linked to whether or not you are paying tax. I will come back in in a moment.
I ask that the Minister look at the situation of PhD researchers. He knows the inequity that is already built in by virtue of their not getting the stipend they should be getting or indeed not being treated as workers, which they should be. It highlights why they might be excluded in this situation. I hope a way will be found to include them. Of course, it is just €500 and in the context of rural-proofing our policies and students from rural areas having to find and pay for accommodation it is just a tiny bit of what we need to do.
I am sure through the other questions we have tonight we will tease out the whole area of student accommodation and what needs to be done to give certainty to students. I am concerned students are now thinking of dropping out because they have been couch-surfing and in accommodation that is not conducive to their participating fully in their studies and now their parents are trying to ensure they stay on at college.
I have a couple of bits and, as the Deputy suggested, we will be able to come back to some of this in later questions. The first thing is we need to do a full, proper, external review of PhD supports. I expect to be in a position to announce the details of that this week. We need to look at it root and branch, at all the elements of support, at what other countries do, at what we do well and at what we must do better. We need to be aware of the inconsistencies that exist with different levels of stipends administered by different people. How does that work and how does that interact with our PhD students? I am happy to engage with the Deputy later in the week on that. We have a committee meeting tomorrow evening as well.
I will have more time when answering later questions to address the broader issue of student accommodation. There are two issues, which are affordability and supply. This question relates to affordability. We took a number of measures in the budget to reduce fees and improve grants, with a bonus student grant payment. We are talking about another measure which we are taking. I accept that the Deputy is welcoming it. It will provide access to the tax relief on rent for students and their parents. That also helps with affordability.
81. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science if he recognises the need to remove all fees for and financial barriers to further and higher education given the shortage of graduates and postgraduates across multiple sectors of Ireland’s economy and public services; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [51823/22]
I have just come from UCD, where the first person I met was a lecturer who said how worried she is about the college's ability to retain and recruit PhD students because of the financial pressures they are under. I was at Trinity College for the student walkout organised by the Union of Students in Ireland the other day. I met undergraduates who were furious that effectively nothing has been done for them in the budget. I met postgraduates. This week, I met psychology students. Some are funded, some are not, and all of them said that it is nearly impossible for them to complete their studies because of the financial pressures they are under. What will the Minister do for students?
I accept that there is always a need to do more, but the idea that the Deputy suggests, or would suggest on behalf of anybody else, that nothing was done in the budget to assist students, is manifestly untrue. Some €143 million has been allocated for cost-of-living measures for students between now and the end of the year, which is not nothing. About 95,000 students will benefit from a €1,000 reduction in fees between now and Christmas. More than 50,000 students will benefit from a bonus student grant payment on 16 December, which will amount to about €679 extra for many students. Student grants will rise by between 10% and 14% from January. Students will not have to wait until the next college year. That is ahead of the inflation rate. The student assistance fund has been increased by €8 million. We have made sure that students and their parents are covered by rent relief. I accept that we need to do more, but it is certainly not nothing, or effectively nothing, as the Deputy said about the budget. That is not true.
The Deputy's question intends to inform discussion about the need to do more and what the system should look like, but we have taken many actions. I am not sure that the Deputy would be able to point to any other budget delivered in this House that has delivered more to reduce the cost of education in a single move, in the context of cost-of-living measures. I accept that there is more to do. Deputy Boyd Barrett raised a valid issue about PhD students and researchers, which is why I intend to have a full review of how this country supports our PhD students, how it compares with other countries and what we must do better. I intend for that to be an external review. It will not be a departmental exercise but will be done by somebody who can liaise directly with PhD students to look at what the country does well, what it must do better, and at the issue of financial support.
Real measures have been taken which will affect tens of thousands of students and their parents between now and Christmas. They will not have to wait for any significant period. I know that we have more to do.
What the Government did was a drop in the ocean. It is telling that we had some of the biggest student protests for a long time after the budget. They were not happy. I am relaying what those students expressed to me. Some PhD students get no stipends. Some get miserable stipends of a few grand. Even those who get €18,000 have to work all the hours that God sends. They find it difficult to study or they have to have a second job, which makes it almost impossible for them to complete their studies. A lecturer who used to lecture me in UCD said they are worried about UCD's ability to recruit and retain postgraduate students. That is serious when we have chronic skills shortages in a number of areas across our society and public services. We are making it extremely difficult for people to get postgraduate degrees, to do doctorates and so on. That is the point. We now have increasing numbers of students saying they will just leave the country.
We also have record numbers of students in third level education. There are more than there have ever been in the history of the State and that has to be acknowledged. There are more students than ever before in the history of the leaving certificate getting their first choice of college course. New technological universities are opening in the regions. There are pathways between further and higher education. We have abolished the post leaving certificate, PLC, course levy, increased financial supports for apprentices, and increased the PhD stipend. My record with regard to PhD students is one of increasing stipends in every year in which I have been Minister. When I first became Minister, there was a significant differential between the Irish Research Council and Science Foundation Ireland stipend. We equalised that. We are increasing those stipends by a further €500 in this budget. We are putting that €500 into the baseline. We need to do much more for PhD students. We have increased the number of postgraduate students who will be able to access the €1,000 additional contribution towards their fees this year. We made a permanent increase to the threshold in 2023. This budget has significant measures to address the cost of education, by any objective factor, but we have more to do and will build on this in the years ahead.
I still think the Minister is missing the reason they are protesting and why they are so angry. People who are on poverty stipends, who have no stipends, educational psychologists who have no funding and clinical psychologists who have a little funding are on such low incomes that they have been doubly hammered in real terms by the cost of living and the housing crisis. It is becoming unbearable for them. What they got in the budget was a drop in the ocean. It does not compensate for how much worse things have got for them over the last year and a half, particularly with the low incomes they have. I am telling the Minister that we have to get rid of the fees for postgraduate students. It makes no sense to put financial barriers in the way of people reaching their maximum potential in education. Why are we still putting up barriers, making it difficult and putting them in a situation from which many drop out or then decide to leave the country?
Objectively, we are removing barriers. I am the first Minister with responsibility for higher education who has been able to stand here in 27 years and talk about fees coming down. That is what the budget did. We can have a legitimate debate about the pace of reduction and whether we can move faster, but let us not escape the context, which is that we have just delivered a budget which has reduced college fees. It is not on a once-off basis. It has permanently reduced college fees for any household earning less than €100,000. It has done double that this year in recognition of the cost-of-living crisis. The Deputy said it does not even compensate. All of the increases or reductions that we have provided are ahead of inflation or the increased prices that students are facing. When one looks at the budget in the round, there are further additional supports. For example, there has been a 50% reduction in public transport fees for students and young people. These are real, tangible measures. We have more to do. I regularly, intensively engage with students on this issue and I listen to and hear them. There are real cost-of-education challenges in this country. This budget takes a significant step forward. We have more to do in the months and years ahead.
82. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science the estimated total expenditure from the National Training Fund in 2022; the allocated expenditure for this coming year as part of budget 2023; the estimated reserve in the National Training Fund by the end of 2023; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [51724/22]
Will the Minister explain the reduction in expenditure on the National Training Fund from €752 million in 2022 to €682 million in 2023? Will he outline the estimated reserve by the end of 2023? Why are we reducing our expenditure when the reserve continues to grow so rapidly?
I thank Deputy Conway-Walsh for this question. The 2022 Revised Estimates provided for expenditure, as the Deputy said, of €765 million from the National Training Fund. While these amounts have been allocated to the various beneficiaries, the final actual expenditure for 2022 is not known as yet because we have not reached year end. The final allocation for the NTF in 2023 will be set out in the Revised Estimates. Any increase in NTF expenditure, all other things being equal and without a corresponding reduction on the Vote, requires an increase in my Department and overall Government expenditure ceilings. NTF expenditure increases general Government expenditure and can only be accommodated within the fiscal strategy agreed by Government.
Budget 2023 has allocated €682.5 million for the NTF, as the Deputy correctly said. The net difference between the 2022 and 2023 allocations is €82.5 million. This is due to the removal of the temporary funding provided in 2022 for Covid, the Brexit adjustment reserve and the national recovery and resilience plan, which amounted to €131.4 million in 2021, with the provision of €48.5 million in the 2023 allocation for Covid and Brexit measures, as well as an increase of €400,000 in the NTF baseline for access to apprenticeship initiatives. I know I have presented many figures, but it is important to put them on the record.
When finalising the Revised Estimates for 2023, further expenditure may be identified and categorised under the NTF. The final amount is a matter for Revenue in the coming weeks. The cumulative surplus for the NTF at end 2021 was €1.102 billion. The projected annual surplus for 2022 as set out in the Revised Estimates for 2022 was €88.7 million but it is likely to be higher when all receipts and expenditure fall due.
The forecast for the annual surplus in 2023 will be reviewed in finalising the Revised Estimates taking account of all allocated expenditure and income projections. The forecast annual surplus for 2023 was calculated on a preliminary basis as part of budget 2023 as €338.4 million. While a prudent level of reserve is imperative to guard against uncertainties the current level of the surplus evidently exceeds what may conceivably be required for any potential rainy day.
This year the money collected from the National Training Fund, NTF, is estimated, as the Minister said, to pass €1 billion for the first time. However, he is only proposing to spend about two thirds of that. Some €340 million will go unspent. On top of that, the Minister said there is more than €1 billion sitting in reserve from unspent funds from the past few years. That means that by the end of 2023 there will be €1.5 billion sitting in this reserve, accumulating no interest. This money was collected through the levy with the commitment that it would be invested in education and training and at the same time the Minister has failed to deliver any meaningful progress on addressing the funding gap in the third level education budget. Will the Minister commit to mobilising the NTF reserve to address the funding needs of further and higher education? We have a situation where third level education is crying out for greater levels of funding. At the same time, we have an ever-increasing reserve of money in the NTF. I request that the Minister work with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform to invest this money to address the very severe workforce planning challenges that we have.
I fundamentally agree with Deputy Conway-Walsh. I ran out of time on my last answer but I fundamentally agree with the Deputy in regard to the size of the surplus. It is prudent to have a level of surplus. We would agree on that. It is imprudent to have such a large surplus. I agree on that too. The challenge for the Government, and I respectfully suggest it is also a challenge for the Opposition to show how it is done, is that any expenditure from the NTF is categorised as the equivalent of general Government expenditure. We have signed up to, and I believe the Opposition supports, operating within the general fiscal rules, the European framework and the likes. Having said that, I am doing exactly as the Deputy suggests, which is engaging with other Departments, including the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, to see how we can better leverage this. I would like to see a particular application of the NTF to support skills priorities and to develop the quality of our workforce. In regard to the latter issue I envisage an expanded mandate for Skillnet Ireland, which is the way to proceed, in leading workforce development as the Government agency with extensive partnerships with industry and employees. In addition the Deputy will be aware that the OECD is conducting a full review of Ireland’s skills planning and development and it can be considered in that context.
I was cut off there when I wanted to talk about the severe problems we have in workforce planning. Today at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education, Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science when we were talking about mental health and the need for resources on mental health within schools, the point was made about advertising vacancies when there are so many vacant places. We do not have the workers coming through in the high-demand courses that we need in regard to health. We are not only threatening our economic stability but we are causing a deep inequality in access to health and other essential services. There is a real knock-on effect. It is not good enough just to list the technical issues around the Vote and the expenditure ceilings. We need to lift the bonnet on this to get that money and to get it in a way that it can be spent. I have looked at the legislation around it in regard to the flexibility that it will allow us. I believe there is greater flexibility there than we are using at the moment to get that money invested so that we have the multiplier effect and the benefits of it.
We have to get this right. My colleague, the Tánaiste, indicated most recently in his speech at the IBEC annual dinner his wish, my wish and the Government’s wish to be able to use this fund, an element of the surplus of this fund, to provide an additionality when it comes to skills provision in Ireland. As I have said, on my invitation, the OECD is currently conducting a review of Ireland’s approach to skills planning and development. These and other developments will support further consideration of this issue, including skills priority or investment strategy and the role of the NTF. I intend that the Government would develop proposals within the year 2023 as to how we can better harness this within the context of the rules, the law and all the very careful considerations that need to be given.
In regard to training, training places and workforce planning, which are important points about which I feel strongly, we must do much better as a State in regard to workforce planning. At the same time, we cannot just reduce it to an issue of training because there are obviously issues in regard to recruitment and retention of individuals. In some areas we train many more than the European average. Training is absolutely an important element but not the only part.
83. Deputy Matt Shanahan asked the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science the quantum of capital funding which he envisages will be available to draw down over a timeframe to deliver on the aspirations to halt the brain drain in the south east as part of this framework; the new courses, new disciplines and new buildings that are being put in place as part of South East Technological University configuration; the timeframe for this achievement given that he has made great efforts to deliver amalgamation of the new university; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [52079/22]
My question relates to the South East Technological University, SETU, and the quantum of capital funding that the Minister hopes to announce to deliver on the aspirations to halt the brain drain, to create new courses and to deliver new buildings and new capital structures in SETU.
I appreciate the concise way in which the Deputy delivered a very lengthy written question. I thank Deputy Shanahan for raising the question and for his ongoing engagement with me in regard to SETU, and particularly in regard to Waterford city and county. I look forward to visiting on Monday and engaging further with the Deputy there.
The multi-campus South East Technological University, SETU, will be transformative for the south-east region. Addressing the economic and social needs of the south east is at the centre of its mandate building on the previous achievements which I want to herald of the Waterford Institute of Technology and the Institute of Technology, Carlow. SETU provides a high-quality multi-campus environment with a strong focus on science and technology programmes aligned with skills needs in the region and nationally. It also engages in industry-oriented research and plays a pivotal role in facilitating access to, and progression through, higher education. In this context I am confident that SETU, our country’s newest university, will play a key role in retaining and developing talent in the south-east region. I am strongly committed to supporting the university on its campus development plans. I am strongly committed to expanding the footprint of the university in Waterford. An engineering, computing and general teaching building in Waterford, and a science and health building in Carlow are being advanced through the higher education public private partnership programme. I expect news on that very shortly. Also, next year, construction is scheduled to commence on significant energy retrofit projects in Waterford and Carlow. Engagement is ongoing with the university in regard to the expansion of the Waterford campus footprint. Steps are also being taken in regard to the Wexford campus. The Deputy can be assured that these developments remain key priorities for me and for my Department.
The specific level of investment as in all higher education institutions, and this is not specific to the south east, is always informed by the scope and pace of capital projects and will be decided in the context of my Department’s overall allocation under the national development plan. We issue capital calls and we invite universities to apply, and the same will be the case with the SETU. We have, however, separate and distinct from what I just said, made specific provision in regard to securing an expanded site in Waterford and for that there is not a need to compete with other projects in and across higher education institutions.
It is now 11 years since Fine Gael promised Waterford a national university. It also promised this to the south east in 2011. Since that time no investment has been made on the campus in Waterford Institute of Technology, WIT, despite the fact that the Government and the Higher Education Authority, HEA, blocked any developments and this ended up at the Committee for Public Accounts as well. The Minister told us that the technological university was the only show in town for many years and that it would be enough to meet the needs of our region and our young to set them up for professional achievement. I have had the benefit of the Minister’s formal answer, which I reviewed earlier. Basically what he is announcing is a reannouncement of an engineering building in 2007. What is worse is that in the climate we are currently in we have no confidence that it is going to be built under a PPP mechanism. There is no exceptionalism mentioned anywhere in the Minister’s answer for the fact that SETU will be the only third level educational stream in the south east, unlike every other region in the country.
I ask the Minister why the people of the south east should believe that this Government has any aspirations or desire to address the needs of higher education. I have asked the Minister a number of times about capital funding and the quantum and all he has said to me is there is a strong commitment and a breadth of ambition. That is all I have heard.
The people of the south east can believe us because we are delivering. The Deputy can decide whether or not to get on board with that but we are delivering. There is a technological university in the south east. Job done. The staff and the students voted for it. Veronica Campbell, the former bursar of Trinity College Dublin, is the president, and Paddy Prendergast, the former provost of Trinity College Dublin, is chairing the governing authority. It is going really well. There is an excitement in Waterford and in the south east. There is an excitement across the political divide, by the way, whether one is in the Sinn Féin Party, the Fine Gael Party, Fianna Fáil Party or the Green Party. They are all getting on board and welcoming this university. That has happened. The staff and the students voted for it and there is cross-party support for it. It is game on. The Deputy can misrepresent my answer if he wishes. There is not another university in the country that has a separate commitment above and beyond competitive calls to expand the footprint in its city. I know that because I have access to the capital budget and there is not another one. I am not going to outline on the floor of the Dáil how we are going to negotiate commercially securing various things.
As a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, the Deputy knows how these processes work. We are investing in Waterford and the south east. The naysayers are wrong. South East Technological University is now there and was delivered by this Government.
I might remind the Minister there was never a need to buy additional land in Waterford. We already had three sites with planning permission that could have been developed. I have seen how Government can walk through walls since I have come in here. I saw it when Deputy McHugh moved forward the public private partnership, PPP, for the Munster Technological University MTU. I have seen two buildings now delivered at €106 million each to University College Cork, UCC, and another €56 million given to the MTU in Cork and nothing done in the south east at this time. The Minister has no problem committing dozens of millions of euro to other projects, but not to Waterford.
I have asked for nearly two years what we will get out of this. Essentially, the Minister is signally his intent all the time. Expectations are very high now in Waterford, largely because the Minister has raised them, to be fair. If the Minister comes down next week with the Tánaiste and if the breadth of their ambition is not €250 million over three years, as I said before, then they will not do anything to halt a brain drain. The Minister is creating no exceptionalism for this and will have broken promises, yet again, to the people of Waterford and the south east. I hope that will not happen, but I think it may. I do not sense any great commitment here, to be honest, or any straight answers that we can expect that quantum of money.
It used to be that the Deputy did not believe that I was going to deliver the university. Now we have delivered the university and he does not believe that I will properly fund it. I will fund it.
It is just a structure.
No, it is not just a structure.
It is just a structure.
I ask the Deputy for a little degree of positivity. For the first time in the history of Waterford, people in Waterford city can get a university degree. People in Waterford county and in the south east, the Industrial Development Authority, IDA, Enterprise Ireland and even Sinn Féin, with respect to it, believe in it. The Opposition and the Government have come together on this. However, it does not work for the Deputy politically and we wish him well.
I am very clear on this issue and I am fed up with being misrepresented on it. We will expand the footprint. If the Deputy does not believe that we need to expand the footprint, that is a difference of a political view.
Show us the money.
The university and business people believe it. We will not negotiate the commercial amounts on the floor of the Dáil. However, we will get on and do it. Many people told me that this Government will never deliver a university, but we have. Now those same people want to say we will not expand the footprint; we are.
84. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science if he will provide an update on the implementation of the Action Plan for Apprenticeship 2021–2025, particularly regarding participation of employers and retention rates of apprentices with their training employer; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [51822/22]
This question is on apprenticeships and the apprenticeship programme, particularly how employers can be encouraged to participate in the programme and how the retention of apprentices in the system afterwards can be accommodated.
I thank the Deputy for his question. We are making significant progress in realising the ambition of the Action Plan for Apprenticeship 2021-2025. A key objective is to make apprenticeships more attractive to employers and learners and to ensure continued engagement. The progress to date includes: the establishment of the National Apprenticeship Office, the appointment of its first director and the initiation of its work plan; the removal of legislative barriers to the development of apprenticeship programmes in professions, enabled by the approval of the Oireachtas of the Higher Education Authority Bill 2022; the establishment of the National Apprenticeship Alliance, representing a broad range of partners involved in apprenticeship; the imminent establishment of the equity of access subcommittee, to help make apprenticeship more reflective of the national population; securing resources for access measures, including a bursary programme for underrepresented groups; the introduction of the apprenticeship employer grant of €2,000 and a gender bursary grant of €2,666; a significant increase in the number of new apprenticeship registrations in 2021 - a near 40% increase on the 2019 figures; the allocation of €17.2 million of additional capital investment for SOLAS and the Higher Education Authority, HEA, building on the €20 million apprenticeship capital fund investment in 2021; and the inclusion of apprenticeship options on the CAO website from November 2021.
Due to these measures and other supports aimed at simplifying the process for employers, there are currently almost 8,500 employers and 25,000 apprentices. We are confident that these numbers will increase as apprenticeships can help companies to compete in the modern marketplace and make their organisations more competitive. In addition to building the company's skills base, providing quality training helps with staff loyalty and retention, thus adding more to the benefits of apprenticeships.
The figure of a 40% increase in apprenticeship registrations in 2021 sounds impressive. That means basically that there were 16,000 apprentices last year and there are 25,000 this year. Much still has to be done to make sure that it works. I sense that there is a problem among the public where employers do not see the value in apprenticeships. There is a certain amount of risk from an employer’s point of view in the apprentice moving on after they have taken them on and trained them for four years. That is an issue that will have to be addressed by a combination of employers paying apprentices properly and then paying them properly when they qualify. However, there has to be the ability to show an employer that it works and has a value for them as well. That is the big problem. What measures will be taken to ensure apprentices will be retained in their apprenticeships and that employers will offer apprenticeships as well, because that is vitally important?
The Deputy rightly outlined the issues with retention rates in our action plan for apprenticeships. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform carried out a review of the cost of apprenticeships in 2019. It highlighted the need to standardise the cost data collection. Basically, inconsistent and decentralised reporting in areas such as costs and tracking of apprentices means that the information to support the assessment of spend on apprenticeship was unavailable, retention rates are not recorded centrally and the impact of programmes in terms delivering employer and apprentice requirements had not yet been assessed at a central level. That is now changing, obviously, with the National Apprenticeship Office.
Apprentice recruitment is heavily linked to economic activity, with immediate impacts on recruitment and retention rates where there is a decline in activity. Under the action plan, by the end of 2022, the National Apprenticeship Office will establish a performance framework to assess efficiency and effectiveness of apprenticeships to include monitoring of: employer and apprentice mix in terms of employer size; apprentice gender, ethnicity, age, disability and socioeconomic background; apprentice retention rates; and an annual survey of apprentice employers in educational institutions and consortia. Separately, SOLAS is examining its apprenticeship data systems with a view to enhancing data collection and the analysis capabilities arising from it.
It seems there is much work happening. However, it will be a long number of years before we see any statistics come out of that. That is a big issue because there is a huge problem with retaining apprentices and making sure that apprentices can qualify, as well as paying apprentices so that it is worth their while to continue on in it. That needs to be part of the measures being recorded to ensure that happens. There is huge scope for apprenticeships, particularly in rural Ireland, where I welcome the roll out of the university programme and stuff like that. For rural Ireland and my town of Killybegs, people who have apprenticeships and qualify can live and work locally. That will be important for that to work out. Much needs to be done. I push the Minister of State to make sure that we start recording that quickly because that will make a difference. We need to ensure that it has a strong base.
We agree with the Deputy. The issue he raised is valid. It is something that we are conscious of and we have spoken to the National Apprenticeship Office and the director about making it a priority. The whole apprenticeship space has changed so much in the past number of years, even in terms of the new apprenticeships that have been added, particularly the consortia apprenticeships, which are a collaboration between the sectors, the employers in particular within the sectors and the training providers.
We are all learning and we are all on a journey. However, we are making significant progress. There will be learnings and we accept that. There has to be a comprehensive feedback and information flow in terms of why people drop out. There will always be people who will drop out for various reasons and obviously we need to try to minimise that. The key to that will be enabling people to make informed choices when they are pursuing the earn-as-you-learn career path of an apprenticeship also.
