Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AND FAMILY AFFAIRS debate -
Wednesday, 12 May 2010

Back to Education Allowance: Discussion

The joint committee will today receive a joint briefing from officials from the Departments of Education and Skills and Social Protection on proposals to ensure social welfare payments are effective in encouraging people to return to second and to access third level education, with specific reference to the back to education allowance scheme. I welcome the representatives of the Department of Social Protection: Ms Alice O'Flynn, assistant secretary; Mr. Dave Dillon, principal officer; Ms Joan McMahon, principal officer; and Mr. Martin Perrill, assistant principal officer. I also welcome the representatives of the Department of Education and Skills: Ms Anne Forde, principal officer; and Mr. Brian Power, principal officer.

Before I ask Ms O'Flynn to commence the briefing, after which members will be invited to ask questions, I draw the witnesses' attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege. By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, the witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they are to give this committee. If directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and a witness continues to so do, he or she is entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of that evidence. The witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against a Member of either House, a person outside the House, or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I thank the Chairman and committee members on behalf of the Departments of Social Protection and Education and Skills for the opportunity to meet them today to discuss the effectiveness of social welfare payments in encouraging people to return to education with specific reference to the back to education scheme. In the course of my presentation I will outline the schemes that provide specific supports to jobseekers and focus in detail on the back to education allowance.

The Department operates a range of employment support programmes which assist unemployed people, particularly the long-term unemployed, lone parents, and sickness related welfare recipients to return to the active labour market either by taking up employment or becoming self-employed. This is done principally through the operation of the back to education allowance, part-time education option, back to work enterprise allowance and short-term enterprise allowance. These schemes offer supports to social welfare customers and other disadvantaged persons to assist them to improve their employability and personal and family circumstances.

Specifically with regard to the unemployed, the profile of unemployed people has changed in recent years with the downturn in the economy. Until 2007, measures such as the schemes outlined were targeted at getting those who had been unemployed or out of the workforce for long periods back into a position where they could access the workplace again through education, upskilling, reskilling or self-employment. With the economic downturn, the live register increasingly comprises people who have had work in recent years and who may have significant skills and education as well as those who have low skills but for whom the good economic times afforded ample work opportunities.

In the education sector all full-time further and higher education programmes continue to be open to unemployed persons. We know from the vocational education committees and higher education institutions that unemployed persons are taking advantage of further and higher education learning opportunities in increasing numbers. This is underlined by the significant increase in the number of back to education allowance recipients, an issue I will address in more detail.

Full-time opportunities are being provided for more than 40,000 learners, including the unemployed, under the youthreach, senior Traveller training centre, STTC, vocational training opportunity scheme, VTOS, and post-leaving certificate programmes, PLC. VTOS, Youthreach and STTC participants receive a training allowance in lieu of their social welfare payments and are eligible for a range of additional meal, travel and long-term unemployment bonus allowances. They are also eligible to access child care supports. Unemployed PLC participants may avail of the back to education allowance. Part-time opportunities, targeted at the low skilled, disadvantaged and hard to reach, including the unemployed, are available through the back to education initiative, BTEI, adult literacy and community education schemes. Together, these schemes will cater for an estimated 125,000 learners in 2010.

The challenges presented by the changed economic circumstances are being addressed at cross-departmental and agency level. Specifically, joint approaches have been adopted by the Departments of Social Protection, Enterprise, Trade and Innovation and Education and Skills to the development of a range of activation programmes which support the unemployed in getting work, work experience or the education-skills that will support them in the search for employment.

These measures include the work placement and short time work training programmes sponsored by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation. Also included is a range of third level labour market activation initiatives for jobseekers, which in 2009 supported more than 3,000 unemployed people to embark on a range of newly developed transition and accelerated programmes in institutes of technology as well as part-time undergraduate and postgraduate programmes in institutes of technology and universities which support the goals of the smart economy.

A new labour market activation fund of €20 million has been introduced to support innovative proposals aimed at progressing the unemployed into employment or progressing their education attainment. It is expected that this fund will provide at least 3,500 training places. Some 350 proposals were received by the deadline and an evaluation committee is assessing the tenders. It is intended that the process of awarding contracts will commence during May.

People participating in many of these schemes are supported by the Department of Social Protection which allows participants to continue to receive their existing social welfare entitlements via the part-time education option. The Department of Social Protection also directly supports unemployed persons to prepare themselves for employment through schemes such as the back to education allowance scheme.

The back to education allowance scheme encourages and facilitates people on certain social welfare payments to improve their skills and qualifications and, therefore, their prospects of returning to the active workforce. Participants in the scheme are paid a weekly allowance equivalent to the maximum standard rate of the social welfare payment they received prior to starting an approved course of study. In addition to the weekly payment, participants are entitled to an annual cost of education allowance of €500 which is paid at the start of each academic year. The allowance can be paid to people who wish to participate in approved second or third level courses of education.

In general, an applicant was required to be in receipt of a relevant social welfare payment for six months if pursuing a second level course or 12 months if pursuing a third level course. However, in response to the changing nature of the composition of the live register since the economic downturn, certain changes have been made to the entry criteria for the back to education allowance scheme. From September 2007, people who are awarded statutory redundancy can access the scheme immediately. As of September 2009, the six month waiting period for those pursuing second level courses was reduced to three months. In addition, the 12 month waiting period applicable to third level courses has been reduced to nine months for participants recommended by a facilitator of the Department of Social Protection. This nine month waiting period already applied to participants referred by FÁS under the employment action plan process.

Two study options available in the scheme, the second level option and third level option cover full-time courses of education from second level to higher diploma level in any discipline and to a graduate diploma in education. Under the second level option, a person may attend a second level course of study at any community, comprehensive, secondary or vocational school. The third level option applies to approved courses at a recognised university or third level institution.

The number of participants in the scheme in the current academic year 2009-10, as at the end of December 2009, was 20,808, of whom 16,010 or 77 % came from live register schemes. This constitutes a 79% increase from the 2008-09 year when there were 11,646 participants, of whom 7,919 or 68% had come from live register schemes. A total of 10,457 participants availed of the second level option, of whom 8,365 or 80% came from live register schemes. This constitutes an increase of 105% from the academic year 2008-09 when there were 5,087 participants, of whom 3,726 or 73% had come from live register schemes. A total of 10,351 people are participating in third level courses, of whom 7,645 or 74% came from live register schemes. This constitutes an increase of 58% on the preceding year when there were 6,559 participants, of whom 4,193 or 64% came from live register schemes.

At the end of April 2010, there were 20,983 participants in the back to education scheme. In 2009, expenditure on the scheme was €107.3 million and a budget of €169.7 million has been provided for the BTEA scheme in 2010. In 2008, the annual cost of education allowance was increased from €400 to €500. The effectiveness of the back to education allowance is concerned with the outcomes of the scheme and the relationship between those outcomes and the objectives of the scheme. These can be viewed in terms of take-up, the impact of the scheme on getting people back to work, eligibility criteria, the payment regime and scheme awareness.

The eligibility criteria of the scheme allow access to it from a broad base of social welfare customers which includes the unemployed, people with disabilities, lone parents, carers and other groups in receipt of social welfare payments. The significantly increased level of take-up at both second and third levels has been noted and is a reflection of the effectiveness of the scheme in encouraging people to seek further education and skills as a route back into employment.

Analysis of the data on the cohort of BTEA participants from jobseekers' payments who finished second and third level courses at the end of the 2008-09 academic year shows that 37% had left the live register by the end of December 2009 and 41% had left it by end of April 2010. Moreover, of the 59% still on the live register at the end of April 2010, 91% were on jobseeker's allowance and of these 72% had completed a second level course and 28% had completed a third level course while on BTEA.

The imposition of a waiting period serves to minimise the deadweight element which is the extent to which people would have moved into employment or training and education without access to the scheme. The exit rates from the live register at three, six and 12 months are 70%, 50% and 80%, respectively. This means that 70% of the people who join the live register leave it within three months. Of those who remain on it for more than three months, 50% leave within six months and of those who remain for more than six months, 80% leave within 12 months. Consequently, access to BTEA confers a significant benefit in terms of extending entitlement for the duration of a course and the potential for dead weight exists. In the current economic climate it is paramount that the resources available are used well.

The main components of the eligibility criteria are the qualifying payments, the length of time a customer must be in receipt of a qualifying payment and the age of the customer. These conditions have been modified over the years to facilitate increased participation. The BTEA payment regime incentivises and facilitates participation in the scheme. It is not a means-tested payment and participants receive the maximum weekly rate of their qualifying payment, regardless of the rate paid prior to availing of the scheme. In addition, it attracts a cost of education allowance of €500 per annum. BTEA participants can also work part time without affecting their entitlement.

Awareness of the scheme is promoted through the Department's information services, the network of local social welfare offices, Citizen Information Centres and the Department's website. The increased take-up of the scheme over the course of the past year indicates that awareness and perception of the value of the opportunity presented by participation in the scheme are well established.

Although the subject of discussion today is social welfare payments, specifically, the back to education allowance scheme, it is important to point out that the national employment action plan, NEAP, is the main activation measure for jobseekers and provides for a systematic engagement of the employment services with unemployed people. Under the national employment action plan, everyone who is approaching three months on the live register is identified by the Department of Social Protection and referred to FÁS for interview with a view to assisting them to enter or re-enter the labour market.

In response to the increase in unemployment in 2009, FÁS, together with the local employment services provided by area-based partnerships, have increased their capacity for referrals from the live register from 6,500 to 12,250 cases per month under the national employment action plan. In 2009, FÁS put in place measures to double the capacity to cater for the rise in referrals from the Department of Social Protection increasing the annual referral capacity to 154,000 persons in 2010, which is more than double the referral capacity in 2008.

The Department of Education and Skills will fund the provision of 157,000 training and work experience places for unemployed people in 2010. That compares to the 66,000 equivalent places that were delivered in 2008 and the 130,000 places delivered in 2009. Those will be delivered by FÁS and the bulk of the additional provision will be in training places on short courses for unemployed people. The additional places are being delivered through three core-training initiatives, short courses, night courses and on-line courses.

I welcome the delegation. Is it possible for the committee to get a breakdown of the types of courses available? I accept some are provided by FÁS and others by the Department of Education and Skills. Is it possible to provide a breakdown of all the courses covered under the schemes and the duration of each course? I accept that will involve some work but I am concerned that we get many figures such as 157,000 training and work experience places but it is not clear what that means? Some of the courses can be of one, two or three weeks duration while others can last for a year. There is a big difference in the level of assistance being provided to someone who does a one week course as opposed to someone who does a year-long course. The outcomes are also different. For us to get a handle on where we are going it would be beneficial for the committee to get that level of information. I do not expect it today. I am happy for it to be sent to us. I accept the question is a specific one.

The reason we invited the delegation to the meeting is because of the difficulties we, as public representatives, experience in people trying to access the back to education allowance. The changes that were made are welcome and they made a difference. It is obvious that not everyone comes within the criteria and that there is a cut-off somewhere along the line. However, given the current economic climate the cut-off is too brutal. I find the work of the facilitators in my constituency is very good. They are as flexible as they can be under the terms of the schemes. A degree of compassion and common sense is used when they meet people to ascertain whether they are genuine cases. I do not consider the people of Laois and Offaly who do not make the cut-off to be dead weight. That is not the right type of terminology to use. We are talking about people who find themselves unemployed, not by choice but due to current economic forces. They want to either access employment or further education. In many instances they are not being facilitated to do that because of the terms of the scheme.

Figures are outlined on page 4 of the presentation on the 2009 expenditure on the scheme being €107 million and that there is a budget of approximately €170 million for this year. Are there corresponding figures for the savings being made by virtue of the fact that those people are not claiming jobseeker's allowance but the back to education allowance? Has a comparative analysis been done in that regard and if so, can we see it? I appreciate that the entitlement for the back to education allowance can be provided for longer but there are people on jobseeker's allowance long term. That situation might get worse.

What discussions were had or what considerations were taken into account between the Department of Education and Skills and the Department of Social Protection on the decision to scrap the higher education grant for people on the back to education allowance? Was a poverty impact assessment carried out? A commitment was given in the past that any such decisions would require a poverty impact assessment. Along with other colleagues I receive correspondence from constituents who feel the back to education allowance will not be enough. What is the position? I have a particular sympathy for those who have done a certificate, then a diploma and who then proceeded to do a degree because if one is in the first year of a four year degree course, one is guaranteed funding for four years, but if for whatever reason one has to complete the certificate and diploma before doing the degree then one will not receive funding. That is unfair because one does not always have a choice for reasons of access or for personal reasons.

What degree of co-ordination exists between Departments? The best example I can come up with relates to County Offaly. In May 2008 the then Minister, Deputy Hanafin, made a statement on targeting young jobseekers to get them back into education and training. We should bear in mind that one in five young people are unemployed, many of whom are graduates. She indicated that young people should not see signing on the live register as their future. They should look at the supports and opportunities that are available for them. She referred to further education and FÁS. There are 50 places on post-leaving certificate courses in County Offaly. Where are those people, realistically, supposed to go? That is one example.

The reason given for having only 50 such places is that there is a very good further education college in Moate in County Westmeath. I am sure Senator McFadden will agree that is a very good college, yet County Westmeath has in excess of 600 post-leaving certificate course places in addition to the places in that college. Where is the logic in that? What kind of discussion goes on within the Department when the facilitators come across people who want to attend a post-leaving certificate course? Where do they send them? Whose role is it to liaise with the Department of Education and Skills on these matters? Whenever we have delegations from Departments we often seem to find a gap in communication between one section and another.

The presentation referred to FÁS. It is supposed to be part of the solution and the Departments of Social Protection, Enterprise, Trade and Innovation and Education and Skills all refer to it. Since the changes to the structure of FÁS, and the division between the three Departments, what change will there be in terms of the work of the Department of Social Protection? I refer in particular to the facilitators and the back to education allowance. What co-ordination is there between those facilitators and FÁS? Will Ms Flynn provide a description of what happens from the day a person loses his or her job and presents in a social welfare office? What advice will one be given on one's options and where one can go? Who will one meet and who will advise on whether one should take the back to education or FÁS route? Who advises on whether one should seek a job? I do not believe the people who come to me have received any advice. They come to me because they want to know what options are available. It would be very valuable if we could be talked through how the process works.

I welcome the officials of both Departments and thank them for their presentations.

I agree with Deputy Enright on the danger of presenting the increased number of places as a panacea to the unemployment problem. Saying there are 157 training courses is fine because they are welcome, but the reality is that many are very short. As the delegates said, some are on-line or night courses of one or two weeks duration. While they are fine and I know a number of people who have participated in them with a view to reskilling to engage in retrofitting or housing insulation work, that is not what we are talking about today. I would not like to believe the figures are being used to defend the Department in regard to its approach to providing support for people who want to avail of second and third level options. Short and night courses are different entirely and geared towards people who need to reskill. Reskilling can be achieved very successfully in a short period, but this is a different issue to the one we want to discuss.

The delegates' written submission refers to the analysis of the data on the cohort of back to education allowance scheme participants transferring from jobseeker's payments who finished second and third level courses at the end of the 2008-09 academic year. They were different times and circumstances have changed drastically and very much for the worse since. Can we have an update on the figures? What are the most recent figures available? In any case, the figures are not especially relevant to the issue about which we are talking. The specific issues that both Departments were invited to discuss are the back-to-education allowance and the problems associated with the scheme. I would welcome it if both Departments addressed these problems.

I have some questions on the particular problems people face. The scheme is very good overall and operated very well by the Department. It is a non-statutory scheme that allows a certain amount of flexibility, which is good, but in a recession the scheme should be the backbone of the Department's response in helping people to lift themselves out of the welfare system. There are a number of scheme rules that prevent people from doing so. The purpose of this meeting is to seek to get both Departments to focus on the problems to determine what can be done to remove the obstacles faced by people seeking to move beyond welfare and avail of good quality training options. I refer to academic training options in the main as opposed to skills-based options. The Departments should determine how the scheme can be improved to help more people than are being helped.

The problems relate in the main to the third level option. One of the main difficulties I recognise is the enforced waiting period. If a person receives statutory redundancy payments, he or she can avail of the scheme at third level after three months, but substantial numbers lose their jobs without receiving statutory redundancy payments. Last year approximately 40,000 people who lost their jobs did not receive their statutory redundancy payments. In such cases, they must wait at least nine months. In most cases, they must wait 12 months. There seems to be no sense to the imposition of the waiting period.

When we raised this issue with various Ministers and officials, we were told the Government did not want people giving up jobs to enter third level education with financial support available. Whatever about that argument in the past, it does not apply now. There is a need to update the rules to reflect current circumstances. As recently as 2004, the waiting period was only six months. That was a time of full employment, yet the Government allowed people to avail of the scheme within six months. Why must people now wait 12 months in most cases? The rule seems to encourage welfare dependency. It would be much more realistic and beneficial to reduce the period to three months.

The scheme, as it operates, is completely incompatible with the arrangements for the CAO. It does not tie in to the academic year. If one becomes unemployed in January, one cannot meet the qualifying criteria before college starts at the end of August or in September. One must wait until the following February to apply to the CAO. This means one is forced to remain unemployed and draw jobseeker's payments for 20 months before one can avail of the scheme. This makes no sense. Why are we forcing people to remain on the dole, hanging around doing nothing, in many cases for 20 months, because the scheme is so inflexible? Why can we not bring it into line with the arrangements with the CAO to reduce the waiting period?

I have two other concerns, the first of which relates to the limits that apply to postgraduate study. In the majority of cases, applicants cannot avail of the scheme to do a masters programme, although there are thousands of unemployed graduates. If one has a primary degree, it is very difficult to find any course that is acceptable under the back-to-education scheme rules. It is extremely difficult to understand how the system works in the first instance and it is also difficult to find a qualifying course. Why is the Department so restrictive in the courses acceptable under the scheme?

Deciding officers are allowed to have discretion but only in very exceptional circumstances. It is not right that applicants who, through no fault of their own, get caught in the recession and lose their jobs should be dependent on claiming exceptional circumstances.

I appeal to the Deputy to be brief in order that I can allow all members to contribute.

My final question is on how the scheme impacts on mature students. As we know, the arrangements, whereby applicants could avail of the back-to-education allowance and the third level grant, have ceased to apply. This is particularly unfair to mature students with dependants because there is no provision made for the cost of caring for them. If a mature student with children wants to participate in an academic course, he or she must have arrangements made to look after them. If one has a mortgage one is trying to repay, there is no recognition of this. There is no recognition of the fact that people must travel to participate in a course.

I cannot understand why there is a ban on full-time students receiving support from community welfare officers. It makes no sense whatsoever at this stage. Why is this issue not being addressed?

Like other colleagues, I wish to be associated with the welcome extended to the delegation. I hope its size and strength, from two Departments, indicate the extent to which these issues are being taken seriously. I am taking it as read that they are.

I had an opportunity in the past 16 hours to engage with the new Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Ó Cuív, and the Tánaiste and Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Coughlan, who happened to be in Tallaght last night and this morning. It was interesting to hear people engage with her on this issue. It is important to support people bringing these matters to the attention of Ministers and Deputies. I know it is a habit among many of us to claim we met someone this morning with a particular issue. Having listened to Mr. Nick Clegg and Mr. David Cameron in recent weeks, I am going to kick the habit for a while. Deputy Olwyn Enright referred to her home patch which means I can mention Tallaght the odd time.

I used it as an example.

People come to us about these issues and it is important to understand that there are challenges.

As Deputy Róisín Shortall said, there is a new poor, people in unemployment who have never been in that position before. They find the structures and restrictions to some of the schemes in question are a problem.

I have had a normal life and was made redundant three times. Each time I had to re-invent myself. Going to the social welfare office, seeking assistance is a big challenge and people can be upset by it. We need to get the one-stop-shop concept in this context to work. People should not have to sign on one day and go to FÁS on another day. I hope joined-up thinking will be implemented in this regard.

My community is no different from anyone else's but where I live in Tallaght there are 10,284 unemployed, of whom 8,000 are more than 25 years of age. The back-to-education allowance has to be examined in a more innovative way, particularly the waiting period to qualify. Having lost one's job, one does not want to be told to sit around for a long time before one can access back-to-education services.

We all received an interesting e-mail yesterday from Mr. Gregori Meakin, whom I suspect is not from Tallaght.

He said in his e-mail that he is from Wicklow.

I did not say I did not know where he is from; I suggested he is not from Tallaght.

He made a fair point in his e-mail about the back to education allowance. He, along with his partner and two children, wants to get over unemployment by going back to education but the assistance he has been afforded makes it difficult. The committee has always acted in a responsible all-party way to many of these issues. I hope the senior officials will understand these issues and how we must assist people get back to work.

I also extend a welcome to the officials from both Departments.

Are courses tailored to the jobs needed to lift the economy? There is no point in training people for non-existent jobs. I agree with Deputy Olwyn Enright that excellent post-leaving certificate courses are offered by Athlone Community College, Moate Community School and Longford VECs. I am tired of listening to how many jobs will be delivered by the smart economy by Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and every other party. Is the Department of Education and Skills doing research into how courses can be tailored for jobs in the end?

Many of the people who have come to my office with inquiries about the scheme have never had access to a facilitator. Where can one make an appointment with a facilitator for the scheme?

While I accept there has been a serious economic downturn, there has to be serious consideration of the effects of any cuts to higher education grants. I know of unemployed people who, in the middle of Access courses, are concerned about how they will pay for course costs, such as books and photocopying, if their grants are abolished. Young school leavers can still keep their costs down, particularly if they live at home. For mature students with mortgages, child care costs and so forth, it is not so easy. It would be mean to take the back-to-education grant off mature students in the middle of their courses. Are emergency funds available to assist people in these circumstances?

I thank the officials for attending the committee. While many figures were presented, it is important that at some stage we get the breakdown as to what they actually mean. How many are long-term courses and how many short-term?

Many young people left school early to go into the building trade. Now, with the downturn they find themselves unemployed with little chance of getting back into their former trades. They lack education and require specialist advice and training. Many young graduates can head to Australia and Canada for reasonably well-paid jobs but it is not so easy for someone without training or qualifications. Waiting nine to 12 months to get on a back to education scheme is a problem for this group. Many of them did not get redundancy packages as they were self-employed. That period of waiting is certainly not very good for them, either emotionally or in any other way. Only recently one of our colleagues was talking about some of the people in that business actually finishing up in psychiatric units. We do not want to see that type of thing, but rather that they get the opportunities they deserve.

The cut in higher education grants has already been mentioned. That is having major problems for those who had started in courses and intended going further. They are going from one structure to another, and because they are not confined to whole-time attendance, they are losing out. The sum of €6,000 a year is an extremely significant figure for someone who has lost his or her job and has no other income.

I had a phone call on Friday from a person who was on one of those schemes. His wife lost her job, so both of them are unemployed, and it is just the last straw for him to have received this letter pointing that out. It has already been said that it is so important that there are courses on offer that lead to jobs. A significant problem exists in the Cavan-Monaghan region, specifically with the Quinn group where 900 people have been given redundancy notice. At least 300 of those are in Cavan. When we met in Cavan on the Tuesday before last, one of the problems raised by the chairman of the VEC was the fact that there is a post-leaving certificate college in Cavan which has 1,200 places and 3,000 applicants for them.

There are umpteen vacant factories and other premises that the VEC is more than willing to rent and use to extend the number of places, but it is capped. There is no point in talking about people returning to education if they cannot get that education in their immediate area. That is a major issue that needs to be addressed, especially in an area such as Cavan. Obviously, it is relevant to other areas as well, but I am talking about the one nearest to me, in the same way that Deputy O'Connor talks about Tallaght. Obviously, it will also affect the Navan area, Blanchardstown and elsewhere. We should try to see how those people might be helped out of the traumatic situation they find themselves in at present.

I agree with Deputy Crawford about the Quinn workers and this is an enormous challenge because many of them are very well educated. The types of courses being made available might not be suitable for many of them, and this in itself will present a significant challenge. I do not know what the role of the officials present might be in this regard but if they could outline whatever role they have, this would be helpful.

The Opposition, as usual, is criticising cutbacks and so on. I am glad to see the budget has been substantially increased for the back to education allowance scheme. It is not fair of Members of the Opposition to be boasting at Leaders' Questions about their commitment to cutting the deficit while criticising every time something is actually cut. They need to be consistent in that regard. In fairness, the opposition parties in Westminster have been reasonably consistent in that respect.

Will the officials say whether these schemes are statutory and, if not, is there a particular reason they are not? I have a feeling that the back to education allowance is not statutory and I want to know why this is so.

I do not have questions but rather a few comments. I am very much in favour of people wanting to go back to school, especially in the times we are in. They do not have many other choices. Regardless of whether the courses are short-term or long-term it is the only option many people have if they do not want to vegetate at home, which is no good for anyone.

There is a lack of information in this regard. I know of many people on the dole and they have little or no information on what courses they can do. I have asked them and they have received no information. I know that people have certificates coming out their ears at this stage. I am referring to people with a relatively low level of education. The problem is, when they apply for a job, they are competing with people who have law degrees and everything else. The situation is almost hopeless for someone with a few FETAC certificates or whatever. The reason most people want to get back to education is to have something to do and have a few bob in their pockets.

Some of this is based on false hope because what people want ultimately is a job, stability in their lives and a sense of worth. I cannot see that happening at the moment. At the end of Ms O'Flynn's presentation, she said the Department of Education and Skills would fund the provision of 157,000 training and work experience places for unemployed people in 2010. She went on to say that this would be delivered by FÁS and the bulk of the additional provision would be in training places on short courses for unemployed people.

I received a letter from a place called the Liberty recycling centre in Bluebell industrial estate. It is a project run for people suffering from drug addiction who are trying to recover, and has 50 participants. It tries to train people to deal with their addiction through education and life learning skills, including reading and writing. Out of the 50 participants due to come next week, the project is to lose four, who will not be re-instated, and it will also lose two supervisors. It is something of a contradiction, given what Ms O'Flynn has said about people filling training and work experience places in 2010, that people who are already in training and trying to finish courses are being told they cannot participate any longer.

These people are among the weakest in society. From day one they have had enormous social problems, in education, housing and everything else. Just when they are starting to get some ground under their feet to enable them to get back into society, they are being taken out of the system. I know this has to do with FÁS, but how can we say, given what Ms O'Flynn has indicated, that this will be delivered by FÁS and the bulk of the additional provision would be in training places on short courses for unemployed people? These people in the Liberty recycling project deserve a chance and many of those who complete the course there go on to do other things. We are being told by FÁS and everyone else that these people are going to have their places cut. It is quite contradictory that, on the one hand, it is being said people will be taken into training while, on the other, they are being removed from courses. It does not make sense and the approach is not balanced. These are the people we should be talking about — those on courses. Why are we reducing numbers when Ms O'Flynn is saying she is going to ensure more are enrolled?

I am not a member of this committee and am grateful, therefore, to the Chairman for affording me the opportunity to debate with officials from the Department of Social and Family Affairs and the Department of Education and Skills. I support what Deputy Catherine Byrne has just said about the Liberty recycling project. I visited that project a year ago and saw the participants there engage in both work-based learning and work as a means of drug rehabilitation. If we cut back on this type of project, we are cutting off our nose to spite our face because these people have no other opportunities. Everyone's chance in life is not equal. That is a fact. This is the type of project that needs to be supported.

I am here to represent this year's group of Access students who have been caught in the middle. In September 2009 they were offered and accepted places on Access courses. We are talking about hundreds of students. The officials might enlighten me as to how many hundreds are involved in Access courses this year. When they accepted a place, they knew they would have a place in college in September 2010. I have met 39 of them who were offered a place on an arts course in NUIG from next September. Of the problems brought to my attention in my Galway office, the main category is education grants. The new recession proofing measure is entitled "back to education". In September we will have 1 million people in education, or one quarter of the population. When the group of students in question were offered a place, they took it up on the basis that the back to education allowance and the maintenance grant would be in place. I understand the allowance is the same as jobseeker's allowance in monetary terms.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

The position can vary. A person could be on a lower rate of jobseeker's allowance, but when he or she receives the back to education allowance, he or she will receive the maximum level of the allowance and end up with an increase.

In the cases I came across, the back to education allowance was the same as jobseeker's allowance. This means people have to be able to afford to go to college on the dole, as the maintenance grant which was used to cover items such as travel has been pulled. One person who came to see me was a mother with four children whose husband had lost his job. She was travelling from Rosmuc to Galway city, 50 miles away. She can do it under the access programme because she only does one day a week and at the weekend. However, having to attend college five days a week is untenable. This group of students consists of those who dropped out of college or secondary school earlier in their lives. They are now coming back for a second chance and about to fail because the maintenance grant has been pulled. What can the Department do to ensure they can afford to go to college? One in every six second level students is dropping out of school before completing the leaving certificate. Now we see that people who were to be given another opportunity are being cut off at the knees. This is fundamentally wrong. Education is the route out of poverty, yet this option is being taken from them again.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

Deputies Enright and Shortall sought figures for the courses covered. We do not have that information with us but will arrange to have it forwarded to the Deputies. Deputy Enright also asked about savings on jobseeker's allowance when people transfered to the back to education allowance. We will see what we can do, but in general people receive an increase when they transfer to the back to education allowance because they receive the allowance at the maximum rate. We will see what figures we can obtain and will forward them to the Deputy.

I thank Ms O'Flynn, but when officials are sitting down with the Minister for Finance before the budget, they must have facts and figures to back up the arguments they are making. We do not want to be simplistic and assume jobseeker's allowance recipients transfer to the back to education allowance; this should be open to everybody. I want to know the reasonable nature of the arguments being made and the figures to back it up. There must be a way of breaking down the numbers who transferred from one allowance to the back to education allowance. If we can be told how much the back to education allowance costs, somebody in the section which deals with jobseeker's allowance must know how much is being saved.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

We can provide that information. It will be at a superficial level, but we will do what we can.

We were asked for a breakdown of the types and duration of courses available.

Ms Anne Forde

It would not be feasible to provide a list of each course available in each higher or further education institution. I am not even sure if that level of detail is available. For example, Qualifax is a database which provides information on every single course available within the third level sector. There is a mix of provisions as between FÁS, further and higher education institutions. There are two week courses provided by FÁS, on-line courses, night-time courses, PLC programmes in the further education sector of 12 months' duration, while VTOS programmes can extend up to two years. Such courses are full time, but part-time courses are also available as part of the back-to-education initiative which covers a combination of 15——

The figure provided in the presentation was 157,000 training and work experience places.

Ms Anne Forde

Those places are provided through FÁS. There are about 150,000 places within the higher education sector.

To clarify, what courses are delivered through those 157,000 places? What is their duration? We would to like to receive these details.

Ms Anne Forde

It would be at a general level. I do not think the Deputy is looking for the details of each individual course.

We want to know how many are of one week's duration and how many are of longer duration. The duration of courses provided by the Department through PLCs and so on is more clear because the PLCs work under a school system. It is very hard to establish the duration of FÁS courses.

Ms Anne Forde

That is fine. The Deputies are not looking for a list of courses but rather a breakdown in terms of the duration of courses.

The figures mean nothing if we do not have an assessment of the quality of courses. Do we have such an assessment?

Ms Anne Forde

Yes, a review was recently——

I remind the Senator that she cannot get involved in the discussion while the delegates are answering other members. She is not a member of the committee. I only obliged her in allowing her to ask a question.

Ms Anne Forde

I shall continue. A review of all FÁS programmes was published in late March or early April and is available on the Department's website. It gives much detail on the duration and number of participants in each course. There are also ongoing assessments of courses within the education sector also.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

A number of questions raised relate to the maintenance grant. I will convey them to my colleagues in the Department of Education and Skills. I will deal with the ones that specifically refer to my Department.

I note what Deputy Enright said about using the term "dead weight". It is a technical term and underlines the reason we have a waiting period. Many leave the live register quickly. When resources are scarce, we want to be sure people who are long-term unemployed are in the best position to avail of courses. "Dead weight" is simply a technical term that refers to the high level of attrition from the live register in those early months. It is not intended to suggest certain people are not worthy of assistance.

I have been asked about what happens on day one when a person joins the live register. When a person comes to sign on, the immediate concern is to ensure his or her claim is taken and that income support is provided as soon as possible. We have had our issues in that regard because of the sheer volume of claims. The entire focus is on dealing with the claim, authorising it and ensuring the person is paid. There is an information service in all local offices and all new claimants are given an information leaflet outlining the various options available to them. Deputy Crawford referred to the difficulties being experienced by young people. Last year we sent a mail shot to all 18 and 19-year old claimants bringing to their attention the educational opportunities available to them.

As I mentioned in regard to the national employment action plan, once a person is on the live register for three months, he or she is automatically referred by the Department to a FÁS employment services officer. Claimants are lined up at that stage for counselling, career guidance and segmentation in regard to the activation effort best suited to help and support them. An action plan is drafted for each applicant which is followed through by the employment services officer. In addition, facilitators are located in most local offices, with whom any claimant can make an appointment at any time. People who do not progress as a consequence of their engagement with FÁS or come back on the live register will be engaged with by a facilitator. Since September 2008 facilitators have engaged with more than 30,000 people who have come through the process but not moved on.

I am concerned about the practicality of this arrangement. While the concept is good, I am not sure what level of intervention 63 facilitators — with the seven more to be appointed — can achieve, given the numbers involved. Moreover, the previous Minister indicated several times that facilitators were also working with one-parent family groups, which is a separate remit. For some unemployed persons with particular needs, a half-hour chat with a facilitator will not necessarily provide the support needed. The quality and outcome of the 30,000 engagements referred to by Ms O'Flynn must be open to question.

According to the employment action plan outcomes information given to the Minister, more than 5,000 claimants failed to turn up for interview last year. Are those concerned simply allowed to keep on claiming their benefits? Did they all offer explanations for their failure to present? Is there active contact to ensure people show up for interview? The people concerned are supposed to be available for work and, as such, should be available for interview.

Mr. Dave Dillon

FÁS will notify us when people fail to attend for interview in the context of the employment action plan. In 98% of cases the person's payment is suspended, subsequent to which they will generally present to their social welfare office. They are questioned at this point about their failure to attend and their claim may be disallowed. In general, however, a new appointment is made and they are returned to the employment action plan process. We have been tracking those who failed to attend last year and of the 5,000 headline figure, most are back in the process and awaiting an interview time, waiting to commence a FÁS course and so on. It is, therefore, inaccurate to suggest such persons are being left alone, rather they are thrown back into the mill and we monitor what happens to them.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

On the question of waiting times of three months and nine months, one of the issues is that of the dead weight. Many leave because they get——

It is important to take on board the comments made about that phrase. Perhaps the delegates will try to avoid using it.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I accept that. It is a technical term.

It is inappropriate to use it in reference to people.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

Yes, we are talking about people who leave the live register after three to six months. We want to ensure those who are capable of finding work for themselves do so and that our resources are directed at the less capable. The waiting period has always been an aspect of the back to education allowance scheme and that waiting time was reduced in response to the economic circumstances that pertained.

One of the members has observed that the back to education allowance scheme is not aligned to the arrangements for the CAO. My colleagues from the Department of Education and Skills might deal with the CAO aspect. The back to education allowance scheme includes courses not affiliated to the CAO. I take Deputy Shortall's point about applicants having to wait up to 20 months, depending on when they apply. However, on the whole, the back to education allowance scheme does not fall foul of the CAO system.

The situation has changed much in recent times, with many more young people unable to find work. For them to have to wait 12 months is a cause of unnecessary pressure and distress.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I assure members that we will take all of their comments on board as part of the ongoing deliberative process within the Department on the back to education allowance scheme.

What is Ms O'Flynn's evaluation of the scheme? There seems to be a presumption in the Department that people are leaving work specifically to avail of it. This is something I have not come across. How has the Department come to that conclusion? Has it estimated, if the scheme was opened up for another three months, how many more applicants there might be? Ms O'Flynn has referred to the numbers who leave the live register within a short period. However, I meet so many who do not return to employment within that timeframe and who want to avail of the back to education allowance scheme. It is nonsense that we should deny them the advantage of education.

On a point of order, will Ms O'Flynn will tell us how she intends to proceed in responding to the many questions posed?

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I had proposed to set aside the questions requiring data which I undertook to provide at a later date.

I am trying to figure out how Ms O'Flynn is responding. Is she responding to individual members' questions one by one?

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I was trying to amalgamate questions where a common issue had been raised by several members. However, I can refer individually to members' questions, if that is preferred.

If we could receive the responses first, we could then come back in with supplementary questions.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I have dealt with all of Deputy Enright's questions and will now move on to reply to Deputy Shortall's.

Deputy Shortall expressed her unhappiness at our citing of increased numbers of places as a panacea for the live register. I emphasise that the back to education allowance scheme is merely one element of the Government's and the Department's response to helping the unemployed.

My point was that this is the issue members wished to discuss.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

The Deputy will appreciate that I cannot stray into the policy options the Government or the Department might be taking in that regard. What I can say is that the scheme has been changed and developed and there has been a substantially increased take-up of the scheme over the past year, which indicates that people perceive it to be a valuable response to the current economic situation. The numbers speak for themselves.

With all due respect, given the explosion in the number of people who are unemployed, it is obvious that the numbers would increase significantly. My question is, why does the Department continue to place obstacles in the way of people who seek to come off welfare and gain third level qualifications? Why is this scheme so restrictive in the manner in which it operates? What is the thinking within the Department? What is the justification for expecting people to wait 12 months before being able to gain access to a course?

Ms Alice O’Flynn

The reasons for this are the reasons we have outlined. Traditionally, people leave the live register and we want to give those who can do so the opportunity to get work or to get other opportunities without the State's support. This has been borne out by the figures and by the attrition rates. There have been changes but——

The figures are out of date. My point is that an entirely new situation obtains at present, given the existence of such large numbers of unemployed people who suddenly found themselves without a job. The rules that apply in respect of this scheme appear to be very outdated. They do not recognise the reality of unemployment for many people. What is the reason the Department is not reviewing these rules to facilitate people to get onto a course to improve their chances of securing employment? This is not about seeking the spending of additional money. The opposite is the case because it is about facilitating people to get off welfare as quickly as possible. My point is there does not appear to be any justification for forcing people to remain on the dole for 20 months because of administrative rules the Department is placing in their way.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

As my former Minister, Deputy Hanafin, may have mentioned at a previous meeting of the joint committee, elements of the scheme are being reviewed. They are in the policy domain and I cannot comment on them.

Perhaps Ms O'Flynn will indicate whether she recognises the points members are making about the difficulties and will give members some reason to believe they are being reviewed and that there may be decisions on them sometime soon.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

Yes. I assure the Deputy that these particular points are under review. As the previous Minister, Deputy Hanafin, indicated, they were the kinds of points she would be reviewing and would be taking back for consideration. While they are under review, I cannot comment on them any further than that.

What is the duration of this review? When can members expect some changes?

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I cannot comment on that.

Does Ms O'Flynn not know the duration of the review?

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I am not in a position to comment on that. The points have been under review both before and after they were referred to by members.

Can someone revert to the joint committee and tell members the nature of the review that is taking place and when it will be completed? If the witnesses are not in a position to provide this information to members today, can someone revert to the joint committee? This is strange, given this was the main issue the witnesses were invited before the joint committee to talk about.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

The Deputy will understand this is a policy issue specifically in respect of the development and implementation of policy in respect of the scheme. As an official, I am not at liberty to discuss such matters.

The existence of a review is not a policy issue.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

The policy is being reviewed with a view to ascertaining how best it might be suited to the economic circumstances. This is always the underlying rationale for examining a policy and I simply am not in a position to comment on it.

I take it that Ms O'Flynn does not know when the review will be completed.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

No, I do not. I cannot comment on it.

If it is being reviewed, I do not understand the reason Ms O'Flynn cannot comment on it.

I remind members that a civil servant cannot question or express an opinion on a matter of Government policy. Is that okay?

I am not asking a policy question. My question is, if the scheme is being reviewed what will be its duration and when will the result be made available?

My interpretation differs. Ms O'Flynn should proceed.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

Deputy Shortall mentioned the postgraduate issue. We have noted the views of members regarding a postgraduate element to the scheme. This also is a matter that is part of the policy consideration of the scheme. We will bring the committee's concerns and the points made by members to the attention of the Government.

May I make a point in this regard? I can understand the reason it evolved that, originally, one could not avail of this scheme to pursue a postgraduate qualification because, to a large extent, it was about second chances and getting people back into education. I note Senator McFadden mentioned the smart economy and, on foot of the changed environment, Government and Fine Gael policy both emphasise specific areas that have been identified as having potential for job creation and job growth. It would be worthwhile at least to allow into this scheme masters courses in such areas. Masters courses should be opened up to this scheme in respect of areas in which it has been emphasised that a particular direction should be taken. The witnesses are familiar with the kinds of areas to which I refer, such as green energy and so on. There must be such an emphasis in this regard.

I also wish to raise a concern with the representatives of the Department of Education and Skills about the manner in which post-leaving certificate colleges are allowed to employ people. If a teacher who has been employed to provide courses in auctioneering were to become permanent, obviously he or she could not be removed from the position. I imagine the desire to pursue courses in auctioneering is fairly low at present. In addition, the cap and the employment embargo mean such colleges cannot recruit teachers to teach other subjects in which there is a need to train people. Will the departmental officials outline how, or if, this issue can be addressed?

On that point, what is the rationale for excluding masters courses? When postgraduate courses of similar duration qualify, why does the Department not allow masters courses to qualify?

Ms Alice O’Flynn

My colleague will respond.

Is there any chance the other questions could be answered first?

This should be done before these supplementary issues are addressed.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I must conclude my response to Deputy Shortall's questions.

Ms O'Flynn should continue her response.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

I believe I have covered Deputy Shortall's questions.

What about the question on masters courses?

Ms Alice O’Flynn

The position in respect of masters courses goes back to the original purpose of the back to education allowance. It was directed towards long-term unemployed people who had been on the live register for a long time. It has never been considered that one needs a masters degree to get a job. This scheme was a second chance at education and was for those who were not educated, had poor educational or literacy standards, lacked a leaving or junior certificate and did not have a job. Crucially, one of the original rationales was to enable entry to the labour market. It has its roots in the historical nature of the unemployed cohort. We will note the points made by members in respect of masters degrees and regarding the new skills that are required in the economy and will bring them back to the Department.

I do not follow the point Ms O'Flynn is making. Certain postgraduate courses qualify.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

Yes, they do.

Masters courses of similar duration do not qualify. What is the rationale for that?

Ms Alice O’Flynn

Perhaps some of my colleagues might comment on this but from our perspective, such postgraduate qualifications might include, for instance, a higher diploma in education, involving a person with an arts degree who wishes to become a teacher. Consequently, the qualification is linked to the career path the person is pursuing. Perhaps Mr. Dillon will comment.

Mr. Dave Dillon

I refer to the change in respect of the higher diploma. It was made in 2003 in respect of a perceived shortage of teachers at the time and was to facilitate a greater flow of teachers into the labour market.

Are other postgraduate diploma and certificate courses allowed?

Mr. Dave Dillon

Yes. My colleague tells me a higher diploma and postgraduate in education are allowed.

A masters course can also follow a career path initiated at undergraduate level.

Mr. Dave Dillon

Yes, but a particular exception was made in 2003 in response to a perceived shortage.

Was that the only exception?

Mr. Dave Dillon

Yes. It was an example of the scheme responding to the labour market conditions prevalent at the time. In the context of the current policy consideration——

The point being made by many people is that there is a need to amend the rules of the scheme to take account of the current reality.

Mr. Dave Dillon

Without straying into current policy considerations, from which I am precluded, I can ask the Deputy to examine a previous scenario when the scheme was flexible and responsive to the prevailing labour market circumstances.

Perhaps the official could provide a written response on the issue.

The officials are unfairly getting a hard time on policy. It would be preferable for the Minister to be present. Members are asking many reasonable questions, but it is unreasonable to expect the officials to answer them.

The officials probably have the answers.

They are constrained.

Reasonable questions are being asked and reasonable refusals to answer are being given. We are in a bit of a conundrum.

Ms Anne Forde

Deputy O'Connor and Senator McFadden have left, but Deputy Thomas Byrne asked for a——

As to his questions, a transcript of the meeting can be sent to both Ministers for a response.

Ms Anne Forde

The question was on why they were non-statutory. They were set up on an administrative basis because this affords a degree of flexibility in how one might administer the scheme. When something is laid down hard and fast under legislation, it becomes quite rigid. There might be a view that the scheme is rigid, but tweaks and flexibilities have been introduced over time.

Those were done by the Minister who might have written a letter asking for the scheme to be changed.

I would appreciate an answer.

The officials are going through the questions and the Senator is not a member of the committee. I did not make the law. It was made before I became Chairman.

Ms Anne Forde

We have addressed the main cases raised by members. The maintenance grant, an issue common to a number of members, is a matter proper to the Department of Education and Skills. Would my colleagues like to respond?

Mr. Brian Power

I will respond in a general way to the concerns expressed by almost every member about the introduction of the new arrangements for the maintenance grant vis-à-vis the back to education allowance. I will then address the specific questions about its impact on mature students and the possibility of other or emergency funding for people who find themselves in a particular situation and its impact on individuals in access courses.

As every member will probably be aware, a decision introduced by the budget will be brought into effect from September 2010. Under it, new entrants to third level courses will no longer qualify to hold both the back to education allowance and the student maintenance grant. At the same time, individual students will still be able to apply through the maintenance grant scheme to be means tested to qualify to receive the student service charge or, where they are postgraduate students, an amount to cover fees. The outcome is specifically pointed at the maintenance portion of the student grant.

A number of points were raised about a number of costs, such as child care, travel and other living costs. The nature of the maintenance grant and the back to education allowance, as I understand it, is to provide income support in a general way for the living costs to which I referred. As the Senator is probably aware, current holders of the back to education allowance will continue to hold the full allowance and the maintenance grant while taking their current courses.

The back to education allowance will be the sole income support for a number of people in higher education. Our estimate places that number at between 2,000 and 3,000 new entrants who currently qualify for the allowance. Under the third level option, there is a total of 10,300 back to education allowance qualifiers, but those numbers are split into a three to four-year course structure. Up to two thirds or three quarters of that group will continue to hold the grant, but the new entrants will not.

How many new entrants will be caught in that year?

Mr. Brian Power

On the basis of the current figures, approximately 2,000 to 3,000 new entrants would qualify for the back to education allowance.

And not the maintenance grant.

Mr. Brian Power

We cannot say whether all the 10,300 who qualify under the third level option would qualify for the maintenance grant as well. A number of qualifiers would qualify having moved on from jobseeker's benefit, so they may not have had a means-tested payment. They may have had other income disqualifying them for the grant.

The Senator is not a member of this committee. I have explained to her four times that I will take no further questions from her. I do not want her to interrupt the officials' answers.

The Senator is seeking a clarification question. The Chairman should be reasonable.

I know, but I did not make the committee's rules. One question is all the Senator is entitled to ask. I have allowed her two or three, but that is it. Mr. Power should proceed.

Mr. Brian Power

Of the specific matters, I can address access courses. A number of issues pertaining to these courses present us with a challenge in this regard. First, access courses are not currently recognised as being approved courses for maintenance grant purposes. Students currently on those courses might not receive the maintenance grant in any event. As with students moving forward or changing from any other course, including further education, access students will no longer qualify for the back to education allowance and the maintenance grant. In this respect, they are treated equally to every other student.

We were asked about the numbers. From memory, there are approximately eight full-time access courses. The range of part-time access provision would be difficult to count but I presume we are mainly speaking about full-time courses. Some 300 to 400 students are involved in those access courses.

Regarding the impact of this measure on mature students, it is clear from statistics that a high proportion of students on the back to education allowance are mature students. It is in the region of 85%. The point made by the Deputy is supported by the evidence available. A high proportion would have an impact on students over 23 years of age.

Does the figure of 85% relate to last year?

Mr. Brian Power

These are the back to education allowance figures for last year.

Regarding the issue of emergency funding raised by a number of Deputies, for people not able to afford specific costs such as child care and travel as a result of this measure, we have a student assistance fund in each of the colleges. This is available to the students through the access office in each of the colleges. The overall provision for the fund is some €5 million. It is assessed locally by the access officer in the college on the basis of need presented. This is the best way to do it.

Is it used up every year?

Mr. Brian Power

Yes.

It is very quickly used up every year.

This may not be of much assistance to the 85% of people over 23 years of age.

Mr. Brian Power

It was particularly quickly used up last year. This was partially because of the late payment of grants by a number of local authorities and VECs. I wish to reassure the committee that in the current year we are working closely with grant awarding authorities to ensure we get everything in place to ensure the earlier award of grants for the 2010 period. We have a new, simplified application form. It will be published on the student finance website over the coming days. The grant schemes will be under way significantly earlier for the 2010 to 2011 period. We have taken some action in some specific areas of technology. We have put out the tender for an on-line grant scheme on a pilot basis. There has been no on-line application for grants until now. We hope to be in a position to have a limited number of areas on-line for grant applications by September. Last week, we introduced a pilot electronic funds transfer payment system whereby student grant payments are being made directly to the students' accounts. This has proved very effective in terms of interaction between the grant awarding authorities, the VECs, the local authorities and the individual third level institution. It is also of great benefit to the students.

That is welcome news and hopefully it will prove to be the case that various authorities will get their act together so that they pay grants on time. Given the state of the economy, the number of students experiencing hardship will greatly increase. There will be additional demands on the €5 million fund. I would like one of the Departments' representatives to address the point that they seem to be turning a blind eye towards regarding the financial challenges of mature students, especially those who have financial responsibilities for dependent children, possibly a mortgage and significant travel expenses because they cannot rent a bedsit beside college if they have children at home. Neither Department is prepared to accept responsibility for income support for those people.

Mr. Brian Power

We recognise the unique position of mature students regarding the higher education student maintenance grant. We have a range of rates of grant split in terms of the grants available to adjacent and non-adjacent students. Any student within 15 miles or 24 km of the college is paid a significantly lower rate of maintenance grant. The obverse is that any student beyond that distance is paid a considerably higher rate. We have allowed all mature students, irrespective of how far they live from their college, to receive the non-adjacent higher rate of grant. If there are child care and other costs, even if one is living close to the college one receives the non-adjacent rate.

This is not paid if someone is on the back to education allowance. That is the difficulty. There is no recognition of these additional expenses for someone starting off college on the back to education allowance. That calls into question the fact that community welfare officers cannot assist students in third level education. Is that matter being addressed in the review?

Mr. Dave Dillon

This is a series of policy considerations of emerging issues rather than a formal review process. The community welfare officer aspect and the position of mature students with adult and child dependents has not been a feature of this but we can take on board the comments of Deputy Shortall. A specific disallowance exists for people in full-time education from the basic income maintenance payments made on a weekly basis but emergency needs payments can still be made to people irrespective of their circumstances. The rationale behind this is that the traditional trajectory through education is covered by back to education and income maintenance grants. That is the reason the community welfare officer has not been in that space. There is also a knock-on effect of precedent to people who access education anyway throughout the year without recourse to back to education or a previous social welfare or live register attachment. We had not examined it in detail but the knock-on implications and the associated costs of the precedent may be part of the consideration. It is something we must bear in mind.

A person could start the year on back to education allowance and a full jobseeker's benefit rate and then run out of benefit in a number of months.

Mr. Dave Dillon

No, back to education allowance is continuous once one receives an entitlement at the beginning of the year.

Is that true of means-tested payments?

Mr. Dave Dillon

Yes. One holds this for the duration of the course and if one progresses from certificate to diploma to degree, one holds it through the progression stages. A lone parent may get married halfway through the course but the payment continues.

What happens if the person starts an access course?

Mr. Dave Dillon

The back to education payment continues for an access course continuing to a degree course if it is seamless and progressive.

Does maintenance continue?

Mr. Dave Dillon

My colleague in the Department of Education and Skills has dealt with that.

Ms Alice O’Flynn

Deputy Byrne raised the point about FÁS and the Liberty Recycling centre. We were not aware of that situation. I am not aware whether it is the community enterprise scheme from the Department but we will check it out and if we find anything we will communicate with the Deputy.

Ms Anne Forde

I will answer a number of points raised by Senator McFadden and other members on how we know the courses being provided are relevant to any job opportunities arising. In the further education sector, the VECs and all third level colleges are members of the expert group on future skills needs, which is an advisory committee established jointly between the former Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Department of Education and Skills. It reports to both Departments and is tasked with analysing on an ongoing basis where future skills needs are required. It produces reports on a regular basis on various sectors. All of these reports are fed into the decisions and considerations taken in the third level sector on the types of courses provided. There is also a requirement that in allocating post-leaving certificate programmes a college must make a case on the labour market justification for the programme.

Deputy Shortall raised how the back to education allowance is so inflexible and linked to the CAO. Under the auspices of the Department of the Taoiseach, a number of Departments have been working together during the past 18 months and we have become very conscious of the needs of those losing their jobs at present. As committee members have pointed out, these needs are significantly different from those in the past, as are the skills background and the profile of the people. The back to education allowance was developed at a time when we were focused on putting people back into full-time education, particularly second chance education. Many of those who lost their jobs more recently do not want to go back into full-time education; they want to get a job as soon as possible. Due to family commitments and mortgages, they are not in a position to embark on a two or three year education programme. It is for this reason that we have sought, particularly in education, to try to come up with more flexible responses for people.

Last year, approximately 3,000 places were rolled out. These were a combination of various measures, including condensing 12-month programmes into a shorter duration. There are also transition-type programmes because for people who have been out of the education sector it is very daunting to return. People also need a certain amount of time to work out what they want to do. The appropriate place for that is not at an initial guidance interview, be it through FÁS or the national employment action plan, NEAP. People need to give it more thought and consideration. For that reason, many institutes of technology in particular developed these very short duration programmes. They are delivered on a full-time basis, and in collaboration with our colleagues at the Department of Social Protection we ensured participants would continue to receive their social welfare payments and we adapted the back to education allowance to facilitate shorter duration courses.

We are very conscious of the demand for part-time responses, particularly for those who have higher skills to whom committee members referred. For that reason, last year in collaboration with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment — as it was then — we rolled out 2,500 part-time undergraduate and postgraduate places for those unemployed. The functions in question have now moved to the Department of Education and Skills. In consultation with the expert group on future skills needs, we limited those places to specific areas in which the expert group had identified job opportunities. It is early days as the first cohort started programmes in September.

The three Departments are working together on implementing the activation fund, which is a new response approach with provisions suited to the particular circumstances of people losing their jobs. We are also ensuring that we have more flexible responses not only in the third level sector, but also in the further education sector. There are also opportunities for the voluntary and private sectors to come up with proposals. It is fair to state for the sake of clarity that while the back to education allowance scheme was introduced at a particular time, we are very conscious that other responses are also needed and we are trying to work towards adapting what exists so people have the widest choice possible.

I did not catch the name of the task force.

Ms Anne Forde

It is not a task force; it is an interdepartmental group made up of the Departments of Education and Skills; Social Protection; Enterprise, Trade and Innovation; Finance; and the Department of the Taoiseach, which meets regularly on the unemployment issue.

Is it possible to receive copies of the reports that have been published?

Ms Anne Forde

The interdepartmental group has not written any reports. Perhaps Senator McFadden was referring to the expert group on future skills needs. All its reports have been published and are available on www.egfsn.ie.

I welcome what Ms Forde stated about recognising the difficulties that exist and the need to have a system fit for purpose. Is anything happening formally to progress some of these ideas or to make the necessary amendments?

Ms Anne Forde

All of these initiatives have been launched. The new places and approaches were put in place last year. The activation fund went to tender at the end of March and the closing date was April. More than 300 proposals were submitted for funding and evaluation of the proposals is almost complete. It is expected that the Department will enter into contracts with the successful tenderers during May. It is a rolling series of initiatives and we examine how they work on an ongoing basis and adapt them to see what else we can do, obviously all within the overall constraints in which we work.

Is any work being done on the implications of withdrawing the third level grant for those on the back to education allowance? What is likely to happen given that 85% of third level students involved are mature students? Is any monitoring being carried out on what is likely to be a very high drop out rate given the withdrawal of income support? It does not add up for many people who have financial commitments.

Mr. Brian Power

We have had consultations with the national office for equity of access to higher education, which is part of the Higher Education Authority, and with the association of access officers in the colleges with a view to examining precisely how we should monitor the information impact and the impact of all of these measures on access to higher education. Over the coming year we will put arrangements in place to monitor its impact. This will include specific target access groups, such as mature students.

Obviously, as a result of a policy decision taken by the Government, people no longer have access to the grant scheme. However, it may well turn out to be a false economy if large numbers of mature students and social welfare recipients drop out simply because they cannot afford to remain in the education system.

Mr. Brian Power

We will have to monitor the impact of the measure on overall access figures as it develops.

I thank the officials for briefing the committee in such a comprehensive way.

The joint committee went into private session at 1.10 p.m. and adjourned at 1.15 p.m.until 11 a.m. on Wednesday, 26 May 2010.

Top
Share