Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 1 Jun 1994

Vol. 140 No. 13

FÁS Community Employment Programme: Motion.

Mr. Farrell

I move:

That Seanad Éireann commends the new FÁS programme Community Employment; and welcomes the valuable work, training and development opportunities which it will provide.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire don Teach agus comhghairdeas lei maidir leis an obair atá á déanamh aici.

The Minister has left a positive mark on every Portfolio she has had since entering public life and I have no doubt that she will leave her mark when she tackles the unemployment problem by creating jobs. She is working in a positive, sincere and dedicated manner. I congratulate her on that.

This is a very good scheme. When I was young the minor relief scheme started just before Christmas each year. My first job with Sligo County Council was through the minor relief scheme and I earned 4s. 8d. a day, which is about 22p in today's money. I recently bought a hammer similar to the one I used to break large stones into half inch shapes but it is now an antique. Some man wore down that hammer breaking stones. I participated in that scheme in the early 1940s. We have come a long way since then.

When I hear about unemployment today I think of the work we did then. If we did not take the six weeks' work before Christmas, we would have a very poor Christmas. This was followed by the social employment scheme, a good scheme, but this one is superior.

The new scheme responds to the needs of the community. It gives the community an opportunity to get involved in worthwhile projects and simultaneously pays people a reasonable wage. A disadvantage of the previous scheme was that people could only participate in it for one year. Very often the scheme was only properly under way by the end of that year. There was no continuity. When a scheme starts, the first four or five months are spent getting things organised. However, staff were let go at that point and new people had to be recruited the following year. This made it impossible for organisers to have continuity.

This scheme is great because people can be kept on for up to three years. The same people, or at least a core number of people, can continue on the scheme, and if new people are recruited others are already there to co-ordinate and keep the work going. This is a major improvement and the Minister of State should be congratulated for introducing it. I advocated this move because many good people were let go because they could not be kept on for a second year; often, the whole thing then collapsed.

The new scheme will create a work culture and a work ethic. For too long there has been no work ethic and a dole, social welfare mentality. It is terrific that 40,000 people will be employed on this scheme by the end of the year. In the 1950s, when I started collecting rates, there was a large number of people unemployed. When I called to collect the rates, people did not want to see me; they disappeared. Their houses were dilapidated and everything was run down. However, as soon as people got work and started earning some money, they did up their homes and they had the few bob for the rates. It gave them a new lease of life and completely uplifted them. They felt they had a little independence.

This scheme will give people independence and they will see others progressing. Previously, they were in a rut. They drew the dole and sat up on the high stool or went home. They were not bothered about doing anything and the result was that nothing was done. As the old adage states, if one wants something done, ask a busy person. In the 1950s, when people got work, they improved their homes, etc., and the same will apply as a result of this scheme.

Previously, many people did not take up jobs on schemes because if they did, they lost their secondary benefits. If they had a medical card or their children's school books were paid for or any of the other free services, they lost them if they took up a place on a scheme. They will now be able to work and retain their entitlements. This is wonderful because this problem was the largest barrier to people taking jobs. People felt they were losing too much if they lost their medical card or other services. The Minister of State should be complimented for considering this matter because it is at the core of what keeps people at work. It is most important.

I ask the Minister of State to extend this measure to include temporary work. Many people would take temporary work in the summer. This week I heard of a person who was offered a job. She said she would love to take it, but if she did she would lose her unmarried mothers' allowance. I can give the Minister of State details of the case. It would be marvellous if people who took summer jobs for three or four months in peak periods could be paid wages, on which they would pay tax, but retain their secondary benefits. If people thought they would not lose these benefits, there would be many more in work today.

I have experience of this matter. I know of many people who would take work but do not do so because they lose their medical cards, etc. I ask the Minister of State to consider extending that measure to include temporary summer work, particularly in the west where there is plentiful summer work in hotels and guesthouses. If it was implemented, many extra jobs would be created, many of which perhaps would continue long after the summer. Allowing people to retain their secondary benefits is the best thing the Minister of State has ever done. People worry if they get sick that they will not have the money to pay for their care. It is important that people can retain their cards.

I welcome the new age limit, but I would like if the Minister of State could reduce it even further. People could not avail of the previous scheme unless they were 25 years of age or over and that was wrong. We must get young people at work. In the days when many people went to England, if they got a job as soon as they got there, they were successful. However, if they did not get a job and ended up on the dole or in the pub, it was disastrous. We must target the youth. I ask the Minister of State to consider lowering the age limit to 18 years rather than 21 years. The youth of today are good and it would be much better if they could go straight from school into those type of jobs, rather than telling them that they cannot avail of the scheme until they are 21 years of age. If young people come out of school at 18 years of age, why not make it possible for them to avail of the scheme at that stage? They are good workers, able and capable. If the Minister of State is to do anything, she should reduce the age limit even further.

The training programme the Minister of State has introduced is terrific. It is an important matter. Earlier the House discussed planning and I said that we must try to marry industry and planning in an effort to create jobs. We cannot have one area acting as a barrier to another and preventing it from progressing. Perhaps a scheme dealing with planning would be a good idea because nobody is trained in this area. Very few people know how to make a planning application or the problems that can arise, what to research or what they need. Perhaps there should be a course to train young people for what they will come up against in the planning area.

In the debate earlier I mentioned the case of a young man who went on the dole. He tried to set up a small business, but he got so fed up dealing with applications to change the use of a building, dealing with health inspectors and other matters that he threw in the towel. Young people starting work are full of enthusiasm. Perhaps we should try to organise a one stop shop where young people could go and explain their needs to someone who could help them. Perhaps they could go to FÁS, where someone could help them to fill in planning applications or applications for a licence to sell food or whatever. Everything could be dealt with in the one office.

Perhaps it is more discouraging for people like me who were brought up in an age that when one decided to do something, one went ahead and did it. The rules or regulations of today did not exist then, but we must abide by them. We must try to develop an environment that is friendly towards people who want to create jobs or who want to work. At present one must go to the county council with a planning application. One must fill up another application at the health board and then go to the tax office for a tax clearance certificate.

Mr. Farrelly

One might have to get a passport.

Mr. Farrell

Straightaway that person gets bogged down and fed up. We must get to grips with unemployment, particularly in relation to young people. After a certain age people say they will not get jobs and that is it. However, young people coming out of school are full of enthusiasm and ambition. If they run into a grumpy official, and such people are in every walk of life, they can be discouraged by what that official thinks. It breaks their courage. This FÁS scheme includes extra money for training and we should try to establish a section where a young person who wishes to go into business could approach one person who could advise on all the requirements necessary to set up the business. The adviser could help the entrepreneur to fill out the necessary forms. When the forms are sent away there were no requests for further information because the adviser would have filled out the form correctly. That would be very encouraging for people starting their own business.

As I have said on many previous occasions, it is difficult to start a business today. Years ago when a person decided to start a business he could approach a bank manager for extra funding to supplement the money already saved. Then he could buy the property, carry out the necessary alterations and start doing business. That is no longer the case.

There are now too many regulations and rules. None of the industries in my village could be started today because it would be too expensive. When those businesses were started 20 years ago they simply applied for planning permission which cost nothing. The planning officer called out to inspect the site and gave the go-ahead. Planning and building took place side by side and people were delighted. There was a hunger for work.

Unfortunately, that is not the case today. It is very expensive to carry out environmental impact and other studies which are required for planning permission. It is a major job just to get a business started and it can be heartbreaking for many people. In one case the prospective business person just gave up and went on the dole.

We should deal with that problem in our training schemes. There are many good aspects to this employment programme. It is the path to further progress and I hope the path will widen. It will become a first class road to further job creation. It was great to hear about the creation of 2,000 new jobs in Dublin. This Government is dedicated to creating jobs. No society is healthy if it is not working. If our young people were working we would have less violence and crime. As the old adage says: the devil finds work for idle hands.

I congratulate the Minister on her wonderful work.

Mr. Daly

I formally second the motion. I commend the Minister on taking this initiative. The scheme will help the long term unemployed. Recently there have been indications of a downward trend in the unemployment figures. That is very encouraging. However, State intervention through these schemes will be necessary for quite some time to help eliminate unemployment especially in areas where, because of regional imbalances and difficulties, it is difficult to get work. Any new efforts in this regard are welcome, particularly at a time of economic development when it is likely that the unemployment figures will be reduced substantially.

All the indications are that there will be an upturn in economic activity here. In the international arena the GATT negotiations have been resolved, there is a new EU-EFTA agreement in place which opens up new economic areas, the North American Trade Agreement has been resolved and the south-east Asian economies are co-operating with each other. The international trend now indicates quite positively that there are enormous opportunities to increase employment, economic prosperity and development in the next four to five years. We must keep abreast of those developments in a number of sectors, particularly in new technology.

We have seen with the Motorola announcement during the week that advances in new technology will mean many employment opportunities. It will be important to keep abreast of developments in the technological area and to have trained professionals in that area. It is likely that, in the advanced technology, bio-technology, engineering and science sectors, there will be a substantial increase in employment opportunities during the next number of years.

It is difficult to translate such prospects to areas where there are long term unemployed who do not have the basic educational requirements to fit into such schemes. Although there will be positive opportunities for young people coming out of schools and colleges with high educational qualifications, they will not apply to a substantial number of people, many of whom are to a large extent unemployable, although they are on the unemployment register.

If we look at the list of unemployed in areas where big projects have taken place, we discover that the project did not make any material change to the list. I recall, for example, the huge Moneypoint generating station being built when 1,100 people were employed around the clock on its construction but there was only a minimal reduction in the unemployment figures in the town of Kilrush. The reduction consisted mainly of young students who took summer employment on the project. The fact is that within two miles of Kilrush a huge construction site employing 1,100 people did not materially affect the unemployment figures in the town. I believe there is something more to the unemployment register than meets the eye.

I am satisfied that many of the people on the register will seek the type of employment opportunity contained in this training scheme. That is why I welcome the work being done by FÁS in organising community projects at local level in many areas. The projects give employment and training for a certain number of hours each day or week at a certain rate. The participants have an opportunity of acquiring skills and the community is provided with important facilities. There are numerous examples everywhere, and particularly in the west of Ireland, of the FÁS community training scheme providing community halls and other facilities while providing part-time employment for the unemployed.

There are some problems with the schemes. A common complaint is that there is no real incentive to get involved because of the small margin of difference between what somebody earns working on a scheme and what he would receive by signing on at the local employment exchange. In spite of the huge unemployment figure there is a marked reluctance on the part of many people to participate in the schemes. I recall going through a list of 18 people who had spoken to me a year ago about the prospects of securing employment. None of them would take a job on a FÁS community training scheme for two reasons. First, they were not satisfied with the income return. Second, many young people felt there was something more meaningful to do than being involved in community programmes or schemes which were below their skills or qualifications.

The Minister may have the evidence from the returns of the various schemes to show that many people who start a scheme find employment before it concludes. This indicates that provided they have an opportunity or a long term prospect of meaningful improvement, young people are prepared to get involved in these projects. When the opportunity does arise because of the training and experience they gain, they have taken up long term employment with construction and other companies.

I have not examined the scheme in great detail but I am aware certain conditions attach to it. I welcome the reduction of the minimum age limit from 25 years of age in the old scheme to 21 years in this scheme. This has caused anxiety because it debars people from getting employment in these schemes. It is reasonable to say that the age when people are most motivated to seek employment is immediately after leaving school. Most students are keen to obtain employment on immediately entering the workforce.

The age limit of 21 leaves out those aged between 18 and 20. That group will take employment in any scheme, as we can see everywhere. Young people also seek employment in the holiday period from university and second level schools. Even primary school children are pressing for jobs in their holidays, although they should not be employed under the laws of the land. Younger people are more enthusiastic to get into work, be busy and do something constructive and positive. Although the age limit has been reduced, two or three vital years are being missed and that requirement should be examined.

There are other areas to which I would direct the scheme. We all welcome the community work undertaken, such as sporting facilities, games rooms, halls and community centres. There are many young married and single women seeking part time work, especially in the clerical and services sector. The number of applicants for clerical positions in institutions such as health boards is huge. Thousands of people are also applying for nursing positions. FÁS should consider providing clerical training in schools or community development associations. In my constituency many young women leave commercial classes with no prospects of jobs. They find themselves unemployed in a short time.

I welcome the steps the Minister has taken and encourage her to continue along those lines.

Mr. Farrelly

The motion states:

That Seanad Éireann commends the new FÁS community employment programme and welcomes the valuable work, training and development opportunities it will provide.

I would prefer if we were debating a motion proposing that the Government make available a portion of the money for training to local authorities so they could employ people to work on our roads. Some weeks ago the Minister for the Environment visited my county council, having travelled the roads of the county. He lectured us on what we should be doing along our roadways and undoubtedly intended this to be done all over the country. If we had the number of workers available in years gone by, our current problems would not be as great.

We are discussing the numbers of people who can participate in these schemes. The programmes are only useful to people while they are on the scheme. There is no long term prospect of employment for many of them. I would like to be able to welcome the programme; but although we are giving people the opportunity to do something for a short period, we are not providing them with a future.

If anyone on a scheme is married or intends to marry and applies to a local authority for loan assistance because he or she does not have permanent employment, the authority cannot allow them to apply for a proper mortgage. The difficulty is that there is no permanent solution. One effect of these schemes is to reduce the numbers on the unemployment register. This suits the Government of the day, whoever that might be, because such schemes are not new.

I said previously in this Chamber that I would prefer Government directing local authorities to establish teams of people who would be trained as carpenters, fitters, bricklayers, etc., to work on behalf of the community. They could build houses for the thousands of people on local authority housing lists. We can give trades to people and provide houses. Why can we not give money to local authorities to do this? My authority was given £1.75 million to build 47 houses but it was not allowed to take on people to be trained to do the work.

One wonders what was the thinking behind the schemes. Money was given and the houses will be built but there will be no long term effect because young people will not get trades. If money is to be made available for such groups, as it has in Dublin and elsewhere, why can local authorities not avail of that funding? They could train scores of people, men and women. Only yesterday the Minister mentioned the numbers of young people entering the trades and that is to be welcomed.

We are at a crossroads. We are providing more schemes for the long term unemployed but we are not providing long term work. We should train people so they can have long term work. They should be able to finish their training and get jobs.

I agree with Senator Farrell who mentioned the obstacles confronting those who want to employ people or start their own businesses. He also mentioned the costs involved. There is a new scheme where the main financial institutions make money available to young people who want to start-up their own businesses, or to people who want to take an extra person off the unemployment register. However, it is difficult to get this money. Recently we were informed that a substantial amount of the £25 million or the £50 million was committed. However, three people I know, who have legitimate businesses and are looking for an extra person, were refused funding because they did not meet the criteria. We have schemes for certain people but not for others. As Senator Daly mentioned, we have introduced an age limit. If people cannot get work when they leave school, or no training is available, as proposed in these schemes, they get disillusioned with the system.

Perhaps a Minister will explain why we can organise substantial funds for unemployment benefit, unemployment assistance, FÁS schemes and training but we cannot replace an outdoor staff member in a local authority area; there are more engineers than outdoor staff in some areas. At one time there were 20 men in certain sections, but now there are only two or three and no one is being replaced. Anyone who came through the local authority system knows what I am talking about. We talk about helping the long term unemployed, but the Government must make a decision to employ people to do work that was done for years by the fathers of the people we are talking about, otherwise, we may not need the money to repair the roads in rural Ireland.

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise and Employment (Mrs. O'Rourke)

For how long may I speak?

Acting Chairman (Mr. R. Kiely)

The Minister has 15 minutes.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I thank the Members who tabled this motion and I am glad to come into the Seanad to speak about the Community Employment Programme which was a joint effort between my colleague, the Minister for Enterprise and Employment, Deputy Quinn, and myself. We were pleased to launch it together at the end of March.

There has been a downward trend in unemployment levels but I do not shout about this fact because our unemployment figures are still too high. While we welcome the downward trend, we cannot reduce our efforts in dealing with unemployment. While there are approximately 284,000 people unemployed, we cannot cease to work towards reducing unemployment. The downward trend is only part of the picture. Redundancy figures, the compilation of which comes within my brief, have shown a welcome downward trend. This is nothing to shout about because this must be kept in perspective.

The recently published ESRI report stated that even if positive economic growth continued and led to a downward trend in unemployment levels, the Irish economy would still need special interventionist measures to deal with the long term unemployed. There must be direct policies to deal with this and that is what we are considering in the Community Employment Programme.

We are finalising Ireland's Structural Funds allocation for 1994-99 and a key part of this will be a local development programme. A major part of that programme will be the 33 local area partnerships, which were designated by the Government and which the Taoiseach launched last week in Dublin Castle. I was glad to be part of that. We will all be involved in these local area partnerships, including the public and private sectors and workers and employers who will come together to see what they can do to stimulate employment and to generate creativity in their local areas. In addition to the local development programme, the Government will commit £150 million each year for community employment in the 33 areas. We welcome these positive indications but they are only the beginning.

As regards intervention, people say we are only interventionists and that we should allow free market forces to operate so that everyone can find their proper level of activity. However, our unemployment figures mean there must be a combination of market forces and interventionist policies. The NESC report also said this; it stated that many people want to work and there is a large amount of work to be done. A marriage of the two, with proper structures and training, will achieve the best results.

We have amalgamated the social employment scheme, the community employment development programme and Teamwork. Their strengths are coming together in the Community Employment Programme. It provides part-time work together with personal and skills development opportunities and the number of hours people must work are also highlighted. It is operated as a key resource in areas covered by the local development programme. I am pleased to be working closely with the new local development areas through the Department of Enterprise and Employment, the Taoiseach's office, which is the motivating force for the local development areas, and the Tanáiste's office to improve the progression chances of participants through co-ordinated area action. At the end of last month there were 27,000 participants in the Community Employment Programme; by the end of the year we hope to provide 40,000 places. This is a substantial increase.

People have asked me what is the difference between this scheme and other schemes. Those involved in community projects say there are better chances for people on the Community Employment Programme. People have a chance of employment for longer periods and better training. One had to be 25 years of age to qualify for the social employment scheme; the age limit has been reduced to 21. There is no age limit with regard to those in receipt of unemployment benefit. Furthermore, persons in receipt of lone parent's allowance are also eligible. Some 25 per cent of all available places have been set aside for those over 45 years of age who have been unemployed for three years or more.

During the last 12 months I travelled around the country visiting the local area partnerships, the FÁS offices and meeting community groups. The most important point put to me was that 25 years of age was too high. Many below that age wanted to do this community work and wanted to get involved but were prevented from doing so because of the age limit. We have reduced the age limit to 21 years in the new programme. Senator Daly said we need to reduce it even further. A measure must be put in place for young people between school leaving age, which averages at about 18 and 21 years. We hope that a new programme, Youthstart, will deal with that.

Participants will retain their secondary and other social welfare benefits, if entitled to them in the first place. Community employment contains a number of specific developmental elements, which are new and important. People may avail of specially targeted programmes of training and may draw down time and moneys to engage in their own training.

Senator Farrelly and Senator Daly spoke about the need to progress in the scheme. There will be opportunities for progression. This has been clearly marked out. Participants may go on for two or three years. There is no longer a cut off at the end of one year, which was the real deterrent in the old social employment scheme. There is a chance to continue. I am insistent on the type of training in the programme. I do not want people engaged in a project for a project's sake and when it is finished to be cut off with nothing to hope for.

Professor Kieran Kennedy of the ESRI wrote a booklet on unemployment. He said there can be a nationwide programme of good work and training for the unemployed in a progressive manner linked to benefits, but also linked to proper training for local development employment placement. He added that it will take enormous work and management skills to do this in each local area. It will not be easy. Support must be given so that a person's developed or innate skills may be matched with the project in hand, whether it is historical, infrastructural, the compilation of parish records, restoration, tidy towns or any other community employment project replacing the social employment scheme. We must match the participant's innate skills with the work in hand, not their potential.

Training should be given during the course of the work which will be targeted to suit the person concerned. Throughout this training vocational guidance and support should be given. The participant should be assisted in a search for employment in their local area at the end of the one, two or three year period. We will not be able to do this for everyone, but we can give it keen attention.

When meeting with FÁS — I concluded a series of meetings in the past couple of days — I insisted that training be proper, documented, certified and progressive. The role of the old placement officer seems to have lessened recently, because we put too much work on FÁS and demanded more from it. The job placement role will be enhanced and developed. It is a decisive shift towards a participant centred approach emphasising the need to provide useful work and skills for participants. On several occasions I described it as a pact between communities and their local unemployed. I want to broaden that pact to include others at local level who may help to build community employment and provide pathways to further progression.

The Department and FÁS believe 5,000 more places could be made available if local difficulties with the social partners in some areas could be ironed out. I want to do that. I have taken on board what Senators have said about those aged between 18 to 21 years. As Senators rightly said, people leave school with high hopes; it is the nature of youth. Young people have stars in their eyes, yet they are plunged into dependency at a time when they should be independent. They are plunged into a sense of increasing failure when they should be able to hold their heads up high.

The EU Commissioner, Mr. Flynn, is engaged in developing a community initiative, Youthstart, which would give training, education and a right to a job to all young people between 18 and 21 years. I developed within FÁS — I spoke about this at the National Youth Council of Ireland — a pilot project, which we hope to have in place in two areas in the autumn and then broaden it out so it could be eligible for particular community initiative funding. Whether we do that or not, we are going to have that Youthstart idea. I do not want young people going on a year course. I would like them to engage in at least two years developmental type training.

I would like employers on board because it is an area where on the job training must be carried out by them. I want it to be progressive, so that if a young person does two years, he or she may then consider going to a regional technical college, further education or apprenticeship. A person should be able to progress; there should no boundaries preventing someone from doing something if they have the ability. I will not engage in a Youthstart project which only goes so far. All community development programmes should allow people to develop if they have it within them to do so. We cannot consign large numbers of people, particularly young people, to long term unemployment. We cannot say the economic parameters are right and refer to other economic jargon of the day, while at the same time looking at the register of high unemployment. I will not accept that and I am sure Senators will agree. I am not in that type of business. I like to see people develop and local areas revitalised.

FÁS is doing magnificent work throughout the country. I am not here as a propagandist for FÁS, but the face of Ireland has changed through work done by it. If one sees the red sign in any village, town or county, one will see wonderful community initiatives where sponsors have put in endless hours of voluntary work in their particular idea or project. Yet FÁS is an aunt sally for people to take pot shots at. It does a huge amount of work. Because it must be a lot of things to many people, its definitive role in its areas of responsibility — training for people in employment, training the unemployed and community initiatives — is sometimes clouded over.

Senator Farrelly spoke in the House on the Apprenticeship Bill. I met with local authorities which want to get back to their role in apprenticeship. I also met with Senator Farrelly's county manager who has gone to County Kildare.

Mr. Farrelly

He has gone back to County Galway; he only came over for a holiday.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I met with five local authorities which are keen and which will come back to me with proposals for taking on apprentices in local authority areas. Senator Farrelly spoke about taking on full time local authority workers. I do not have the remit to extend into that area, although I accept the philosophy of what the Senator has said. Are we spending money when we could have people in full time employment in local authorities? We must spread the money around. The unemployment figure is too high; we must give people a first or a second chance for employment.

I commend community employment to the House. I welcome Senators' contributions. I hope we will work through any difficulties which may arise in the implementation of community employment. With my colleague, I will work to see the programme is fruitful, developmental and positive for participants.

Professor Lee

I wish to be associated with the welcome to the House which the Minister has received from other Senators. I also wish to be associated with Senator Farrell's tribute to the Minister at the outset. Having said that I must also admit that I probably know less about the realities of what actually happens on these schemes than anybody else who has spoken in this House.

I welcome the ideal behind the community employment programme and the selection of these 33 areas, because although it has been demonstrated recently — and we all know that poverty is very widespread throughout the country — that there are poor people everywhere, nevertheless a culture of poverty develops in particular areas. Cultures of poverty are area located and area bound and therefore it is very important in trying to break the culture of poverty that there be area programmes, however much poverty may be distributed at an individual level and can be found everywhere. I welcome very much the principle behind this.

It is also the case that it is very difficult to plan for areas because that involves going beyond sectoral planning and trying to blend a whole range of what are normally parallel activities and to get people to think in terms of the area as a whole as distinct from one particular sector. Whether it is at governmental level or at local level, achieving the cast of mind which involves co-operation with others, thinking about a common area objective is a major psychological challenge as well as an administrative one.

Therefore I welcome these approaches very much. I welcome them partly because the people in FÁS in Cork to whom I have spoken about these matters are very enthusiastic about this scheme and think that in the light of their experience with a pilot project on the north side last year, it has enormous potential. I respect the judgment of these people and I was glad to hear the Minister's tribute to FÁS.

I am no expert on FÁS. One hears differing reports, probably depending on whom one is speaking to, because as we all know in every institution there are those who excite one and there are those who discourage one. But FÁS was quite severely castigated, it is fair to say, in the Culliton report and there were massive proposals for extensive restructuring. The evidential basis was not provided for the severe castigation and FÁS itself was the product of restructuring only a few years previously. It was not a product of inaction. It may have been the product of somewhat mindless action at times, but certainly not of inaction. I am glad to hear that tribute because it has a very important remit and it is very important that it discharges that remit to the satisfaction of those who have an opportunity of observing its activities on the ground.

I welcome the emphasis that Senator Daly laid on the younger age group. In a sense my only complaint to the Minister is that in her own contribution she has so completely anticipated virtually every question that could be possibly asked that it is a little difficult to think of angles of approach.

It is important to realise that there are really two different programmes going on here. If 25 per cent of places are rightly reserved for over 45s who have been unemployed for three years, that is a very different type of programme and challenge from that of getting to the school leavers and making sure they get work straight away. It would be unfortunate if these two rather different trajectories of activity were to get in each other's way, so that two different types of official might be needed to deal with this, with two different concepts of where one is going with the workers on these schemes.

I also welcome the emphasis on work for young women, which again Senator Daly has mentioned, and how young women can be incorporated positively into the workforce. Here, both for young women and for young men, one should look at part-time employment from a positive rather than from a negative point of view. There was and probably still is with the majority of the population a view that part-time employment is somehow second best to full-time employment. In the world of work into which we have already entered, part-time employment will become much closer to the norm than it has been; and shifting from job to job and even in some respects from career to career will become much more the norm than it has been.

The changes in the nature of the labour market, even in the last five years, are quite extraordinary. I may be generalising from a somewhat privileged level but I have gone recently through the work patterns of about 200 of my own graduates over the last three or four years and nearly all of them are at work, but very few of them are at work they thought four years ago they would be at. Several of them have come to that work through one or two other jobs in the meantime.

What is now important is that we produce people, whether at 18 years old, 21 years old or whatever, who have the capacity for work. They must be work oriented and have sufficient flexibility to adjust to the changing requirements of the market and indeed to identify and pursue requirements themselves. The idea of the job for life is virtually gone at all levels, and if that mentality is imbued into our young people it is a recipe for defeat and disillusion on their part.

I know I am speaking from the privilege of a job for life but the young people themselves, at least the ones I talk to — and again they may be from the privileged end of the market — are much more alert to the changing nature of the labour market than many of us of an earlier generation are. They are aware that the job for life is, except in very rare cases, not there. They are adjusting psychologically to that and therefore the type of scheme the Minister has in mind for encouraging them to think along those lines and to prepare themselves as individuals and personalities for work, even though one cannot predict the precise type of work, is very important.

This leads me to wonder what sort of relationship the Minister perceives between these schemes and the educational system. She talks about training, about identifying educational routes for them, and quite rightly, she is very keen on that. Nobody here is more familiar with the educational system than she is. The relationship has to be specifically fostered rather than left to some sort of chance. Young people can be encouraged to think for themselves about what sort of course they ought to be encouraged on. The institutions, at whatever level, can also be encouraged to respond and to think pro-actively rather than simply waiting for a demand.

The ideas the Minister has expressed in her contribution should be injected into the thinking of the educational institutions as well as into the thinking of the young people and of FÁS itself. I am not looking for more work for educational institutions. We all know that there are intense pressures on them, but nevertheless the co-ordination of activities is important. This Minister is constructive about education even when she is not Minister for Education. I would like to see more Ministers of that type. I would like to see the Minister give a lead in guiding the thinking of the educational institutions as well as of FÁS and of the young people. I wish this scheme well, it deserves well and more power to the Minister in pursuing it.

Mr. Calnan

I welcome the Minister to the House again and I also welcome this new community employment scheme. When the social employment schemes were first moved, we were moving onto new territory really, something that had not been done before. I compliment the people in FÁS who worked so hard to make these social employment schemes a success. Many local groups deserve our gratitude for getting them to work. I wish to mention the staff of the county councils, particularly the local executive engineer. Very often he had to select the job that was to be done. Often it was very difficult because there would be conflicting opinions as to whether it was a worthwhile job, whether it would conflict with unions or otherwise. Therefore there was a lot of teasing out to be done and it was done very well by the FÁS officials and also by the local authority officials as well. As I mentioned already, the executive engineer locally played a tremendous part.

It is good that the community employment scheme replaces three other schemes because too many schemes confuse the issue; one overall scheme is better. That is not to say that good work was not done under the social employment schemes, the community employment development schemes — the CEDP — or the Teamwork schemes. Getting people working must be the aim. Long-term unemployment is a curse; when people who are willing to work are left without employment day after day, week after week, year after year, and have nothing to do, it is soul destroying and brain destroying. We now have second and maybe third generations of families who have not seen work.

The right to work must be a priority and the community employment scheme gets us off to the right start. It is good to see people getting off unemployment benefit or assistance and doing meaningful work. In any forum or at any meeting the words "migration", "emigration" and "unemployment" have been so commonplace for so long that people are getting fed up hearing them. We must emphasise that the only way of stopping those three phenomena is to provide work, such as community employment.

Whether it is on heritage work or improving a local area for tourism, there are many small jobs which can be done by the community. Could that not be expanded? Many of the older politicians often suggested taking the money from social welfare and giving it to the county councils to get work done. It is important to highlight that point. I would like to see a development of the community employment scheme so that more work would be done by the county council, where people who were working on a community employment scheme could be taken on by the county council when they are finished so that there would be a continuity of work. I admit that it may not be easy to do.

Under the old scheme a person was employed for six months and when the job was done they went back on the dole. I am glad to see that the duration has been extended to 12 months and be extended to two years, and even three. That is welcome because it gives continuity. It would be good if there was the prospect of full-time employment in a local authority or any other community organisation and that a person's work on a community employment scheme could be taken into consideration.

We sometimes overlook a point about which people who have been involved in social employment schemes in the past are proud, and that is when they apply for a job they can get a reference. It is a tremendous boost to be able to say they were employed on a social employment scheme, and that the person who employed them, the FÁS official or the county council engineer, can give them a reference. This is the only opportunity to work many people have had for ten or 15 years; previously all they could put down on a form when asked what they had been doing for the past ten years was "unemployed". That alone has done a lot for people.

I am glad the age limit has been reduced to 21 years and that the secondary benefits may be retained. People got a fright when they got a few pounds more only to lose it in benefits. People would shy away from these schemes completely if they felt that they would lose their medical card. They might get a few pounds extra but, if they caught a cold or a bout of the 'flu while working they would have to go to the doctor, pay his fee and pay for the medicines and tablets prescribed and the money would be spent. In that case they would be better off unemployed. We must get rid of those difficulties.

I am glad the Minister mentioned the Youthstart scheme. The age limit in the community employment scheme is being reduced to 21 years but we must remember that school leavers have never had full time work. They might have done holiday work or held a part-time job at the weekends or been involved in babysitting, but they have never worked for a sustained period. People often leave school and sign on for those formative years between the ages of 18 and 21, but that is not good enough. We must provide for those between 18 and 21 years because we are not taking them on board at present and this could be a severe loss for us.

Under the Community support framework we must get money into more of these jobs because they are often the only type of employment in rural areas, such as my own in west Cork, as there are no factories but only small local projects. Our local group of Macra na Feirme is holding a seminar on emigration and migration in my home town tomorrow night. It will stress that in rural areas migration has been and is nearly more damaging than emigration.

Dr. Henry

I enthusiastically welcome this scheme. It is a great improvement on the previous schemes, including the social employment scheme. I often feel sorry for FÁS because I feel that it gets a bad name. I had better declare a family interest at once; it is always wise to do so. My son went overseas with FÁS. A large number of young graduates go overseas with FÁS and I have not known one firm which did not want to keep them on. Indeed, some firms asked if there were any more graduates at home. That was extremely encouraging.

One of the most important aspects of this scheme is that all the fringe benefits can be retained. It was difficult before to urge people to take part in schemes because they did not want to lose their medical card, in particular. This is a great improvement. I am also glad that the age limit has been lowered, that the Youthstart scheme is to come into operation and that lone parents will be able to be involved in the community work schemes. The Minister and several Senators talked about young people leaving school with high hopes only to find nothing to do. The Youthstart scheme is a good idea.

It is important to have certification because there is a training element involved in many of these schemes. As Senator Calnan said, it is also important that these people have a job to go to every day and that when their course is completed they can get a reference from their employer.

The importance of that in the social framework of someone's life cannot be underestimated and it is something far too many have lacked in the last few years.

I am always fascinated by people who want workfare, where one must work for the dole money. If we can help all the people who are desperate to work, we can then start on the recalcitrant group who do not want to work; we will all be old before we have dealt with all of those who want to work.

The one aspect that depressed me — the Minister did not mention it in her contribution but it is in her script — was that 5,000 places could be made available in local authorities if industrial relations problems were resolved quickly. This matter must be examined seriously. Another report said that if people were only permitted to work two hours overtime per week, over 100,000 jobs would be created, which seems an astonishing number. Employment may have to be shared out a little more; the cake is not that enormous. Some may be getting more than they are entitled to. One will have to be prepared to sacrifice some of their work so that those without employment, who strongly deserve to have a job, will get one.

While I think all FÁS instructions and leaflets are explicit, some have told me that they are not that easy to follow. Those who will be using these leaflets should examine them to ensure they are clear to them. I am a bad form filler. Whenever I have to fill in a form — a visa application for entry to America, for example — and I get to the top of a queue, I am often told that it is not filled in properly. I am extremely sympathetic with those who find difficulties with this. These forms should be made as easy as possible to fill in and understand. Officials in this area need a tremendous amount of training so they can help people in this regard. There should be a one-stop shop where people can go to discuss their unemployment problem and the options available to them. Training for these officials is required for directing people and finding out the most suitable area for their skills.

With regard to those over 45 years of age, is it wise to have any limit on the length people can remain on schemes?

Mrs. O'Rourke

After 45 years of age?

Dr. Henry

That is correct. I know the Minister has raised the limit from a year to three years, but the chances of these people getting employment are not good. If they are slotted into a post within the community where they are useful, do we really need to drag them out of it? We will have to give them unemployment benefit when they leave this job anyway. Whatever small business they are in may be extremely sad to lose them. Some people told me they had got a well trained secretary of 52 years of age for a community project. They did not know that they could keep a person on under this scheme for three years. I told them that the scheme had been extended recently and that they should apply again. This was a terrific fillip for them. What is the point of letting her go? She is most unlikely to get any other work in the area. Apparently, she is valuable to this small circle. If she leaves, they will have to train someone else. I know it is designed to give someone else a chance, but could the Minister give some leeway on that? Does it really matter if people are allowed to work for another period of time if they are useful to the community? Perhaps the Minister could be flexible on this issue.

Finally, I want to refer to — I know the Minister is sympathetic on this — child care for those women trying to become involved in training programmes and community work schemes. This is a major problem for women who want to work. There are no State creche schemes. Any money they earn to get into a better economic position is spent on child care. A large number of lone parents have applied for these schemes, which is terrific. As I have said before, only 12 per cent of single mothers stay on long term unemployment benefit. Obviously, they desperately want to become economically viable. No one wants to be poor forever. However, they have no chance of improving their economic position unless they become involved in training schemes that, as Senator Calnan said, gives them a reference and some experience. Everything should be done to encourage this, not only financially, but also in the provision of better facilities. I welcome the scheme and congratulate the Minister for introducing it.

Mr. Byrne

I join with other Members in welcoming this scheme. I am sure it will be beneficial and will bear fruit in the years ahead. We are not alone in having this unemployment problem. It exists worldwide, especially in the EU. I heard a reference on "The Gay Byrne Show" this morning to the potential removal of shorthand and ordinary typists by a voice activated computer that can do their job effectively. This problem is becoming greater each day and has nothing to do with any Government. Modern technology is making it more difficult for any Minister or Government to provide jobs for young people. This may be progress in one way, but it will also reduce the number of jobs. If this gadget is introduced it will have this effect on secretaries, but what can be done? One cannot stop progress.

I pay tribute to the FÁS staff. Its staff in my constituency of South Tipperary, for example, are courteous. Our county council has been one of the fortunate ones over the years in that we have had many hundreds of jobs under the FÁS schemes. We have also had great co-operation from both the social partners and the trade unions and the county is better for it. I thank everyone in FÁS for their help with these schemes.

The day is long gone — Senator Henry and others referred to it — when people could say that they would be a teacher or a nurse and that they would not do anything until they got a certain job. I know of a case where two young neighbours sat their leaving certificate. One of them got many honours while the other did not do as well. The young man who done well stayed at home for a few years and his parents supported him. The other one sold petrol at the local filling station and washed cars by day and worked in a chip shop at night. He worked at many kinds of jobs for two years. A job in a local co-operative came up. He was one of many — maybe 60 to 80 — people who applied for it. The applications were shortlisted to five or six candidates. He got the job, even though he had no honours in his leaving certificate. Naturally, questions were asked. The mothers of both boys talked to the manager of the co-operative, who told them he got the job because of his references. It is great for a person who cannot get a permanent job to say they were on a FÁS scheme and had worked in different places. This young man had references from all of the places he had worked. He saw what the real world was like, what it was to earn a bob, and more importantly, not to spend it too freely. The other young man, while brilliant, stayed at home for two years and had no experience of life. He was waiting for a certain type of job, but that day is long gone.

We all had to work at minor jobs when we were young, whether on the farm, in a shop or elsewhere. It did not do us any harm. We might not have got much financial reward for it, but it did us some good. As one goes on in life, one learns its ups and downs. Ten people may have been employed in a business five years ago, but the same business might now be manned by only two people. Competition is intense in every walk of life. One has to be competitive to survive; it is a vicious circle.

The Minister has put considerable thought into the scheme and has discussed problems with staff on the ground. There should be more co-operation at local authority level. Sadly, local authorities have more engineers than outdoor staff. The county council worker is an endangered species. There is a great deal of work which cannot be undertaken by machinery, only by outdoor staff.

Some counties may have let more staff go than others; this issue was discussed by my own council recently. While the council maintained its staff levels, a different system was established; people who retire, take ill and cannot work are not replaced. At some stage local authorities will have hardly any outdoor staff, this is a step in the wrong direction. They have nothing to do with this scheme, but there should be some linkage, especially in counties where there is no co-operation among the social partners, to ensure involvement in the various programmes the Minister has launched in this scheme.

All chiefs and no Indians in any walk of life is not healthy and all people hear is that there is no money for this or that. Is it possible to ascertain how much of every £1 a local authority receives, whether it is from the European taxpayer through Brussels or the Irish taxpayer, is allocated to roads or other developments such as housing? Little monsters have been built up in every county where there is continuous demand that the Government provide more money, resulting in the doors turning around all the time.

Too many people advise that there is no money to do anything while it is they themselves who are gobbling up any money which is available. There is too much officialdom at local level given that the purpose of a local authority is to provide services. Matters have got out of hand in the past ten or 15 years. Officials must be paid before any potholes are filled, or if they are to be filled.

In the past ten to 15 years there was also an embargo by certain bodies on recruitment. The chief agricultural officer of any county council could not employ a typist because of an embargo. However, the county manager could employ as many engineers and clerical staff as he liked; the people were employed in a non-productive area.

These areas must be examined because they have gone out of control. I wish those administering this community employment scheme every success. No scheme is perfect and the old FÁS schemes had their weaknesses, perhaps because of regulations from Brussels and so on. However, this scheme is a step in the right direction. It will give hope to many people. I thank the Minister and those involved for it.

Acting Chairman

It is not the usual procedure to call on the Minister a second time. However, I now invite her to address the House.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I am grateful for the opportunity to conclude the debate and to thank those who spoke. Senator Farrell proposed the motion which Senator Daly seconded Senator Farrelly, Senator Lee, Senator Henry, Senator Calnan and Senator Byrne also spoke on the motion. Seven contributions is a fine record and I thank Senators for their comments, for the time they spent in the House and the many suggestions made.

Senator Farrell spoke of his experiences long ago with the relief schemes, as they were known, in the county council areas. He spoke from a clear knowledge of that era. Senator Daly spoke of the necessity for the needs of young people to be accommodated from the age of 18 years upwards, and of the vacuum created by not having schemes or projects to deal with young people.

Senator Farrelly, referring to county councils, spoke of the need to have permanent employment and posed the question of transfer of funding from projects such as this into the local authority area. This theme was taken up by Senator Byrne.

The area partnerships were referred to by Senator Lee, as was his experience of one of them in Cork. He also spoke of the need to address the cultural poverty of the north side of Cork, a need which could be addressed within such partnerships. Senator Lee rightly entered the caveat of different types of programmes for young and older people and the necessity of having two different approaches to their different needs. He also referred to the link between proper training, experience and education and always to have that link to the forefront of these programmes.

Senator Calnan referred to the county councils. He is supportive of the scheme, especially the secondary benefits which will now remain if people have their entitlements and the age breakdown is maintained. In this respect Senator Henry referred to trade union difficulties. There could be 5,000 but for these difficulties. There are pockets of trade union difficulties around the country which we are working to bring to a satisfactory conclusion by consensus and discussion. Many areas have been progressive on this issue, linked to the Programme for Competitiveness and Work. Hopefully difficulties at local level will be worked through by means of this mechanism.

Regarding the issue of clear leaflets and proper language, I confess that forms terrify me. That is why I always call for clarity and simplicity. I fail to see the need for complicated forms when precise information can be requested in a clear manner. I will pursue this matter as there is no point having beautiful leaflets if the requirements are not clearly indicated.

The idea of including those aged over 45 years, allowing for the three year span in certain areas, will be considered. The likelihood is that others will want a chance to get on a project, but often there is not another person fully qualified to do so. Senator Henry referred to the lady who engaged in secretarial work. Her services were required, she was willing and all would be satisfied if she could be kept on. This issue must be considered, otherwise people are only being consigned off the programmes. A balance can be found between the need for others to get a chance and to recruit those over a certain age with accomplishments in certain fields.

Regarding child care, when Senator Henry sees me coming she jumps to the ramparts. I could take the facile view and advise that this issue is the responsibility of the Minister for Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Taylor, but I do not take that approach. If these are projects the Department of Enterprise and Employment wishes to establish, and on which it is our stated aim to have women included, and one of the barriers to this is child care, then it must be addressed. There have been good examples of how child care has been satisfactorily introduced. However, these are only isolated pockets and they have arisen only where huge and determined efforts have been made by women, who have battered down the doors of FÁS and of all of us to say they would like to work on such projects but are hindered by the absence of child care facilities. There needs to be greater provision for this, even within FÁS projects themselves. Each project could have a child care component. The NOW initiative for women has done a great deal of work in this area. I hope to bring this from a developmental stage into the mainstream.

Senator Byrne spoke of his long years on local authorities and the work done by them through projects. He praised Tipperary South Riding County Council for its developmental work. He also welcomed the age reduction but thought it could be lowered further. He spoke about the Youthstart programme and young people at work.

I have gained from this debate. Three or four clear points have been made during it. The local area partnerships were emphasised. There are now 33 of them, which is good. Young people are determined not to go down the road of unemployment but to start working. There is a need for projects at county council level. I have tackled the issue raised by Senator Farrelly through the apprenticeship scheme and I might be able to do more in this regard.

We need to look at cultural poverty. Times were hard for people 50 or 60 years ago. There is a different kind of deprivation today which takes the form not of hunger but of cultural poverty. This must be dealt with if we are not to have generation after generation of people knowing nothing but unemployment. People want to get up in the morning with an objective in mind. They want a purpose in life, whether it involves temporary or short term work or job sharing. People want to have a stake in life and their communities. This is only possible if people can work with their hands, mind or brain and engage in meaningful activity for which they are recompensed. The community employment programme allows for such participation.

We speak about the apathy and alienation of voters and their reluctance to vote in European elections because they feel European issues are not relevant to them. However, these issues are important for them, because unemployment is a European phenomenon. Part of the difficulty is related to Senator Henry's point that issues are not laid out clearly before people. The community employment scheme is mainly funded by the Exchequer but we are receiving some funding under the EU community support framework.

This year is the 100th anniversary of the founding of the co-operative movement by Horace Plunkett and this will be well celebrated. This movement was part of the flowering and empowerment of people at that time. People had moved on from the Parnellite episode and the land wars to the congested district boards, the Gaelic League, the Abbey Theatre and the co-operative movement. This movement involved people coming up with their own ideas. We use the word "meitheal" to describe people coming to the aid of their neighbours when there is work to be done. You, a Leas-Chathaoirleach, would know this well from your agricultural activities. A meitheal involves people coming together to share their strengths and foster their community spirit. I am convinced that the more this spirit is encouraged the further it will spread. I welcome this debate and am glad to have been part of it.

Question put and agreed to.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

When is it proposed to sit again?

Mr. Mullooly

It is proposed to sit at 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 15 June 1994.