I welcome the Minister of State with responsibility for foreign affairs, Deputy Creighton, to the House.
Adjournment Matters
Flood Relief
I thank the Minister of State for taking this Adjournment debate. I apologise for not welcoming her when I was in the Chair earlier. Another Senator jumped in before I had the opportunity, but I will welcome her now.
My matter relates to the town of Rathmore in County Kerry. I am unsure as to whether the Minister of State is au fait with it. The Cullavaw river flows behind the town for approximately two miles before joining the River Blackwater. Much of the area has suffered severe flooding several times, with one house flooded and five others put at risk. At Ballycullane in Rathmore, two large streams join together and flow into the Cullavaw river, which can lead to exceptional flooding that blocks the road and forces residents to use a longer route to get to the western side of the town where the church and a number of shops are located.
I cannot understand why Rathmore has not been included in the catchment flood risk assessment and management, CFRAM, programme, which is designed to assess and map the county's river system to identify areas at risk of significant flooding. I assume that major works will not be carried out on the Cullavaw, given that it has not been even included in the flood risk review report that is being prepared. If this is so, will the Minister of State confirm whether the river is suitable for funding under the minor works scheme? Residents are asking that the overgrowth along the river banks be cut back and that the eyes of the bridge be cleared of the shrubbery that impedes the water's flow and results in flooding. I am sure the Minister of State agrees that it is not too much to ask for the Office of Public Works, OPW, to clear the river bank.
People are entitled to live in their homes without the fear or risk of flooding. If a house is flooded and one claims on one's insurance, the house will never be covered against flooding again. This is a major concern for residents.
We seem to have wet weather constantly. Unfortunately, this might continue to be the case. In this light, it is important that we nip the problem in the bud before a considerable amount of money is needed to carry out major works. I await the Minister of State's response and hope she will have some good news for me.
I thank the Senator for her brevity.
I thank Senator Moloney for raising this issue. Unfortunately, the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, cannot be present for this debate, but he asked me to extend his thanks to the Senator. I will take this Adjournment matter in his stead.
As I am sure the Senator knows, the OPW is aware of the location's flooding problem, which the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, understands has been ongoing for a number of years. However, as the River Cullavaw, a tributary of the River Blackwater, does not form part of any arterial drainage scheme for which the OPW has a maintenance responsibility under the Arterial Drainage Act 1945, as amended, the maintenance of this watercourse does not fall under the OPW's remit. This position was notified to Kerry County Council in February 2011 in response to a resolution adopted by the council requesting that the OPW carry out works to address the flooding issue. The OPW's position was reiterated in the Minister of State's reply to Parliamentary Question No. 95, which was tabled by Deputy Tom Fleming on 10 November 2011. In both instances, it was advised that it was open to Kerry County Council to submit an application under the minor flood mitigation works scheme for funding to implement measures to alleviate the flooding problem. To date, no such application has been received.
The scheme was introduced by the OPW in 2009 to provide funding to local authorities to undertake minor flood mitigation works or studies to address localised flooding problems within their administrative areas. The scheme generally applies to relatively straightforward cases where a solution can be readily identified and achieved within a short timeframe. Under it, applications are considered for projects that are estimated to cost not more than €500,000 in each instance. Funding of up to 90% of the cost is available for approved projects, with the balance being funded by the local authority concerned. Works that would be normally the responsibility of the council or for which funding is available from other State bodies, for example, road repairs or gully cleaning, will generally not be considered for funding.
Local authorities submit funding applications in the prescribed format. These are assessed by the OPW, having regard to the specific economic, social and environmental criteria of the scheme, including the cost benefit ratio. Any proposal should be cost effective, have no negative social and environmental effects and not create a significant flood risk elsewhere.
Regarding the benefit-to-cost ratio, proposals must meet a minimum of 1.5:1 to qualify. The benefit-to-cost ratio for a particular project is calculated under the terms of the scheme, having regard to the total costs of the works and the value of the total benefit accruing from such works.
It is a matter for the council to devise a feasible engineering solution to address the problem and to submit it to the OPW for consideration under the scheme. Any proposal received from the council will be assessed under the scheme's criteria, having regard to the availability of funding for flood risk management. Should funding be made available, the commencement and progression of any work would be a matter for Kerry County Council.
I thank the Minister of State for her good reply. It was my understanding that it had not been confirmed that these works were suitable for the minor works scheme. However, the response clearly lays out that the council has been notified several times. I will raise the matter with the county manager and engineers and proceed from there.
Good luck with it.
Foreign Conflicts
I welcome the Minister of State. My Adjournment matter relates to the need for the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to make a statement on the need for the former Camp Liberty in Iraq to be recognised as a refugee camp under the UN flag and his willingness to pursue at EU level the resettlement of refugees from Camp Ashraf in Iraq to EU countries. Since the Minister of State's reply might make reference to it, I am aware that the group involved in Camp Ashraf forms part of the People's Mujahedin of Iran, PMOI, which was designated as a terrorist organisation more than 15 years ago. I am aware that the United States bombed these camps on at least one occasion and also that the National Council of Resistance of Iran, NCRI, has taken a case in the United States, with the US Court of Appeals giving the Secretary of State four months to determine the position and whether a group opposed to Iran should be removed from the list of foreign terrorist organisations. It has been indicated that if the Secretary of State fails to take action within four months, the petition for a writ of mandamus setting aside the foreign terrorist organisation designation will be granted. It is clear that the courts were far from satisfied with the failure to back up the designation which was granted when Dr. Condoleezza Rice was Secretary of State.
Following the attacks by Iraqi forces on Ashraf, in which 47 people were killed and over 1,000 injured, an agreement was signed at the end of 2011 between the United Nations and Iraq to relocate the residents inside the country before allowing the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, UNHCR, to carry out its refugee determination process to transfer them to third countries. The people within the camps were encouraged, as part of an attempt to find a peaceful solution, to transfer to Camp Liberty, which was agreed to, despite the legal right to stay in Ashraf.
Ashraf residents have movable and immovable properties because they have been there for a considerable number of years and these properties are estimated to be worth over €500 million. They were built and obtained through their own efforts and with their own money, yet Iraq does not allow them to sell them in Iraq or transfer them to another country. Camp Liberty does not meet humanitarian and human rights standards. There is a heavy presence of armed forces and vehicles, a lack of freedom of movement, a serious shortage of infrastructure such as water, electricity and sewerage systems, and also a lack of necessary facilities for the disabled and the elderly. All of these facilities are available in Camp Ashraf, provided at the residents' own expense. Iraq justifies these restrictions under the pretext that Camp Liberty is a temporary transit location.
Only last week a committee of the European Parliament refused to meet a high level delegation from Iraq because it included the commander involved in the camps. There is international recognition of the issue. While condemning violations of the Iranian dissidents' rights in Camp Ashraf and Camp Liberty, there is a real need for the United Nations and the United States to compel Iraq to stop imposing inhumane restrictions on residents, particularly preventing them from selling or transferring properties. The United Nations and the UNHCR must recognise Camp Liberty as a refugee camp. I am asking that we play our part in achieving this. The matter also covers the resettlement of people from Camp Ashraf who do not want to move to Camp Liberty because of what has happened there, the conditions in which people live and the risk to them. Apart from whether one subscribes to their political beliefs, it is important from a humanitarian perspective that we are seen to play our part in this regard. I, therefore, ask that Ireland play its part in having other countries in the European Union accept refugees from Camp Ashraf.
It is important to state the leadership of the resistance movement has responded to allegations that there are weapons at Camp Ashraf by saying it would support a call on the American State Department and the Department of Defense to task the US military with immediately inspecting Camp Ashraf with necessary equipment and announcing the findings. In other words, it would welcome independent verification by the United States that there are no weapons in the camp.
I attended a rally the group held in Paris over the weekend. A former UN official who was personally involved and left the service because of qualms of conscience about this issue indicated that the UN base in Iraq and Baghdad had falsified documents on the conditions at Camp Liberty in order to meet the requirements of those above who wanted more favourable pronouncements and assessments of the camp. That is appalling, although it is a separate issue.
I am taking this matter on behalf of the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Eamon Gilmore.
In December 2011 an agreement was reached between the United Nations — specifically the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees — and the Government of Iraq on the closure of Camp Ashraf in Iraq. The camp residents agreed to their relocation under its terms. The process for the closure of the camp has been under way since February this year, under the supervision of the UNHCR and the UN Special Representative, Mr. Martin Kobler. Of the 3,400 residents in Camp Ashraf, approximately 2,000 have now transferred to Camp Hurriya, formerly Camp Liberty, near Baghdad. This is designated as a temporary transit location from which the residents will move on to more permanent accommodation in other countries which both the residents and the Iraqi authorities now agree is the desired solution. The transfer process to Camp Hurriya is a difficult one, with great distrust and suspicion between the two sides. This issue has been well outlined by the Senator.
In Camp Hurriya the UNHCR is processing the individual residents and determining where best to relocate them. A number of residents may already have a citizenship or other claim to relocation in another country and the UNHCR is identifying these first. The remaining residents, probably a majority, must be found relocation places in other countries. The UNHCR is encouraging countries to make such places available.
It is important to be aware of the wider background to these issues, some of which have been alluded to by the Senator. Camp Ashraf was set up as a military base by the People's Mujahidin of Iran, PMOI, in 1986. The PMOI was classed as a terrorist organisation by the European Union until 2009 and is still so formally designated by the US Government. Neither the PMOI nor the political wing, the NCRI, has significant support inside Iran and the people concerned cannot be regarded as the Iranian resistance or a government in exile. Their forces assisted Saddam Hussein in the violent suppression of uprisings in the Shia and Kurdish communities in Iraq, during which large numbers of civilians were massacred. By its own admission, the PMOI admitted responsibility for numerous attacks in Iran resulting in thousands of deaths during the paramilitary campaign. Although no longer engaged in violence, the PMOI has continued to run Camp Ashraf in a tightly controlled and near totalitarian manner, with well documented reports, including from Human Rights Watch, of the abuse and intimidation of residents.
Following the war of 2003, the new Iraqi Government took a very different view of the presence of the PMOI enclave in the country and sought at first to move it from its position near the Iranian border. Latterly, when this was resisted by the residents, the Iraqi Government has moved more strongly to have the camp closed altogether and the PMOI and the residents moved to other countries. Although the background from which Iraq has approached the issue is appreciated, the protection and human rights of the residents are key concerns for Ireland, its EU partners and the wider international community. The European Union has enunciated a series of essential principles regarding Camp Ashraf and its residents. Iraq is, once again, a fully sovereign state, no longer under the tutelage of either the United States or the United Nations. It has sovereignty over the camps and is within its rights in seeking to move Camp Ashraf away from the Iranian border. Equally, this means that the Iraqi Government is responsible for the safety and humane treatment of the residents. There must be no question of forced return of any resident to Iran and the Iraqi authorities have accepted this. The process under the UNHCR is the agreed and only means of resolving the situation at Camp Ashraf and should be adhered to.
With regard to the living conditions in Camp Hurriya, we call on the Iraqi authorities to allow all reasonable provision for the safety and comfort of the residents, including the transfer of necessary equipment and property from Camp Ashraf. In doing so, we recognise that it is the judgment of the UNHCR that Camp Hurriya is of an acceptable standard to accommodate refugees. The precise status of the camp is a matter for the UNHCR and the Iraqi authorities to decide.
I thank the Minister of State for her comprehensive reply but it did not state if we will pursue at EU level efforts to have these refugees resettled in Europe. The UN has said the camp is of an acceptable standard but I have personally heard the person who was involved in drafting that report stating it was falsified. That was my point; it is an appalling vista, should it be true. Given we are endeavouring to secure a place on the human rights council of the UN, it would be vital to take up that. I have also heard serious criticism of the UN representative but I do not have any personal knowledge about the veracity of that. It came from people who are more familiar with the situation within the European Parliament and elected representatives within the US.
On resettlement, as a country that promotes and values human rights — a core aspect of our foreign policy — we encourage it but it is the sovereign decision of individual member states as to whether they accept refugees or not. Of course we encourage others and Ireland will try to play its role but for historical and political reasons we must be sensitive. Some member states in the European Union are reluctant to accept refugees because of the character, history and make up of the PMOI. We must be sensitive to that reality while trying to pursue the objective the Senator outlines and with which I agree.
I cannot stand in the House and pronounce on the veracity or otherwise of a report. We put our trust in the United Nations as a vital multilateral institution, one which we are very involved in and often leading in the field of human rights promotion. I cannot stand over that claim, I can only say that in respect of any doubts, we will explore them. Ireland is seeking a nomination to the human rights council and we hope we will be successful in that election. If we are, we will be in a stronger position to proceed with some of these issues.
Community Employment Schemes.
I thank the Minister for coming in because I realise how busy she is. I am conscious of the hours of work she has put into resolving the outstanding issues surrounding the community employment schemes. This Adjournment matter offers the chance to debunk any scare-mongering that has taken place about doubts surrounding the Minister's own personal commitment to the community employment scheme model and the Government's commitment to those schemes. My concerns, as set out in my question to the Minister, are that there are more than 23,300 workers employed in 1,270 community employment schemes country-wide, all carrying out valuable work, training and labour activation activities.
The budget in December caused some consternation for many of the schemes because it was proposed initially that there would be a 66% cut in materials grants for the schemes, which would have rendered many of them inoperative and unsustainable. The Minister, to give credit where it is due, initiated a review of that and embarked on a wide-ranging review of the operation and funding of the schemes.
It is universally accepted that one size does not fit all, that not all schemes are the same and they do not all require the same funding or training modules. The review was initiated as far back as January. Half the year has since passed and the initial report was due at the end of March. A considerable period has passed where many of the schemes, their workers, supervisors and sponsors have been operating in limbo and they have not had much clarity on the funding model.
This evening I urge the Minister to assist us in this regard. It is imminent and the Minister has been pressing for this to be brought to a conclusion. I ask her to indicate to us this evening when we can expect the review to be concluded and what its determination will be so the schemes can proceed in a vigorous and sustainable fashion. In Laois, a total of 17 viable schemes employ more than 300 people. Like everyone else country-wide, they want to know where they stand so they can get on with their work.
I thank Senator Whelan for his kind remarks and I acknowledge and reiterate the importance of community employment in the provision of crucial services to both rural and urban communities across the country.
There are 1,143 CE schemes in operation nationally, with 23,300 places, on which there are around 22,000 participants and approximately 1,400 full-time supervisor posts. Work on these schemes covers a diverse range of activities such as child care, horticulture, social services, cultural and arts activities, IT, sports, environmental, heritage, clerical and administrative and drugs rehabilitation. The overall estimated budget will be in excess of €315 million for 2012.
Due to the current economic circumstances facing the country and the need for the Department to find substantial savings in the context of the budget, it is necessary to examine all aspects of expenditure of my Department on an ongoing basis. It was against this backdrop that the financial review of CE schemes got under way a couple of months ago. The schemes were transferred to the Department on 1 January. The main objective was to identify areas where savings could be achieved through efficiencies so that best use could be made of the available funds in the context of the important work that is done for local communities and in order that participants have a good quality experience that offers the possibility of progressing into work.
As a result of the review, significant savings have been already made to the overheads of CE projects in terms of annual insurance costs and audit fees. The savings will increase next year as some projects had already incurred these costs prior to the new arrangements being in place. Given the volume and breadth of the data being returned, the review has taken longer than anticipated to complete but it is important to point out that this has allowed more time for schemes to engage with local officials in the finalisation of their respective budgets and for the Department to bring forward improvements to the overall operation of CE which will improve the budgetary situation for schemes. We must bear in mind that 700 FÁS staff joined the Department, along with the 23,000 people on the schemes. This has been a major change under the Croke Park model.
I am happy to tell the House that the review is now complete and schemes will receive notification of their revised allocations by the end of this week from their local departmental offices.
Under the revised arrangements to be notified to sponsors, schemes will no longer be given universal amounts of financial support but instead will be provided with a specific level of support aimed at meeting the particular costs necessarily incurred by them, having regard to the overall level of funding available for community employment nationally.
As Senators will appreciate, the review is of interest and importance to the many stakeholders involved. Accordingly, I will ensure stakeholders will be able to respond to the findings.
It is worth noting that a separate labour market activation schemes policy review is under way because my Department is spending almost €1 billion on various forms of activation and employment support. This review, which is nearing completion, will also help to inform the Department's strategic approach to the schemes, including the community employment programme.
I assure Senators that the Department is committed to supporting the community employment programme and the valuable contribution it is making to the provision of services to individuals and communities. I anticipate that the employment managers involved in the schemes from the Department will contact schemes from tomorrow in regard to allocations in respect of materials and training. This will be very much influenced by the submissions made by scheme organisers. I am putting into place an appeals mechanism for scheme organisers who are unhappy with what they have received.
I thank the Minister. It is really good news that the review is concluded and that schemes will be notified as and from tomorrow. This is very important for many schemes because, although many accepted there had to be modifications and changes and that there were budgetary limitations, the lack of clarity was crippling their ability to proceed with any vigour. The development is very important.
I welcome the fact that the Minister, in her wisdom and as part of the review process, has embedded in the system an appeals process. When there is a change of structure and system and a new template, it is important that the sponsors and supervisors be given a chance, where necessary and appropriate, to make their case and appeal if they believe certain circumstances have not been taken into account. I welcome this. Could the Minister elaborate a little on the appeals process and how it will work?
As I indicated, some additional funding is being made available in regard to materials and training. Its allocation will depend on the applications made by schemes. This will be communicated by regional managers. Some schemes submitted applications referencing figures below €500 and other schemes submitted applications referencing figures above €1,000. They can apply to the regional manager initially and if they are still unhappy with the outcome, they can apply to the assistant secretary in charge of the schemes overall. Clearly, they will have to justify any application they make and show they have made savings.
One of the interesting points to emerge from the review is that many schemes were incurring heavy administration costs because there are so many companies, particularly in respect of insurance and auditing. We have changed the arrangements to make it possible to make savings. As I stated, some schemes have already entered legal commitments, and in some cases schemes are committed to quite expensive rents. We will be asking schemes to seek to re-negotiate with landlords. Savings may not be possible for some this year but it may be possible to enter the negotiation process now.
I hope we will have good outcomes. We are involved in discussions with the prototype SOLAS on the provision of training. With certain types of programmes, particularly ring-fenced ones such as those pertaining to drugs and child care, the training, education and qualifications offered are very important. We hope to improve the qualification people can obtain from such schemes. I have had an opportunity over the past few months to visit schemes around the country and meet groups of supervisors and directors of scheme sponsorship companies. I have enjoyed this very much and I was very impressed by the work taking place. We have retained all the places and supervisors. Under the current structure, there are schemes that last for one year, two years and three years. For certain categories of individual, it may be possible to extend the given period. In this regard, the position remains as it was.
I thank the Minister and Senator John Whelan. I hope there will be good news for many schemes when they receive a telephone call tomorrow. I hope there will not be many appeals.
National Internship Scheme
I thank the Minister, Deputy Joan Burton, for attending this evening. I will be brief because I am last, but not least. I am acutely aware of how busy the Minister is. I commend the Government on the JobBridge scheme and how well it is working. The six-month placement, which I have used in my company, works very well. Some employers in the private sector may have taken advantage of the JobBridge scheme. I would not like to see young interns used for an extra three months as a cheap form of employment.
I wish to discuss the opportunity I believe lies in the public sector. The internship scheme is wonderful for young people who might have been sitting at home unemployed and who are desperate to get their foot onto the first rung of the ladder. There is a great opportunity to enter internships. Some Departments are seeking extensions for their interns. This may be where a project has become bigger than envisaged or where an intern is doing so well that there is an opportunity to give him or her further work and keep him or her on for nine months, thus resulting in a superb experience for the intern. I ask the Minister to examine how JobBridge is working in the public sector and whether considerable flexibility can be allowed such that a young intern can get an extension of three months.
The national internship scheme, JobBridge, was launched on 1 July 2011. Therefore, we are approaching the first anniversary. In practice, as Senator O'Brien is probably aware, the first internships took place in September of last year. The scheme is open to organisations in the private, public and community and voluntary sectors. I thank the significant number of firms, particularly in the private sector, that offered to host interns. There has been much criticism of the scheme but, by and large, the feedback from participants has been extremely positive. Those who have monitored the scheme extensively on social media have in many ways done a public service because I do not believe they appreciated initially that the scheme is not just for graduates. When people use the phrase "intern", they often believe it pertains only to graduates. I was always very interested in having no age limit, other than that one must be over 18, and no qualification limit such that different people at different levels would be able to obtain experience. More than 15,000 employers of various kinds have offered to host interns. This indicates the pent-up interest among employers to give people an opportunity. The feedback has been positive.
The scheme provides internship opportunities of either six or nine months for unemployed individuals at all skill levels. It aims to assist individuals in breaking the cycle where they are unable to get a job without experience by providing them with an opportunity to gain valuable experience, relevant knowledge and skills within a working environment.
To date, the scheme has made significant progress. Slightly more than 8,000 internship placements have commenced since the launch of JobBridge in July 2011. Our target was to have 5,000 placements commenced within one year. While the scheme has its critics, it has clearly been popular. There are currently 4,896 interns undertaking internship placements and in excess of 2,000 internship posts are currently advertised on the JobBridge website at www.jobbridge.ie. These figures show the strong level of interest in the scheme, both from a host organisation perspective and the perspective of prospective interns.
JobBridge is the first initiative to be rolled out under the new national employment and entitlements service, NEES, which is a key commitment in the programme for Government. In assisting individuals to bridge the gap between unemployment and the world of work JobBridge provides those seeking employment with the opportunity to undertake a six or nine-month internship in a host organisation. It aims to offer individuals of all skill levels, ranging from those who left school early to highly qualified graduates, a unique opportunity to develop new skills to complement their existing skills and to earn valuable experience. I have met graduates, postgraduates and even a number of individuals with post-doctorate qualifications who are participating in the programme. On completing their internship, participants will have much improved their prospects of securing employment. In the current labour market environment JobBridge provides individuals with a unique opportunity to secure work experience in a new field and enables people to break the cycle. For instance, an internship may provide unemployed workers with skills acquired in construction, a sector which has lost many jobs, with an opportunity to try a new field.
The establishment of the national employment and entitlements service, under the management of the Department of Social Protection, is a crucial element of our improved targeting of resources for work placement, training and education for the unemployed. I am confident the service will provide the framework within which the reinvigorated national employment action plan will deliver activation policies and priorities.
The current guidelines governing JobBridge provide that a participant may avail of a placement on an internship work experience opportunity for a period of six months — 26 weeks — or nine months — 39 weeks. It is a matter for the host organisation to advertise the proposed duration of the placement, which is completely at its discretion. I understand the majority of host organisations offer the longer period of nine months or 39 weeks. Many employers have told me they would like the internships to be longer than nine months. In this context, it is important to note that an internship opportunity is intended to act as a probationary period to establish if the intern is suitable to take up a permanent role with the host organisation. It is not intended to act as a probationary period to determine if the intern is suitable to undertake a further period of internship with the same company. For this reason, host organisations need to make a decision on the duration of the internship before it commences.
Overall, it is important to note that individuals may avail of a maximum of two JobBridge internships. However, the total cumulative time may not exceed nine months or 39 weeks over the two-year period. Employers who retain JobBridge interns in paid employment, of whom there are a significant number, receive an 18-month holiday in respect of employer PRSI. This benefit appears to be little known among employers and I am anxious to ensure they become aware of the significant saving that can be made from taking on a person on a paid basis.
My Department continues to monitor and review the operation of the JobBridge scheme. We have appointed external consultants to carry out an independent evaluation of the scheme. I am anxious that all labour market activation schemes are subject to real-time evaluation. In the past, much of the evaluation of schemes occurred several years after people have completed the relevant programme. The external evaluation of JobBridge has already commenced.
Is Senator O'Brien happy with the Minister's reply?
I am extremely happy and congratulate the Minister on her professionalism and aggressive, business-like approach in having the evaluation done immediately. I agree with everything she said about the private sector. The JobBridge scheme is wide open to abuse. As an employer, I am ashamed to admit I was not aware of the PRSI holiday available to employers who permanently employ someone who completes a JobBridge internship.
The Senator will have to advertise that information.
I will start shouting about it tomorrow. We are all aware of the problems in the public service arising from the moratorium on recruitment. I have encountered cases of public service organisations taking on JobBridge interns for six months, only to find that they had sufficient work to continue the internship for a further three months. This is a wonderful experience for the intern. The Department will probably tweak the scheme after the first year. I ask the Minister not to change the position regarding the private sector but to give the public service greater flexibility in this regard. I sit on the audit committee of Kildare County Council. Given the evolution and changes under way in local and national government, it is important to reform and take different approaches. It is in that spirit that I ask the Minister to provide for a little more flexibility in the scheme. One does not always know in advance if one has nine months work for a person.
I thank Senator O'Brien for her comments. I will specifically ask for the point she raises to be addressed in the evaluation. As she noted, the embargo makes it difficult in the context of public sector placements for interns to immediately secure employment in a public organisation. Nevertheless, there is a certain placement rate because opportunities also arise in the public sector.
At the end of May we secured an additional 1,000 places on the scheme, which will increase the number of placements to 6,000. The purpose of the increase is to make provision for potential applications from lone parents and people with a disability. Some people may not be interested in the community and voluntary sector, which is where activation schemes have tended to be available for lone parents and people with a disability. However, many lone parents who became aware of opportunities in small and medium-sized businesses contacted me to express an interest in pitching for such opportunities. For this reason, we opened up the scheme at the end of last month. We will find out over the summer if this decision has resulted in lone parents and people with disabilities benefiting from many of the interesting opportunities to emerge in the small and medium-sized business sector. I expect a significant number of entrepreneurs to emerge from this process as people avail of opportunities to work with others in the development phase of a business. There is nothing to compare with acquiring experience in the business environment and using it later in one's own business, if one is so inclined.
The Seanad adjourned at 8.20 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 28 June 2012.