Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 Feb 2014

Youth Guarantee: Statements

I thank the Members of the Seanad for this opportunity to discuss the youth guarantee implementation plan. I promised the Senators that when we had the plan ready, I would be happy to come back and discuss it. I also want to thank the Members of the Seanad who made contributions during the drafting of the plan, particularly Senators Zappone and O'Donnell, who made very considered, detailed and helpful proposals on how the guarantee could be implemented.

Unemployment is the greatest economic, social and moral challenge this country faces. Our central target, as a society, has to be full employment because that is how we leave austerity in the distant past. It is how we increase tax revenue, build a viable social insurance system, reduce welfare expenditure and create room for new investment in essential services. It is how we create a more productive economy and a more caring society. It is how we make people in this society wealthier, richer and better off.

As Minister for Social Protection, I have focused on transforming the Department from the passive benefits provider of old to an active and engaged employment service through the Pathways to Work strategy. That work, and the wider Government drive to boost job creation, is now paying off. As compared with one year ago, more than 58,000 additional people are now in jobs, the vast majority of them in full-time employment. Overall unemployment has fallen from a peak of 15.1% to 12.3%, as the latest figures from the Central Statistics Office today demonstrate. That is something for us to celebrate because we are now on a par with many of the better-off European countries. While we still have a long way to go, it is a massive improvement compared with the 300,000-plus jobs the country lost in the wake of the bank guarantee and the construction collapse. Today's figures also show that the live register fell by 7% in January when compared with January of last year.

I am happy to say youth unemployment in Ireland is also falling, from a peak of over 33% to below 25% today. This downward trend is in contrast with developments in many parts of Europe where, in a number of member states, youth unemployment is running at close to 60%. However, although we have now exited the bailout and seen economic growth return, employment rise and unemployment fall significantly for young and older people, there remains a long way to go. This is especially true when it comes to youth unemployment. That is why we made tackling youth unemployment a priority of our EU Presidency in the first half of last year and achieved political agreement throughout Europe on the youth guarantee. It is why we are going to spend more than €500 million this year on providing employment, education and training opportunities for young people.

As I said at the launch of our implementation plan last week, the youth guarantee can be summed up in a single word, namely, opportunities. It is about making sure we give our young people the opportunities they need to achieve their full potential. It is about ensuring that our job activation and training system helps them achieve this potential. It is about putting in place the cultural and organisational change necessary to achieve all of this. The concept of the youth guarantee is simple enough - to ensure that all young people under the age of 25 receive a good quality offer of employment, continued education, an apprenticeship or a traineeship within four months of becoming unemployed or leaving formal education. However, it would be unwise to try to do this with the flick of a switch. While the plan we have published is ambitious in its scope, it is important to stress there is no instant or single solution to the problem of unemployed young people. It will take time and perseverance, involving ongoing investment and the sustained effort of the State, employers, unions and jobseekers alike. We need employers with a sufficient sense of social and community responsibility to play their part in the great national challenge confronting us of getting our people back to work.

As agreed at EU level, and in common with a number of other member states, the guarantee will be introduced on a phased basis in Ireland because of the financial constraints we are facing. Nonetheless, Ireland will move to implement the guarantee from a very advantageous position, as recognised by both the EU and OECD. Many of the elements that will make up the guarantee at EU level are already in place in Ireland through Pathways to Work and related strategies. These include Intreo, the transformative new employment service helping people back to work. I know many Members of the Seanad had the opportunity and took the time to go to their local Intreo office to see the new system at work, for which I thank them. The strategies also include JobBridge, which is the national internship scheme, JobsPlus, which is the wage subsidy scheme for employers, and work experience options such as Tús and Gateway.

In implementing the guarantee, we will build on these elements and continually widen them. There will be earlier and faster engagement for young people under Intreo. There will be thousands of additional places available on schemes such as JobBridge and Tús. We will reduce the amount of time a young person has to be unemployed before availing of JobsPlus. In keeping with the Government's broader focus on tackling long-term unemployment, we will first target interventions at those young people most at risk of long-term unemployment. In this way, we ensure that limited resources go towards those who are most in need.

I want now to address the Ballymun youth guarantee pilot project which, again, some Senators have taken the time to visit and are familiar with. In Ballymun, the first referrals for the project have already begun. While still at an early stage, the pilot has a vital role to play, not just for the young people of Ballymun, but in informing the development and roll-out of the national youth guarantee. Each young jobseeker we engage with will receive a guarantee of access to career guidance, leading to identification of an individual career plan, with follow-through to training, education, work experience or full-time employment.

An excellent team has been assembled to deliver the Ballymun project, and I have had an opportunity to meet the team on a number of occasions. The team includes members from the public employment service, Intreo, education and training providers, local development and youth organisations and employer and trade union representatives. I emphasise that such team work will be crucial to the success of the youth guarantee at a national level.

I am pleased to say there has been a significant commitment from employers, both locally and in Dublin city more generally. Next month, an employers meeting will be co-hosted by IBEC and the Dublin Chamber of Commerce to facilitate the active participation of the business sector in the pilot scheme. I cannot stress how vital this is. The Department, with the assistance and advice of the Labour Market Council, will seek to replicate this employer buy-in right across the country. The support and willingness of employers to give our young people a chance will be critical to the youth guarantee's success. Of course, it will also be critical to employers' future business success because, like everybody else, they depend on our young people for their future.

The Department, through the transformation from passive benefits provider to active and engaged public employment service, is perfectly placed to assist employers with their needs. To give just one example, last July we established an employer incentive scheme, JobsPlus, which is essentially a wage subsidy for employers.

Under this scheme, we provide cash grants to employers to help them meet the costs of hiring people who have been unemployed for more than 12 months. In the short few months since it was launched, JobsPlus has helped to create 1,286 new full-time jobs. The scheme is facilitating people to leave the live register and go to work. We are working in partnership with employers through the provision of a wage subsidy, something which has proved effective in countries with low levels of unemployment such as Austria and Germany. The creation of 1,286 full-time jobs in the short period during which the scheme has been in existence is a good outcome.

We hope many more people will avail of the scheme in the coming months. Participating employers have recognised the scheme's potential and acknowledged the calibre of people coming off the live register. There are many people in this country, both young and older and many of them highly educated, who lost their jobs through no fault of their own. They include people who, during the construction boom, went out every day with the dawn and worked until the sun went down. There is no lack of appetite for work or capacity to work among people on the live register. In the coming months, I hope many more employers will throw their weight behind both JobsPlus and the broader youth guarantee implementation plan. This will allow us to accelerate the pace at which we can get people of all ages back to work.

I have consistently stated that a fiscal response to the economic crisis could never be enough. There must also be a social and whole-of-community approach. The youth guarantee is a key element of that social response, which puts young people - the future of this country - front and centre.

I welcome the Minister. It would be churlish not to echo her enthusiastic response to the Central Statistics Office figures released this morning. Any reduction in the overall unemployment rate is to be welcomed and it is good to see that we are coming closer to the European average. Looking at our near neighbours in the United Kingdom, however, where the unemployment rate is a little over 7%, it is clear we still have a long way to go. Moreover, looking at the other side of the account book, so to speak, the numbers of young, talented people who continue to leave this country are a cause for concern. I hope the CSO figures to April of last year, which will be published in the coming months, will show a reduction in that outflow. The hope must be that the reduction in the unemployment figure is real and not simply an illusion created by continuing high levels of emigration.

In regard to the youth guarantee implementation plan, my colleague in the other House, Deputy Willie O'Dea, observed in a statement issued today:

One of the central planks of implementing the youth guarantee is having Intreo [in place], which is a new one-stop-shop for the unemployed where they can receive information on retraining and employment services, with offices [to be] established in towns and cities all over the country. [However] Cork city, for instance, has no Intreo office. How can the Government pledge to implement the youth guarantee with such a major part of the plan incomplete?

Deputy O'Dea points out that there are approximately 300 employment service officers, ESOs, in place in the Department of Social Protection to cater for the 315,000 people on the live register, equating to 1,000 people for every ESO. How can the Government promise to tackle youth unemployment with such a scarcity of resources?

I understand the Minister has admitted that the Department will be unable to provide training or unemployment for more than half of those aged under 25 on the live register. The National Youth Council of Ireland has pointed out that recent figures which do not include the data released today, show 41,453 young people have been on the live register for six months or more. On the basis of the Swedish figures, the council estimates it would cost €273 million to implement the youth guarantee in Ireland. Given that scale of funding, it is more likely the scheme will be phased in over several years.

I am interested in the Minister's view on the amount of money being allocated under the European Social Fund and how much of it the Department expects to secure. I understand that every €1 allocated from Europe under that programme must be matched by €1 from the Exchequer. I agree with the National Youth Council of Ireland's assessment that the youth guarantee scheme can work in this country. I also agree, however, that it must, as the council argues, be properly resourced to ensure we have sufficient high-quality education, training and job experience places and the staff to provide job counselling and guidance. There are question marks over these requirements. In addition, the council argues that the Government must provide job subsidies and incentives to employers to encourage them to take on young people under the scheme.

I confess that with so many initiatives being introduced, I am beginning to lose track of exactly what the protocols and requirements are in each case. In the case of JobsPlus, is there a time limit on placements or are they open ended?

They are for two years.

The scheme has already been proven to some degree. Likewise, there has been some success with JobBridge.

To clarify, the JobsPlus subsidy is given for two years and paid on a monthly basis after every month of employment.

I thank the Minister. It is also true, however, that the anecdotal evidence suggests that employers are taking advantage of the JobBridge initiative, with people being let go at the end of the placement period.

The JobsPlus scheme has only just commenced.

I appreciate that. However, what is happening with JobBridge is a cause for concern. I have seen cases where small businesses take on a large number of JobBridge people, but there is no guarantee that any of them will be kept on when their placement is finished.

Returning to the question of funding for the youth guarantee scheme, the National Youth Council of Ireland points out that there is strong support for the provision of a significant portion of the next round of EU social funding to tackle youth unemployment and support the implementation of initiatives such as the youth guarantee. Will the Minister comment on that? The idea behind the guarantee is that support would be offered to young people within four months of their becoming unemployed. There has been a suggestion, however, that the Department might extend that eligibility period out to nine months because of a lack of resources and the shortage of available training places. In a situation where 45,000 people are eligible for the scheme but only some 22,000 training and education places will be made available, how does the Minister propose to address the shortfall of 22,000 plus places? We are talking about more than 20,000 people who will not be offered a place under the scheme and will have to rely on a vastly reduced jobseeker's payment. I hope the Minister can offer some assurance in this regard.

I welcome the Minister to the House to discuss this very welcome and important implementation plan. A failure to reverse the tide of youth emigration and unemployment would mean allowing our brightest and best to depart, possibly for ever, and would denude the country of its future leaders in every sphere of life. Several stark statistics illustrate the extent of the challenge the Government is facing. Over the past five years, the number of people between the ages of 15 and 24 in employment fell by a staggering 60% and the youth unemployment rate nearly trebled to 33%. In the three years following the economic crash, some 10% of our youth population emigrated . Although youth emigration has recently stabilised and youth unemployment has begun to fall, as reflected in this morning's CSO figures, the Minister has rightly pointed out that much more needs to be done.

In that regard, I welcome the publication of the youth guarantee implementation plan and the opportunity to discuss the matter here today. I compliment the officials who drew up this comprehensive document and am particularly grateful for the statistical analysis contained therein. I note that the National Youth Council of Ireland has given a broad welcome to the plan, while expressing some concerns - concerns I share - regarding the resource base behind it. Can the Minister provide a breakdown of the new resources committed to this particular programme? I note the detailed chart outlining proposed Exchequer expenditure on the plan. Will the Minister clarify whether there will be roll-over from other programmes plus additional funding or a new dedicated stream of funding?

The Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport indicated in this House that estimated expenditure on programmes providing employment, training and further education opportunities for young people will be in excess of €500 million in 2014.

This appears to be an overall figure, which includes new, existing and EU funding. In that regard, perhaps we could obtain an indication regarding when the Irish application for funding under the EU youth employment initiative will be made. Perhaps it might be possible to obtain clarity in respect of this matter.

I am fully cognisant of the fact that resource constraints apply and that we will be obliged to implement the plan on a phased basis because available funds do not allow for immediate and full implementation. If, however, some indication of how the programme is currently being funded is provided, this would be of great assistance in mapping its future. For example, is the Minister in a position to supply an update on the location and number of Intreo offices countrywide? Are there any plans to increase the number of employment service officers in the Department? The plan indicates that caseworker costs are not included and it is stated that the experience during the first period of the plan will indicate the additional caseworker requirement. I welcome the proposal to involve local and community groups in the registration process. Would it be possible for the Minister, who referred to the pilot project in Ballymun, to provide additional details in this regard? Have the Minister or her Department identified any particular groups in respect of this matter and have any of these been approached? I accept that she probably dealt with this matter to some extent during her opening contribution.

On a more general note, the EU youth guarantee requires that a young person is to be given a good quality offer of employment. Is there some baseline or criterion which will be used to deem whether such an offer is of good quality. Is there an in-built measurement system similar to that relating to the Action Plan for Jobs in the context of key performance indicators and specific deadlines by which certain actions must take place? If such a system exists and if there is departmental oversight in this regard, then it would spur matters on to an enormous degree and give rise to increased public confidence.

The announcement of this plan is very positive for young people. I compliment the Minister, her officials and the Government on the straightforward way in which it is laid out. I wish the Minister every success with it.

I welcome the Minister and thank her for keeping the commitment she made during the debate on the social welfare legislation to accede to my request for a discussion on this plan. I also thank my colleague, Senator O'Donnell, for her very informative report.

I welcome the plan. This is the first occasion since the advent of the financial crisis that a comprehensive plan bringing together all the elements to tackle youth unemployment has been produced. We should acknowledge the role the Minister has played in this regard, both in terms of her brief and in the context of her personal commitment to youth employment. It is extremely positive that a concerted effort will now be made to support young people from unemployment to education, training and work experience.

During the debate on the social welfare legislation, we engaged in a lengthy discussion on youth unemployment. As a result, I will use the time available to pose some very specific questions on the youth guarantee. I fully support the decision to commence the engagement process relating to the youth guarantee with the 22,000 young people who have been on the live register for 12 months or more. This makes sense. May we take it that these young people will be offered quality and appropriate educational, training or work experience placements by the end of 2014? If that were made clear, it would send out a great message to people.

I welcome the personal progression plans and the focus and early intervention for young people with a low probability of exiting the live register, PEX, score. There is a need for a two-way process between case officers and young people. Will there be a commitment to changing focus from needs of education and training providers to those of the unemployed and local labour markets? A greater number of and more intensive engagements can only happen if sufficient case workers are available. Is the Minister in a position to provide details with regard to the number of case officers and hours that will be assigned to the youth guarantee in 2014 and 2015? It is not clear from the youth guarantee implementation plan how much of the education-training provision is existing and how much will be new. This is important because it is clear, in view of demand, that merely rearranging the existing provision will not be sufficient. Will the Minister indicate, particularly in the context of education and training, where new provision will be available? I welcome the changes to schemes such as JobsPlus, particularly as these will allow employers to take on young people and obtain the wage subsidy for those under 25 who are on low to medium PEX scores and who have been unemployed for four months rather than being obliged to wait for 12 months. This is a welcome initiative and I thank the Minister for putting it in place.

The Minister correctly pointed out that some of the targets are ambitious. I was very happy when I discovered that the expected number of new JobBridge places for young people is set at 5,000 for 2014. Given that 6,000 young people under 25 have participated on the scheme since July 2011, however, this means that the Department proposes to almost reach in one year a target it previously took two and a half years to achieve. Will the Minister provide further information in respect of this matter and on the proposed JobBridge scheme for disadvantaged youth? I am interested in the latter but I would welcome additional detail in respect of it. I welcome the strong focus in the plan on disadvantage. Those in this category are often missed by plans of this nature because we tend to go for the low-hanging fruit and forget about that which is difficult to reach. I am disappointed that the opportunity to harness the capacity of the youth work sector in the context of supporting the implementation of the guarantee has been missed. I know the Minister has had some very positive meetings with representatives from the National Youth Council of Ireland and other youth work organisations on this issue. The reality is, however, that it will be challenging for State agencies to reach and engage with young people who are most disadvantaged. This is because those agencies lack the connections into the community that those youth sector already have in place. As already stated, the plan represents a missed opportunity and this regard and perhaps it might be possible to review the position that has been adopted.

The Minister may be able to answer some of the questions I have posed now. Perhaps she might respond in respect of the others at the earliest opportunity. I thank her for her vision, commitment and proposal to drive the youth guarantee forward. We are focusing on the right area and my questions are intended to achieve the results we all want to achieve.

I welcome the Minister. I also welcome the figures released by the CSO this morning. It is great to see that they are moving in the right direction. I thank the Minister for the work she has done in bringing this scheme to fruition. I am aware that she has done a great deal of work, both at home and in Europe, to ensure that the scheme would be introduced here. The scheme was piloted in Ballymun and it will now be rolled out nationally.

I welcome the reduction in the level of youth unemployment in Ireland from 33% to 25%. Of course, the figure remains much too high. While job creation is once again on the rise, we cannot ignore the fact that emigration has placed a role in the achievement of the reduction to which I refer. The negative social impact of unemployment on the well-being of young people, their families and communities is incalculable. We must put a halt to the brain drain that is emigration. I appreciate that there will always be some level of emigration. Even in the boom times young people left in order to experience different cultures and find work abroad. However, they were always able to return because there was something for them to come home to. Unfortunately, young people are now being forced to emigrate in order to find work because they cannot obtain employment here. It is imperative that we create jobs in order that they might return.

The youth guarantee scheme must be properly resourced in order to ensure that high-quality educational, training and job opportunities will be created. The staff necessary to provide the intensive job counselling and guidance that will be required must be appointed. A recent study revealed the economic loss to society of not integrating young jobseekers throughout the EU is estimated at €153 billion. We face a stiff challenge in the context of providing a sufficient number of places for young people who are out of work. The most recent figures indicate that 42,000 of those under 25 years of age have been out of work for four months or more. It must be remembered Rome was not built in a day. It will take time and perseverance in order to make the scheme a success and the co-operation of all stakeholders - the State, employers, unions and jobseekers - is going to be required in that regard.

I welcome the fact that the Minister and her colleague, the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, are working together to deliver training and education places. However, I have serious concerns in this regard.

I have serious concerns in this regard because delivering education and training places in large urban areas is completely different from delivering such places in rural areas. For example, if a person aged under 25 years who receives a social welfare payment of €100 per week decides to return to education, the back-to-education allowance would not even cover the cost of transport from the Dingle or Iveragh peninsulas to the Institute of Technology, Tralee, which is the only third level facility in County Kerry. If he or she wished to move to Cork or Dublin, it would be difficult to meet the cost of accommodation. The Minister for Education and Skills has a role to play in this regard. Let us take the case of a person aged under 25 years who has completed a course at third level but has been unable to find a job in the area of his or her competence and decides to retrain. In such circumstances, he or she will face the prospect of paying fees on the basis that he or he received a grant or free fees for the previous course. The Minister should consider introducing an exemption for such persons under the youth guarantee.

I had hoped to speak about the JobBridge scheme, which has been reasonably successful, with 60% of those who have completed the scheme subsequently finding employment. In some cases, however, employers who take on a person under the scheme subsequently reduce the number of hours of their full-time employees. As such, the costs of full-time employees are reduced and the company benefits from having an unpaid employee under the JobBridge scheme. We need to be mindful of this unfair practice. Furthermore, if a company takes on two interns and does not provide one job at the end of their internships, it should be precluded from taking on further interns. In addition, Government jobs should not be offered to interns because they have no prospect of being recruited subsequently as an embargo on recruitment in the public sector remains in place.

The Senator should conclude.

On the Order of Business this morning, Senators asked for more time for this debate. Confining contributions to five minutes curtails those of us who wish to speak on the many issues that arise under this topic. I ask the Minister to consider returning to the House for a further discussion because many of the Senators who would like to contribute to the debate are unable to do because discussion has been limited to one hour. I would appreciate if the Minister were to agree to come before us for another hour or two in the coming weeks.

I am appalled that the Seanad is not packed. When the Pathways to Work scheme was announced the other day there was not enough seating available for members of the press. I cannot understand the reason the Chamber is not full. I will not call a quorum as it would draw attention to the absence of so many Senators. All Senators should be in the Chamber because the most important issue facing society is our young people. I refer to our undergraduates, postgraduates, school leavers, early school leavers, those who did not have educational opportunities and those who do not have work, as well as all those aged in their 30s, 40s and 50s who have lost their jobs. This is a mammoth problem and I congratulate the Minister on a the mammoth task she has done in trying to bring all of the stakeholders together to create some kind of a pathway, bridge or platform for education, training and experience and bring people back into employment. Her work cannot be underestimated. I am appalled, therefore, that the Chamber is virtually empty.

Senator Mooney, a man among women today, cited statistics that are one year old.

I indicated that the figures could be-----

I am appalled that the Seanad is not packed as this debate deals with an issue that affects everybody in every constituency and every walk of life.

The Pathways to Work document, the OECD report and the large number of other reports all of us have read say all that needs to be said on this issue. I will make only a few points, therefore. I have a question on the programmes that are being offered to those who have been unemployed for four months or nine months. These programmes range from initial engagement to record keeping, progression plans, progress in education and training and so forth. How many staff will be needed? Are the resources required to bring this about being made available?

I have written previously on the issue of apprenticeships. Apprenticeships are offered in 384 occupational areas in Germany, 170 occupations in the United Kingdom and only 26 occupational areas in Ireland, although the number is being increased. The Minister for Education and Skills received 76 submissions on the apprenticeship model as part of his review. It was amazing to read the list of those who made submissions. It included the Forestry Service, the Crafts Council, the ESB, Bord Gáis, the Heritage Council and the technology, hospitality, hotels, engineering, furniture design and accountancy industries. A wide range of organisations submitted ideas on apprenticeships. I will cite one submission made by Forestry Ireland. It is probably not well known that the output from forestry in 2008 was valued at €1.89 billion, 3,700 people are directly employed in forestry and 2,500 people are employed in saw milling, panel board manufacturing and so forth. Forestry Ireland's submission states the following:

At present, there is a lack of any structured, formalised and nationally accredited system of workplace training for forestry workers employed within the Irish forestry sector. Such systems are widespread across Europe and are a recognised, effective and respected way for new workers to begin a career path within the forestry sector or for existing workers to formalise their status within the industry.

I am firm believer in apprenticeships and a strong opponent of a caste system in education. There is something brilliant about vocational education and it is a good way to go. I referred previously to using the gateway project for this purpose but the Government is not using that method. One could go through the submissions to find out about issues such as inland fisheries, national landscapes, wildlife, national parks, maintenance, water, seashores and so forth. There are thousands of ways this could be used.

I have a question on the resources in place to bring about education, training and experience. There is nothing wrong with being aspirational and I know the Ballymun pilot project is a good one. Are there other projects in place? How will the Department cope with this? The Minister is a great Minister. We have a wonderful opportunity to be creative and establish a pilot project in one or more counties, which involves construction, surveying, flora, fauna, engineering, surrounds, the environment, plants, marketing and communications. We should take something that involves all of these experiences, vocations and vocational education and training and use it as a vehicle. I made this suggestion in a report and while it may be too creative, in some senses, we have nothing to lose.

I congratulate the Minister because this is the beginning of an attempt to come to terms with this issue. One of the most important aspects of my work as a Senator is to try to link into what the Minister is doing in creating possibilities and positive outcomes for young people, without whom we will not go anywhere.

I will not make a statement but instead take advantage of the Minister's presence in the House to ask a series of questions. I will throw myself into it in the hope she will be able to answer as many of my questions as possible. Perhaps she will revert to me after the debate if she is unable to answer some of my questions.

The Minister stated the concept of the youth guarantee is "to ensure that all young people under the age of 25 receive a good quality offer of employment, continued education, an apprenticeship or a traineeship within four months of becoming unemployed or leaving formal education." Social welfare rates have been cut for people aged under 26 years. People have raised a concern that a person aged 25 whose social welfare payment has been cut may not have access to the youth guarantee and some of the schemes.

It applies to those aged under 26 years, that is, until the end of a person's 25th year.

I thank the Minister for her response. This issue was raised with me in conversation with a representative of a youth organisation. Another issue that was raised with me - previous speakers also alluded to it - relates to numbers. Will the Minister clarify how many of the places are new and how many are being rolled over? The document provides a breakdown of the funding for the youth guarantee. How much of this is added value?

For example, if we exclude the turnover that is already happening naturally, what is new for those who are already participating in these courses? Does the Minister have an idea of how much funding will be drawn down from European funding? Perhaps another document with more statistics and figures in that regard could be provided.

I would like to speak about the initial engagement with disadvantaged youth, which is an issue I consider to be important. In that context, a footnote on page 18 of the Minister's document provides that "where there are indications that there are any significant groups of young people in difficulty not covered in this way [the public employment services and through Intreo], alternative ways of reaching these young people (e.g. through Youth Work approaches) will be explored". The pilot in Ballymun is concerned with young people on the live register. The Commission has recommended that there should be an alternative defining point for young people who are not registered with the public employment services. Page 17 of the Minister's document suggests that "a system will be developed and implemented to ensure that all post primary schools give contact details for early school leavers to the relevant Education and Training Board for early follow up on alternative education and training options". How will that happen if the pilot will be confined to those on the live register? Is that happening already? Can the Minister give any practical examples of that? Will this be evaluated? What benchmarks and targets will be used in any evaluation of this? What indicators will be used? Who will be reviewing this?

I have attended many informal meetings with youth groups in recent weeks. I met a youth group - St. Michael's Youth Project - and a young mothers' group in Inchicore. Page 8 of this report notes that "among inactive NEETs [those not in employment, education or training] aged 18-24, almost 60% are carers - primarily young women aged 22-24 who describe themselves as looking after children". The members of the group I met in Inchicore told me that access to child care is a barrier for them if they try to go into education, training or employment. What can be done to try to square the circle in this regard and ensure these young women are able to take up any places that might be open to them? When I met a Tús scheme supervisor in a rural area, he told me that the days of placing people in the right placement are gone. I know that the personal plan approach represents an attempt to put young people in courses that suit their skills and career paths. He made the interesting point that if he was to place a young man in his group on a course he wanted to go on, and which would give him future employment, it would account for the entire budget of €1,000 that is available for the entire cohort of 20 participants in that group and some other people in the group could lose out as a result. How would these personalised plans deal with such constraints? What will happen if a course is found to suit a young person, but the budget is not big enough to enable him or her to avail of that opportunity? The Minister has already responded to one of my points, but maybe she will answer the other questions I have asked.

When my officials receive the transcript of this debate, I will try to ensure more detailed replies are provided to those Senators who have made specific requests for information and made particular points. I will make a few general remarks about the position of young people in Ireland. As Senators will have seen, the secondary school completion rate in Ireland has reached 90%, which is a tremendous national achievement. People often complain about teachers, but it is a great tribute to those involved in education in Ireland that so many young people are now staying on in school until 18 or 18 and a half years of age. Many of our young people are in education and will complete their leaving certificate. Our school completion rate of 90% is one of the highest of any country. The school completion programme, which is in place as we speak in areas where young people are inclined to leave school early, is very important. We will be following that process from an educational point of view in the hope of keeping young people in school and ensuring they complete their leaving certificates, at least.

I would like to take up one of Senator O'Donnell's points. If young people are to take up apprenticeships and traineeships, they need a good basic level of education. It is clear from the experience in countries like Austria, Germany and Finland, which have low levels of youth unemployment, that participation in a wide variety of educational and other opportunities and pathways is critical. As most Senators know, no one thing will address the needs of everybody. It is a question of having a series of different options. Some Senators, including Senator Mooney, will appreciate that those young people who leave school at 16 years of age are almost always the same people who are most at risk of long-term unemployment. As we speak, we have an adequacy of places on the Youthreach and community training schemes.

I was asked how many Intreo offices have been rolled out so far. The Intreo system is in operation in between 45 and 50 social welfare offices throughout the country. A large number of them have been converted. There are issues in a number of places, including Cork city. As Senators probably know, requests have been made over the last ten years for more and better social welfare offices to supplement the existing facilities. That process, which involves the OPW, has been fairly protracted. I am constantly involved in efforts to sort out supplementary provision in Cork sooner rather than later. The fact of the matter is that we are in the hands of the OPW in that respect. Many of the Intreo processes are under way in Cork. I have been in the social welfare office in Cork on a number of occasions. I have to say that in Cork and right around the country, the staff of the Intreo offices and the social welfare system in general have participated enthusiastically in this process. The next Intreo office that is due to be opened, in honour of the Cathaoirleach, is in Castlebar. I assume the Taoiseach and the Cathaoirleach will be there to celebrate that. It is very important because it is not just a question of the offices. Perhaps Senator O'Donnell will come home to Mayo for that day as well.

She was down there last weekend.

She would be very welcome. I will send her a personal invitation, or I am sure the Taoiseach will. The Intreo initiative involves a physical overhaul of the offices, which will give people more privacy, and significant information technology changes. The Cathaoirleach is now probably familiar with those changes, which allow for claims to be processed much more rapidly. When one goes into an Intreo office, there is a general reception area where one can get all the forms and information. The office in Killarney has been in operation for almost a year and a half.

It is going great.

I am sure the Senator will agree that it has transformed the social welfare experience. We are converting it into a public employment service. An Intreo-serviced office is a place where people can get income supports, including jobseeker's payments, but it is primarily a place where everybody can be placed on the first step back to work, education or training. I hope this service can be rolled out in all of the principal offices throughout the country by the end of the year. It will depend on the OPW, but that is our target. We were on target at the end of December. I hope we will have converted most of the offices by the end of next December. The key thing is to profile the prediction of exit.

We take details of people's levels of education, where they have previously worked and what they earned. Based on that, we get a prediction of their likely exit from the live register, in many cases through getting a job. If you have young and highly qualified and experienced IT graduates whose work premises has, unfortunately, closed down, given the shortage of such people, it is very likely that they will be able to find a job in a relatively short period of time. Therefore, their spell of unemployment is likely to be short rather than protracted. If one takes those who possibly left school early on, signed on when they were 18, possibly built up two or three years where they have not worked and have relatively light qualifications, one would probably not be surprised that what might be essential here is to have educational and training assistance to help them get even an entry-level job in today's employment market. It is a process that is person-centred.

This year, we will double the number of case officers, as I advised Deputy O'Dea during the last Question Time involving the Department of Social Protection. Is that enough and would I like more? Yes, of course, I would like more but our resources are constrained and it is better to build up the system than say we will hold everything until we have a perfect set of resources in place. We submitted our proposals to the European Commission in early to mid-December in more detailed form that I have outlined to Senators. We anticipate that the Commission will come back to Ireland by the middle of this month and that this will enable us to have a more firm understanding of what we are likely to draw down. Due to the fact that Ireland had a much higher level of youth unemployment when the benchmark dates were set than we have now when it has fallen below 25%, we are still allowed to use the figures from 2011 to 2012 when the level was much higher as our benchmark. That should allow us to fast-forward some of the European funding. Those Senators who have dealt with European social funds will know that this process is complex and very demanding in terms of what one must fill in and one gets the money in arrears. I hope that in respect of European funds plus Irish additional funding, we would have an additionality amounting to €100 million per year. When we get the confirmation from the Commission, we will be in a better position to give the House a more finalised item. There is a cash flow element because by and large, European funding is recovered after about two years.

I stress the personal element. This is what is interesting about the Ballymun project, which is a European pilot. There is a series of pilots in other countries. Every unemployed person is an individual. Statisticians can group all the characteristics and give statistics but every young person is their own self. We hope to have services that are generalised but also personalised. I have seen in Ballymun how very disadvantaged young people who have not worked much will get support and help that builds up their confidence. The co-operation of employers and the SOLAS service is incredibly important. Before Christmas, the Department ran the first pilot scheme in the Cabra-Finglas area and north County Dublin with the supermarket chain Tesco. Tesco took on a number of trainees whom it interviewed. The people involved got an educational module of some period of time via Coláiste Dhúlaigh. Out of that, they got a FETAC level 4 qualification in retail. As part of their module, they also got work experience in warehousing logistics, which is obviously very big in terms of the supermarket industry, and worked in some of the Tesco branches. Out of that, up to one third of the young people were offered employment. Tesco now hopes to roll this out nationally.

I will address the JobBridge programme in Kildare. Again, I will make the details available to Senators. A number of the other supermarkets such as the Musgrave Group have training in retail excellence programmes. Different organisations offer training at different levels. In respect of JobBridge, a number of people spoke at an event where a supermarket took on some people on JobBridge. Some of them have gone into management while some are managing the delicatessen side of the operations, which is a big area in local large supermarkets. Based on the feedback from the people involved who were previously unemployed, some of whom had been in construction and changed field, the experience has been so positive for them on a personal level and very positive for the employers. We constantly monitor JobBridge. Where Senators or anybody else bring forward any criticisms, we always investigate. About 9,000 organisations have hosted JobBridge opportunities. It is not for everybody. It is a voluntary scheme. We have had about 4,400 site visits to monitor organisations offering JobBridge places.

There is a difficulty with respect of the embargo in the public sector. Based on my experience, a good quality work experience that is well-mentored, be it in the private or public sector, SME or voluntary or community organisation, is so important even if the organisation cannot guarantee to subsequently employ the person possibly because of funding issues. I know there was some comment recently about advertisements for JobBridge intern posts for PhDs. This is a question about our education system. Senator O'Donnell has worked in this sector. It is very sad to come across a PhD student who has had no work experience. If one has a very large gap on one's CV because one has been unemployed - this applies to any age - or has never worked, it is quite difficult to convince an employer that one is a person of serious calibre who will really contribute to their business. That is the job we must do. None of the schemes we offer, be it back to education, community employment, Tús which I started from zero or JobBridge, is perfect for everybody. We must find different ways. JobsPlus is a very important and generous incentive that is paid each month in arrears for each month that the person has been unemployed. The person must leave the live register so it has to be a sufficient enough job for them to do that. The employer is paid by electronic funds transfer the month after for up to two years of employment. Somebody asked whether this is a job for life.

Relatively few jobs, unfortunately, are guaranteed jobs for life. However, experience builds experience in a job. My time is concluded and there have been many questions from Senators. I will endeavour to provide replies to Senators.

I ask if the Minister could circulate those replies to all other Members.

If I may suggest to the Cathaoirleach that another discussion could be arranged. I agree with Senator O'Donnell and Senator Moloney that this is a very important issue and perhaps we can agree to return to it in a couple of months when we will have more confirmation from the European Commission as to what it will commit to Ireland.

I suggest that Senators call to their local social welfare office, talk to the manager, introduce themselves, tell the manager I sent him or her and take a tour of the facilities. The Dundalk office is the local office for Senator Reilly's area. It has been fully converted as are a number of other offices in the Dublin area and in the larger cities and towns. The Senators are invited to see the system at work. They will find that the newly-converted offices provide a much better experience for clients. I hope that people are dealt with in a much more considered way with a good quality service. There is more privacy which is an important issue because people are discussing difficult issues to do with losing a job. The information system for advertisement of job vacancies means we can provide what employers want. Appropriately qualified or experienced applicants can be sent for interview because it is the employer who has the final say.

That concludes statements on the youth guarantee. When is it proposed to sit again?

At 2.30 p.m next Tuesday.

Top
Share