Written Answers Nos. 81-100
81. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Education and Skills the procedure to be followed to facilitate an interdepartmental transfer for civil servants of middle rank wishing to transfer to alternative Departments for whatever reason; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28668/14]
View answerThere are a number of procedures in place for civil servants to transfer between Departments.1) Redeployment If the Department determines that in accordance with its Employment Control Framework target, it has surplus staff, it can place officers on the Resource Panel for redeployment to another Department or Agency in accordance with the Redeployment toolkit.In addition, an officer can submit an application for any redeployment or secondment opportunities which are advertised by this Departments HR Unit from time to time.2) TransferAn officer can apply for a transfer to another Department either by - The Central Applications Facility (CAF) for decentralised locations (www.publicjobs.ie) - A letter sent through this Departments HR Unit for non-decentralised locations3) Head-to-Head TransferAn officer can seek a head-to-head transfer via their Staff Representative Associations magazine.
82. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Education and Skills the actions his Department has taken to address the delay in the publication of the findings of the research project referred to as Project IRIS which was commissioned by the National Council for Special Education in 2008 and which is still not available six years later; and if he will have major concerns about such a long unexplained delay, especially in view of his request for input from the NCSE to drafting his policy on educating children with autism and where he has previously indicated that the NCSE has advised his Department that the policy advice would be delivered in spring 2015. [28677/14]
View answerThe research project to which the Deputy refers is the Inclusive Research in Irish Schools Project (Project IRIS). This National Council for Special Education (NCSE) commissioned research is a longitudinal study initially over 3 years examining the provision of special education within schools. The aim of the project is to look at the educational experiences and outcomes of students with a variety of special educational needs in various school settings. It was expected that the report would be published late last year but was delayed at review stage. NCSE has advised that they expect to have it published before the end of this year and I have no major concerns in this regard.
Separately as the Deputy is aware I have asked the NCSE to provide policy advice specifically on the educational provision for children with autism spectrum disorders. The NCSE has advised that the policy advice will be delivered in the spring of 2015 and will draw upon findings gathered from an extensive consultation process which has already commenced.
83. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Education and Skills further to Parliamentary Question No. 273 of 13 May 2014, if he will ensure the pamphlet, to which he made reference, when published, will include a list of all interventions currently approved by his Department for use in educating children with autism; and if not, the reason such a list is not currently available to parents of children with autism. [28678/14]
View answer84. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Education and Skills further to Parliamentary Question No. 274 of 13 May 2014, wherein he advised that the information pamphlet regarding the education of children with autism was at an advanced stage and would be published shortly by the National Council for Special Education in consultation with his officials; the reason this pamphlet has not been published; and the date upon which it is now expected to be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28679/14]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 83 and 84 together.
I am pleased to inform the Deputy that the National Council Special Education (NCSE) has advised that final preparations are underway for the printing and publication of the information pamphlet for parents/guardians of children with autism. The pamphlet could not be published until this preparation was completed.
As previously outlined the aim of this pamphlet is to inform parents and guardians of supports and services available for children and young people with autism spectrum disorder and their families. It will provide a general overview of available supports and services rather than the detail mentioned in his question.
My Department's position is that, as each child with autism is unique, they should have access to a range of different approaches to meet their individual needs. As children differ significantly from one another and as children's needs vary and change over time, it is not possible to impose a method or approach that will work for all children with autism. There is not an exhaustive list of approaches or interventions which can be accessed to support the education of children with autism as new approaches continue to emerge.
As the Deputy is aware the NCSE is currently preparing policy advice on the education of children with autism. Their report which is due in 2015 will identify the nature and extent of educational intervention/s, teaching practices and other supports which should be provided to enable children with autism to achieve educational outcomes appropriate to their needs and abilities and will inform future policy development.
85. Deputy John O'Mahony asked the Minister for Education and Skills the reason a pupil (details supplied) in County Sligo with special needs is being denied school transport to the school they are attending when there is no place available for them at a school nearer to their residence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28682/14]
View answerThe general approach to the provision of school transport is that application is made on behalf of a child at the commencement of their primary and post primary education cycle. At that point, a decision is made in relation to eligibility. Again, the general approach is that transport is provided to the child's nearest school subject to compliance with the distance criteria.
In the case of children with special educational needs eligibility for school transport is to the nearest school that is, or is capable of being resourced, to meet the educational needs of that child. It is important to stress that once eligibility is correctly determined, that eligibility remains for the duration of the child's education in that school. In practice this means that there is not an annual application process but that the initial decision to grant eligibility remains in place.
In the case in question, the child was eligible for school transport to the nearest school resourced to meet the educational needs of the child. The parents, as was their prerogative, opted to send the child to a more distant school. At the time of this decision there was a place available for the child at the nearest school and the parents chose not to avail of it. The consequence of this was that school transport eligibility was not available under the scheme to the more distant school.
The fact that the enrolment position of the nearer school has subsequently changed is not relevant, as eligibility under the scheme is determined at the point the child commences school. Indeed to adopt a different approach would logically require an annual review of all cases where parents opt to send the child to a school other than their nearest with a view to granting school transport in circumstances where the nearer school has subsequently become full.
86. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Education and Skills following the winding down of All Hallows College Dublin, if he will ensure that all current BA degree students are facilitated to complete their full degree and that this important adult learning degree, which responds to the complex requirements of adult learners providing them with a second chance degree level education, continues into the future. [28712/14]
View answerThe position is that All Hallows College is a private college and is not an approved institution under the Higher Education Authority (HEA). It does not receive core funding, however, my Department provides grant in lieu of tuition fee funding to the College in respect of three approved undergraduate courses. This funding amounted to over €430,000 for the 2013/14 academic year.
My Department does not have a role in the placement of students in any third level institution and decisions regarding courses to be run are matters for individual institutions as autonomous bodies. I welcome the fact that the college has stated that it intends to wind down on a phased basis in order to facilitate as much as possible the completion of current students' studies.
87. Deputy Martin Heydon asked the Minister for Education and Skills if he will review the case for retention of a third teacher at a school (details supplied) in County Kildare which will have the required number of pupils in September 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28736/14]
View answerThe criteria used for the allocation of teaching posts for the 2014/2015 school year is set out in the Staffing Schedule (Circular 0007/2014) which is available on the Department website. The key factor for determining the level of staffing resources provided at individual school level is the staffing schedule for the relevant school year and pupil enrolments on the 30 September 2013. The staffing schedule also includes an appeals mechanism for schools to submit an appeal under certain criteria to an independent Appeals Board. Details of the criteria for appeal are contained in the staffing schedule, Circular 0007/2014.
The school referred to by the Deputy submitted an application for consideration by the Appeals Board for the June meeting. The Appeals Board determined that the appeal did not satisfy all of the published criteria as set out in Circular 0007/2014. The Appeal Board operates independently of the Minister and the Department and its decision is final.
88. Deputy Jonathan O'Brien asked the Minister for Education and Skills the reason teachers who graduated with the Department of Education commercial teachers diploma are not treated equitably in the PCW agreement and its implementation in circular letter, CL18/97; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28741/14]
View answerFollowing detailed discussions under PCW, agreement was reached and set out in my Department's Circular 18/97 which provided for the payment of allowances in respect of qualifications which hitherto did not qualify for such payment.
The Circular was agreed under the auspices of the Teachers' Conciliation Council, a body established in accordance with the terms of the Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme for Teachers.The Council is comprised of Representatives of Teachers, School Management, Department of Education and Skills and the Department of Public Enterprise and Reform and chaired by an official of the Labour Relations Commission.Agreements reached at this Council are of general application to all teachers.
The agreement provided for the payment of a pass degree allowance to a range of non graduate teachers, including non graduate holders of the Commercial Teacher's Certificate.
89. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the procedure to be followed to facilitate an interdepartmental transfer for civil servants of middle rank wishing to transfer to alternative Departments for whatever reason; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28743/14]
View answerThere are no formal arrangements in place within the Civil Service to facilitate requests for transfers to other locations/employments, except in the case of grades represented by the Civil & Public Services Union. Transfers for these grades (mostly Clerical and Staff Officers) are arranged in accordance with formal procedures agreed with the Staff Side at General Council under the Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme for the Civil Service.
Interdepartmental transfers between other grades in the Civil Service can be arranged on an informal, head-to-head, basis. Such transfers are arranged between the officers seeking to move and the relevant Personnel Units and require the agreement of both Personnel Officers.
90. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation the current position regarding the EU-US trade negotiations; if the progress to date indicates a positive result; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28729/14]
View answerSince the EU Council’s Decision in June 2013, to start negotiations with the US on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), five negotiating rounds have taken place, the most recent taking place from 19-23 May in the US. This round covered extensive technical discussion on a broad range of issues including regulatory issues, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, government procurement, intellectual property rights, electronic commerce and telecommunications, environment, labour, small and medium-sized enterprises, and energy and raw materials. Some discussion has already started on the text of an agreement in relation to helping SMEs, technical barriers to trade and on competition.
The sixth round is due to take place during the week beginning 14 July, 2014. The EU Commission has indicated that the topics expected to be discussed during the next round include trade in goods and services, regulatory issues, government procurement, environmental protection and labour rights, energy and raw materials, and opportunities for small- and medium-sized enterprises. The latter topic is important for Ireland because it will enable our SMEs to win more export business in the U.S., where Enterprise Ireland has invested considerable resources to support its clients in that market. The EU Commission has indicated that, as in previous rounds, EU and US negotiators will spend a day with representatives of industry, non-governmental organisations, consumer groups, trade unions, professional bodies, and other civil society groups.
Negotiations on TTIP can be summarised as covering three broad areas:
The first is market access, for goods, services, and public procurement. The first tariff offers, that is, the immediate or phased elimination of import tariffs on an extensive list of goods, were exchanged earlier this year, and I expect that, over the next few weeks there will be further work and negotiations to extend the range of tariff free trade that can take place once TTIP comes into effect. On services, I understand that the US tabled its first offer last week, and Member States will meet shortly to discuss what has been proposed by the U.S. The Commission expects that the EU’s first offer on services will be ready soon. Naturally there is an important level of confidentiality about the detail of both sides’ negotiating position, but I am hopeful that the greatest level of market access can be achieved for our goods and services exporters and for those looking to extend access to the very large U.S. public procurement market.
The second area covered by the talks is “rules" , on trade facilitation (EU and US customs systems), state-owned enterprises (these should operate on commercial lines), on raw materials and energy (EU is looking for access to US oil/gas exports that are currently restricted), and on labour and the environment issues (no weakening of the high standards/protection applied by both parties). Coming to agreement on these will also serve to set the standards for other Free Trade Agreements with trading partners, reduce the complexity for small companies to comply with many different standards and market regulations, and to regulate markets in an open and transparent manner.
The third most difficult and complex, but most important aspect of the negotiations, is reducing regulatory burdens, which will involve a multiplicity of sectoral regulations. In areas of regulation covering important sectors such as financial services, environment, and health and public safety, there are legitimate but in many cases unfounded concerns about a possible lowering of regulatory standards. In fact, both the EU and the US are equally committed to retaining existing high standards that protect consumers. The objective of TTIP is to address differences in standards between our two economies, that can give rise to heavy compliance costs, while at all times maintaining the high levels of health, safety, environmental and other protection that is reflected in EU legislation.
Studies show that addressing regulatory burdens will yield the most net gains from the agreement. The Commission’s impact assessment suggests that between two thirds and four fifths of the gains from TTIP would come from cutting red tape and having more coordination between regulators. Consequently, progress in respect of regulation, through harmonisation, mutual recognition or convergence, is the most important means of capturing the largest benefits from TTIP.
It is important to see this as a two part issue: the process of how regulation is enacted, and the sector specific solutions being negotiated. How regulations are made needs to be more transparent, efficient and objective, with regulators deepening relationships in order to address emerging issues together, for example in setting standards for new technologies. Regulators are also discussing how to reduce the cost of meeting existing standards without affecting the levels of protection afforded by them.
Real progress on issues like car safety standards, ending double inspections at pharmaceutical and medical device plants, should, over time, reduce costs for business, regulators and consumers. It is important to note that while regulatory aspects are one of the main elements of the TTIP negotiations, there is nothing in the negotiations that should prevent or undermine the rights of both sides to regulate, and the level of regulatory protection on both sides, be it environment, food, consumer safety, will not be lessened.
As regards investment protection, the public consultation launched by the European Commission last March on the investment protection provisions of a future Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, is still underway and will run until 6 July. All stakeholders have the opportunity to respond to this consultation, so that specific interests and concerns on investor protection and settlement of related disputes are well understood by the European Commission, and can be used to better define the EU’s approach to investor protection in the TTIP negotiations. The public consultation can be accessed at http://trade.ec.europa.eu/consultations .
Further information on the negotiations, including background documents, are available on the European Commission’s TTIP website. [http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip ]
My Department recently engaged international expertise to examine the economic and other impacts TTIP and related potential opportunities. The focus of this study will be to identify key areas and sectors of the economy that will be impacted by TTIP. This work will help to inform our input to the European Union’s negotiating position and to identify appropriate policy responses to be deployed, to maximise the potential of this historic agreement and provide an assessment of the longer term implications for enterprise policy.
I hosted a Conference in Dublin Castle on 20 June to look at the opportunities for Ireland from TTIP. This conference aimed at bringing together at political and senior executive level, Oireachtas members, representatives of various economic interests (including farmers and trade unions), Government Departments, Agencies and Regulators, in order to tease out the issues that lie ahead for Ireland.
At this stage it is too early to draw definitive conclusions about the impact of TTIP on our economy. However, initial assessments suggest that Ireland will benefit to a greater extent than the EU. Preliminary estimates point to a possible increase of 1.1% in GDP compared with a .5% GDP increase for the EU as a whole. This could give rise to an increase of 8,000 jobs over the implementation period of the Partnership.
As the negotiations advance, I will continue to look for an agreement that is comprehensive and balanced and one that delivers real trade and economic potential for our economy. In this context I recognise the need to minimise the impact of trade liberalisation and market opening on sensitive areas of the economy and will continue to express our position that any agreement would respect our broad trade interests and especially our interests in the agriculture sector.
91. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation his plans to request or allocate funding for additional full-time forensic accountants for the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement. [28676/14]
View answerI am aware that the Office of the Director, in common with the other Divisions and Offices of my Department, participated in a Departmental Workforce Planning exercise in 2012 and again in 2013. Notwithstanding the merits of the various submissions received, the moratorium on recruitment and the need to observe Employment Control Framework targets severely limit the capacity of my Department to respond, as requested. Staff assignments are made by reference to the priority needs of the Department and its offices as a whole.
The ODCE's revised workforce plan has specifically highlighted the centrality of accountancy skills as being fundamental to that Office's ability to deal with the more complex issues and investigations which it has been facing since the economic downturn. Despite the severe limitations referred to above, I am strongly supportive of the case made by the ODCE to rebalance its staff complement to increase the accountancy expertise available to the Office. I have recently written to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform requesting his assistance in expediting the necessary sanction from his Department to fill these important posts.
92. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if he will provide a report in tabular form outlining the funding for each county and city enterprise board in 2011, 2012 and 2013 relative to the population of that area; the detail of each stream of funding utilised by each CEB; and the number of enterprises in each CEB area who received financial assistance in each area. [28706/14]
View answerDetails of the population in the functional area of each City and County Enterprise Board (CEB), the funding allocated to each Board and the number of enterprises funded by each one for the period from 2011 to 2013 are set out in Tables 1 to 3 below. The capital allocations made available to the CEBs each year during this period, and in 2014, were maintained at €18m despite serious budget pressures.
The CEBs were dissolved with effect 2014 and replaced by 31 Local Enterprise Offices (LEOs) from 15 April. LEOs are the “first stop shop” for providing information and guidance for start-ups and small business, and provide direct grant assistance and so called “soft supports” to micro enterprises employing less than 10 people.
The allocation of funding to each of the CEBs was decided by the Board of Enterprise Ireland in line with criteria agreed with my Department. The Committee took account of a number of factors, including the population statistics available from the CSO at the time, which are detailed in the Tables.
The Deputy may wish to note that, following the establishment of the LEOs, it has been agreed that initially the Budget Allocation methodology will remain unchanged as regards Capital allocations. Over time this allocation and the allocation methodology will be reviewed by my Department and Enterprise Ireland (EI) to ensure that opportunities for business development are maximised and that value for money is being secured across the LEOs. Such reviews will in the future be primarily informed by achievement of targets and performance metrics rather than a purely population based assessment. It is envisaged that a competitive element to budgetary allocation will be developed and introduced over time.
In addition to grant aid, LEOs can provide valuable advice, mentoring, training and management development supports to help grow and develop micro enterprises including those not eligible for direct grant assistance.
Table 1: 2013
|
CEB |
Population of CEB Functional Area |
Current Funding Utilised (€) (Pay + Non-Pay) |
Capital Funding Utilised (€) (Grants + Other Supports) |
No of Clients Paid |
|
Carlow |
54,612 |
221,290 |
428,851 |
29 |
|
Cavan |
73,183 |
389,925 |
446,626 |
20 |
|
Clare |
117,196 |
230,373 |
505,281 |
33 |
|
Cork City |
119,230 |
275,159 |
411,245 |
24 |
|
Cork County (North) |
89,132 |
164,742 |
382,383 |
12 |
|
Cork County (South) |
240,905 |
413,465 |
1,049,476 |
41 |
|
Cork County (West) |
69,179 |
374,696 |
428,046 |
12 |
|
Donegal |
161,137 |
404,717 |
627,964 |
29 |
|
Dublin City |
527,612 |
438,504 |
1,045,182 |
68 |
|
Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown |
206,261 |
307,418 |
652,997 |
47 |
|
Fingal |
273,991 |
447,516 |
656,612 |
27 |
|
South Dublin |
265,205 |
357,829 |
700,631 |
37 |
|
Galway |
250,653 |
292,078 |
708,816 |
26 |
|
Kerry |
145,502 |
345,588 |
466,575 |
40 |
|
Kildare |
210,312 |
244,860 |
499,481 |
31 |
|
Kilkenny |
95,419 |
247,204 |
388,419 |
19 |
|
Laois |
80,559 |
278,237 |
373,977 |
9 |
|
Leitrim |
31,798 |
333,653 |
299,080 |
26 |
|
Limerick City |
57,106 |
353,889 |
426,028 |
20 |
|
Limerick County |
134,703 |
267,848 |
601,379 |
29 |
|
Longford |
39,000 |
344,652 |
390,769 |
40 |
|
Louth |
122,897 |
410,279 |
415,021 |
29 |
|
Mayo |
130,638 |
207,641 |
572,526 |
19 |
|
Meath |
184,135 |
389,692 |
554,359 |
30 |
|
Monaghan |
60,483 |
302,639 |
354,629 |
14 |
|
Offaly |
76,687 |
350,579 |
370,438 |
25 |
|
Roscommon |
64,065 |
215,507 |
357,928 |
14 |
|
Sligo |
65,393 |
342,939 |
500,258 |
27 |
|
North Tipperary |
70,322 |
353,539 |
414,054 |
22 |
|
South Tipperary |
88,432 |
264,840 |
401,706 |
20 |
|
Waterford City |
46,732 |
225,080 |
387,806 |
20 |
|
Waterford County |
67,063 |
187,696 |
500,895 |
32 |
|
Westmeath |
86,164 |
324,085 |
639,310 |
35 |
|
Wexford |
145,320 |
302,020 |
566,793 |
42 |
|
Wicklow |
136,640 |
397,284 |
618,241 |
36 |
Table 2: 2012
|
CEB |
Population of CEB Functional Area |
Current Funding Utilised (€) (Pay + Non-Pay) |
Capital Funding Utilised (€) (Grants + Other Supports) |
No of Clients Paid |
|
Carlow |
54,612 |
228,527 |
481,965 |
33 |
|
Cavan |
73,183 |
397,871 |
434,645 |
18 |
|
Clare |
117,196 |
242,594 |
547,068 |
41 |
|
Cork City |
119,230 |
315,807 |
444,022 |
21 |
|
Cork County (North) |
89,132 |
161,857 |
234,079 |
6 |
|
Cork County (South) |
240,905 |
422,815 |
1,183,614 |
46 |
|
Cork County (West) |
69,179 |
380,232 |
466,083 |
18 |
|
Donegal |
161,137 |
414,488 |
789,522 |
25 |
|
Dublin City |
527,612 |
433,895 |
1,214,463 |
70 |
|
Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown |
206,261 |
302,601 |
693,008 |
54 |
|
Fingal |
273,991 |
451,662 |
643,928 |
35 |
|
South Dublin |
265,205 |
367,379 |
802,601 |
51 |
|
Galway |
250,653 |
298,520 |
655,903 |
34 |
|
Kerry |
145,502 |
354,471 |
599,215 |
39 |
|
Kildare |
210,312 |
238,798 |
556,781 |
20 |
|
Kilkenny |
95,419 |
338,573 |
461,320 |
28 |
|
Laois |
80,559 |
290,429 |
371,955 |
10 |
|
Leitrim |
31,798 |
337,066 |
331,398 |
26 |
|
Limerick City |
57,106 |
361,768 |
422,131 |
31 |
|
Limerick County |
134,703 |
337,109 |
444,074 |
17 |
|
Longford |
39,000 |
279,110 |
386,964 |
33 |
|
Louth |
122,897 |
421,733 |
457,778 |
25 |
|
Mayo |
130,638 |
200,633 |
525,242 |
12 |
|
Meath |
184,135 |
411,701 |
471,795 |
28 |
|
Monaghan |
60,483 |
301,789 |
372,713 |
16 |
|
Offaly |
76,687 |
353,843 |
368,435 |
27 |
|
Roscommon |
64,065 |
207,330 |
387,493 |
13 |
|
Sligo |
65,393 |
342,560 |
402,315 |
28 |
|
North Tipperary |
70,322 |
362,852 |
467,086 |
17 |
|
South Tipperary |
88,432 |
243,950 |
439,643 |
22 |
|
Waterford City |
46,732 |
253,888 |
489,461 |
30 |
|
Waterford County |
67,063 |
190,609 |
408,944 |
32 |
|
Westmeath |
86,164 |
368,683 |
601,260 |
51 |
|
Wexford |
145,320 |
307,262 |
646,432 |
34 |
|
Wicklow |
136,640 |
405,836 |
595,926 |
30 |
Table 3: 2011
|
CEB |
Population of CEB Functional Area |
Current Funding Utilised (€) (Pay + Non-Pay) |
Capital Funding Utilised (€) (Grants + Other Supports) |
No of Clients Paid |
|
Carlow |
50,349 |
348,881 |
404,532 |
38 |
|
Cavan |
64,003 |
398,290 |
418,658 |
21 |
|
Clare |
110,950 |
295,577 |
527,230 |
48 |
|
Cork City |
119,418 |
382,732 |
435,991 |
25 |
|
Cork County (North) |
80,795 |
176,998 |
449,989 |
13 |
|
Cork County (South) |
218,373 |
444,889 |
828,371 |
17 |
|
Cork County (West) |
62,709 |
381,355 |
357,320 |
13 |
|
Donegal |
147,264 |
424,451 |
589,801 |
22 |
|
Dublin City |
506,211 |
443,597 |
1,146,172 |
101 |
|
Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown |
246,935 |
335,679 |
634,922 |
57 |
|
Fingal |
194,038 |
440,489 |
693,194 |
41 |
|
South Dublin |
239,992 |
366,028 |
725,739 |
41 |
|
Galway |
231,670 |
271,942 |
882,129 |
62 |
|
Kerry |
139,835 |
345,829 |
547,115 |
46 |
|
Kildare |
186,335 |
360,629 |
560,225 |
23 |
|
Kilkenny |
87,558 |
330,394 |
438,029 |
26 |
|
Laois |
67,059 |
288,322 |
361,820 |
16 |
|
Leitrim |
28,950 |
328,211 |
392,392 |
27 |
|
Limerick City |
52,539 |
365,488 |
406,798 |
30 |
|
Limerick County |
131,516 |
336,571 |
552,508 |
25 |
|
Longford |
34,391 |
277,743 |
358,021 |
31 |
|
Louth |
111,267 |
429,700 |
532,558 |
33 |
|
Mayo |
123,839 |
198,803 |
465,565 |
19 |
|
Meath |
162,831 |
406,973 |
700,907 |
36 |
|
Monaghan |
55,997 |
305,674 |
350,375 |
19 |
|
Offaly |
70,868 |
354,870 |
365,761 |
27 |
|
Roscommon |
58,768 |
199,479 |
373,242 |
20 |
|
Sligo |
60,894 |
364,979 |
430,442 |
21 |
|
North Tipperary |
66,023 |
353,844 |
405,748 |
32 |
|
South Tipperary |
83,221 |
348,451 |
378,541 |
20 |
|
Waterford City |
45,748 |
216,561 |
339,771 |
36 |
|
Waterford County |
62,213 |
179,272 |
501,806 |
37 |
|
Westmeath |
79,346 |
381,995 |
497,032 |
58 |
|
Wexford |
131,749 |
307,485 |
566,249 |
37 |
|
Wicklow |
126,194 |
413,743 |
588,211 |
28 |
93. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Social Protection her views on the merit of allowing an extension of the JobsPlus scheme to allow for one parent family payment recipients to partake on the scheme; her further views on allowing successful JobBridge participants the opportunity to avail of the JobsPlus scheme; her further views that such an arrangement would support job creation; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28634/14]
View answerJobsPlus provides a direct monthly financial incentive to employers who recruit employees from those who are long term on the live register. JobsPlus is biased in favour of those who are longer term unemployed. It provides employers with two levels of payment: €7,500 over two years where a jobseeker who is 12-24 months on the live register is recruited and €10,000 for each person recruited who has been unemployed for more than 24 months. The subsidy is paid in monthly instalments over a two year period provided the employment is maintained.
In line with Pathways to Work commitments, the long-term unemployed on the Live Register are a particular focus for interventions and the JobsPlus Incentive is, therefore, exclusively targeted at this cohort. Periods spend on an internship under JobBridge are counted towards eligibility and interns can be supported directly from JobBridge once the eligibility criteria are satisfied. A person on a one parent family payment is not considered eligible given the focus of JobsPlus on recruitment from those longer term unemployed and receiving a jobseekers payment. The Department of Social Protection is currently finalising a review of the initial phase of implementing JobsPlus. The review will consider eligibility criteria and if it is appropriate to meet the objectives set for JobsPlus. The Deputy will appreciate that any broadening of eligibility will have cost implications and require consideration in the context of the forthcoming Budget.
Since its launch in July 2013 to the end of May 2014, JobsPlus has concluded arrangements to support 2,385 jobseekers in full-time employment with 1,811 employers nationally. Around 60% of jobseekers being supported had been on the live register for over 24 months at the time of recruitment.
94. Deputy Michelle Mulherin asked the Minister for Social Protection the reason an increase in a qualified adult payment ceased in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Mayo; if same will be restored due to the hardship that will be caused by this fall in income. [28563/14]
View answerThis matter relates to spouses engaged on the rural social scheme and community employment. With effect from 17 September 2012, rates of payment on work placement and training programmes have been standardised. In cases where both spouses are simultaneously engaged on work placement and training programmes, as in the case detailed by the Deputy, the Department considers that neither spouse are dependant and the weekly rate of pay is €208 per week per individual applies, not including any increases for dependent children.
95. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Social Protection the number of students involved in the 100 DEIS and special schools that were recently brought in under a project (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28572/14]
View answer98. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Social Protection if she will provide a breakdown of the payments under a school meals project scheme (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28603/14]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 95 and 98 together.
The school meals programme provides funding towards the provision of food services to some 1,600 schools and organisations which benefits some 205,000 children through two schemes. The first is the statutory urban school meals scheme, operated by local authorities and part-financed by the Department. The second is the school meals local projects scheme through which funding is provided directly to participating schools and local and voluntary community groups who run their own school meals projects.
Despite pressure on the social protection budget, the Government allocated an additional €2 million for the school meals programme in 2013, providing a total allocation of €37 million. The additional €2 million allocated to the school meals programme budget for 2013 was used to extend the school meals local projects scheme to some 100 additional DEIS and special schools benefiting over 9,700 children.
Statistics on the average payment per pupil under the school meals scheme is not maintained by the Department.
96. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Social Protection the qualifying criteria for inclusion on the JobsPlus scheme; if she will outline any future Department plans to integrate JobBridge and jobsplus schemes to ensure that trained interns under the JobBridge scheme can be employed under the terms of the JobsPlus scheme; her views that such a plan makes economic sense; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28576/14]
View answer97. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Social Protection if she will extend the terms of the jobsplus scheme to allow for persons on one-parent family payments to be eligible for the inclusion on the scheme; her views that such persons who qualify for and successfully participate in and complete JobBridge schemes should be accommodated on the jobsplus scheme; if she will acknowledge that huge savings in social welfare payments can be made by allowing such participation; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28577/14]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 96 and 97 together.
JobsPlus provides a direct monthly financial incentive to employers who recruit employees from those who are long term on the live register. JobsPlus is biased in favour of those who are longer term unemployed. It provides employers with two levels of payment: €7,500 over two years where a jobseeker who is 12-24 months on the live register is recruited and €10,000 for each person recruited who has been unemployed for more than 24 months. The subsidy is paid in monthly instalments over a two year period provided the employment is maintained.
To qualify as an eligible employee for the €7,500 Incentive a jobseeker must be at least 12 months (312 days) on the Live Register in the previous 18 months. To qualify as an eligible employee for the higher Incentive of €10,000 a jobseeker must be at least 24 months (624 days) on the Live Register in the previous 30 months. Periods spend on an internship under JobBridge are counted towards eligibility and interns can be supported directly from JobBridge once the eligibility criteria are satisfied. A person on a one parent family payment is not considered eligible given the focus of JobsPlus on recruitment from those longer term unemployed and receiving a jobseekers payment. The Department of Social Protection is currently finalising a review of the initial phase of implementing JobsPlus. The review will consider eligibility criteria and if it is appropriate to meet the objectives set for JobsPlus. The Deputy will appreciate that any broadening of eligibility will have cost implications and require consideration in the context of the forthcoming Budget.
Since its launch in July 2013 to the end of May 2014, JobsPlus has concluded arrangements to support 2,385 jobseekers in full-time employment with 1,811 employers nationally. Around 60% of jobseekers being supported had been on the live register for over 24 months at the time of recruitment.
99. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection the reason rent support has been withdrawn again in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 6 whose payment only recommenced last month; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28606/14]
View answerFollowing representations made by Deputy Durkan, the claimant’s payment was re-instated on 9 May 2014. The claim has continued in payment on a weekly basis since then and current payments are up to date. Arrears issued to the claimant on 20 June 2014.
100. Deputy Sandra McLellan asked the Minister for Social Protection if further experience is gained from a TÚS scheme in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork if the person may reapply to the same company; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28636/14]
View answerTús, the community work placement initiative which was introduced during 2011, was set up to provide short-term, quality work opportunities for those who are unemployed for more than a year. This initiative is being delivered through the network of local development companies and Údarás na Gaeltachta. Tús is designed to break the cycle of unemployment and maintain work readiness, thereby improving a person’s opportunities of returning to the labour market.
The duration of the Tús contract was set to reflect a number of inter-related elements. These include (i) the need to ensure that the limited numbers of placements available are opened to those on the Live Register, (ii) that weaknesses identified in other work programmes resulting from longer duration placements are not replicated with Tús, (iii) optimisation of the resources available and (iv) how Tús fits with the objectives set out in the Government’s activation policies in Pathways to Work.
I consider the existing 12-month period on Tús to be adequate to meet the programme’s objectives. It also ensures that as many unemployed people as possible are able to benefit from the initiative. There are no circumstances under which a person’s term on Tús will be extended beyond 12 months. Opportunities are available on community employment (CE) where a person is interested in pursuing a work placement that may have a longer duration in order to complete certified training. Time spent on Tús is considered eligible for accessing CE.
As of the week ending 27th June 2014, 18,243 participants and 418 full-time supervisory/ team leader personnel have been engaged on Tús since its inception in July 2011.
