Skip to main content
Normal View

EU Directives

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 10 June 2015

Wednesday, 10 June 2015

Questions (11)

Mick Wallace

Question:

11. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Education and Skills if she has had discussions with the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation or with the Department of Environment, Community and Local Government regarding the possible introduction of a specific training grant to assist small steel fabricators affected by European Union Directive EN-1090-1, who are now obliged to undergo CE (Conformité Européene) marking standards compliance training, which is often costly; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21866/15]

View answer

Oral answers (8 contributions)

In July 2014, EU Directive EN-1090-1 came into force requiring all structural steelwork in the European Union to be CE-marked. The training, testing and certification costs involved in the CE-marking process can cost a business anywhere between €20,000 and €30,000. The only State assistance available is a 20% discount on training costs through Skillnets which amounts to about €200, a pittance of the overall cost. Does the Minister have any plans, in conjunction with the other relevant Departments, to introduce a specific training grant to assist small steel fabricators to comply with this EU directive?

My Department has engaged with the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and the National Standards Authority of Ireland, NSAI, on this issue. An information leaflet is being prepared for the sector for distribution through local enterprise offices, LEOs.

In 2015, education and training boards, ETBs, and institutes of technology will offer over 2,000 places on a variety of welding courses. Typically, fees are not payable by unemployed people but are charged to those in employment. Subsidised training is also provided through two Skillnets networks in responsible welding co-ordinator training. While welding practices and co-ordination are important elements to compliance with this directive, it should be noted that other compliance elements need to be tailored to the specific workplace and cannot, therefore, be arranged through the mainstream education and training system. My Department funds ETBs and institutes of technology and provides co-financing to Skillnets but does not provide grants to employers to access training. It funds educational training provision in respect of welding skills, as well as responsible welding co-ordinator skills through the ETBs and the further and higher education system. There are several elements involved in the route to compliance with this directive regarding steel fabrication. Several of those elements, including factory production control procedures, welding process specifications and applications of the NSAI for audit and certification, require an audit and assessment of the workplace and cannot, therefore, be arranged through the mainstream education and training system.

The Minister of State essentially said the Department is not structured to help out in a serious way. Too often when different Departments are involved in a matter like this, it just ends up being pushed around a bit. The firms in question generally employ between four and five people. They will not be able to come up with the kind of money in question. While regulation is good, this is more about bureaucracy and paperwork. Once the training and certification is obtained, the work is not tested anymore. It is like the lack of inspection in house building.

In Britain, 70% of the cost is subsidised by the UK Government. If this Government is serious about small and medium-sized enterprises and wanting people to stay in business, it will have to help the firms in question because they will not be able to afford this certification. Over 1,000 companies will be affected by this.

We are monitoring what is happening in other countries and I will check what is happening in the UK. We help with the training and qualifications end of this. Full-time and part-time courses are provided in all the areas affected by this directive through the ETBs and institutes of technology, as well as Skillnets which involves employers. There are many options available at the training end. However, some of this has to do with work practices in the workplace. This is not an area in which the Department of Education and Skills can get involved.

I accept the Deputy’s point that the overall co-ordination is an extra burden on these companies. We are examining this through the LEOs. We are involved in the skills end of this but we do not have a role in the auditing of the workplace. That has to be arranged with the companies in question. Many employer groups are involved in this in terms of putting together various options. Skillnets is the place where we can enhance provision.

The majority of the cost is the actual training. Does the Department subsidise the training? The certification comes after one passes the testing of the weld. The testing of the weld is done after one does the training; then one gets a certification if one passes. Is the Department subsidising the training end of this? It would beggar belief if we cannot find a way to keep these people in business.

There are over 2,000 places for upskilling in this area through a combination of full-time and evening programmes. Some of this is subsidised. If one is unemployed, these courses are provided free by the Department of Social Protection and the Department of Education and Skills. In other cases, there is a charge. A course is generally 25 weeks to 28 weeks long and costs usually between €250 to €300. This is generally paid for by the person themselves or by their employer. Skillnets, a combination of taxpayers’ and employers’ money, is where much of this training is provided. That is where the solution is. Maybe we can tailor the programme slightly differently to deal with this.

I accept companies are under pressure with these new regulations but there are other directives that affect other companies in other areas. We must constantly ensure educational provision caters for that and takes on board new directives. In some cases, the actual on-the-job training is not a solution the Department can provide.

The actual grant the Minister of State referred to is actually €200. Companies that have checked this out are looking at having to pay between €20,000 and €30,000 to get this done. Many of them are going to England because it is much cheaper there. One can get it done there for as low as €15,000. If one had a British passport, one could get a 75% subsidy from the UK Government on top of that.

This directive will affect up to 5,000 jobs and push out the small man unless the Government does something active to help. It will be the bigger companies doing steel fabrication as a result. That would be a shame because the small firms that employ between four and five people are, from my experience, the best guys to do welding. They tend to be far more professional and good in their approach.

I will investigate exactly what is on offer in England compared to here to see what the different systems provide and if there is anything to improve our provision. A range of options through many courses are being provided through various arms of the State. The Deputy is correct that the cost is often borne by a combination of employers, business owners and the taxpayer. I will certainly examine the UK system to see if it is placing our companies at a major disadvantage.

Top
Share