asked the Minister for Economic Planning and Development the advantages, in terms of increased employment, if any, which have accrued as a result of the establishment of his Department.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Increased Employment.
1.
The function of my Department is to co-ordinate and promote economic and social planning. In the exercise of this function the generation of increased employment is a high priority and the Department have been giving special attention to the development of strategies for higher employment. These strategies are integrated with the overall economic and social policies of the Government. The Department have had a central role in the preparation of the proposals for full employment which were put forward in the recent Green Paper. I am satisfied that the Department are making a valuable contribution to the effort to expand employment.
Of the estimated increase in employment has any resulted from the establishment of the Minister's Department? The Minister has not replied to that question; he has not given any numbers. Am I to assume, as most of the country assumes, that the Department have nothing to their credit since their establishment?
The Deputy need not make a speech.
I am asking the Minister am I to assume——
The Deputy has asked the question.
I asked the question but it was not answered. What employment, if any, is the Minister's Department responsible for since it was established 18 months ago? Am I right in asserting that the only possible employment——
The Deputy need not make a statement.
——he is providing is, scripts for Fianna Fáil Deputies to make speeches in the House? Apart from that I can see no other employment accruing from the Minister's office.
The Deputy is unhappy that I did not give specific numbers. I answered the question by indicating the manner in which my Department make their contribution to increasing employment. The Deputy appeared to want particular numbers, but I would point out that that is a fallacious approach. The Deputy might as well table a question—go ahead and laugh, and if you think it is wrong, just try to prove it.
It is the nature of the policies pursued by the Government which has an influence for good or ill on the level of employment. Some of that employment can be created by direct Government action such as' recruitment of additional civil servants, teachers or other people who are paid from the public purse. Other increases in employment can take place through the pursuit of policies which have a beneficial effect on activities on the private sector. I have never seen anybody attempt to isolate, and attribute fractions of those changes in employment to the behaviour of individual Departments and Ministries, and it would be wrong to do so, because the policies are the policies of the Government arrived at after discussion by the Government. I have indicated that my Department make their contribution in that manner.
Is it true that at present Government Ministers and Ministers of State are making excuses for the Minister's Department——
It is not true.
——for its failure in meeting targets announced at the establishment of the Department?
That is a separate question which will be dealt with later.
The last one to do so was Deputy Burke, Minister of State at the Department of Industry, Commerce and Energy.
This is entirely argument. I would point out that we have a great number of questions to deal with and I would like to get through as many as possible within the next two days.
That is not so.
In relation to the Minister's statement that there is an influence by the Government on the level of employment, how does he reconcile that with his having told the House in reply to me yesterday that they were not a dictatorship and that the Government could not take responsibility for the level of employment in regard to the redundancies about which I was complaining?
I indicated in my reply today that the Government could influence the level of employment by their direct employment activities and through the beneficial impact of their policies on the behaviour of the private sector. The fact that the Government can exert an influence on the private sector which can lead to an increase or decrease in employment does not mean that it is totally responsible for what happens in the private sector. In my reply yesterday I refused to accept total responsibility. I said that employment in the private sector could also change as a result of the behaviour of the people in the private sector. That is perfectly reasonable.
I am not in the dark about the points the Minister is making, but I never heard them made by his Party when they were on this side of the House, and I have never heard the Government fail to take credit for any increase in employment whoever brought it about.
A question.
It seems consistent that they should accept the blame for the level of redundancies that I was complaining about yesterday.
I propose that we deal with Question Time today and not the history of previous Governments.
(Interruptions.)
Question No. 2.
Can I ask another supplementary?