asked the Minister for Finance, if he will indicate the extent of the shortfall to date in the employment creation target contained in the terms of the current national understanding; if the Government are still committed to the provision in the agreement that special measures will be taken to meet any shortfall up to a maximum of 5,000 jobs during the period of the agreement; if so, the progress to date in this regard.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Job Creation.
22.
The national understanding envisages an average annual increase of 25,000 in the numbers employed over a period of three years. For 1979, on the basis of latest estimates, it appears that the increases will have been at least 15,000.
The provision in the national understanding to underwrite a shortfall up to a maximum of 5,000 jobs is being implemented under the supervision of a tripartite standing committee of Government, employers and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. A special employment fund of £20 million is being set up to finance a joint public and private sector job creation programme. Projects for the creation of 1,000 additional jobs in the public sector have already been announced and a temporary supplement is being added to the employment incentive scheme payments to encourage more rapid recruitment of additional workers. Assistance towards the recruitment of additional engineering apprentices, the training of industrial relations personnel and the construction of an airport at Waterford have also been agreed. I expect that further decisions will be made by the Tripartite Standing Committee in the immediate future.
What percentage of the £20 million allocated has already been accounted for?
The following decisions have been taken already by the tripartite committee—1,000 jobs in the public sector to be created in the first half of 1980, cost £5 million for one year, the extension of the employment incentive scheme, to which I referred, in respect of which a sum of £2 million has been set aside and the apprentice scheme, which provides for the recruitment of 200 additional engineering apprentices. I do not have the precise figure for that, or the training scheme, because their cost is still being considered by the committee. Finally, there is the construction of the airport at Waterford in respect of which there is a written reply.
Might I ask the Minister whether the £5 million announced by the Taoiseach for a project which he described as being enthusiastically accepted both by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the employers has been included in the figures he has given?
No, it is not.
Why?
These are ones that were actually formally adopted some time ago by the committee. They have given indications of their position in relation to a number of other matters. Until such time as the committee take a formal decision, it is not a final decision.
Would the Minister not agree that the statement made by the Taoiseach to the Ard-Fheis and to the people was to the effect that this proposal for an expenditure of £5 million had been enthusiastically accepted both by the trade union movement and employers' organisations, and that this is at total variance with the facts?
The Taoiseach did not say that it had been decided——
Accepted.
The Taoiseach did not say it had been decided. The Taoiseach had discussions with both the ICTU and the employers' organisations. I know that, as a consequence of the understanding conveyed in the course of those discussions, he made a statement to the Ard-Fheis. Allowing for that fact, a formal decision has to be made in the context of the tripartite committee.
If it had been accepted—as was stated by the Taoiseach to the Ard-Fheis and to the people on television—surely the Minister would have included that figure of £5 million in the figures he has just given. But he has excluded it for the very obvious reason that it has not been accepted and it is a totally incorrect statement, to be charitable about it.
What he said was that in fact it was accepted for very serious consideration and is at present receiving serious consideration by the committee. It was accepted in the course of those informal talks. If the Deputy wants to create misunderstandings in relation to that, that will not serve the purpose of the committee's work.
There is no misunderstanding. The Taoiseach deliberately misled the Ard-Fheis and the people.
I do not accept that.
And the Minister has confirmed that by excluding the £5 million from the answer he has just given.
He would not have got away with it in here.
Question No. 23 has gone for written reply.