asked the Minister for Labour if he will as a matter of urgency, restore the Employment Incentive Scheme assistance in respect of the hotel and catering industry.
21.
Ceisteanna—Questions . Oral Answers . - Employment Incentive Scheme .
20.
asked the Minister for Labour if he will, in view of the serious state of the building industry, restore the Employment Incentive Scheme assistance immediately.
22.
asked the Minister for Labour the reason the employment premium for the construction industry has been dropped despite the fact that it is being continued for manufacturing industry; and the likely effect on employment in the industry as a result of this decision.
23.
asked the Minister for Labour the impact the changes announced by him in the Employment Incentive Scheme will have on employment in 1983.
: With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I should like to answer Questions Nos. 20 to 23, inclusive, together.
: On a point of order, this is a matter that has been coming up consistently. I understood it was no longer necessary for a Minister to ask for the permission of the Chair on this matter.
: That is understood. It is not necessary.
: Why is this line being pursued now?
: I did not think it necessary to intervene. I wish to establish now once and for all that a Minister may answer a number of questions together without asking for the permission of the Chair.
: It was a case of force of habit.
In the latter months of 1982 expenditure commitments relating to the Employment Incentive Scheme were in the order of £2 million per month. This pattern, if carried into this year, could have required a budget for the scheme of £24 million in 1983. The amount provided by the Fianna Fáil Government in their Estimates published in November last year was £4.88 million — a potential shortfall of more than £19 million. Had the scheme been continued on the same basis, that estimate would be exhausted for all economic sectors covered before the end of this month. On my arrival in the Department of Labour I was advised of the massive under-estimate and immediately took steps to salvage the scheme to the optimum extent. An additional £4 million has now been provided so that the amount available for the Employment Incentive Scheme in 1983 is £8.8 million, almost double that provided by the last Government.
In reshaping the scheme, as a consequence of the under-estimate to which I have referred, it was necessary to exclude the services and construction sectors and to concentrate the available resources on the economic sectors most exposed to external influences. Accordingly, manufacturing industry and agriculture will continue to benefit under the Employment Incentive Scheme in 1983. In addition, I am considering what arrangements could be made to encourage increased employment in the hotel and catering industry, in view of its potential for having a positive effect on the balance of payments through generating revenues from tourism.
I regret very much that it was necessary to curtail the Employment Incentive Scheme in 1983 but I would draw attention of all interested parties, and particularly the Construction Industry Federation, to the level of under-estimate involved and to the impossibility of meeting commitments for even a fraction of this year had the scheme's provisions been retained on the basis that had previously applied.
: I have a number of questions I wish to ask. First, will the Minister state specifically what amount of money has been paid by way of the Employment Incentive Scheme to date? Secondly, will he tell the House why he decided to penalise two industries that seem to be the target of Coalition attack, namely, the building industry and the hotel industry? Will he tell the House what steps he intends to take and when he intends to take them with regard to assisting the hotel and tourist industry? We are now in mid-March and by normal standards that industry should be about to take off very shortly.
: I have not the information requested in the first question. The second question asked why the scheme was curtailed and I have given my reply to that. The answer is simply that money was not available. The scheme had to be added to considerably in the resources made available in this year's budget, even to continue in the areas I have outlined. Thirdly, I have asked the Youth Employment Agency of the possibility of their continuing a scheme to aid the hotel and catering sectors and a decision from them is awaited.
: Will the Minister not agree that the absence of the figures I requested is an indication of how mythical were the figures he used at the outset?
: The Deputy is engaging in argument. I ask him to put a question to the Minister.
: I would be glad if I were allowed to raise a very important issue here rather than having the Minister attempt to mislead the House and to set out a position that was completely unreal——
: The Deputy will get permission to ask a question but he will not get permission to indulge in argument.
: I have no wish to indulge in argument. Will the Minister not agree that the non-availability of factual information is an indication of how unreal is the fictional information he has given to the House? Further, will he not agree that it is extremely important and urgent that the Youth Employment Agency come up with a reply regarding the hotel and catering industry? Will he state when that reply is expected?
: There was a provision of £4.88 million in the Estimates in November 1982 and a further £4 million was added in the present Estimates in order to keep the scheme going on the basis I have outlined. Until the board of the Youth Employment Agency meet and give a decision I cannot say if they intend to adopt the scheme.
: The Minister said he was replying to Question No. 23 in my name in which I asked him to state the impact the changes would have on employment but the Minister did not reply to that question. Does he intend to reply to it now?
: As regards the impact on unemployment in 1983 of the curtailment of the Employment Incentive Scheme, it should be pointed out that the scheme applies only to incremental employment by an individual employer. Therefore, there is no question of job losses. With regard to increased employment, of course this depends on factors other than wage subsidies. For example, in the building and construction industry the major determinant of employment is the volume of contracts available and this situation would apply to other industries also.
: I wish to ask the Minister a question in relation to the nonsensical aspect of the reply. Is he aware that the Employment Incentive Scheme and every pound spent on it is helping to create a new job? His reply in relation to the amount allocated in the Estimates in November as against what he has done now is nonsense when we see that, at the same time, he could find £31 million for increased unemployment benefits. The Employment Incentive Scheme was introduced as an incentive to employ people on the dole. Every pounds spent helped to create a job——
: The Deputy is making a speech. I would point out that this is Question Time.
: The Minister has given a reply that does not make sense. Every penny spent on the scheme is helping to create jobs. The Minister made a major point about what he has provided. He and the Minister for Finance could find £31 million for increased unemployment levels. It appears now as if this Government are only interested in more unemployment.
: The Deputy knows he is being disorderly.
: I doubled the amount of money which the previous Government had allocated in their Estimates for this scheme. Therefore, if I am nonsensical they must be doubly so.
(Interruptions.)
: Would the Minister now indicate the number of jobs in the two productive areas he mentioned, manufacturing and agriculture, that it is expected this scheme will assist in 1983?
: I am sorry I have not got that information for the Deputy. If he wishes to put down a question, or if he wants me to give him the information by letter, I will do so.
: I protest about the inadequacy of the information.
: The Deputy can only protest to the Chair and the Chair has no control over the way questions are answered.
: I asked two relevant questions——
: Question Time is now over and the remaining questions will appear on tomorrow's Order Paper.
: I wish to raise on the Adjournment the 104 redundancies at Platin, Drogheda, announced by Irish Cement Limited.
: The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
: I wish to raise on the Adjournment the subject matter of Question No. 2 on today's Order Paper.
: The Chair will communicate with Deputy Blaney.
: Deputy Blaney may not be aware of the fact that my putting down of Question No. 2 has achieved its purpose and, therefore, I withdraw it.
: I hope Deputy Blaney will not be misled by Deputy Haughey's comment.