asked the Minister for Social Welfare the number of people who will be transferred to the pre-retirement scheme.
10.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Pre-Retirement Allowance Scheme.
8.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if those on the pre-retirement scheme remain part of the live register for statistical purposes in order to reflect at all times the true situation in relation to the numbers out of work.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 and 10 together.
The pre-retirement allowance scheme is intended to provide more flexible arrangements for unemployed people in the over 60 age group, many of who regard themselves as semi-retired and not really members of the labour force. At present these people are required to sign on each week at their local employment office where they receive their unemployment payments. The new scheme will relieve certain persons, who are long-term unemployed of the necessity of attending the local office while at the same time providing them with alternative arrangements for receiving their basic income maintenance payments. The scheme will be optional and in these circumstances it is not possible to predict the numbers of people who might claim. However, it is estimated that 2,000 to 3,000 persons in the over 60 age group in receipt of unemployment payments for periods in excess of 12 months will avail of the option.
Persons who opt for the pre-retirement allowance instead of staying within the unemployment payments system will not remain on the live register of unemployed.
Like the Jobsearch programme, this is an indication that we are not getting true statistics about the number of people unemployed. I must assume that the 2,000 to 3,000 people in the pre-retirement scheme will be removed from the live register with the result that we will never be given a true figure of the number of people unemployed.
I am sorry to interrupt the Deputy but, although I am anxious to assist him in eliciting information, I require relevant supplementary questions.
I am endeavouring to get information from the Minister in regard to this issue. I understand that 2,000 to 3,000 people in the pre-retirement scheme are no longer considered to be in the workforce with the result that they are automatically removed from the live register.
I presume the Deputy was present in the Chamber before Easter when we debated social welfare issues.
We dealt with ten of the 31 sections in the Social Welfare Bill.
The Deputy had ample opportunity to discuss this issue if he was so upset about the matter. Does the Deputy want the allowance paid to those people or not? The House has decided that they should be paid the allowance and I do not intend to enter into another debate on the provisions of that legislation at this stage. The Deputy's question is a meagre, miserly one which is typical of what the Progressive Democrats are coming up with at present. The Deputy had his opportunity to say what he wished about this matter. The people concerned are being given an opportunity under the arrangements approved by both Houses of the Oireachtas. We estimate that between 2,000 and 3,000 people will avail of the scheme. I do not have the exact figures because the scheme will not come into operation for a couple of months. I will keep the Deputy informed of the number in case he wants to run back to his leader and say, "there is another five or ten; we might get a bit of publicity from highlighting that." Is that what the Deputy wishes?
I am surprised to hear the Minister yet again running away from facts. I have asked the Minister why between 2,000 and 3,000 people are being removed from the live register, a move which will result in false information being given in regard to the number of unemployed.
People are not being removed from the live register; they have taken up the option under the pre-retirement scheme. The Deputy is aware, following our discussions on this matter in the House, that they will no longer be on the live register. The whole purpose of this is that they should not have to go to the local exchange to sign on each week. Does the Deputy want to reverse that decision and insist on such people signing on weekly? The Deputy cannot have it both ways and that is what he is trying to do now. On the one hand he is trying to say that we should not insist on these people signing on weekly but at the same time he wants them counted on the live register weekly.
Will the Minister accept that Deputy Wyse's concern is valid and arises from attempts by Government spokesmen to make unemployment figures look lower than they are due to the Jobsearch scheme, emigration and the pre-retirement allowance? Will the Minister promise the House that Government spokesmen will not allege that they are getting unemployment under control using artificial figures——
The Deputy is injecting new matter into this question.
In relation to the Jobsearch programme I should say that a number of people left the register. Having signed on for years they suddenly decided they were no longer interested in signing on. They were given an opportunity to engage in a course, to take up a job or avail of the provisions of a social employment scheme but, when given that opportunity, they decided they were not going to sign on any longer. The Deputy is fully aware of that.
That was our scheme. Why is the Minister claiming that unemployment has been reduced when it has not been?
Deputy Mitchell wants to have it both ways also.
I am seeking to deal with questions nominated for priority, the first being No. 22.