asked the Taoiseach the number of occasions on which the Central Review Committee of the Programme for National Recovery have met since the election of the present Government; if he will outline the main topics discussed and any decisions arrived at; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Central Review Committee.
1.
The Central Review Committee of the Programme for National Recovery has met on three occasions since the election of the present Government. The meetings took place on 27 July, 21 September and 19 October 1989.
At these meetings a wide range of issues covering employment, education, social welfare and EC Structural Funds were discussed and progress evaluated.
It is a matter for the committee to report publicly on their own deliberations as they see fit. A report was published by the committee in December 1988 on the progress made in meeting the job targets of the programme and I understand the committee are currently preparing a further report on employment.
I intend to suggest to the committee that they now consider publishing a report on the progress made under all headings of the programme. From the Government's viewpoint as a partner in the programme, the main targets in new jobs, income tax reductions, social welfare increases, pay and hours of work are being fully met and in some cases exceeded.
May I ask the Taoiseach if he is aware, as I am sure he is aware, that there is serious concern in the trade union movement at the continued high emigration levels and the lack of progress on serious job creation? Is he aware that it is expected there will be 15,000 redundancies this year under the Redundancy Act — that is not counting those who will not be covered by that Act —and that the job creation rate for 1989 is expected to be below target? Has he any proposals which would lead to a rectification of this situation?
The principal feature of the situation is that unemployment figures are falling every month. There is a very clear indication that there is a resurgence in the number of people at work. The general economic policy of the Government, of course, is to secure economic growth and, as I have said quite a number of times recently, our main problem now is to translate that economic growth into jobs. That is something to which we give constant attention. The Deputy will be aware that quite recently the Minister for Labour announced a number of measures which are designed to improve the employment situation but the overall objective of the Government at present is to endeavour to see that to the greatest extent possible economic growth is translated into more jobs.
Would the Taoiseach confirm that while the unemployment figures are reported as having fallen by 31,000 in the past year, the emigration figure has risen to 47,000 and that it is estimated that 75 per cent of the fall in unemployment figures is accounted for by emigration? What specific measures is the Taoiseach proposing to take to stop the haemorrhage of the emigration of some extremely skilled people, emigration that is causing problems with economic development and the creation of jobs?
A reduction in the emigration figures, indeed the ending of emigration, is central to everything the Government do and, as I have said, is the principal objective of Government economic policy. The first requirement, of course, was to get the public finances into order and then to secure economic growth. These two targets we have succeeded in achieving. That is the basis of getting the employment situation under control. Right across the spectrum our endeavours are to create more jobs and by specific measures to reduce the numbers on the unemployment register through various schemes while at the same time, now that we have a very satisfactory rate of economic growth, to translate that into jobs. I am sure the Deputy will agree that it is not possible to create jobs unless we have economic growth. We now have reasonably favourable economic circumstances and the basis is there on which we can, under all the different policy sectors, endeavour to create more jobs which is the only real answer.
Is the Taoiseach not aware that at their annual conference in Bundoran, uncharacteristically, Congress decided to have a special conference in January to review the programme precisely because the economic growth to which he refers is not taking everybody along with it? Furthermore, is he not aware that the current measures for employment stimulation for which the Minister for Labour is currently responsible have been effectively reduced and that we now have large areas of structural unemployment in our urban communities? Does the Taoiseach propose to direct the agencies of the State, including the various Government Departments, to specifically and directly intervene in areas that are resistant to any kind of private sector development, notwithstanding what levels of growth there might be, so that there would be State-led employment creation in those areas which are defying all other efforts to create employment?
Yes, I think the Deputy would agree that we have a very vibrant public sector at present with a number of our State companies recording considerable success in their particular sphere of activity.
But is it jobs——
All State companies have a brief, in so far as they possibly can within the ambit of their activities, to create more employment.
Would you not agree——
Order, please.
Would you not agree that notwithstanding the positive signs which everybody in this House welcomes, there are areas of structural unemployment in our urban communities that are resistant to any kind of private sector development? Therefore, the responsibility falls directly on the Taoiseach to propose specific measures.
We cannot remain unduly long on any one question as I want to make progress in regard to other questions.
I accept that structured unemployment is at issue and, as the Deputy is aware, we have from time to time taken special measures to relieve the situation of the long-term unemployed who perhaps are the principal sufferers in this area. I want to assure the Deputy that the entire thrust of Government policy in the State sector and in sections of the private sector is to deal with the fundamental problem of unemployment. I accept — I have said it a number of times — that the core problem now seems to be how we can translate economic growth into more jobs.
Does the Taoiseach agree that his reply shows no awareness of the existence of a severe shortage of skilled workers in the construction industry, leading to the danger of excessive increases in pay which could generate inflation across the economy? What steps are the Government taking in this sector — where there are jobs available — to encourage people with these skills in Britain to return here to take up these jobs by conveying to them the fact that there is a possibility of sustained employment here? The Government should get away from ideology and get down to brass tacks.
A number of steps have been taken to deal with that precise problem. I would remind the Deputy that the construction industry is in a far healthier condition now than when he was responsible for it.
That is not because of the Taoiseach's policies.
A final brief question from Deputy De Rossa.
In view of the fact that this House debated the Programme for National Recovery prior to its implementation and that it is due to expire approximately this time next year, will the Taoiseach allow the House to have a debate on the programme, not necessarily in this session but perhaps in the next? Will he also indicate whether it is intended to initiate discussions for a renewal of this programme for a further period of years?
I would be quite prepared to facilitate the House at some stage along those lines. As I have stated on a number of occasions, we are very anxious to start discussions with a view to having a second programme to take over from this one when it expires.