Peter Barry
Ceist:16 Mr. Barry asked the Minister for Labour the number of persons no longer registered as unemployed although still in receipt of training or unemployment allowances.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Training Courses Participants.
I am taking the Deputy's question as referring to people participating on FÁS and CERT programmes, who were recruited from the live register, and to whom training allowances are payable. Information on recipients of unemployment allowances would be a matter for the Minister for Social Welfare.
At end April, 1990, there were 21,700 former live registrants participating on FÁS training courses-employment schemes, and over 300 on CERT courses.
Does that mean that the true level of unemployment is the number on the unemployment register plus 22,000 people?
Minus the black economy.
The Minister would accept that the unemployment figure could be adjusted by the 22,000 in training to whom he has referred.
No. I would never accept that because they are usefully training to get jobs and increase economic activity.
They are people in the labour force who have not got jobs.
They are in training schemes. I never try to point out that people involved in schemes are there to avoid appearing on the live register. Anybody participating in this scheme is furthering his or her education and ability to get a job in the labour market and is not dumped into a scheme to keep down labour costs. It is quite expensive to have people on schemes.
Would the Minister not accept that for the sake of statistical accuracy it would be useful to include these figures in the monthly unemployment figure so that we would know when there are real improvements and when there are only fictitious improvements?
They are included in the labour market surveys each month, even as to the category of training people are in. It is wrong to say that people involved in training schemes are really part of the unemployed. They are not. They are very much like people in education who are not included on the live register either.
Jim Kemmy
Ceist:18 Mr. Kemmy asked the Minister for Labour the number of persons currently participating in employment schemes and training programmes; and the corresponding numbers on such schemes at the same dates in 1988 and 1989.
The information requested by the Deputy is set out in a tabular statement which I propose to circulate in the Official Report.
Participation on FÁS and CERT Programmes as at end April, 1988 and 1990
|
1988 |
1989 |
1990 |
|
|
FÁS training programmes |
15,300 |
13,467 |
14,642 |
|
FÁS employment schemes |
17,806 |
13,246 |
16,371 |
|
CERT training programmes |
1,886 |
1,718 |
2,191 |
|
Totals |
34,992 |
28,431 |
33,204 |
Would the Minister agree that there is far too much overlapping and wastage in training and employment schemes and that we could do with more co-ordination?
I think Deputy Kemmy would accept that a great number of schemes have been rationalised, while a lot have been abolished and others restructured. At present there is a major review of the apprenticeship scheme. I am willing to look at any schemes people believe are of no great value. I have shown my attitude to this by abolishing a number of schemes over the past few years and by setting up new and useful schemes such as Youthreach.
I hope the Minister continues his good work——
I will be willing to look at any schemes people bring to my attention.
——and brings forward a report on this area. No matter how well intentioned the people involved on a day-to-day basis are, they find it most difficult to direct people to the best schemes. There is a bewildering plethora of schemes which could be streamlined and a departmental report on this area would be very welcome.
With regard to Question No. 18 and training schemes, would the Minister not agree that youth employment schemes, as we knew them of old, or the Teamwork schemes, to use more modern terminology, have virtually ground to a halt, that they do not operate on anything like the scale they did heretofore and, that therefore, there is a need to look seriously at the possibility of bringing down the age threshold for the social employment schemes to enable people in the 18-25 year age group to participate in work at community level?
The trouble with many of these schemes is that we have to be guided by the resources available and the age threshold set by the European Social Fund. I think 41 per cent of the participants in the schemes are in the 25 plus age group whereas previously there was a very low level of participation by this group because there was no funding. Without the ESF these schemes would be a huge cost on the Exchequer.
As I pointed out earlier to Deputy Mitchell, what is happening in a number of schemes is that voluntary organisations — I have great respect for them — use the schemes to run their organisations on a full-time basis and come back each year looking for additional funding. After a few years the workers on the schemes run the voluntary organisations almost on a full-time basis. This was never meant to be the case and is not in the spirit of the ESF. The difficulty is that if we take away the scheme we will be closing down the organisations, which I am reluctant to do because they do very good work.
May I——
A final question, Deputy Kemmy.
Does the Minister not agree that one of the more irksome aspects of the social employment scheme is that a person who completes 12 months on a scheme has to wait 12 months before he can apply for another social employment scheme? It is very difficult for a person who is willing and anxious to work not to be able to apply for a social employment scheme until 12 months after he or she completed the first course.
There is an exception to that rule. This rule was introduced because the trade union movement did not want, and rightly so, the social employment scheme to become a full-time job but the monitoring committee can make exceptions to the rule in certain cases. For example, on the islands the scheme can be extended for a further year because there are not enough people to take up the places. If the sponsor of the scheme in urban or rural areas — often the parish, the community or some local organisation such as a football club — cannot find suitable people, a person who has been unemployed for three months can come back into the scheme. I brought in that amendment in the autumn.
Deputy Rabbitte rose.
I was hoping we would come to finality on this question. I will take Deputy Rabbitte's question.
Does the Minister agree with the position of the trade union movement and the social employment scheme vis-à-vis replacing the system of caretakers for primary schools?
I do, and we are working towards a compromise. Our experience filling caretaker posts for primary schools from the social employment scheme has been very good; but in the context of filling full-time posts which were there, this would be in breach of the scheme. I have met with the Congress of Trade Unions and we have——
Was this in relation to secondary schools?
No, they are mainly primary schools. We are endeavouring to work out this question. I do not think we can fill all the posts in the school system but we have at least started to redress the 1984 position.
So there is hope for the primary schools which are affected?
Yes.
Can the Minister hold out any hope for secondary schools?
I want to sort out the primary schools first and I will see where we can go from there. I do not have a closed mind on this. Research has shown that participants in the social employment scheme do very well obtaining jobs because they have the opportunity to meet parents and others who can help them to get these jobs. It is better than the old story of cutting nettles in a graveyard; they have a better chance of getting employment.
I want to proceed to deal with a Private Notice Question.