Vol. 418 No. 9
3 Mrs. T. Ahearn asked the Minister for Labour if he will give details of the extent of the reduction of the social employment scheme in 1992; whether his Department intend to end the operation of this scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
41 Mr. Connor asked the Minister for Labour if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern in relation to the massive cutback in the social employment scheme; whether it is his intention to ensure that this scheme will continue at the 1991 level; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
46 Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Labour if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern in relation to the massive cutback in the social employment scheme; whether it is his intention to ensure that this scheme will continue at the 1991 level; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
55 Mr. Cotter asked the Minister for Labour if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern in relation to the massive cutback in the social employment scheme; whether it is his intention to ensure that this scheme will continue at the 1991 level; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
73 Mr. Cosgrave asked the Minister for Labour if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern in relation to the massive cutback in the social employment scheme; whether it is his intention to ensure that this scheme will continue at the 1991 level; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3, 41, 46, 55 and 73 together.
Expenditure on the social employment scheme in 1992 is projected at £72.9 million compared with £68.943 million in 1991. Activity on the scheme in 1991 amounted to approximately 11,500 man years while the 1992 level of activity will be in the region of approximately 11,000 man years.
The scheme will continue in operation. The scheme is no longer eligible for assistance from the European Social Fund and is now fully funded by the Exchequer. The level of Exchequer funding for each year will be agreed in the context of the annual Estimates process.
I intend to pursue the question of the reintroduction of European Social Fund assistance for the scheme in the context of the negotiations now under way on the Structural Funds in the period after 1993.
Is the Minister aware of the effect of the cutbacks in the social employment scheme? The Minister said that it amounted to 10 per cent but in my constituency, of which I have practical experience, the reduction is as high as 30 per cent. Is the Minister aware of the hardship this is causing to the long term unemployed because it is their only hope of experiencing or getting work? Any decision by the Government to eliminate the chance of escaping unemployment is a very bad one. Will the Minister also agree that much of the work in local communities carried out by people on the social employment scheme was excellent? Will he further agree that any reduction in the social employment scheme will have a very negative effect on local communities?
From personal experience I know that the social employment scheme has worked exceptionally well in local communities. Good work has been done which has given job satisfaction to the people involved. However, the Deputy was tilting at windmills when she talked about discontinuation of the scheme because, as I pointed out, the Government have committed £72.9 million to the scheme in 1992. I emphasise to the House that this is purely and simply Exchequer funding; hitherto, the Exchequer had assistance from the European Social Fund and it is a measure of the Government's commitment that they are providing £72.9 million from the Exchequer this year. I stated quite clearly in my reply that the scheme will continue in operation.
Deputy Ahearn rose.
Two questions remain to be answered and time is fast running out. I have asked Members to have regard for equity and justice in this matter. Let us seek to dispose of the last two questions.
I have a short supplementary question. The Minister said he intended to seek further ESF funding for this scheme. Why were steps not taken to prevent the scheme finishing?
It was a European decision, not an Irish Government decision, needless to say.
Why did the Minister not take steps to ensure that——
Question No. 4, please.
We fought to retain it.
It was very remiss of the Government to allow the scheme to be ended.
I totally reject that accusation.
Let us not waste precious time in arguing.
