Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 19 Mar 1997

Vol. 476 No. 5

Adjournment Debate. - Job Creation Incentives.

Mr. Callely

I thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, and your office for allowing me to raise this matter this evening. I call on the Minister for Enterprise and Employment to reverse this Government's job creation discrimination against Dublin. I am particularly surprised that an elected Dublin representative such as the Minister for Enterprise and Employment, Deputy Richard Bruton, should stand over and support incentives for job creation outside the Dublin area. This Minister's and the new IDA-Ireland policy of discrimination and bias against Dublin will long be remembered as a resurrection of the rural ritual in our capital city. This Government has attempted to strip Dublin of its much needed incentives for job creation and continued economic development.

I tabled parliamentary questions on the subject on 11 March seeking the Minister's views on the need to promote jobs in the Dublin region, to which he replied that Dublin and the eastern region generally had been successful in securing a large proportion of inward investment and went on to say that job creation on the part of Forbairt-assisted companies has also been exceptional.

On 6 March I tabled parliamentary questions asking that new or additional measures be focused on the north side of the city which I represent. In reply, the Minister made similar remarks to the effect that Dublin and the eastern region had been successful in recent years.

I draw the attention of the Minister of State to some questions I tabled to the Minister for Social Welfare on 11 March on the percentage of social welfare recipients with an address in the Dublin region. As one might expect, sadly and unfortunately, Dublin had by far the highest percentage of such recipients, over 28 per cent, followed a long way behind by Cork with 11 per cent and Galway with 5 per cent, all other areas showing single figures.

I also tabled some questions to the Taoiseach on 11 March in relation to the unemployment rate in the Dublin region. I was given an interesting figure in response to my question, showing that the relevant rate in April 1996 was 12.3 per cent compared with a national average of 11.9 per cent. The Taoiseach went on to state that the average unemployment rate for the European Union was 10.9 per cent.

Why is this Government standing over and supporting incentives for job creation outside the Dublin region, bearing in mind those facts and figures? As I travel around my constituency of Dublin North Central I am only too well aware, as are others, how bad the job scene is. There are specific areas of high unemployment in every part of Dublin and in my constituency it is in excess of 70 per cent in some cases.

On the basis of the factual information provided by the Taoiseach and Minister for Social Welfare I ask for an end to this rural ritual, this attempted rape of our struggling economy in Dublin. Dublin warrants, and I demand, a radical vision and level playing field in job creation.

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise and Employment (Mr. Rabbitte)

Ireland offers businesses an integrated incentive package that broadly applies to all parts of the State equally. The package also extends on a broadly equal basis to overseas investors — FDI — indigenous manufacturing companies and businesses operating in certain traded services, that is designated services.

This package is promoted and administered principally through IDA-Ireland and Forbairt, with SFADCo and Udarás na Gaeltachta responsible for the promotion and administration of their specific areas. Other agencies, such as FÁS, play an important supporting role in the implementation of these incentives while local authorities work closely with the principal promotional agencies. This unified approach and unity of purpose have been singularly successful over the years and secured spectacular success in the lifetime of this Government. The fruits of this unity of effort are visible nationwide.

I find it most disturbing that Fianna Fáil — through this question this evening — appears intent on breaking with the national consensus so crucial to our success to date. If we are to take this question at face value it would appear that Fianna Fáil has decided to play politics with national industrial policy, something the parties in this House have refrained from doing in the national interest.

In contrast, this Government and the three parties that comprise it have maintained the consensus approach to industrial policy and national development. The general scheme can be traced back to the former Taoiseach, the late Séan Lemass, something the three parties in Government would acknowledge.

Ireland's general incentive package has been developed and maintained by a succession of Administrations involving all parties in this House and certain agreed changes were made in the way that integrated policy operated from time to time. For example, it is modified in the case of Gaeltacht regions to take account of their special circumstances, remoteness and cultural significance.

Another example of ensuring fitness or determination of purpose is the International Financial Services Centre package which takes account of the emerging role of international financial services, the decision of the Government of the day being to develop our capacity to attract such services here.

There are other examples of targeting one might mention, such as the Tallaght Task Force established to deal with the consequences of the Packard closure and the Galway Task Force established in the wake of the Digital announcement. Such initiatives were taken within that unified framework, to take account of exigencies as they arose. All are characterised by a certain unity of purpose including, at the political level, an appropriate approach to national development and industrial policy.

During the lifetime of this Government in particular industrial policy, as implemented by the Government and until now supported by all parties in the House, has achieved spectacular success. Between the years 1992 and 1994 employment in Dublin was growing at a rate of approximately 4,000 annually and nationally employment was expanding at a rate of 19,600 per annum. However, between 1994 and 1996 employment in Dublin grew by 19,300 annually and nationally by 51,700 annually.

The conclusion to be drawn is obvious. Employment generally has grown rapidly over the past three years and is more evenly spread than ever between Dublin and the nation as a whole, which is good for Dublin and the country.

Mr. Callely

Rubbish.

Mr. Rabbitte

Dublin has benefited in one area especially — the attraction to Ireland of global-scale, very large facilities, established by some of the biggest firms worldwide in the electronics sector and rapidly growing international services such as call centres. These companies have special requirements we are meeting. In locating in Dublin, they are choosing Ireland.

The Government remains conscious of the national interest generally and pays special attention to the particular needs of our smaller towns and urban long-term unemployment black spots.

Mr. Callely

To hell with Dublin.

Mr. Rabbitte

The recent announcement by my colleague, the Minister for Enterprise and Employment, Deputy Richard Bruton, aims to reinforce the role of development agencies in promoting industrial development nationwide and to emphasise the flexibility available to them in pursuing that goal.

As to the long-term unemployed and urban blackspots, this Government, of all Governments, cannot be accused of ignoring need. A wide range of measures has been adopted.

Mr. Callely

What a joke. Rubbish.

Mr. Rabbitte

My colleague, the Minister for Social Welfare, has instituted pro-job reforms in social welfare, for example, an expanded back-to-work allowance scheme, changes in the family income supplement and the tapering of the adult dependency allowance. These measures are helping people back to work, ensuring a fair share for working families, part-time workers, working parents on low incomes and represent action on the jobs crisis, as does the affirmative action programme introduced by the Minister incorporated in the three schemes, Workplace, Job Initiative and Job Start, and the new local employment service, LES. Dublin has 12 of the 38 area-based partnerships along with eight of the 18 local employment service offices.

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, why is Deputy Molloy muttering?

Mr. Molloy

The rules of the House should be applied equally to Ministers.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I would appreciate it if the Minister would now conclude since his time is exhausted.

Mr. Rabbitte

In the same way as the agencies pay special attention to the needs of our smaller towns and rural areas, I can assure the House they are also intensively promoting new towns and inner cities. These efforts are bearing fruit. In respect of Dublin I might refer Deputy Callely and the House to the proposal for a new national distribution park at Clonburris, Clondalkin, County Dublin which, when fully developed, could provide employment for up to 5000 people, most of those jobs of an industrial type, exactly what the nearby blackspots sorely need on an appropriate scale. This Government is not ignoring the needs of communities in those blackspots in the interest of rural employment and smaller towns.

Mr. Callely

That is exactly what it is doing.

Mr. Rabbitte

The reality is that within the framework of what was until now agreed policy in the national interest this Government is catering to the needs of all. If the Minister's announcement had concentrated on what this Government is doing to alleviate unemployment blackspots, Deputy Callely would be tabling a motion this evening denouncing an appalling decision, one of the biggest body blows to our small towns and rural areas. The Deputy is playing politics.

Mr. Molloy

On a point of information, what is the time limit allowed to Members?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There is no such thing as a point of information. Deputy Molloy is now called and I hope he will line in with the time.

Mr. Molloy

I do not understand the comment "line in with the time". It does not seem to apply to Ministers, which is extraordinary.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It does indeed. The Deputy will know the Minister exceeded his time by one minute despite the protestations of the Chair. I can assure the Deputy he will not go over his time.

Mr. Molloy

That is the point I was making. I have no intention of exceeding my time.