Vol. 480 No. 2
36 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise and Employment the steps, if any, she intends to take to establish the 25,000 place programme which she proposes to develop to tackle long-term unemployment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [13994/97]
The programme for the new millennium contains a commitment to establish 25,000 places which will pay the going rate for the job. The action which I will take in this area will be driven by the need to ensure better opportunities for the long-term unemployed.
Will the Minister indicate whether the 25,000 place programme will be additional to the existing community employment programme? Will there be a move towards a combined participation rate of 65,000 across the programmes?
The intention is not to add to the existing 40,000 but to ensure that those engaged in the valuable work of community employment are valued for the work they do and that it is made more attractive for people to be involved in community employment by paying them a rate for the job. The CORI pilot project which was in place for the past two years has been evaluated and we have to learn from that experience. The intention is to have 25,000 people paid the going rate for the job. This is an appropriate way to proceed.
That was not the impression given during the election campaign.
Is this not misleading for the general public who heard in the election campaign that this was a major issue and who will see that one of the planks in the programme for Government is the establishment of the 25,000 place programme? Is it not a huge and dramatic let down for the long-term unemployed, allegedly a priority of this Government, to find that the system of working 20 hours for their £80 will be replaced by a system which will still pay £80 but on the basis of a notional rate for the job? This is the only change envisaged.
The long-term unemployed and those involved in community employment schemes will not feel let down. During the lifetime of the Deputy's Government only 3,000 community employment scheme participants were paid the rate for the job. This measure is a dramatic improvement on that record and many people will welcome that fact. It is important that we understand the priorities and the concerns of the long-term unemployed. In the first instance we want to give them valuable work and training opportunities and to ensure their dignity is returned to them by paying them the rate for the job. This commitment seeks to ensure that 25,000 people are paid the rate for the job. It is not merely a commitment in relation to this issue; we also want to look at other labour market interventions, many of which are operated from the Department of Social Welfare. I have had preliminary discussions with the new Minister for Social Welfare and I intend to have further discussions with him to ensure that we provide worthwhile and valued work and training opportunities for those who are at the margins of our society, who are isolated and who have been stripped of their dignity and self-worth.
From a practical point of view, what does the Minister envisage the dramatic change will be for the long-term unemployed by being on this programme? Is it not the case that they will receive the same amount of money? In most cases, they will be working the same number of hours and will be in the same programmes with the same sponsors. How can the Minister present this as a significant development from the point of view of the long-term unemployed?
On the contrary, their contribution will be more valued and recognised. The experience we have gained from the pilot CORI project, introduced by the Deputy's Government, is good and worthwhile and we want to build on that. This programme is an acknowledgment by the Government that we wish to value, in a more meaningful way, the contribution made by people who engage in community employment. As the Deputy is aware, paying people the rate for the job will give the individuals involved far more value than the current system. That is one of the bones of contention and one of the reasons it is difficult for people to take up schemes. I understand that as many as three in four people who are offered community employment refuse to partake in it. That is very unsatisfactory. The way the Government intends to proceed in relation to this issue and other labour market interventions is designed to encourage people to take up opportunities in community employment.
I would not seek to advise the Minister as to the possible reaction from those involved in community employment in her own constituency. However, I would speculate that people certainly expected this programme to be more than a replacement of the existing programme.
I can confirm that.
Thank you, it is good to have knowledge from the ground.
This programme is much more than Deputy Bruton did as Minister.
Will the new programme be open to participation by women in the home who, until now, have not had access to many of these schemes? Is it the Minister's intention to extend the criteria for participation in this area?
Yes. I wonder why Deputy Bruton did not do that when he was Minister. I am very amused at his great plans and ideas less than two weeks into Opposition.
These are not views, they are questions. The Minister expressed very strong views when she was in Opposition but it appears she does not have any views when in Government.
I have many views and I intend to do something about them. There are wonderful public officials in the Department of Enterprise and Employment and clearly it was not they who prevented Deputy Bruton taking action. I presume he could not make up his mind or did not want to take action. I will consider the matter of women in the home as I am anxious to provide as many people as possible with the opportunity to return to the world of work.
