Vol. 481 No. 5
5 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his views on whether the fall in the live register figure of over 26,000 in July 1997 was mainly attributable to the impact of the anti-fraud campaign introduced in 1996; and the further measures, if any, he proposes in this regard. [16561/97]
The decrease in the live register in the 12 months up to the end of September 1997 was over 29,000. The drop in the month of September alone of over 9,000 is the highest September drop on record. It is also significant that it was the first time since 1990 in which the live register for the month of September was below 250,000.
In addition to the increased employment arising from the improvement in economic activity, the programme of measures to combat abuse of unemployment schemes, which has been in place since the end of 1996, is undoubtedly a major contributing factor to the fall in the numbers of unemployed. Features of this programme include the more effective application of the conditionality requirements for entitlement to unemployment payments, more targeted reviews of the entitlements of claimants on the live register, better co-operation and exchange of information between FÁS and the Department in directing unemployed people to available opportunities and greater publicity in relation to fraud and to the opportunities available to unemployed people. Better co-ordination of control activity at local level through the local area control teams has also contributed to the development of a more effective control programme.
The effectiveness of the control programme can be further improved in this connection and I will be giving particular attention to the following areas: specific measures to identify more accurately the extent of fraud and abuse and the areas in which it is most prevalent; modernising our systems, using information technology to enable payments to be made more efficiently and to provide more effective control and cross checking systems. Tighter systems provide the most effective controls; ensuring that procedures at all stages of the claiming process are such as to minimise the potential for fraudulent claiming. In this connection a major review of these procedures has been undertaken and I am making arrangements for an independent assessment of the effectiveness of current arrangements; maintaining adequate and systematic review and investigative systems to detect fraud where it occurs, giving particular attention to areas of greatest risk. A number of specific control exercises are being put in place at present; applying the full rigours of the law where fraud is detected, including prosecution and effective arrangements for recovering amounts wrongly claimed; measures to assist people wishing to make the transition from unemployment and potential fraudulent claiming to legitimate activity through using the various employment support schemes which are now available.
I intend to put an increased emphasis on the positive measures to encourage and support people moving from unemployment to employment. While there are a number of very good initiatives in this area the areas of training, retraining and educational opportunities merit more attention if we are to provide the unemployed — especially the long-term unemployed — with the necessary skills and ability which are essential for the current labour market. I will explore this matter further in the coming months.
The team of job facilitators in my Department will have a major role to play in this. Their task is to ensure that the unemployed and employers are fully aware, at local level, of the Department's wide range of pro-employment, educational and training programmes. They also have a significant part to play in assessing the needs of the unemployed, supporting them in seeking job opportunities, informing and directing them towards the wide range of initiatives and options provided by various Government Departments, agencies, voluntary bodies and community groups.
I am encouraged that the trend in the live register continues to be downward and I assure the Deputy that everything possible will continue to be done by my Department, by way of initiatives both to combat abuse and help unemployed people get back to work, to ensure that this trend continues.
Deputy O'Keeffe may ask only one supplementary question as the time for priority questions is now exhausted.
It is not exhausted as a result of any questions I asked. The previous question lasted 15 minutes.
Do I take it that the Minister agrees with the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General in which he attributed the drop in the live register figures to the impact of the measures introduced by the previous Government last year? Does the Minister recognise there may be a problem in relation to the control officers who have been appointed, some of whom have, apparently, been grounded due to inadequate resources and prevented from following up trails they believe would lead to the discovery of further fraud?
The Comptroller and Auditor General was dealing with a particular period in that report. His comments on the Department were, by and large, quite helpful. With a budget somewhere in the region of £4.7 billion the figures in relation to overpayments and the clawback of same, while a big sum, must be seen in comparison with the overall budget. It is a figure which must be looked at in future.
One of the first issues I addressed as Minister was whether sufficient funds were made available in last year's Estimate to ensure that people involved in control throughout the country had sufficient resources to allow them to do their work. I asked the Department to redirect its efforts from one area into another to ensure the correct approach was being taken in relation to fraud. I am actively looking at that issue on an ongoing basis. Such redirection can be defended because of the good work which has been done.
All the Department's staff are obliged to ensure that taxpayers' money is disbursed a proper way and that it goes to the people it should. Unfortunately, it is a fact of life that there are people who will endeavour to defraud the system. That is why 600 out of a total employment complement of 4,200 are specifically designated in the area of control to investigate fraud. There is an obligation on every staff member to ensure, when dealing with claimants, that the information they receive is correct. Department officials are keenly aware of that.
That concludes Priority Questions.
I do not wish to get into an argument, but I understood the procedure was that when priority time ran out we proceeded to deal with the questions we were on and subsequent questions in normal time.
It is only the last two Priority Questions that are allowed in ordinary time. The first three questions cannot be taken in ordinary time. Had I not taken Deputy O'Keeffe's question, it would have fallen and could not have been taken.
It sounds very illogical.
That may be, but it is the Standing Order.
