Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 3 Nov 1998

Vol. 495 No. 7

Written Answers. - Community Employment Schemes.

Proinsias De Rossa

Ceist:

101 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment her response to the Deloitte and Touche review of the community employment programme commissioned by her Department; the changes, if any, to be made in the operation of community employment schemes; if she will ensure that any proposed changes do not create further obstacles to the return of single parents to the workforce; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21631/98]

John Perry

Ceist:

106 Mr. Perry asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the plans, if any, she has for the future size and scope of community employment; when a review will be carried out on the community employment programmes, both the integration and part-time job options, pilot part-time jobs opportunities programme and the jobs initiative; and when the expansion of targeted employment measures will be evident. [21628/98]

Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Ms Harney)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 101 and 106 together.

On Thursday I published the independent review of the community employment programme which was carried by Deloitte & Touche. The review covers the integration option and the job option. The job option is currently being converted into a rate for the job option, on a phased basis. The pilot part-time job opportunities programme no longer exists, some of its features having been incorporated in the rate for the job option. It would be timely to have an independent review of the jobs initiative next year as the first set of participants begin their third and final year.

For the review of community employment Deloitte & Touche were asked to evaluate the success of the programme in meeting its objectives; to consider its efficacy in the light of current and evolving labour market conditions; and to make proposals to improve the programme within existing resources.

The key finding of the review is that community employment is largely meeting its objectives of providing job opportunities for the long-term unemployed and socially excluded and assisting participants to become job or progression-ready. The review makes a case for a substantial reduction in the numbers of places on the programme in the light of the current labour market, i.e., strong growth in employment, reduction in unemployment and long-term unemployment, and tightening labour market giving rise to recruitment difficulties in some sectors. The review further makes the point that any savings from a reduction in the size of CE should be used to provide both enhanced and additional preventative and reintegration labour market supports for long-term unemployed persons either within the proposed remodelled CE programme or through other labour market supports.

The overall point emerging from the report is that for the investment currently made in community employment there could be a significantly better outcome for participants through directing some participants towards other active labour market programmes and through enhancing the training and market linkage elements of the remaining substantial number of places on the programme.

I am anxious to ensure that the proposals in Deloitte & Touche are discussed by and with the social partners. I believe that we should give strategic consideration to the mix and quality of our active labour market programmes so that they progress participants towards jobs, and I believe this should be of paramount concern in related Partnership 2000 discussions.

With specific regard to lone parents the report recommends a further dedicated review once sufficient data has been generated to allow an analysis of the current growing participation of lone parents on the scheme, which has risen from 4 per cent of participants in 1994 to 22 per cent at present. It will be at least two years before a sufficient data base for this purpose will have built up.

One of the recommendations in Deloitte & Touche is that 25 and not 21 should be the minimum age for eligibility to participate in a CE programme. While not directly targeted at lone parents, this would have implications for younger lone parents but the point is not to limit their participation in CE but to direct them to programmes with better outcomes, such as specific skills training.

The anecdotal evidence is that the progression rate of lone parents into a job or employability enhancing programme is lower than for other categories of participants on CE. This is a problem we have to address by developing progression supports, encouraging lone parents to participate in active labour market programmes with better employability outcomes than CE and designing such programmes with more flexibility.