Vol. 896 No. 4
65. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection if employees of companies (details supplied) who are tasked with the privatisation of the job placement role of her Department have been vetted by An Garda Síochána; and how she will ensure that these companies operate within the provisions of the Department's customer charter 2013-2015. [40100/15]
This arises from a question we dealt with earlier, namely, the State out-sourcing those who are long-term unemployed to Seetec and Turas Nua under the JobPath scheme and to ensure that all the protections that currently hold to the Department of Social Protection also hold in regard to these companies, in particular Garda vetting, data protection and any other restrictions in terms of the sensitive data they carry.
JobPath is a new approach to employment activation and it will help support people who are long-term unemployed and those most at risk of becoming long-term unemployed to secure and sustain paid work. Following the completion of a public procurement process, two companies were selected to provide the JobPath service - Turas Nua and Seetec.
Garda vetting is typically undertaken in respect of people who work in registered organisations through which they have unsupervised access to children or vulnerable adults. In the case of JobPath staff, Garda vetting is not a mandatory requirement as their client base does not include such categories of people and as the work with clients is performed in a shared office with supervisors present. However, I am advised that both JobPath providers undertake background checks on prospective employees. These checks include independent verification-screening services, reference checking and, in some cases, Garda vetting.
In regard to the customer charter issue, this is referring to the Department’s Customer Charter 2013-2015 which contains a commitment to deliver a high quality service to all customers. That is why we have transformed all of the Intreo offices around the country. Deputies have complimented the Department on the changes we have made, which allow people make appointments and be treated with dignity, privacy and respect.
JobPath providers are required, under their contracts, to provide a service statement to each jobseeker that sets out the service that they can expect to receive. The service statement must contain elements that were specified by the Department including a service guarantee to ensure that all participants receive a baseline level of service and have access to a transparent complaints process. A copy of the service statement must be provided to each participant on JobPath.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
Both companies will be subject to regular on-site inspections and audits to ensure that JobPath is delivered in accordance with contractual obligations and the service statement. In addition the Department will commission customer satisfaction surveys to independently assess if customers who are referred to JobPath are satisfied with the level, and quality, of service delivered by the contractors. Failure by the contractors to satisfy the Department’s inspectors or to achieve a satisfactory score in the independent survey will result in payment penalties being applied.
As far as I know, Turas Nua employees are Garda vetted, whereas Seetec which obviously is a private company has its own private system. The customer charter for Turas Nua does not seem to be as accessible online as the Seetec one and that should be corrected. There could be highly sensitive data about people who are long-time unemployed for a multitude of reasons. There could be a big file for each of them. For JobPath companies to properly understand the background and how to activate or help somebody, I presume they have access to some of the data held in the Department. If they are held in it, the Minister is fully responsible and takes the hit if something untoward happens. In this case two private companies, with links abroad, are tasked with encouraging, hassling or whatever else some of the long-term unemployed into finding employment. Can we be assured that the Department's current standards of data protection and sharing of information apply to these private companies?
Like other Deputies, the Deputy has previously complained about the Department not having enough case officers to deal with all of the people who, unfortunately, became unemployed because of the crash and who are now going back to work in large numbers. We want to ensure this opportunity is open to everybody who has become long-term unemployed. Obviously, as the numbers reduce, some of the services provided will be for the limited period of years of the contract.
Regarding the organisations mentioned, we will have a system to allow clients to refer back to the Department of Social Protection if they have issues or complaints. A system of client surveys will commence in the new year. The process of referring people to JobPath has just begun. About 3,500 people have been referred and it is an assignment for one year. I will take what the Deputy is saying into account and if issues arise, we will be happy to look at them because what is key is the quality of the service the unemployed person receives to enable him or her to get back into work. We recognise that being involved in education may be part of it.
66. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection her views on the JobBridge scheme; if she envisages any amendment or change to the scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40068/15]
My question is to ascertain if the Minister intends to make changes to the JobBridge scheme in view of a number of recent reports.
JobBridge is a national scheme which was introduced in July 2011 in response to the unprecedented collapse in the economy, particularly the sharp increase in unemployment. As the Deputy will remember, we were heading to have nearly 500,000 people unemployed and an unemployment rate from the live register of 15.1%. Thankfully, the figures today are much more positive and moving in the right direction. It was announced today that the unemployment rate had reduced to 8.9%, dipping below 9% for the first time, something Members opposite said on many occasions we would not see in the lifetime of this Dáil, but we have. This is very much down to the Government targeting a job-led recovery.
The primary aim of the scheme is to give unemployed people the opportunity to secure work experience and then to access work. It comes down to the old saying, it is necessary to break the cycle whereby one cannot get a job without work experience but one cannot get experience without a job. So many young people and others who lost their jobs during the recession have said constantly to me that they could not get back to work unless they could get experience. JobBridge has allowed that to happen.
To date, the scheme has attracted the voluntary participation of more than 44,000 people. It is very much voluntary participation. A total of 18,000 host organisations are involved on a voluntary basis. They offered a wide range of work experience opportunities. Currently, there are more than 4,800 people on internships. Approximately 36% of participants progress into paid employment immediately on completion of their placement. The independent evaluation of JobBridge by Indecon found that the figure rises to more than 61% within five months of completion of an internship. Those progression outcomes are the highest of any general employment or training programme offered by the State and compare favourably with similar programmes in other countries.
I thank the Minister of State. We will come back to him.
I will just finish on this point, in fairness to Deputy O'Dea. We are tendering for an evaluation process. The tenders have gone out and we hope to have an evaluation process in place early in the new year.
I do not deny there have been some positive outcomes to the JobBridge programme but that should not blind us to the fact that there are certain defects in it. Is the Minister of State aware of the report issued by the National Youth Council of Ireland last February following an extensive survey, which found instances of poorly designed internships, inadequate monitoring, unacceptable treatment of interns, lack of clarity regarding the rights of participants and insufficient monitoring? I do not say that applies to every individual on a JobBridge scheme but those problems have manifested themselves and the National Youth Council of Ireland decided to refer to them in its report and called for measures to alleviate them. Is the Minister of State aware of the report which highlights those particular problems and will the problems be part of the review he has initiated?
JobBridge has been a very successful programme, both for the participants and small and medium enterprises, SMEs. The closing date for the receipt of tenders was 19 October 2015 and the tender evaluation process has been completed. The Department has notified the preferred tenderer and in accordance with procurement guidelines is now observing the mandatory 14 days standstill period before the contract can be formally awarded. It is anticipated that the project will formally commence on 24 November and it will comprise a comprehensive qualitative assessment of host organisations and participants' perspective on the quality and future of JobBridge, including the one-to-one case studies.
I have met many of the groups that have issued reports and they also had positive feedback as well as negative. That is why it is so important that an evaluation is done in order that we can proceed on the basis of evidence. I expect to have the evaluation completed early in the new year and then we can have a proper conversation on how we can improve and progress the process.
Is the Minister of State aware of the report by Impact published last April which suggested the JobBridge scheme in its present format should be discontinued and replaced by a different type of scheme? It was suggested that it would be sub-divided into three different internship programmes aimed, respectively, at youth, graduates and long-term unemployed. Do the terms of reference of the evaluation body considering JobBridge at the moment allow for that?
The Government is trying to conduct evidence-based evaluations. Many schemes have been exceptionally successful across the country such as the JobsPlus element for the long-term unemployed. Moreover, it has been successful in the Deputy's native county where 60% of those involved in JobsPlus have been long-term unemployed. There has been a suite of measures in this regard and the Government is endeavouring to examine each scheme and then, with an evidence-based programme, consider what changes might be needed or improvements made. I launched one of the reports to which the Deputy referred and certainly had many discussions and conversations. All of the reports, of course, will have an influence and will be taken into consideration in the evaluation, as is only right.
67. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection for an update on the issue of determination orders which were not catered for in the legislation on jobseeker's transition payments; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40069/15]
The purpose of this question is to ascertain the position on people who up to now have been open to being pursued by the Department of Social Protection to meet their responsibilities when their partners are lone parents in receipt of lone parent's allowance.
My Department has indicated its intention to review the current maintenance and liable relative procedures since the introduction of the one-parent family payment reforms. While this work is being actively pursued, it is a highly complex issue that involves undertaking a detailed review and any change will require legislation. The issue of maintenance payments, first and foremost, is a private matter between the people concerned and, if they cannot solve the problem, it is a matter for the courts through family law provisions. The provisions on liability to maintain family contained in social welfare legislation are separate from family law legislation. In each case in which a one-parent family payment is awarded the Department seeks to trace the other parent, that is, the liable relative, to ascertain whether he or she is in a financial position to contribute towards the cost of the payment. This does not alter an individual’s obligation to pay maintenance pursuant to a court order. The Department’s legislative basis to issue maintenance assessments to a liable relative does not currently extend to the jobseeker’s transitional payment. As I noted, this matter is under review.
Once the one-parent family payment recipient’s youngest child reaches the age of seven years and the recipient's entitlement to the one-parent family payment ceases, the liability assessed under the liable relative provisions no longer applies. The Department advises the liable relative accordingly. It is important to note that this does not affect any other maintenance arrangement that may be in place between the parents.
While I understand the position on maintenance, the difficulty is that, on foot of the recent change, a person must have a child under the age of seven years to qualify for lone parent's allowance. Until recently, however, that age was 14 years, which meant that in the case of a single parent with a child under the age of 14 years and who was in receipt of the single parent allowance, the State could pursue the non-custodial parent to make a contribution to the State towards the cost of providing the allowance. As a result of the change, people can only receive lone parent's allowance while they have a child aged up to seven years. This means that lone parents with children over seven years but under 14 have been transferred to the jobseeker's transition payment and that the State does not have the same right to pursue the non-custodial parent when the lone parent has been transferred from receiving lone parent's allowance to the jobseeker's transition payment. Why should such people be let off the hook? Why not put in place a provision whereby the people in question, in so far as they can be identified, can be pursued in the same way they have been pursuable up to now?
In 2014 the Department issued 2,586 determination orders for maintenance.
As a result of the transfer of claimants from the one-parent family payment to the jobseeker's transitional payment in July 2015, 134 or 5% of liable relatives issued with determination orders in 2014 no longer have a liability under the scheme.
The matter of maintenance between a couple who are separating is primarily a matter for the courts. Obviously, parents who have means should contribute to the rearing of their children and should be, as far as possible, involved in their children's upbringing, save in circumstances where there may be issues of domestic violence and so on. As I said, we are reviewing the legislation. As a lawyer, Deputy O'Dea will be aware that this is a matter that falls to be addressed in the context of any arrangements put in place between the two parties. It is important that each of the parents contributes to the upbringing and maintenance of their children.
I understand what the Minister is saying. Maintenance has always been a matter primarily for the parents and the courts. Up to now, an absent parent of a child aged up to 14 years could be pursued by the State to contribute to the welfare the State is paying to the parent who is living with the child. Currently, an absent parent can only be pursued until the child has reached aged seven. I do not see any good reason this provision cannot be extended to such time as the single parent is in no longer in receipt of jobseeker's transition payments, which would be the same as applied previously.
As I said, we are currently engaged in an indepth review of the legislation. Any changes deemed necessary will require legislation, which will be brought before the House in due course. We want to arrive at a situation whereby lone parents transitioning to jobseeker's payments, whose children are between seven and 14 years and settled in school, can be offered educational and developmental opportunities and, after their children have reached 14 years, are encouraged into paid employment. Obviously, during the early stage of the child's life, the issue of determination orders is under current legislation in respect of lone parents. We are actively reviewing potential changes to the legislation, which will brought before the Dáil in due course.
68. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection if she will consider reversing the change made to the farm assist scheme with respect to income disregards given that it has had a serious negative affect on the income levels of already struggling farming families; the reason she has not carried out an analysis to assess the impact that the change has had on these families; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40148/15]
Will the Minister consider reversing the change to the farm assist scheme with respect to income disregards given the serious affect this change has had on the income of farming families and will she update the House on the reason an impact assessment of the affect of these cuts on families in receipt of farm assist has not been carried out?
The farm assist scheme provides support for farmers on low incomes and is similar to jobseeker’s allowance. Farm assist recipients retain the advantages of the jobseeker’s allowance scheme, such as the retention of secondary benefits and access to activation programmes. The 2015 Revised Estimates for the Department provide for expenditure of almost €89 million on the farm assist scheme.
Changes introduced in budgets 2012 and 2013 have brought farm assist into closer alignment with the treatment under the jobseeker’s allowance scheme of self-employed persons. Farm families with the lowest income were least affected by these changes as the headline rates of farm assist were maintained.
Last year, the Christmas bonus was reintroduced, payable at 25% of the weekly rate. This year, I am in a position to provide a 75% Christmas bonus payment for all long-term welfare recipients, including recipients of farm assist. All recipients, with children, of farm assist are benefitting from the increase in child benefit of €5 per month per child as announced in budget 2015. In addition, farm assist recipients eligible for the fuel allowance will gain from the increase in January of €2.50 per week, from €20 to €22.50 per week, over the fuel season. Recipients of farm assist will see a significant improvement in their payments. In particular, the Christmas bonus will constitute a significant payment to such families.
One would think from the Minister's response that her stewardship of the Department of Social Protection has led to an improvement for farmers in receipt of farm assist. Unfortunately, her response bears no reflection on reality. When was the last time the Minister set foot on a family farm or the farm of someone who depends on farm assist as weekly income?
There are 1,500 farming families in Donegal and 9,500 such families across the country who are in receipt of farm assist. For those who are not aware of it, farm assist is paid at the level of jobseeker's allowance. Previously only 70% of a farm family's income in terms of means was taken into account. Under the Minister's stewardship, every euro earned by a farm family is taken into account for the purposes of farm assist payments, which removes the incentive for people to work and be productive. As a result of this change, many farm families are now surviving at below subsistence level.
Hear, hear.
It is long past time this change, which is having a damaging impact on rural Ireland, was reversed. It effectively sends out the message that farm families, particularly those with small farms, are not wanted in the context of farming our land. I call on the Minister to commit to an impact assessment of this change with a view to reversing it.
One of the cruellest cuts ever made by any Government, namely, abolition of the Christmas bonus, was introduced by a Fianna Fáil-led Government.
We are talking about farm assist.
I am happy to say that it is being partially reinstated in December at a cost of almost €200 million. I am delighted to point out to the Deputy that farm families, who are in receipt of farm assist, will properly benefit from that payment.
What about the people who are losing their entitlement to farm assist?
Fianna Fáil cruelly took that away from such families and never sought to mitigate it in any way.
There are 52 weeks in a year.
Answer the question.
In addition, families in receipt of farm assist who also get a fuel allowance will receive an increase of €2.50 per week in fuel allowance from 1 January next, which is something that Fianna Fáil in government failed to even look at.
