JOINT COMMITTEE ON ENTERPRISE AND SMALL BUSINESS díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 1 Mar 2006

Joint Employment Report 2004-05 and Annual Progress Report 2006: Presentation.

Vice Chairman (Deputy M. Brady)

I welcome Mr. Paul Ginnell, policy and support worker with the European Anti-Poverty Network, EAPN, Mr. Eric Conroy, secretary general of the Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed, Ms Orla O'Connor, policy worker with the National Women's Council of Ireland, and Mr. Philip O'Connor, co-ordinator at Dublin Employment Pact and EAPN Ireland and the representative of EAPN's Europe employment task force.

Before I ask the witnesses to commence their presentation, I draw their attention to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, this same privilege does not extend to witnesses. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Mr. Paul Ginnell

We thank the committee for the opportunity to present our concerns. This presentation is a follow-up to an input made by our group in October 2004.

We are a working group of anti-poverty and social inclusion organisations co-ordinated by the European Anti-Poverty Network to monitor, engage and influence developments in employment policy in Ireland. Previously, this mainly involved focusing on national employment action plans but, as the committee is aware, due to changes at the EU level as part of the revised Lisbon strategy, it is part of the national reform programme. The aim of our working group is to scrutinise the development and implementation of employment policy under this process and bring it further into the public domain as opposed to it being dealt with purely by Departments or as part of a selective process. Our input today is an ongoing part of this work.

It is important to highlight that, as organisations engaged in this process, we are extremely disappointed that the Irish national reform programme 2005-08 was developed without any consultation with community and voluntary organisations. The issues we will highlight at this meeting will relate to recommendations and criticisms that have been continually raised by the European Commission in respect of the content and implementation of Ireland's national employment action plan and, most recently, in terms of the content of our national reform programme. These issues were also the basis of our submission, which, although uninvited, was put forward for consideration under the national reform programme. This submission was forwarded to members of the joint committee in advance. It has been updated to take account of a change made since October.

There will be four brief inputs. Mr. Eric Conroy from the Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed will make an input on active labour market measures to support those most removed from the labour market. Ms Orla O'Connor from the National Women's Council of Ireland will comment on child care. Mr. Philip O'Connor from Dublin Employment Pact will make a short input on lifelong learning, while I will comment on poverty traps and making work pay.

Mr. Eric Conroy

I will speak on labour market activation measures in the context of employment services. Strictly defined, we are living in an era of low overall unemployment, but this masks youth, regional and long-term unemployment. The employment scenario is not so good if one looks at the matter in detail.

Those remaining unemployed are generally more distant from the labour market and require resources to enhance their ability to obtain jobs. There are many outside the strict International Labour Organisation definition of people being unemployed, namely, unemployed people who would like to work but need structured help to do so. These groups include people with disabilities, lone parents, Travellers and other disadvantaged communities. The total unemployment figures include those included in the official rate and some groups outside the labour market.

All the supports for the unemployed and jobless to seek and obtain jobs form the basis of the employment services section. A report from the National Economic and Social Council details the blueprint for the development of social and welfare services, of which employment services form a major part. As this will be the structure for social and welfare services development in the next ten years, it is an important area.

The national reform programme, under European employment guidelines 19 and 20, should seek to ensure inclusive labour markets for job seekers and those who are disadvantaged and improve the matching of labour market needs. We are concerned that in the recent Indecon study of the national employment action plan, NEAP, over 40% of respondents stated FÁS had nothing to offer to them. This is a crucial issue in engaging with unemployed persons and options must be available. The following policy areas should be addressed to achieve optimum and effective implementation of the employment guidelines.

There should be improvements to and expansion of the national employment action plan arising from the Indecon study, a good report which contains summary recommendations and touches on many important issues. There should be vertical and horizontal extension to take it beyond those in receipt of unemployment assistance and benefit. It could also be applied to young people.

There should be a wider range of education and training options and supports for the unemployed. This is related to the argument that FÁS cannot do anything for some unemployed and jobless persons in the NEAP. Education and training programmes should be available, in particular, to those most distant from the labour market. It is now more difficult for them to obtain jobs. Unemployed persons took jobs when they were available but those who are still unemployed are more distant from the market and need more help. This is where the NEAP comes into play.

There should be continuing development of local employment services, geared to helping the long-term unemployed. This is another factor in providing support for the unemployed. The local employment service is geared towards helping long-term unemployed persons and getting them back to work.

There should be implementation of the NESF recommendations in the recent report, Creating a More Inclusive Labour Market, which includes putting in place the proposed national strategic framework to co-ordinate activities in terms of the €1 billion spent in various Departments on employment supports. This should be done to get best value.

There should be continued development of active labour market programmes, including community employment, jobs initiative, social economy and rural social schemes. These are important measures in helping people move into the world of work, securing job placements, providing skills and a structure for securing jobs. They must be continued and improved.

There should be a significant increase in the budget for the high supports process to enable wider coverage to help those with significant job-holding difficulties in their lives and who need personal help. This process provides a good safety net, given the haemorrhage of jobs in manufacturing industry.

Some believe we do not have an unemployment problem, but the loss of 350 manufacturing jobs in Ballivor shows that we do. Task forces need to be established to find alternative jobs for those being made redundant. Employment solutions should be devised for vulnerable industries which could face redundancies. The national reform programme does not include enough references to these issues and should be given more power in the area of employment services. Policies to address ongoing unemployment as well as job assistance need to have a more prominent position in the current negotiations on an agreement to succeed Sustaining Progress.

Ms Orla O’Connor

As Mr. Ginnell stated, I will address the issue of child care. As members will be aware, the European Commission highlighted the inadequacies of the national reform programme in addressing and achieving equality for women, particularly in the area of increasing female participation in employment but also in the provision of affordable and high quality child care services. While not new, this criticism has been levelled at Ireland's employment action plans. Clearly, while some progress was made in budget 2006 — the National Women's Council welcomed the extension of maternity leave, the announcement that a national child care office would be established and investment in child care services and training provision — the affordabilty of child care and paid paternity and parental leave, the issues raised by the Commission, have still not been addressed.

The introduction of a payment of €1,000 per annum for children aged under six years will not alleviate the financial crisis experienced by the majority of parents who pay between €500 and €800 per month for child care. In September 2005, following extensive consultation with its members and based on international evidence, the National Women's Council of Ireland published the report, An Accessible Childcare Model. Its recommendations, which are fully costed and similar to those made by the Government's advisory body, the National Economic and Social Forum, focus on four areas. The report noted the need for a publicly subsidised child care model of provision based on developments in most European countries. It recommended provision of free places in early childhood care and education for all three and four year olds. It proposed the introduction of five days paternity leave, which is on the lower end of the scale by European standards, and 26 weeks parental leave, phased in over five years.

The development of a quality, affordable child care infrastructure is critical in a number of areas, not only in ensuring equality for women in the workplace but also in respect of addressing women's — particularly those who are lone parents — poverty. This is an important point in light of the changes and activation measures the Government is considering in respect of how lone parents are treated in the social welfare system. An affordable child care infrastructure is also critical for addressing the gender pay gap here, which is consistently wide in European terms.

Mr. Philip O’Connor

At the previous meeting we attended in October 2004, we highlighted European Commission criticisms of the Irish employment plan. As members will be aware, the Commission takes a diplomatic approach to these matters and, as such, understates its criticism of member states. We were invited to come before the joint committee again to follow up on developments that have taken place since the meeting to which I refer.

Against the background of the new national reform programme, the Commission last month issued a report, Time to Move Up a Gear. This report examines progress in the national reform programmes in the various member states. While it is generally favourable towards the Irish plan and indicates that the Commission must await the outcome of partnership talks and the national development plan before much of the detail can be filled in, there is no masking the disappointment in the Commission's comments on Ireland's position in a number of specific areas, namely, activation programmes, child care and lifelong learning. I propose to discuss the latter issue briefly.

The Commission noted that the Irish employment plan pays relatively little attention to issues of quality of work and poverty among people in work and does not directly address linkages between human capital and productivity. It specifically states that issues such as adult participation in learning could usefully have been given more attention in the plan.

As I noted, the Commission tends to be diplomatic in its criticism. Its comments, therefore, indicate considerable disappointment at the failure to make progress in these areas. The failure has not taken place at policy level because, as members will be aware, initiatives taken by FÁS and other agencies seek to target these problems. In addition, there is an awareness that with Ireland's high levels of employment, the major problems in the area of poverty have shifted to those in low paid work. One of the key routes out of being trapped in low-paid employment is access to training and education. We need to move up a gear in Ireland in this context as evidenced by the disappointment of the Commission with the provision in the plan in this regard.

I will focus here on three policy programmes which have been announced. In its report, the enterprise strategy group targeted the financial and other barriers adults face in trying to return to learning while in work. The One Step Up initiative, which has been launched by FÁS, must be targeted at low-skilled workers. Middle management employees have constant access to training courses and there is no shortage of lifelong learning for them, but low-skilled people must also be targeted. Mr. Roddy Molloy and others in FÁS have indicated that they want to target the low-skilled, but the history of endeavour in this area is not positive. Given the way in which the co-operative strategy, for example, ended up being a strategy for subsidising management buy-outs, we must ensure programmes and schemes are targeted properly at the low-skilled in future.

There has been a great deal of discussion at Government level and among policy makers about the introduction of personal learning accounts to provide resources for individuals which they can put towards training. Lifelong learning is a key to helping people escape lifelong poverty, especially those who are working but remain in the poverty trap. It has already been indicated that Ireland is performing poorly in its approach to what are described in a terrible term as "the working poor". An excellent report, Creating a More Inclusive Labour Market, was produced by the National Economic and Social Forum last month and should form the basis of Government policy. It was agreed by the social partners and strongly seeks real action on lifelong learning for both the unemployed and those in work.

Mr. Ginnell

Mr. O'Connor referred in the context of the working poor to the notion of making work pay. It is widely agreed that apart from a range of other barriers people face in accessing employment, a particular disincentive is the loss of secondary benefits. Last year, the Commission's EUROSTAT report indicated that 7% of the employed population in Ireland live in households in which the equivalent income is below the national poverty line. It is a very significant issue. The Commission's annual progress report in January 2006 stated that Ireland's national reform programme paid relatively little attention to the issue of poverty among employed people.

Research carried out by the European Anti-Poverty Network and the One Parent Exchange Network last year has been updated since the budget. It gave the example of a couple on unemployment assistance with one child and living on a weekly income of €345. If one of the partners were to take up a job at 35 hours per week on the national minimum wage, the family's income would fall by €82, which is €120 below the 60% poverty line. This stark situation, which is of serious concern, was reflected in other household types, especially lone parent households. A significant element of the decrease in income is due to the loss of, or reduction in, secondary benefits, including rent and family income supplements, and increases in child care costs. The issue of child care was addressed by one of the previous speakers.

While the last budget included movements in the right direction, the case study in our own research demonstrates that moving from welfare to work can continue to mean a reduction in real income and a descent into deeper poverty. Some of the solutions to the problem will involve an overall review of the tax and welfare system to ensure that the unemployed will have a sufficient income to lift them out of poverty if they enter employment. Entering employment must lead to increases in household income. There is also a need to simplify the complex and fragmented welfare system which has a multiplicity of means tests which make it very difficult for officials and applicants to calculate the benefits of taking up employment.

The national minimum wage must be set at a level which reflects the cost of living and the people earning it should be removed permanently from the tax net. As the wage increases and changes occur in the tax code, people on the minimum wage enter and leave the tax net. A system should be put in place which keeps them permanently outside the net. Payment of the minimum wage must be enforced and monitored adequately at a national level.

Vice Chairman

Is the European Anti-Poverty Network involved in social partnership? What support does it receive from FÁS? How does FÁS target people with low level qualifications or no skills?

Deputy Lynch

I welcome the delegates from the European Anti-Poverty Network. It is always interesting to listen to such presentations and, in my case, they were speaking to the converted. On the final point made by Mr. Ginnell that the budget was moving in the right direction, I agree it is but think it is not going far enough. There is always a claw-back. The taxation system is nibbling at the heels of those who can least afford to pay. We need to take a major leap forward. I think people would agree to a major funding initiative over a period of five budgets.

We cannot continue to talk about the participation of women in the workforce if we do not take decisive action on offering a multiplicity of child care choices. I am sure Ms O'Connor has an opinion on this.

Community employment schemes always had a training element. However, training has become more specific to the organisation where one is employed under such a scheme. I noticed in the past two years, in particular, that with specific training those working with people with disabilities are now of such a high skills value to the organisation that they instantly get work in the private sector in nursing homes, hospitals and so on because they are skilled in dealing with people with mobility problems. This means the organisation has to recruit new staff.

We need to take a fundamental look at the role of community employment schemes. It is not just about "gap" learning; it should be training for a specific purpose. Once one is trained for a specific purpose, core funding should be put in place to cater for the pool with a specific skill. Community employment schemes serve a different need in a booming economy from their original remit. We cannot continue to pretend that their remit is the same, when the needs are different. I would like to hear the delegates' comments on this.

It is equally important that the European Anti-Poverty Network continue to inform the work of the joint committee.

Mr. Ginnell

First, I will respond to the points made by the Vice Chairman. The European Anti-Poverty Network comprises a number of groups, four of which are represented here. The Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed and Age Action are involved in social partnership, while other members of our organisation are not.

In terms of supports, we receive funding from different sources. The European Anti-Poverty Network does not receive funding directly from FÁS but from the Government through national networks funding. Various organisations receive European funding.

I will refer the questions on FÁS and community employment schemes to Mr. Eric Conroy. Ms Orla O'Connor will address the questions on child care. Mr. Philip O'Connor may also wish to comment.

Mr. Conroy

We are always interested in interacting with FÁS with which we have a good relationship at senior level. There are also various committees. Having said that, we are hearing many comments as to how FÁS could deal better with unemployed people. We heard about the 40% of respondents to an Indecon survey who stated that FÁS had nothing to offer them. We may need to examine the level of training to maximise the return for the unemployed and the working poor, to whom Mr. Philip O'Connor referred. We have access to FÁS to talk about the issues. It is a very important part of the equation and will certainly engage with us. However, there are issues and deficiencies that need to be addressed.

Community employment schemes, raised by Deputy Lynch, are a particular issue for us. One issue is the numbers on community employment. Reducing the numbers on community employment became a political issue. Employment schemes, including community employment, initially provided 25,000 places. There are issues beyond that. It is not just about numbers. It is also about quality. That is why it is important that the progression element of community employment should be on the table. It should be a good progression model. In some cases there is good practice on the ground. There is better reference to training in the context of a career path for people in community employment, whether they are working in the right community employment or should be training for other jobs. There is plenty of room for improvement. We are moving in the right direction. However, we need a more coherent policy apart from the information we received from the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment regarding numbers at the end of 2004. We need a better, more focused, more progressive model of community employment.

We have talked about an option for full-time employment in year three to include things such as training. If there is a lot of training during the 19 hours people work on these schemes, it crowds out other things. Most jobs are full-time jobs. There should, therefore, be an option to progress and get ready for that job. It is a good issue for debate, but has been put on the back burner since the end of 2004. There is room for improvement and we hope to raise the issue in the social partnership talks which are currently taking place.

Ms O’Connor

I want to address Deputy Lynch's comments on child care. One of the problems is that there is a multiplicity of choices. That problem arose before the budget but particularly after it in terms of the €1,000 payment. Parents have different child care needs. A broad brush stroke is simple and looks good in the political system, but it meets nobody's needs. The issue of child care needs strong political leadership. That means looking at different needs and putting in place provision that meets those needs.

The National Women's Council came up with a range of recommendations whereby the work of women and parents in the home caring for their children could be recognised as well as the child care costs borne by women who go out to work. It means having different types of provision. It is a complex issue. The problem is how something that is introduced can be pulled back in the long term. We now have the problem of affordability. The €1,000 payment is in place but it will not make much difference to people and we still have not dealt with the problem.

Deputy Lynch

I have a certain view on child care, as Ms O'Connor probably knows. I have discussed it often enough. Perhaps we should look at what we can do for the child as opposed to what we do for women. One possibility would be to introduce early childhood education for all children. Even though it is a very good idea, I find it very hard to get my head around the fact that we have free third level education but no free preschool education. Those of us who have children know that it is at that level that people learn quickest and most. If we were to shift our focus to preschool, early childhood education and early childhood needs rather than seeing the issue in terms of child care, we would probably achieve far more movement and uniformity across the system. The difficulty with child care is that women have a preconceived notion in terms of who they would like to take care of their children, whereas they do not have such notions in terms of who teaches their four year old children. They simply send their children to school and accept the teachers because it is a uniform standard.

Ms O’Connor

I agree with the Deputy that it is important we consider children's needs. What was surprising in this year's budget was that, for the first time, there was enormous consensus among women's organisations, child care agencies, those involved in child poverty and the Government advisory body, NESF, on its recommendation of a free place for all children for one year prior to their commencing primary school. It was surprising that option was not taken up given the consensus on it. I believe that is the right place to start. If one looks at comparative tables for Europe, Ireland falls down in the area of early childhood care and education.

Vice Chairman

Is Ms O'Connor saying that none of the aspects of the package was of any benefit to anybody?

Ms O’Connor

No, that is not what I am saying. I listed the provisions we welcomed, such as the maternity provision, investment in services, training and, in particular, the establishment of the infrastructure by way of the National Childcare Office. We have been seeking for a long time to have all our child care provisions in one place as that makes the system easier to co-ordinate and manage. Parts of the package were good. However, the issue of affordability, as taken up by the Commission, has not yet been dealt with.

Deputy Curran

I am a father of young children. The issue of child care and how people cope in that regard is continually debated. I was surprised to hear Ms O'Connor say there was consensus on many provisions contained in the budget because prior to the budget I, as a public representative, felt there was a complete lack of consensus in that regard. Each group, never mind the individuals, with whom I met had a different approach in terms of how the issue should be addressed. I do not wish to make a political issue of this but I found it difficult to say what was the most appropriate way forward. I am aware that Senator White did a great deal of research on this. While I mean no disrespect to her, when completed, neither that work, nor the groups and individuals with whom I had met, provided a clear consensus on the best way forward. Ms O'Connor has suggested that X, Y or Z could have been provided for in the budget. From my perspective, I do not believe this issue is as clear-cut as we might at times suggest.

Deputy Lynch

I would like to clarify the position for Deputy Curran. We all encountered the same problems. However, there was enormous consensus on the need for the introduction of care despite people's differences in terms of how that care was provided. It is for that reason I suggested the introduction of a standardised type of care similar to that provided for preschools.

Deputy Curran

I do not believe there is consensus even on that aspect.

Ms O’Connor

I agree with Deputy Curran that there are many differences of opinion on the different packages of measures. However, the Irish Childcare Policy Network and NESF made up of the social partners, politicians and so on were in agreement on that issue. I agree there was a divergence of views on other issues but there was consensus on the provision of a free place for all children for one year prior to commencing primary school.

Deputy Callanan

I welcome the delegation and thank them for their views. As the issue of child care has been fairly well debated, I will not comment on it. Much was done in the last budget to ensure it is not more profitable for people to remain outside the workforce than in employment. If we continue along the lines adopted in that regard we will achieve what we set out to do.

We should examine the payment of unemployment assistance to one generation after another. For some communities, including the Traveller community, there is no break in this cycle. Should we consider including a training aspect in respect of unemployment payments? FÁS should be more involved in order that people in the communities to which I refer can be educated and become accustomed to working. I have nothing against people receiving unemployment assistance because, like the rest of us, they are trying to live. However, members of the younger generation seem to be in a poverty trap because, like their parents before them, they are unemployed. Such people do not expect to finish school or proceed to third level education.

What can we do to ensure that such people are properly educated and that their goal is to better themselves rather than receive unemployment assistance? Travellers would be very good at certain trades and everyone in this country is capable of doing some job and becoming very good at it if the necessary education is provided. Should we pay unemployment assistance in a different way? I do not suggest taking away any payment but perhaps a training and educational aspect should be introduced.

Mr. O’Connor

The Deputy raised some interesting issues but I will respond first to the point raised by the Vice Chairman. Several programmes, such as the Skillnets initiative, target low-skilled people in the workplace. Every year, those who run these programmes return hundreds of millions of euros from their budgets because the money cannot be spent. Involving employers is a difficulty and, although multinationals are the companies with the best record on training programmes in work, Irish companies pose a major problem. Perhaps the committee can address this matter.

Deputy Lynch referred to training and community employment programmes. Many people who have completed community employment programmes are immediately hired by mainstream services. At the committee's meeting of October 2004, European Anti-Poverty Network Ireland sought a particular programme to focus on services at community level. Since then, the social economy programme has been transferred to the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. This move, which we proposed, will remove the restriction of such services to those who are long-term unemployed and so forth. It will also permit employment to be offered on a wider basis and allow for the retention of skilled employees and the development of community-based services. This may provide an answer in respect of the issue raised by Deputy Lynch.

The activation programme provides for an interview when someone has been unemployed for six months. At this point, a guaranteed offer of training is made and we would support an activation programme accompanied by relevant training. In the last round of the EQUAL programme in Ireland there was a concentration on developing skills in the Traveller community in respect of self-employment and small business, for example. One must try to develop skills relevant to the people being dealt with.

Despite the economic boom and our good education system, almost 20% of children do not complete school and are not picked up by the system afterwards. This is a significant problem as FÁS has estimated that, by 2015, 80% of jobs in the country will require third level completion at least. However, there will be a large pool of unskilled people in Ireland. It sounds a long way off but it is just around the corner. This problem adds more urgency to the issue.

The European Commission pinpointed the need to direct training and resources specifically towards low skilled people in the workplace. It is also a political problem as these people are not good voters. In the last partnership agreement a special initiative was meant to support this issue but it has not had enough urgency. Political leadership is needed. If there is none, there will be significant social problems. Only initiatives in this type of area will break intergenerational poverty.

Deputy Curran

I agree with Mr. O'Connor. His comments on the non-completion of second level education are of particular interest. It is a real problem as these people will find it more difficult to enter the workforce in the future at a level equal to their peers that will provide them with opportunities.

I represent Dublin Mid-West and examined the issue of people failing to complete school. It goes back a step further to their overall attendance and participation in school. For example, Clondalkin, where I live, is of comparable size to Lucan but the level of absenteeism is five times that in Lucan. The problem must be identified early in the education of those likely not to complete school. Mr. O'Connor is correct in that if people do not attain a leaving certificate standard, their prospects are poor.

Deputy Callanan

Mr. O'Connor stated 20% of people do not finish national school.

Mr. O’Connor

Secondary school.

Deputy Callanan

I apologise. If we are paying unemployment and child benefits to the mothers and fathers of those children, should there be a deterrent——

Deputy Lynch

Is the Deputy suggesting they should be placed in industrial schools?

Deputy Callanan

It would help people in the long term. Should a restriction be placed on those benefits to ensure that children finish school?

Mr. O’Connor

It is interesting that the proportion of people leaving school before completing their education is increasing, particularly in areas such as north Clondalkin. They are not getting dole or social welfare payments since they cannot qualify at that age. The reason is the abundance of employment. People are working stacking shelves in Dunnes Stores or wherever.

Deputy Curran

It is limited in the long term.

Mr. O’Connor

That is the problem. A large number of people from traditionally poorer areas are returning to a cycle of low skilled work, not unemployment. If there is a downturn in the economy, they will be the first to be hit.

Deputy Curran

They will be displaced.

Mr. O’Connor

Those types of problems are now emerging. Teachers have been a very strong lobby over the years. The idea that one size fits all and everyone should finish secondary school and get a leaving certificate is mistaken. FÁS is interested in expanding its range in this area. There are a number of apprenticeships but they are in traditional trades, such as bricklaying or mechanics. There are no in-work training systems for the new areas of work but there is an interest in trying to develop a work-based learning system for them, in areas such as computers, office jobs and so forth. We must examine how people can complete education and training in other ways than through formal schooling, which does not suit a large number.

Deputy Lynch

The abolition of the technical schools was a big loss for the country. We should examine the issue.

Mr. O’Connor

Yes.

Deputy T. Dempsey

I agree with Mr. O'Connor that one size does not fit all, and this is a difficulty. For example, jewellery making may suit people from the Traveller community because they may come from tinsmiths originally. I remember members of the Traveller community repairing pots and pans in my village. I am sure there is still some inherent talent.

With regard to PLC courses, the name may not be appropriate. What has been discussed are people who leave before the leaving certificate exams. Perhaps post-junior certificate courses would be a more appropriate title. These could be marketed more extensively and more of them could be offered. They should be centralised, as some schools may have only two or three on a course such as hairdressing, and this may be repeated in five or six different schools. That is not economical. It may be possible to have one hairdressing course for people who have dropped out of school early. We should design education to suit people rather than vice versa.

Mr. Ginnell

To return to the issue of inter-generational unemployment, it is a significant matter. Issues such as child care, lifelong learning and training, FÁS supports and the social welfare system are all key and must be discussed together. Training and employment supports are very important for people who are unemployed. Engaging with people at an early age and early in the system is important. Another issue arises when people are expected to take a major drop in income and lose secondary benefits after entering work. These matters should be considered together.

With regard to access to supports for people who find work through enterprise supports or self-employment, this is an issue which Pavee Point Traveller centre and other EQUAL projects, to which Mr. O'Connor referred, have considered. Some of the barriers in accessing loans and proper training, and within the groups themselves, should be examined. Pavee Point and a number of other organisations would ask that a particular structure be set up at national level, which examines issues for groups far removed from the labour market. It is important that, apart from examining access to mainstream employment, enterprise supports are seen to be significant for a number of these groups also.

Deputy T. Dempsey

I was not here for the submission as I was at another meeting. I used to be principal in a vocational school and I remember social welfare officers coming in to check who on PLC courses was availing of unemployment benefits. This was a time when a person starting a business was allowed to continue drawing unemployment benefit for a further six months. I do not know if this practice has changed. One of my constituents contacted me yesterday who is caught between going back to college and drawing unemployment benefit. If he could continue accessing this benefit for six or eight months while accessing various educational grants, he might survive. Has the relationship between losing unemployment benefits and returning to education been considered?

Mr. Ginnell

With regard to our submission to the national reform programme, it is an issue that has been raised. Even yesterday there was a court case relating to the argument that people should be allowed——

Deputy Lynch

Return to education allowance.

Mr. Ginnell

People should be allowed a back to education allowance, much like a back to work or back to enterprise allowance. People should be allowed to retain a certain percentage of their social welfare supports as they progress through the educational system. This would bring about a major change. It needs to come from a very early stage of unemployment, and not late on, an issue slightly, but not completely, touched on in the last budget.

Mr. Conroy

If I may make a further comment, the Deputy mentioned the issue of going from welfare to work, taking up a job or an enterprise. Mr. Ginnell mentioned the support for Travellers who have enterprise ideas. The idea of the back to education allowance exists, where people can move off welfare payments such as unemployment allowance and unemployment benefit. We do not want people dependent on these payments indefinitely, and there should be progression in a supportive way which is good for people's lives.

With regard to the back to work allowance and the back to work enterprise allowance, they have been changed from five to three years. We were pleased the Minister for Social and Family Affairs made this move because, for the long-term unemployed, it can be difficult to get back into business. One may lose all business confidence, contacts and business skills. This is, therefore, a good move in terms of positioning people to move from welfare into good jobs which will improve their lives in a constructive manner. As Mr. Ginnell noted, this is a complex area which requires constant study and review.

Vice Chairman

I thank the delegation for an informative briefing. I propose that the presentation be sent for comment to the Departments of the Taoiseach, Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Education and Science and Social and Family Affairs. The joint committee will meet again to discuss the matter when the Departments' replies have been received. That is the best way to proceed.

Mr. Ginnell

I thank the Chair and members of the joint committee for arranging this meeting as it was important to discuss recent developments in the various issues. This committee has a vital role in holding to account the Minister and Department in terms of how they address a number of issues raised by us and the European Commission regarding the national reform programme.

The joint committee went into private session at 10.30 a.m. and adjourned at 10.35 a.m. until 9.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 22 March 2006.