Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON JOBS, SOCIAL PROTECTION AND EDUCATION díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 16 May 2012

Unemployment and Youth Unemployment: Discussion (Resumed)

I welcome Mr. Martin Murphy, managing director, and Ms Anna Doody from Hewlett Packard Ireland and Mr. Brian O'Malley from the Department of Social Protection. I apologise for the fact that we are a little late in commencing our deliberations. As members are aware, Mr. Murphy chaired the steering group on the national internship scheme, JobBridge, and his contribution today will focus mainly on this. That scheme is playing a significant role in addressing some of the problems faced by those seeking to enter the workforce and is very relevant to the work the committee is doing. I welcome the recent announcement to the effect that the number of available places on the JobBridge scheme has been increased from 5,000 to 6,000. That is a good development and I look forward to hearing Mr. Murphy's views on it.

The committee has already held three meetings in respect of this subject. The main focus of these was to discuss ideas and solutions relating to tackling unemployment, with specific emphasis on youth unemployment. We have also received a large number of submissions. We are probably going to spend the next couple of months identifying the areas on which we believe Ministers should focus their attention.

Before we commence, I wish to inform members that they are 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 House or an official either by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege with regard to the evidence they are to give this committee. If a witness is directed by the committee to cease giving evidence in respect of a particular matter and if he or she continues to so do, he or she will be entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of his or her evidence. Witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and witnesses are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person or persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

I again wish to apologise for the late start to the meeting. We were obliged to move it from the regular time of 9.30 a.m. and this may mean that some members may be obliged to leave and return to the meeting as a result of its clashing with other events.

Mr. Martin Murphy

I thank the Chairman and members for the invitation to address them. I am aware of the wider item of work to which the Chairman referred in his introductory remarks. What I thought I would do is share with the committee some general perspectives I have on the challenge relating to job creation in Ireland. I will also provide an update on the national internship scheme, JobBridge. Given that I work for a company which has made a significant investment in Ireland, I thought I might provide some insights on investment and job creation. I also thought I might refer to some qualities I see as essential elements of a successful jobs strategy.

I accepted the invitation to attend this meeting because I am passionate about job creation in Ireland. I am of the view that this subject is not attracting anything like the focus, priority or sense of urgency that it deserves. The current economic challenges are having a huge effect on every family in the State. Ireland is at a low ebb and people are looking to us for leadership on many fronts. On of the most important ways in which we can provide leadership is in assisting unemployed people to return to the workplace. If we can get this right, we can make a real difference.

The level of work required in respect of job creation is immense and the number of people currently on the live register bear this out. Before we consider the enablers or mechanics relating to job creation, I wish to take a step back. I am of the view that there is a need for an enormous national effort - with politicians, industry leaders and the media being obliged to work together - in order to come to grips with the challenge that exists. We all need to become involved in the business of building a better Ireland.

I am of the view that politicians from across the political divide need to put aside their individual agendas and come together with a unity of purpose in respect of this topic. We need fresh, lateral and radical thinking and we must move away from the current rhetoric which states that the next big idea on job creation is that the previous idea was a bad one and which does not offer any sort of constructive or viable solutions. There is no getting away from the fact that fostering the environment for job creation is going to be difficult and that a unified approach will be required. Sections of the media need to stop talking Ireland down. The perpetual negativity in this particular domain is draining valuable energy away from our nation. It must be remembered that we are at a unique time in our history. Building a better Ireland is not just for the here and now, it is also for our children and future generations.

Job creation should be everybody's business. However, there is very much a national mindset that it is someone else's business. Whereas I am of the view that leadership involves what I, as an individual, can do and what difference I can make, in the context of this presentation the question to be asked is what difference we can make together. Our competitiveness is currently on an absolute knife edge and this must be borne in mind because it is business cases - not sentiment - that create jobs. The national jobs strategy which the Government is working towards must build on our well-established inward investment track record. It must also support small to medium-sized businesses and help them to grow and multiply. Critically, it must also focus on how we can create new opportunities for those who are unemployed. The key to economic recovery is to create an environment whereby every business in the State will actually be in a position to hire staff again. If every business or every second business in the State hired one additional person, we would be well on track to solving the problem that exists with regard to unemployment.

On labour activation and JobBridge, I am a very strong advocate of the principle that Government creates the environment and industry creates the jobs. There is no question about that. In that context, the Pathways to Work initiative packages meaningful back-to-work incentives for people and employers. JobBridge is a very important component of that mix. A year ago I was asked by the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, to chair the steering committee for the national internship scheme, JobBridge. The Government set the steering committee an ambitious target to get 5,000 people back into the workplace in order to give them a boost of confidence and allow them to obtain further experience and new skills. I and many of those participating in the scheme believe it deserves critical acclaim. From a standing start, this public-private partnership built the first national internship scheme in the history of the State from scratch in a period of eight weeks Inside ten months, almost 7,000 interns have commenced placements. This has exceeded our expectations. There has been a very strong take-up in respect of the scheme across the public, private and voluntary and community sectors. There has been a strong take-up across company sizes with almost 60% of interns taking positions within Irish small and medium sized businesses. There is a strong take-up across all the key and prime age groups we would target under this scheme. There are some early indications, which we can discuss later, of positive progression rates back into the workforce, certainly rates that are very much in line with similar schemes in operation across Europe. As the Chairman mentioned, last week the Minister announced an additional 1,000 places and a widening of the eligibility criteria to include those in receipt of the one-parent allowance or the disability allowance. The Minister also announced that an independent evaluation of the scheme is to be undertaken with an interim report due in September. Most importantly, the new PRSI incentive scheme, which was announced as part of the Finance Bill in January, will further encourage the hiring of interns into the workplace. JobBridge is a pragmatic response to an urgent problem. From a standing start, we created, and I emphasise this, a universally accessible internship ethos for the first time in the State, and that is a key part of the job activation mix.

I will deal with the broader picture on investment and job creation. At the heart of every investment decision made in Ireland lies the debate on our national competitiveness. We have improved competitiveness in Ireland by a factor of 10% to 15% in recent years but we need to achieve at least the same again in the next two years. Underpinning our efforts to create jobs in this State must be our holding the line on the competitiveness adjustments we have made, difficult and all as that will be. While we have experienced many cost reductions and improvements in competitiveness, many of our competitor countries have achieved similar gains. We cannot take competitiveness for granted. As part of that equation, we simply cannot take foreign direct investment for granted.

For an investor, the Ireland product is still compelling. We are uniquely attractive as a gateway to Europe. We offer a very high skill base, falling labour costs, favourable tax structures and very strong industry-based clusters here, which the IDA put in place in recent years. Traditionally, we have had a very stable economy. Ireland is still a good place to invest but there is intense international competition for every investment that comes into Ireland.

In recent years my company, Hewlett Packard, HP, has been able to translate the improvements in Ireland's cost base into jobs and more investment here. It is our ambition to build HP's Irish operation into a global innovation hub where we will innovate, incubate and globalise from our Irish base. The National Competitiveness Council has provided a roadmap for change which will drive down the cost of doing business in Ireland. We need to ensure that, as part of our work, we deliver on its findings.

I wish to share with the members a summary of some qualities I consider to be intrinsic in a jobs strategy, and we can discuss them in the questions and answers session. First, our jobs strategy must comprise a strong communications strategy, which effectively reinforces the messaging around Ireland's value proposition internationally, strongly addresses perceived threats to doing business in Ireland and allays any fears around economic instability in this country. I strongly advocate a defensive strategy to fight against perceptions of weak corporate demand in Ireland, tight credit and low market confidence. Getting our communications right will be a key part of a jobs strategy.

Under the Government's action plan for jobs, we need to create 25,000 new and incremental jobs in this State annually. In my view if it does not get measured, it will not get managed. Second, I strongly advocate monthly updates of the number of jobs created being published publicly.

Third, our jobs strategy must implement the findings of the National Competitiveness Council and prioritise the delivery of the recommendations outlined in its recent competitiveness scorecard. Fourth, leadership and innovation is a common denominator across OECD countries and our jobs strategy must position Ireland as an innovation leader. The principles of innovation must be adopted into the core of our jobs strategy. In terms of how we commercialise innovation, create a return on investment, understand the downstream jobs benefits and understand that its deliverables and outcomes are realistic, Ireland has to commercialise innovation outcomes and translate that into jobs. Fifth, our jobs strategy must drive a culture of start-ups and entrepreneurship because the reality is that these businesses will be the lifeblood of job creation in this State in the future.

Sixth, Ireland should examine becoming a global hub for intellectual property. We should examine how we could exploit intellectual property and build a proposition that is the best in Europe for patenting, which is better than any offering available in terms of the protection and cost of patents, and the speed of service. If the intellectual property is here, we can centre the jobs here and, most likely, we can make the products or deliver the services from here.

To support all of the above we need a modern primary and secondary educational curriculum with a much stronger emphasis on mathematics, science and the related technical competencies. We welcome the bonus point change made to honours mathematics at leaving certificate level last year. We strongly advocate that science becomes a compulsory subject in the Irish leaving certificate curriculum. We must build the skills and the competencies that enable us to deal with the global market. That means we must at least ensure fluency in international languages. Specifically we strongly advocate fluency in two international languages at leaving certificate level in this State.

I return to the question I posed at the start, namely, what can we do? Today I have offered the members a roadmap covering areas that are well within our sphere of influence collectively which, if acted upon, would significantly improve the environment for job creation in the State. I came here today because I am passionate about job creation and because I am in the business of building a better Ireland, which is the business in which we are all in. If the members came to this meeting expecting a silver bullet, I will leave them with one. It is that we must act now, we must act with urgency and we must act together to solve the job creation problem that exists in this State.

I thank Mr. Martin Murphy for that. It is much appreciated. We will now move on to a questions and answers session. I will call Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh first as he was here first.

I have a number of questions-----

Mr. Martin Murphy

That is fine.

-----and, hopefully, I will not go on for too long. I preface my remarks by saying I have been critical of Mr. Murphy's company in the past for some of its anti-trade union stances. I will not get to go into that having regard to today's agenda, with the JobBridge scheme, in particular, being the subject with which we are dealing. I was one of those who was critical of it from the start but acknowledge the experience of it has been positive. I have always said there is a need for a proper internship scheme and we do not have that as yet in Ireland. That is evident from even a perusal of what is still on offer on the JobBridge website to people who are fragile because they are unemployed. They are reaching out and looking for opportunities. It is regrettable that what is available includes positions as forecourt assistants and waitresses and positions in housekeeping. Last month there was a furore about the fact that one of the options was to work as a loader, that someone would spend nine months learning how to load a truck. In most of those cases, what is being offered seems to suggest that there is a displacement of jobs. How will the Department ensure the opportunities being offered through JobBridge do not displace full-time positions which were previously offered in hotels, for example? There is an advertisement on the website for a hairstylist. It requires a City & Guilds qualification. If one has a City & Guilds qualification in hairdressing, one does not need nine months in a hair salon. What one needs is a job which pays a wage.

In the United States there is a different type of internship scheme. Has the Minister examined the criteria used there where an employer can only get an intern for free, which is what is involved in this situation, if he or she derives no immediate advantage from his or her activities? If one employs a fully qualified hair stylist in a hair salon as an intern and charges members of the public for having their hair done by the intern, then the employer is gaining an advantage from his or her activities. I could go through the range of criteria used.

There is at least one website where people who have experience of JobBridge post their views, some of which are trenchant in that regard. Are those sites monitored by the JobBridge team to see what problems and issues arise? In some cases the issues are not just with the employer. Some of them relate to mentors not carrying out their function.

A series of jobs are being offered in construction, which is to be welcomed as it is an indication the construction sector is taking off. However, many people have served an apprenticeship and done work experience as part of it. If such work is being offered, it undermines an existing programme. Previously, a graduate placement scheme existed. Some of the companies that used to avail of it have switched to JobBridge which costs them nothing. Has the reduction in placements options on the graduate scheme been monitored? Has there been encouragement for those companies who are taking on interns to invest in them? Not only do employers get staff for free but also they do not enjoy all of the protections of normal employees. Have employers been asked to provide training or to provide access to City & Guilds courses or whatever is the relevant qualification in the area? Apart from being on the JobBridge scheme people would have a piece of paper at the end of the process confirming they got more than just job experience, that they also obtained a qualification. That would be an indication of progress. Working as a car valet, fast food operative or telesales assistant is not what most people presume an internship is about. It is about gaining key experience so that one can go on to a job that was beyond one's reach prior to the internship programme.

I thank Mr. Martin Murphy and Ms Anna Doody for attending the meeting. I do not wish to focus on JobBridge alone. Deputy Ó Snodaigh made many valid points but I do not agree with all of them. My perception of an internship is a little different from his. We are in a situation in which we have never found ourselves previously so we must broaden the scope of what is considered as an internship. Many young people who have finished secondary school or third level have never had the experience of being in a job. They do not know what it is like to work. For all the faults and failings of the internship scheme as it is, which people will always pick up on because it is the nature of any such scheme, there is much positivity around it. Internships provide people with an opportunity to see what it is like to be in a simulated work environment. It is recognised that by virtue of being an intern one does not have the same rights as another worker.

I wish to broaden the scope of the debate as I am a supporter of the JobBridge scheme. I am delighted it has expanded. The news is good about the number of people who have been replaced and those who have gone on to full-time jobs after the JobBridge scheme. We must spread the word more in that regard.

Reference was made to being an enabler. Industry, Government and the media to a certain extent must sing from the one hymn sheet. The message must be that this country is open for business and that this is a good place to invest, create employment and do business. I agree with the point made about the negativity that exists which is evident when one looks at the newspapers every morning. People in this country are not the only ones reading those newspapers. They are being read internationally and it is being reflected in the Financial Times.

Reference was made to a silver bullet. There is a sense of urgency right now. Some of the solutions proposed will be too late given the time involved to roll them out. They will happen either way. It was said that Government creates the environment and industry creates the jobs. I am anxious that people under the age of 25 do not end up being long-term unemployed because of the wage scar and all the factors they carry with them.

As someone who is involved in the private sector I am aware there is a certain amount the Government can do. One of the ideas that has been tossed around is that of a youth guarantee scheme in some shape or form, possibly replicating ideas from other countries but putting our own style on it to match the support systems in place in this country. One could ask how industry can become involved. The reality is the funding does not exist for us to try to create a youth guarantee scheme that would give everyone under the age of 25 an opportunity to become involved in education or training or for the State to become an employer of last resort. We must acknowledge that. Any scheme that would be developed would be a streamlined one that would meet the needs of those who are the most difficult to reach.

To compensate for the fact the Government does not have the money to operate on a broad range and encompass everyone under the age of 25, how could industry become part of the system to devise a scheme to guarantee everyone under the age of 25 some sort of placement or education and training? Any scheme would have to complement the Pathways to Work scheme and the action plan for jobs. It is not about creating something new but about building on and complementing existing schemes.

Mr. Martin Murphy

I will answer the previous questions first. The JobBridge scheme is not perfect and we have acknowledged that. If we had sat down with the intention of designing the perfect scheme, we would still be here today and the scheme would not be in existence. Instead, in the short space of ten months what we have is 7,000 people who are either currently on the scheme or who have progressed through it. Of the 2,000 who have completed the scheme and been reskilled, 800 have moved into full-time positions. They are off the unemployment register. That is an excellent outcome. Given the numbers and the fact that the JobBridge programme is hoping to expand to cater for 6,000 annually, if we can get 40% into full-time positions, that will prove the programme has delivered. The outcome it is designed to deliver is not just progression into the workplace, although that is the ideal outcome to any internship, but also to give people experience and skills in areas in which they do not possess them. For example, there is a significant skills shortage in the technology sector in which I am located. Hewlett-Packard has taken people in under the scheme and these individuals have been reskilled and are helping to solve the problem we face, as are many of the other peer companies in our space.

On the quality of the positions on offer, I accept fully that a small number have been questioned, but the data we have available which I can share with the committee show that in respect of the 7,000 currently participating in the JobBridge programme, we have only received 30 complaints, or five in 1,000 or 0.005%. These complaints must be addressed. A total of 93% of interns who have participated in the scheme have said they would recommend the scheme, while 97% of employers have said they would recruit another intern if the opportunity arose.

Clearly, questions have been asked about the scheme which has been designed as a universal one. Many would say understanding a business involves working in all of its aspects. There is a person in this building who packed my bags in a supermarket for many years who saw it as a key part of what he was trying to do - to understand customers. We may regard this as a menial task, but it was of huge value to the individual concerned. The scheme is universal; as such, we have to have an open mind.

I accept that there must be quality control. We do this in the case of all positions on site and have reduced the number of roles that are open to question. To take the example of the hospitality sector, one of the early takers of interns, we worked with the relevant agencies. The industry bodies would take people off-site for a certain length of time to train them in the hospitality business to ensure that when they had completed their internship, they had not just worked in an hotel or a restaurant but they had gained wider experience, expertise and skills. They were more marketable as a result. We have worked with industry bodies to improve the level of experience gained. It is a mentoring and developmental process and we want an individual to leave the scheme having improved his or her skillsets and made himself or herself more marketable.

There will always be negative experiences, but our job is to continue to reduce them. I am not familiar with the websites to which the Deputy referred, but I know the Department monitors all of them. We have a contract which is signed by the employer which commits him or her to maintaining a mentoring and developmental relationship with the intern. There is considerable checking by the Department of the bona fides of the internships as they progress. We have a complaints mechanism, but as I stated, we have received only 30 complaints in respect of 7,000 participants. We also have a confidential whistleblowing facility in place for those participating in schemes who have issues. Issues will arise for employers and interns can reach out to us in that regard.

Mr. Brian O’Malley

It is an important question which keeps coming up in the feedback we receive, but it is important to note that a variety of measures have been introduced to protect interns and ensure the integrity of the scheme. For an application to be approved, the host organisation must meet a number of quality criteria: the internship must not displace an existing position; it must provide for an appropriate training and development experience; and appropriate mentoring and support must be provided for the intern. Each application received is checked against a number of quality criteria to determine if it provides for mentoring, supervision, the provision of support and the acquisition of a wide range of skills and experience. In that context, it is important to note, as Mr. Murphy stated, that the JobBridge programme is open to individuals, irrespective of their skill levels. Our view is that low skilled individuals have a right to access an activation measure that has been designed specifically to improve their skills, enhance their experience and improve their chances of securing employment.

Additionally, there are a number of checks and balances. For an internship to commence, a standard agreement must be signed and agreed by both parties. The terms and conditions of the internship are clearly stated. Importantly - to reply to one of the questions asked by the Deputy - a learning plan is incorporated; the host organisation must agree with the intern the range of learning outcomes to be achieved during the course of the six to nine month internship. They cover a range of transferable and generic skills such as project management, IT skills, sales skills, etc. It is important to note that we seek to ensure the host organisation and the intern abide by the rules of the scheme.

The Department is involved in continuous monitoring of internships. In that context, it is important to state there were 104 monitoring visits in the first quarter of the year, which involved an employment service officer visiting the workplace, liaising with both the host organisation mentor and the intern and asking a range of questions about the way the internship was progressing. Of the 104 visits, 97, or more than 95%, were very satisfactory.

It is important to note that participation in the scheme is entirely voluntary and that an intern may come to the JobBridge team at any stage in the internship for advice and support. We have a dedicated e-mail address which is listed in the Contact Us section of the JobBridge website. If an intern believes he or she is encountering difficulties, he or she can outline his or her grievance and have it investigated by the JobBridge team. It is important to highlight that there is a whistleblowing facility in operation. Consequently, an individual who suspects an internship may breach the scheme's criteria, including in terms of potential displacement, may contact the team and all such matters are fully investigated.

We are keeping a close eye on comments on social media sites. For example, there were many comments about disability allowance and one-parent family payments. The Minister has acted on this feedback. From 28 May those included in these cohorts will be allowed to participate in the scheme. We take cognisance, therefore, of what is being said on social media sites, including Facebook and Twitter, and try to respond to generic issues that emerge. I have given two examples of where feedback was acted on. Issues arose early on in the scheme about the participation of sole trader companies which was the subject of a good deal of commentary on social media sites. Again, the Minister amended the terms of the scheme to allow such sole traders to participate in it. These are just three recent examples of where we responded to what was emanating from social media accounts.

A comment was made that there was no investment by host organisations. That is not strictly the case. The host organisation engages in a recruitment process to recruit the intern, into which a significant amount of time is put. There is a standard agreement setting out the terms and conditions of the internship. A learner agreement is attached as an appendix through which the host organisation must go with the intern. Every month the host organisation must also undertake compliance checks to ensure the internship is proceeding in line with the standard agreement. There are regular monitoring visits of workplaces. Every advertisement states the intern will gain practical experience in listed areas. There is a significant investment on the part of the host organisation or mentor in ensuring the internship works particularly well.

Let me recap on some of the data. Our figures as of 3 May indicate 6,840 internship placements had commenced. This represents significant progress in the first ten months of operation. We are examining some of the data in this regard, particularly for the rate of progression to employment. As of 3 May, there were approximately 2,100 finishers, of whom 797 had progressed to employment. The statistics are very positive, as some 37% of finishers to date have progressed to employment, either with their host organisation or another company.

Let us examine international comparisons in this regard. A European work study conducted last year examined 3,000 internships across the European Union and concluded the progression rate was typically 34%. Our progression rate, 37%, compares favourably with that statistic. The 797 who had progressed to employment had progressed directly thereto. This figure does not take account of interns who may have found a job several weeks or months after their internship. Our data pertain to progression immediately after an internship.

Does that mean the interns took up employment in the same position in the same company?

Mr. Brian O’Malley

No. Of the 797 who took up employment, 360 were employed with their host organisation, while 437 were employed with another organisation.

We have engaged Indecon to carry out an independent evaluation of the scheme. Its work recently commenced and the results will give us a clearer picture of the progression rate among those who finished several months after their internships. As Mr. Murphy indicated, there will be an interim report by the end of September.

Mr. Martin Murphy

I wish to answer the question on youth unemployment and how we might address it. Transition year in secondary school represents a missed opportunity for youth. It affords the main opportunity to introduce students to industry and link them directly with the skills industry seeks, irrespective of whether the students proceed to third level after the leaving certificate examination. Schools need to build relationships with industry. Every school in the State needs to have a transition year programme that ensures placements to industry, not for a couple of days or a week but, perhaps, a more extended period. Thus, students could become immersed in a workplace and understand the critical skills they would need in it. They include interpersonal, language and technical skills.

I agree fully on the concern expressed by the Deputy. We were discussing the rate of unemployment among those under 25 years. This is a source of great concern. A starting point in addressing this problem is the adoption of a much more structured approach and forging better links between schools and industry. I highlighted transition year, in particular, as an opportunity to start that process.

I thank Mr. Murphy. I will bank all the questions asked. This session was meant to end now, but we will continue until 2 p.m. Members must not make speeches; they should ask direct questions. If we do not have time to hear all of the answers, we may obtain them in writing afterwards. We will probably meet the delegates again on this issue.

I thank the delegation for its presentation. Mr. Murphy has stated job creation is not being afforded the priority it deserves. I did not see in his paper strong evidence to support this, or new ideas he might be recommending to us. I acknowledge that he has said there is no silver bullet. Most of us around the table would accept this and that we will be working incrementally to create jobs one by one in small and medium-sized enterprises.

Mr. Murphy referred to innovation and leadership, as well as intellectual property and development in this area. In recent years staff from Enterprise Ireland, IDA Ireland and other organisations have told us that this is exactly what they are working on and that this is their strategy. Is there something these organisations are doing that is inadequate? Will the delegation elaborate on this point?

Is the gain in competitiveness in the order of 10% to 15% purely on the basis of labour rates? Are there other productivity elements?

With regard to the need for clustering, is it possible to encourage it or does it emerge independently over time? I am interested to hear the delegates' thoughts on this issue.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh referred to JobBridge and people driving a forklift. Traditionally, we regarded internships as being more for engineers, scientists and professionals at that level. An individual with a low skill level deserves an internship just as much as the engineer or scientist.

Mr. Murphy referred to start-up businesses. He is, therefore, speaking about self-employed persons. A charity group stated on radio this morning that many self-employed persons were finding it hard to put food on the table because there was no social welfare system in place for them. I acknowledge there has been a relaxation of the social welfare code for the self-employed. A gentleman who attended my constituency office last week was going to deregister, but the Revenue Commissioners did not want to do so in the hope he would start up again. If we are to make serious progress, we must put a system in place for self-employed persons. Civil servants who were before us recently stated 20% to 30% of their income was taken away to put a stamp in place. I want to see facts and figures. We were told there would be an internal report last November, but it has not appeared. I want to see something done. If we are to have self-employed persons working, we must put in place an incentive for people to start up businesses. What does Mr. Murphy believe is the way forward for self-employed persons?

To clarify, Department representatives were present last week. As Mr. O'Malley is new in the Department, we will not hit him with all the questions. The representatives clarified that the report would be available in a couple of months. We will hear Mr. Murphy's comments on the issue as we cannot expect Mr. O'Malley to answer because, being new to the Department, he is present specifically to discuss internships.

That is satisfactory. The report was meant to be issued in November.

I agree that job creation is the key to moving beyond our current position. I agree with Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh's point on internships. Originally, they were associated with higher skilled graduate positions, for example. My understanding of low-skilled jobs is that there were training areas to which one went to be trained to drive a truck or a car, for example, after which one proceeded to a job. There was workplace training for six months and if one was up to scratch, one was kept on. That is why I am concerned about the way internships are used. I do not believe there was a real need in this regard, but we will see how effective the internships have been when the report is published. Mr. Martin Murphy made the point that the Government creates the environment, while industry creates jobs. However, to my knowledge there has been a reduction in investment of approximately 67% by private industry in Ireland in recent times. How will this issue be resolved? Does Mr. Murphy believe there is a commitment from industry to increase investment in the future? If not, how should one approach matters such as the public works programmes and so on that must be put in place? Mr. Murphy also made the point that national competitiveness has improved by 10% to 15% and this must be replicated within the next two years. However, the problem is many of our competitors are doing the same thing. Consequently, how does Mr. Murphy envisage such competitiveness improvements being achieved? I seek clarity on whether such improvements in competitiveness will be achieved through labour costs, the type of jobs we have etc. From where will it come, as a further 15% improvement over two years would be quite a lot?

I thank Mr. Martin Murphy, as the managing director of a large company, for taking on this work and being obliged to defend it on radio and television. I would love to see other managing directors in similar roles working voluntarily to increase jobs. I thank him for putting his neck on the line.

I will now begin to give out.

The Deputy should not give out but should just ask questions.

I wish to ask Mr. Murphy two things. He mentioned the possibility of the 80,000 companies each taking on another member of staff. Can Mr. Murphy or Mr. O'Malley tell members how this can be done? Would it be possible to try to fast-track this proposal, as a silver bullet, really quickly? My second point is made from an education perspective. I often have heard Mr. Murphy state everyone should be doing honours maths and science should be compulsory. Such comments annoy me because there are different intelligences and some people simply lack mathematical skills but are equally as good at linguistics or in the artistic field. When listening to Mr. Murphy make that point, it is very tough on kids who have failed their maths examinations but who may have been brilliant in other fields - especially tough on the day on which the leaving certificate results are released. I believe those who are very good at maths should only get double or additional points for engineering. One should not receive such a bonus for subjects such as medicine or other studies to which it really does not apply. While I agree with Mr. Murphy, such a bonus should be for the sciences, mathematics or whatever. I ask Mr. Murphy to comment on this point and want him to take on board the perspective of those who are not very good at maths. He also referred to international languages but I do not believe one can make stuff compulsory. We should direct kids who are very good at mathematics to do mathematics.

I agree with Deputy Butler's point that time is of the essence when it comes to self-employed people and this is an extremely important issue. Second, I apologise for not being present for the entire meeting and I would greatly appreciate a copy of the presentation. I share Deputy Ó Snodaigh's views that the chances for exploitation in this sector are serious. I refer to the entire idea of having people doing internships for nine months while on forecourts, waiting on tables, packing bags etc. Nevertheless, I favour the idea of internships. My major problem concerns the figure of 300-odd people who got jobs in the companies concerned and the 700-odd people who got jobs afterwards. According to the latest CSO figures from April 2011, 6,500 people are emigrating each month and consequently, as a proportionate response to the mammoth task ahead, this merely comprises a drop in the ocean. As the State has access to funds, does Mr. Murphy think the Government should access funding from the National Pensions Reserve Fund and the European Investment Bank? In addition, does he believe the Government should take up the offer by the private pension industry to put €5 billion into infrastructural capital expenditure, which could create jobs initially and competitiveness in the long term?

I apologise for missing the beginning of the meeting as I was obliged to attend another committee meeting. I am glad to meet Mr. Murphy in the flesh as I heard him speak on the radio and was impressed as he spoke with great credibility. Moreover, he elicited a great response from people who rang in afterwards - I checked - which is a good sign. He answered any constructive criticisms in a highly forthright and honest fashion. He was a good spokesperson for the brief he holds. The purpose of these joint committee meetings is to hear new ideas and I regret Deputy Ó Snodaigh has used this meeting to criticise. While there will be time for constructive criticism and evaluation of existing schemes, this is about new ideas and Deputy Ó Snodaigh should have spent more of his time on that sector of activity.

I wish to raise two points. First, while I do not know whether he had a chance to respond earlier to my colleague, Deputy Lyons, about youth guarantee schemes, what does he think of such a scheme in respect of youth unemployment? Second, I will run an idea by Mr. Murphy to elicit his response thereto. I have been working, with a couple of others, on imagining a new profile for activation measures for young people to really engage and garner the enthusiasm of young people into this area of activity. It is time for a new profile of activation measures whereby a typical activation measure would embrace health and well-being. For example, as part of their scheme, young people would engage in swimming, physical education, mountain climbing or canoeing. The profile would be animated across the week with such activities, as well of course as the training and perhaps a bridge into apprenticeship or whatever. However I believe young people must be engaged in the round in all the aspects of their being, including health, fitness, lifestyle and so on. I seek a response from Mr. Murphy to this suggestion.

A lot of questions have been asked and while we can stretch out the meeting until approximately 2.05 p.m., we will have to wrap it up thereafter. If Mr. Murphy, Mr. O'Malley or Ms Doody wish to add anything further thereafter, they are welcome to send written replies to the committee.

Mr. Martin Murphy

I will go around the table quickly. No one wants to see exploitation under the scheme and I assure the Deputy that each JobBridge steering group meeting considers the whole area of governance and compliance, as well as the questions raised at this meeting. Each time we meet, which is approximately every three or four weeks, we consider this and we review the statistics on a weekly basis. We are very alert to the concerns that have been raised and that State funding is being used for the scheme in what obviously are extremely straitened times. Exploitation is very much a focus for our minds.

As for the languages question, Hewlett-Packard was one of the first organisations, I think it was about three years ago, to broaden the debate to which the Deputy already has alluded, to the effect this is not just about maths and science but also is about the languages. We have lobbied heavily on the question that people should be leaving with maths or science or, if they are not that way disposed, certainly with language skills. We were one of the first companies to work with some schools, particularly in the Dublin region, to introduce Chinese as a part-time subject in transition year and beyond and many other schools have followed suit. We are highly conscious of this and it is about more than just the science and maths.

As for the question on start-up companies, I accept we have a lot of work to do in the State. However, if one considers the foreign direct investment companies that have come into Ireland over the past two years, many of them did not exist three, four or five years ago. Consequently, the challenge we face as a nation is to create some of those types of companies here. I do not know whether this will solve the problem posed by the Deputy but when I talked about start-ups and entrepreneurships, I note I recently was invited to be a panellist in an Irish entrepreneur forum for 20 and 21-year olds. It was hosted by all the universities in the State and I was absolutely impressed by the calibre and quality of business ideas with which our young people are capable of coming up. I can see many of those young people out there, but it is about making it easy for them to start a business, get up and running, get seed funding and literally giving them that first beginning to drive their businesses forward.

There is a lot of be done in this space but those companies should ultimately be growing into Irish multinationals. As a nation, we have to focus on, foster and nurture those type of companies, whoever is starting them. We also have to look at how we can scale them up.

A question was posed about ideas and I think there are some very good ideas in this document. One might say it is stating the obvious, but that must be done. I have mentioned the work of the National Competitiveness Council a number of times, and competitiveness is a serious enabler to creating jobs. It is not just labour rates, but also the whole package that Ireland has to offer. We have a great story to tell, although we must improve in certain areas. Looking at the tourist sector, for example, we are all well aware that hotel rates have come down. Equally, however, we are aware that the cost of eating out and other things is still very expensive compared to international standards. We know that and must find a way of addressing it.

Competitiveness is an enabler to creating jobs. The task we set ourselves in the Government jobs strategy was getting 100,000 people back in employment by 2016. That is where I got the figure of 25,000. On a weekly basis we can get an unbelievable amount of details and data from the Department on the JobBridge scheme. I am advocating that we publish that data. If we are focused on managing that, in itself it will become a catalyst to push harder and drive numbers.

The question of innovation was raised also. A couple of years ago, the report by an bord snip nua highlighted innovation outcomes. Nobody is denying that we are investing heavily in innovation, but can we drive outcomes and translate them into jobs? That is the question I am posing to the joint committee. We have had some successes but that is the core question.

If we have our intellectual property here, the jobs that will form around it will also be here. My predecessor, Mr. Seán O'Driscoll, who sits on the JobBridge committee with me, is a strong advocate of manufacturing. Some questions were asked about manufacturing following his piece and Mr. O'Driscoll addressed them quite well. We clearly have to start making things in Ireland again and finding ways of manufacturing them. Rather than manufacturing somebody else's ideas, we need to innovate, have the intellectual property and translate that into Irish jobs. They may be high-end jobs but could equally be manufacturing jobs. That is what that circle is about.

Would Mr. Brian O'Malley like to add anything before we wrap up?

Mr. Brian O’Malley

Yes, I would like to clarify a few points. The figure of 797 who progressed directly into employment on immediate completion of internship, was 360 in the host organisation and 437 in another organisation. That was immediately on completion of the internship, so there was not a gap between them going in there.

It is less than a week's emigration in a full year.

Mr. Brian O’Malley

Yes. The exit surveys that we were undertaking indicate that it is easier for people to get a job when they are currently working.

My final point concerns low-skill internships which continue to get much publicity. We are getting a lot of daily feedback from people coming into us, particularly early school leavers who have been long-term unemployed and have not had an opportunity to work. They say that many of these opportunities allow them to develop a work ethic and build networks in places of employment. It is a confidence-building exercise to get back into the routine of doing a nine-to-five job. There has been criticism of those type of internships but they are equally valid depending on the educational qualifications and skills profile of the individual in question. Not everyone has a PhD and can do the higher level opportunities. That is not to say that we do not take cognisance of the criticism of potential abuses. We are following up formal complaints about those areas.

Mr. Martin Murphy

I wish to make a closing comment. My own company took on 23 interns in a facility in Galway. Some of those have progressed into full-time employment. I understand four of them were hired into HP. As a number of them were in HP, in the network and back in the workplace, they found full-time jobs with companies in the area. Therefore part-way through their internship with us, they regrettably left and went into full-time employment. That is a dynamic that nobody had anticipated. The internship scheme is not like a university course which has to be six or nine months long. If somebody comes in and gets a job two or three months later, that is a good thing.

I want to thank everyone for their contributions. I cannot let anyone back in because we have to close. We are over time as it is.

Can I ask just one question?

No, Senator, I am sorry, I cannot reopen the discussion. We may have missed some questions in Mr. Murphy's wrap-up and if members of the committee have any more questions we can forward them to him for written answers. We may invite Mr. Murphy back to the committee on another occasion when the report comes out. There are many issues of concern which feed into the work of the committee.

I thank the witnesses for their time today. Perhaps Mr. Murphy can talk to Senator Healy Eames after the meeting because I know she wanted to pose a question, but we cannot deal with it formally now. We will re-engage with this subject.

Mr. Martin Murphy

I will provide the Chairman with a shortened version of the areas I covered at the outset.

I would appreciate that.

Sitting suspended at 2.45 p.m. and resumed at 2.50 p.m.
Barr
Roinn