Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

SELECT COMMITTEE ON ENTERPRISE AND SMALL BUSINESS díospóireacht -
Thursday, 11 Jun 1998

Vol. 1 No. 2

Estimates for Public Services 1998.

Vote 34 - Enterprise, Trade and Employment.

I have pleasure in welcoming the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Harney, and her officials. They are in charge of a very important Department. There is great news on the economic front from time to time and I hope this continues for the next five or six years. The only item on the agenda is consideration of the revised Estimates for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment for 1998.

I will not ask for Deputies' approval for the timetable but I hope the meeting will be as short as possible. There is a difficulty in that there are three committee meetings this morning. Some Deputies are members of more than one committee and it is impossible for them all to attend. However, we will go ahead with the Estimates as this is an important and large Department and I want to give Members every opportunity to discuss them.

I join the Chairm an, and other Members in extending my sympathy to Deputy Callely on his bereavement.

I will begin by introducing my officials - Paul Haran, Secretary General of the Department, Roddie Molloy, Martin Lynch from the finance unit and Marian Brophy. Officials are not normally named but perhaps it will be better if we start doing so. Ministers of State, Deputies Kitt and Treacy, will attend shortly.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear before the Select Committee and to assist in its examination of my Department's Estimate for 1998. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment has a vital economic mandate to promote employment, enterprise, economic growth, employee welfare and consumer rights. In keeping with the Government's plan An Action Programme for the Millennium, we have identified strategic goals to ensure this mandate is fulfilled.

Ireland has achieved unprecedented and sustained economic growth in recent years on which we are ideally placed to build. To do so there must be prudent management of the economy, improved competitiveness, promotion of enterprise, support for small business and improved training. To ensure that we increase economic growth we must make further significant progress in improving living standards and reducing unemployment. However, we must move forward in a planned and structured way if we are to realise our full economic potential. My Department's overall Vote for 1998 is £807,478,000 net. Members of the committee may have concerns or queries on aspects of the Vote with which I and my ministerial colleagues will deal.

Tackling the problem of unemployment continues to be the major focus of the Government's economic and social policy. All the indicators point to further substantial growth in employment. We are continuing to maintain our strong pattern of output growth. Allied to this, the downward trend in the monthly live register numbers and the Exchequer returns all point to significant further employment growth in the period ahead. The Government is determined to maximise this growth.

The committee will be aware that EU heads of state at the European Council meeting on employment in Luxembourg in November 1997, endorsed a set of EU guidelines on employment. These guidelines comprised policy prescriptions aimed at promoting the employment prospects of people, entrepreneurship, the adaptability of the workforce and equal opportunity.

Following the adoption of the 1998 EU guidelines, Ireland and other member states, submitted an action plan on employment to the European Commission in April 1998. This sets out the policy measures and steps being taken at national level. Within our plan, the Government has set an explicit target of reducing unemployment to 7 per cent of the labour force by the end of the year 2000. This key objective will be achieved by the pursuit, within a strategic framework, of a range of employment and labour market policies.

Key aspects of the EU guidelines call for the adoption of a preventative strategy whereby there will be early intervention with all young and adult unemployed, within six and 12 months respectively of their becoming unemployed, with a view to offering them a job or other employment support.

Systematic engagement at an early stage in the unemployment spell is a major innovation in our action plan. This preventative strategy has not been a feature of Irish policy heretofore. Our systems and interventions focus more on the reintegration of persons who are already long-term unemployed. The policy challenge for us is to reorient our systems in a balanced way such as will enable us to adopt the preventative approach proposed while at the same time ensuring that the reintegration needs of current substantial numbers of long-term unemployed people are met. We cannot ignore the large numbers of people who are already long-term unemployed who constitute 56 per cent of all our unemployment. This is a much higher level than most other European countries.

Our initial focus under the preventative strategy will be on young people under 25 years, where we will seek to intervene with them as they cross the six month unemployment threshold. Primary initial focus at this stage will be on securing job placement through appropriate guidance, counselling, development of job seeking techniques and through the use of instruments such as "self-help" job clubs. Access to personal development, training programmes and other labour market programmes will be offered where appropriate and needed. Referral to the Local Employment Service will be made where it is clear the intensive mediation, which is a key component of the service is needed. We are actively pursuing the implementation of the commitments entered into under our action plan.

We are creating the conditions necessary for greatly enhanced co-operation between agencies and Government Departments. New improved co-ordination and co-operation procedures are being worked out between the FÁS employment service and the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs. Better integration between the FÁS employment service and the local employment service is also proposed. The Department of Education and Science also has an important role in terms of preventing, and providing alternative options for, early school leavers and in offering second chance educational opportunities. A closer link between ongoing entitlement to social welfare income and the obligation to participate in the supports offered will also be a feature of the programme.

The process of systematic engagement with under 25 year olds will be modelled generally on the Youth Progression Programme. The experience of this programme, introduced in October 1996, to enhance the awareness of and utilisation of employment and training services by unemployed 18 and 19 year olds, shows that an investment in a strategy of systematic engagement yields results. A first evaluation of that programme is that it increased the numbers of 18 and 19 year olds leaving the live register by some 20 percentage points - from 30 per cent to 50 per cent.

Under the plan we will pursue policies aimed at promoting a positive operating environment for small business; promoting activity in the social economy; and developing our fiscal policies to enhance the attractiveness of creating and taking up employment.

In addition, our plan encompasses actions aimed at achieving an even more flexible workforce and improving the employment situation of women. We also propose to make major structural adjustments to our arrangements for meeting the employment needs of people with a disability. Historically, responsibility for this area lay with the Department of Health which was responsible for focusing on meeting the medical needs of those with disabilities. The whole approach now is to mainstream their needs with the needs of the wider community. Policy responsibility for their training and employment needs is being transferred to my Department.

Plans for the new indigenous development agency, to be known as Enterprise Ireland are well on track. The enabling legislation is proceeding through the Houses of the Oireachtas this month with a view to having the agency established in July. The legislation will draw on the existing powers and functions contained in existing industrial development, including trade and marketing legislation. The committee will be aware that I have already appointed Mr. Pat Molloy and Mr. Dan Flinter as Chairman Designate and chief executive officer Designate respectively. In keeping with the partnership approach to the restructuring, my Department has been engaged in a consultative process through groups comprised of management, staff and trade unions. Regular meetings have been held with these groups since January last.

All ABT staff and the majority of staff in Forbairt will transfer to Enterprise Ireland. The structured development approach I am adopting and the focus on companies with the potential and willingness to grow will ensure a more efficient approach to the allocation of resources. For example, companies will not be able to "grant shop" between FÁS, Forbairt and ABT. At the same time, it must be recognised that there may be short-term costs incurred if the agency is to be in a position to realise long-term savings.

If, for example, the agency exits from non-developmental areas in the technology area, there will be a reduction in fee income. Upfront costs in relation to staffing could arise as and when the agency streamlines or exits from existing activities. I assure Members of the committee there will be no enforced redundancies.

My Department, under the guidance of the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt, continues to actively pursue our national trade interests through the European Union, the World Trade Organisation and bilaterally. Our strategic interest is the further liberalisation of trade flows, both within the EU's Single Market and globally. A continuation of our success in the trade field depends on vigorous pursuit of a competitive economy which is another key focus of my Department's activities. A revamped trade advisory forum, representative of the social partners and the key players in exporting, advises the Minister of State Deputy Kitt on trade policy issues.

The relative competitiveness of the Irish economy in 1997 contributed greatly to our success in attracting inward investment. Job creation reached an all time high in 1997, with 14,930 new jobs created by IDA assisted companies. The net employment impact was an increase of 9,985 - a 36 per cent increase on the previous year's record performance. This brings the total direct employment in IDA backed companies to 107,826.

Future prospects also look good. The IDA has set a three year rolling jobs target for 1998 to 2000 for the creation of 42,000 new first time jobs. There are a number of US projects, both greenfield and expansion, in the immediate pipeline with a job potential of more than 6,000. In other markets, including the UK, Germany and Japan, activity remains busy with several potential projects in the pipeline. I pay tribute to the outgoing Chief Executive of the IDA, Mr. Kieran McGowan, who announced yesterday that he will not take up the post again when it becomes vacant in August. He is a great ambassador for Ireland and under his stewardship the IDA has done an outstanding job in attracting inward investment. All my predecessors who worked with him were full of praise and admiration for him for the manner in which he lead the IDA.

In 1997 we saw a 7 per cent increase in sales by indigenous Irish companies, amounting to £15.2 billion, thereby exceeding the target of £15 billion for the year 2000. Exports were just under £8 billion -an increase of 9 per cent on 1996. This is well on the way to achieving the target for the year 2000 of £9 billion by 1999. In 1997, Forbairt reported exceptional performance by lrish industry with a gross gain of 12,888 new jobs, its best performance in over 20 years. The net increase in employment was 5,061 - the highest net change in 11 years. Total employment in Forbairt client companies reached 130,641 at the end of 1997. This exceeded the target of 130,000 set in 1994, which was to be reached in the year 2000. A further objective of Forbairt is to bring research and development expenditure in Irish firms up to international standards as part of the general upgrading of competitive capability.

In 1997, Irish companies continued to increase their spend on research and development, investing more than £135 million - an increase of 47 per cent over 1996. There is a need to increase spend further in the coming years if companies are to ensure competitiveness. In 1998, there is every reason to believe that, with the current levels of investment and business confidence, the strong sales and jobs performance of recent years can be repeated. The focus of Enterprise Ireland will strongly enhance the potential of indigenous business to reach demanding employment, growth and export targets.

Shannon Development promotes indigenous industry in all of the mid-west region and has responsibility for the promotion of both indigenous and overseas industry in the Shannon Free Zone. The Shannon Free Zone currently accommodates 110 companies employing 6,300 people - up 6 per cent since the end of 1996 and accounting for almost £1.5 billion of manufactured and services exports per year. The approval rate for new projects in the zone has been very strong over the year and further employment in key sectors is being pursued by Shannon Development in conjunction with IDA Ireland.

The National Technological Park in Limerick has 90 companies employing close to 3,000 people in a balanced mix of inward investment companies, Irish technology companies, research and development entities and support services. Shannon Development aims to continue development of the park. Indigenous industrial employment in the mid west region increased by 13 per cent in the four years from 1994 to 1997 and is continuing to grow strongly.

The objective of Ireland's science, technology and innovation policy is to foster an environment where industrial competitiveness is founded on innovation which in turn is based on the successful application of science and technology. The State's role is to support the enhancement of the competitive advantage in Irish firms by providing a portfolio of infrastructural, financial and skills supports attuned to the expressed and anticipated needs of the economy. The Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, leads my Department's endeavours to boost the economy's science, technology and innovation potential.

This year sees the launch of a new £2.5 million fund that marks an important first step in the way the expenditure across all science and technology spending Departments may be planned and prioritised. The National Innovation Investment Fund is open on a competitive basis to priority science and technology that is recommended by any Government Department and endorsed by providing matching funding. The fund will also be able to assist emerging technologies which can benefit the country in the medium to longer term future. The technology foresight exercise launched recently by the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, and being carried out by the Irish Council for Science, Technology and Innovation will facilitate the timely identification of such technologies.

A total of eight company law inquiries are under way currently. Members of the committee will see that a provisional sum of £45,000 was allocated in 1998 but indications are that this will be exceeded to a significant degree. The excess is due primarily to the costs incurred in the inquiry into Bula Resources (Holdings) plc and the other six company law investigations under way under section 19 of the Companies Act, 1990. The cost of the National Irish Bank inquiry is being borne initially by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

With regard to the inquiry into Bula, the inspector, Mr. Lyndon MacCann has indicated to my Department that his report should be finalised and submitted to me in a matter of weeks. This inquiry is being conducted under section 14 of the Companies Act, 1990, and is investigating the beneficial ownership of certain blocks of shares in Bula. Subject to legal advice I may receive on the content of the report, I propose to publish the inspector's report and to make a statement on its content.

There are six company law investigations under way as a result of the McCracken tribunal. These relate to Garuda Limited, Celtic Helicopters Limited, Guinness & Mahon (Ireland) Limited, Hamilton Ross Co. Limited, Irish Intercontinental Bank Limited and Ansbacher (Cayman) Limited. All are being conducted by authorised officers of my Department under section 19 of the Companies Act, 1990.

The investigations of Garuda Limited and Celtic Helicopters were initiated last September and a great deal of work has been done since then by Mr. Peter Fisher and Mr. Gerard Ryan respectively. I am not in a position to give a precise indication of when the reports of these investigations will be finalised but I expect to receive Mr. Fisher's report first.

With regard to the remaining investigations which commenced in January, they are being undertaken by Mr. Gerard Ryan and good progress is being made. A significant amount of documentation has been received from Guinness & Mahon (Ireland) and Irish Intercontinental Bank, together with a smaller amount of material from Hamilton Ross Co. Ltd. Given that Mr. Ryan is seeking to uncover clandestine activity in the State spanning a period in some cases of more than 20 years it will be appreciated that his investigations will take time. At present I expect it will be a number of months before Mr. Ryan can complete substantially his inquiries.

Ansbacher (Cayman) Limited is not co-operating with Mr. Ryan' s investigation but the papers of Guinness & Mahon (Ireland) Ltd and Irish Intercontinental Bank contain correspondence and other information relating to the business of Ansbacher (Cayman) in Ireland. I am delighted the company's attempt in recent weeks to get a court order in the Cayman Islands prohibiting the release of its books and documents was dismissed. I have no information at this stage on whether Ansbacher will appeal this decision. I am absolutely determined that Mr. Ryan should complete his inquiries and I will assist him in doing so by seeking, through all available legal means, retrieval of the Ansbacher documents which should continue to be available to him here in Ireland for examination.

The investigation into the affairs of National Irish Bank is being conducted under section 8 of the Companies Act, 1990, by two High Court inspectors, Mr. John Blayney and Mr. Tom Grace. Section 13 of the Act provides for the payment of the costs of section 8 inquiries by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform initially. The cost of the first month of the High Court investigation was close to £55,000. I am determined that the taxpayer should not pay for the costs of inquiry ultimately and that any costs incurred be recovered from National Irish Bank as is permitted under the Act.

In addition to the investigation into National Irish Bank, yesterday afternoon the High Court agreed to an early hearing of my petition to appoint Mr. John Blayney, and Mr. Tom Grace as inspectors to National Irish Bank Financial Services Limited. This petition will be heard definitively at 2 p.m. on Monday, 15 June 1998.

Positive co-operative industrial relations are vital to economic and social development. In particular, a stable industrial relations environment contributes to sustaining enterprise competitiveness and employment development.

Since the advent of national economic and social partnership industrial relations have improved considerably. For example, the number of work days lost through industrial action has declined significantly from 315,500 in 1986 to 74,508 in 1997. I have no doubt this substantial improvement has been assisted by the industrial relations agencies - the Labour Court and the Labour Relations Commission - funded by my Department.

At a time of increasing globalisation of world markets and the need for enterprise competitiveness it is, perhaps, not surprising that industrial relations have become more complex. Due to this and because of a planned extension to its remit, my Department's estimate for 1998 includes a significant increase in funding for the Labour Relations Commission. Partnership 2000 calls for the modernisation of industrial relations and I want to ensure that the Labour Court and the Labour Relations Commission are properly equipped to play their part in this modernisation process. The way forward is through increased co-operation between management, employees and their representatives. Confrontation is not the way forward. I am, therefore, disappointed with a number, albeit small, of high profile disputes where confrontation was evident.

A discussion on the Estimates for this Department eight to ten years ago would have focused to a greater degree on high levels of unemployment and low levels job growth. However, today's discussion takes place in the light of good growth in jobs in the economy. I pay tribute to Mr. Kieran McGowan who has indicated that he will retire later this year. He has done a good job and we are all proud that IDA Ireland has such a fine reputation and can attract so much industry to Ireland. I also pay tribute to the other officers who work with IDA Ireland seeking new investment in Ireland. The workers also deserve praise for having made themselves better trained and available for work in these new enterprises.

Lest there be any intention on the Minister's or the Government's part to take all the praise for the job growth, I point out that there was a 36 per cent growth in jobs in 1997. I was part of the Government responsible for a good deal of that growth, which also occurred in 1995 and 1996. One can be in Government at the right or the wrong time and the Minister is lucky to be in office at a good time. My party was also in Government when the figures were good and we share the credit.

However, there are 236,000 unemployed. I have a serious concern about the mismatch between the levels of growth in the economy and jobs and the large numbers signing on. I realise that some of those signing on may not ever work but there are many hundreds of thousands who could take up work. There are jobs available which are not being taken up. I am not satisfied the Government is addressing the mismatch between the large numbers of jobs available, whether advertised in the newspapers or in shop windows, and the unemployed. Whether it is the job of FÁS or the Department to facilitate that match, somebody must take responsibility. The employer sector of our economy is insufficiently consulted about the skills required to fill vacancies. Many employers have contacted FÁS seeking a list of suitably trained people. For example, if a warehouse manager is required for a store FÁS will supply the employer with the names of 20 people suitably qualified and available for work. These people will be invited to attend for an interview but fewer than half of them usually turn up and of those who are offered the job, some will refuse it. There is something wrong when employers cannot fill one vacancy from a list of 20 suitable candidates. Perhaps we need to target the long-term unemployed and help them develop a work ethic. It is easy for a long-term unemployed person to get into a habit of sleeping late, and his interpersonal skills will not be as well honed because he has not had to go into the workplace and work with other people. There are many reasons unemployed people do not take up job offers. An individual may be afraid of rejoining the workforce because he feels unable to cope with the interchange between other employees, the new rules and regulations relating to health and safety or all the new changes in the workplace. Targeted training has to be undertaken to solve this problem.

Last week I attended a meeting in Brussels on behalf of this committee. It was clear the NAP report on employment submitted in April was issued to the Commission without any democratic check on it. In October or November next the Tánaiste will have to submit a follow-up report and I urge her to ensure that the Dáil or this committee has an opportunity to examine her report. I will make this point next week at our meeting. I discussed this situation with a number of EU committee members and discovered that the level of democratic accountability for that report varied from none at all in Ireland's case to other jurisdictions having full parliamentary debates and discussions on it in committees. On behalf of this committee I propose that Ireland follows their example and has the same accountability.

I welcome the fact that matters pertaining to the employment of disabled people will now come under the remit of the Tánaiste's Department. It is time disabled people were treated as full members of our employment sector and came under the remit of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment.

In the Dáil next week we will have a chance to further debate the setting up of Enterprise Ireland. I warn the Minister that there is severe concern that Enterprise Ireland and the structures that have been set up have not taken into account the exporters' role. Their voices have not been heard in the setting up of Enterprise Ireland.

Last February I attempted to raise the issue of the insurance ombudsman in the Dáil by bringing it to the attention of the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, but he treated the issue with indifference. I tried to find out whether he was concerned that the Ombudsman, Ms Paulyn Marrinan Quinn had said she would not renew her contract. It is now more evident that she was deeply concerned about the way her work was being interfered with, or that she felt she did not have the full independence that she deserved. I hope the Minister of State will indicate whether he is concerned about this issue and whether the appointment of a new insurance ombudsman is feasible if the situation remains the same.

I also voice the concerns of people involved in science and research. There is a great deal of confusion over funding for science, technology and research. The Minister recently announced an additional fund for which universities had a very short period of time to apply for funds. Concerns have been expressed about the speed with which universities have to make these applications. Even with my small involvement in science I know it takes time to prepare a properly worked out plan and apply for funding.

There is also a concern that research funds now available to people at the cutting edge of scientific research, which would benefit industries and increase employment, will be shifted to the Department of Education and Science rather than staying with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. I know people involved in the research sector are confused about the amount of funds available. There has not been an increase in funding for the research support fund and there is no guarantee that people who would have benefited from this in the past will be receive funds from the new scheme. Perhaps the Minister of State will deal with this issue.

I note from the Estimates that the grant to the Irish Organisation for the Unemployed appears to have been reduced for 1998. Perhaps the Minister can give us an explanation for this. I also notice that funding for the Joint Labour Committees has been reduced. This has probably nothing to do with JLC awards but with the committee itself.

I join other Members in expressing sympathy to Deputy Callely, his wife and family following the death of his father-in-law.

I welcome the Tánaiste, Deputy Harney, and Ministers of State, Deputies Kitt and Treacy. I also welcome the officials from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment to this committee for what I hope will be an interesting review of the work carried out by the Department during the year. I congratulate them on their achievements, in particular the way they attracted many high tech American multi-nationals over the past year. A recent example of this is the Xerox Corporation.

I also join colleagues in paying tribute to Mr. Kieran McGowan for his fine work in recent years. I work on the north side almost on a daily basis and knew one of his predecessors. I always marvel at the high standards set by our IDA and Forbairt executives. Having said that, over the past year the Department has been lethargic in its preparation of legislation. The Opposition was unhappy with the presentation of the national minimum wage report, the jobs plan and the recent Enterprise Ireland Bill which arrived at 6 p.m. on a Friday evening. Unfortunately, we had promised interested parties that we would be able to provide a copy of the Bill on the previous day.

There has also been a lethargic approach to the issue of copyright. We waited for 25 years until the United States threatened to sue us in Geneva in relation to high tech copyright and all the new developments we have had in recent years. In recent weeks we had to rush through a brief Bill to cope with the matter. I look forward to major legislation on copyright to make up for this.

Many people think we have only discussed Enterprise Ireland over the past three weeks but we have discussed it for the past year and longer. The interested parties, particularly Forbairt employees, have not had enough time to discuss their future. Deputy Owen referred to other interested parties such as the Irish Trade Board and it has not had enough time to discuss the matter either.

The Tánaiste mentioned the great achievement in relation to job creation and I give her credit for that. The Rainbow Coalition Government was built on the ideal of partnership between workers, employers and Government. Over the past year this partnership has been seriously threatened by the present administration in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. For example, there have been a number of high profile factory closures as well as the creation of jobs. There has been the Seagate disaster in Clonmel and I will be interested in what the Minister can report on that. In the Northside Dublin constituencies there have been a number of high profile closures of American companies and there are considerable worries in regard to Apple Computers in Cork to which I hope the Minister will also refer.

I understand that in recent years there was an attempt to set up an early warning jobs protection unit in the Department and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions has been in negotiation with the Minister on this. There is nothing in the documents before us giving any indication what type of early warning system the Minister has in place to protect jobs. Given the nature of our high tech economy, jobs will turn over perhaps at a faster rate. It was unwise of the Minister Deputy Harney, and of the Ministers of State Deputies Kitt and Treacy to reject outright my Sunday Working Bill and my Trade Union Recognition Bill. The Ministers had an opportunity in both Bills to indicate to workers that their right to work voluntarily on a Sunday and to belong to a trade union was respected. The Ministers have set their faces against workers' rights in recent years and this should be strongly highlighted by the Committee today.

Also before the House is my Employment Protection Bill. My party and I have produced more Bills in this area than the Minister's Department over the past year. This underlines the point I made about the Minister's lethargy in preparing vital legislation. My Employment Protection Bill will put into Irish law the huge number of directives on jobs protection and redundancy protection on which the Minister has not seen fit to bring such legislation forward. At this late stage the Minister might adopt my Employment Protection Bill as a Government Bill to put it through the House.

The employment action plan was disappointing. I made this point last week to my colleagues in the Socialist group in Luxembourg. The Swedish Minister asked that each country should seek full employment under the action plan. Why did we not look for full employment over the time of this plan? I understand the target was 7 per cent but what was wrong with aiming for full employment? As we have major employment growth why could we not give guarantees? Additional resources were not allocated for the employment plan. The Minister went along with the European directives on the employment plan about targeting the under 26s with new resources. What will happen to the local employment service? When will it be a nationwide service given sufficient resources to deal with the kind of problems which the former Minister Deputy Owen outlined on matching the job skills to the abilities of people?

Yesterday in the Dáil the Minister Deputy McCreevy stated that the new job assist programme had a very low take up - I think only 207 people embarked on it. I will be grateful if the Minister will explain how this programme can be utilised with the back to work and the area allowance schemes to maximise the numbers taking it up particularly from the ranks of the long-term unemployed. On the North side where the Minister knows I am heavily involved in the local community employment groups, enterprise creation and small business centres, it appears that the real problems are among the over thirties. What type of resources will this Administration and the three Ministers bring forward to help these people? There is no hope for the 236,000 long-term unemployed people in the employment action plan.

In recent months I noted from the figures that some of the underlying trends in unemployment are slightly disturbing. I would like the Minister to comment on what she thinks is happening on the standard employment rate and why there was a blip in the past month or two from 10.3 per cent to 10.4 per cent. What consultation has the Minister had with the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs? He appears to have embarked willy-nilly on a workfare programme without reference to the Ministers Deputies Harney or McCreevy. In recent weeks some of my constituents, having gone to sign on in employment exchanges, were sent to building sites and various other companies. Does the Minister approve of this? Has she had a part in drafting the Minister's workfare programme and in its operation? In general, I am still looking for the action in the employment action plan and we will consider what is brought forward.

I have been very critical of Forfás in the past. They once sent me a box of reports when I had been slightly critical of their research facilities and research production. However, I welcome the recent document Forfás presented to us on helping companies prepare for the introduction of the Euro. Nonetheless it is a critical area. Last week the Danish and Swedish representatives felt slightly superior to the Irish representative since they will be able to watch the action and see what will happen as the single currency and single monetary policy develops whereas Ireland will be in the middle of it without a senior official in the European Central Bank to help us. As we discovered yesterday, the Government again has been remarkably remiss and the Minister Deputy McCreevy has failed abysmally to protect us at the highest levels of monetary policy. In the top 23 officials there is not an Irish man or woman in an executive position and that is deplorable.

I thank the Minister for her reports and vigour in reacting to a series of scandals, whereby banks, in the case of AIB it allowed 53,000 illegal accounts and the NIB and allegedly the Ulster Bank through various accounts liberally helped themselves to the money of small business people and domestic householders. That is a remarkable state of affairs. Why has the Minister not published a full list of Ansbacher account holders so the nation can know who are these people? As Deputy Rabbitte and I urged her why did the Minister not appoint Mr. Tom Grace and Judge Blayney as High Court inspectors at the outset? Why do we have to return to the High Court on this matter?

While I welcome the Department's achievements it has been very lethargic in producing legislation to maintain the partnership. If the partnership is not maintained we will head into very troubled and tricky waters in the years ahead as the Euro eventually comes into our pockets. The net result could be major industrial unrest and job losses. It is critical that the Minister reviews her attitude to national partnership and ensures the necessary legislation is introduced.

I will allow two minutes for any other Member who wishes to speak. I ask Members to deal with the broad issues rather than the specifics. Our main purpose is to go through the Estimates and there are many questions to be answered.

I thank the Tánaiste for her forbearance and patience over the Ray Burke affair and we are very grateful for her vigorous and speedy pursuit of wrongdoers of every kind in the different Departments.

What percentage of taxpayers' money can be recovered in the National Irish Bank investigation?

Will the Deputy make a statement as the specifics can be dealt with under the subheads?

I thank the Tánaiste for her comprehensive statement and compliment her two Ministers of State on the efficient way in which they are carrying out their duties.

In the industrial development area there has been a policy of paying attention to the less favoured areas, giving them special attention. We all welcome the thriving economy, but on the west coast, for example, Kilrush, a town of 3,000 inhabitants has 1,000 people unemployed. Will there be any policy changes to address the less developed areas on the west coast? A declining and ageing population means we will have ghost villages unless some remedial action is taken.

I compliment the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, on his very active involvement with the technology industry. Nevertheless, there is a severe shortage of highly skilled personnel in this field. Young graduates are earning £2,000 a week, and that is obscene. Does the Minister of State have any proposals to get more people involved in this area to solve this shortage which is driving wages to obscene levels? I acknowledge the work of the Labour Relations Commission; the figures on its achievements speak for themselves. The Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt, will be aware that in companies like Aer Rianta there are new compact schemes of partnership between management and personnel. The commission has been actively engaged in setting these types of arrangement up. We can then see effective methods of ensuring productivity along those lines. Is it proposed to extend the powers of the commission to enable it to become involved, for instance, in the Garda pay dispute?

I thank the Tánaiste for getting the US Secretary of Commerce, Mr. William Daly, to visit Sligo yesterday, which was a great boost. It was a fantastic day for the Border counties and was very much appreciated. I also welcome the announcement of capping of supermarket sizes, which I have been fighting for since being elected. It is a good move because it will stabilise the retail sector.

The statement made yesterday by Mr. Kieran McGowan, who has contributed much to the IDA, was very important because he referred to the development of regions as the way forward. The Government should take his comments on board.

The allocation of funds for the enterprise boards should also be increased. They are doing fantastic work and they represent the way forward for small businesses. The loan subsidy for small businesses administered by ICC Bank should be looked at with a view to increasing the funds available to it. The constraints involved in giving those subsidies should be examined with a view to giving a break to people with brilliant business ideas.

I too welcome the Tánaiste and Ministers of State. I second Deputy Broughan's proposal that all those involved in wrongdoing should be named. There should not be a separate code of practice for a poor person who robs a tin of beans in a supermarket having his or her name published in a newspaper.

My constituency has not yet heard the announcements the Tánaiste has made in other parts of the country. Can she indicate when the IDA factory outside Cavan town may get a tenant? That would be very welcome. Deputy Owen referred to unemployment. There are people in my constituency who have no difficulty travelling 50 or 60 miles daily to work. However, within a stone's throw of their places of work there are people who will not get out of bed to work. There was never a better time for people to get jobs, but there are people who have become very lazy.

I am not criticising anybody, but the medical profession should take a hard look at people calling to their clinics to be declared unfit for work. This morning I saw a physically handicapped person waiting at a bus stop to go to work, and there were probably people lying in bed in that street who would not get up to go to work. There must be a commitment from people who receive unemployment benefit or other forms of social welfare that they will go to training courses or back to school so that they do not get money to lie in bed. If there was no work I would accept that people should get money. Social welfare payments are extremely generous.

Nowadays subcontractors do a great deal of work for main contractors, who sometimes do not pay the subcontractor. This causes great difficulty. Much of this work involves factory refurbishment and similar matters for which grants are paid. Grants should not be paid until final receipts for payments to all involved in the work are produced. It is not good that the big player gets the contract and brings in subcontractors who may have to wait to be paid or not be paid at all. Some people have gone into bankruptcy because of this.

Regarding grant aid paid for setting up businesses, a commitment to stay with the business for ten years must be made or the grant must be repaid. If the promoter of this business sees an opportunity to move on and another person wants to take over the original business, there should be a clawback on a percentage basis. If the person is in the business for a certain number of years he or she should be allowed to withhold a percentage of that grant and not the full grant. The person is obviously the type to move on to develop another business and the present system, obliging them to repay the grant and rendering them ineligible for another new business grant, is discouraging.

These matters are causing minor problems and the Department should address them.

I will give the Minister an opportunity to answer these matters but we must move to the Estimates as we have a legal obligation to finish those today. I am moving to the subheads.

Will the Minister reply to some of the points?

Deputy Owen asked me to wait until she returns. We will move to the subheads. I presume replies will be given on the questions raised under the different subheads. We will deal first with subhead A1-A9 - Administration.

One of the ironic things about these sessions is we are discussing money which has been spent whereas we should discuss the Estimates for l999. Deputy Treacy knows there will have to be a system whereby Deputies can be involved in helping to prepare the budget for the coming year. Here we are talking about bread which has been eaten; nonetheless it allows us investigate some interesting trends. The Dáil must be reorganised and we will have to be more efficient in discussing the upcoming Estimates.

On subhead A7 - consultancy services, why was there an increase from £199,000 to £560,000? Under subhead A8 - Advertising and Publicity, are programmes such as job assist or the back to work scheme included or does it relate to advertising for the Department only?

The increase in the subhead is accounted for by the transfer of the trade function to the Department and also the commitments on pay increases under Partnership 2000. The main increases are for consultancy services for which there was an outturn of £199,000 in 1997. It has increased by £301,000. Many of these consultancies were commissioned during the time of the previous Government and as there was a decision to evaluate many of the Government programmes, much of the consultancy costs relate to that. Approximately £20,000 was spent on the SMI process and freedom of information; £75,000 on the Health and Safety Authority; £50,000 on labour force development - to consider the policies of Forbairt, SFADCo and ABT to see if we are getting value for money and £50,000 on evaluation of community employment. There was nothing in 1997 on either of those two headings on the HSA, £30,000 was spent on surveys on legal studies; £90,000 on actuarial services; £10,000 on appraisal of non-life companies and £10,000 was spent on the implementation of groups directives.

In view of the current discussions on consultancies, the Department will only very reluctantly enter into consultancies. The Department and its agencies, particularly Forfás, which is a policy unit attached to the Department, have the capacity to do a great deal of work perhaps traditionally done by outside consultants.

Subhead A8 - Advertising and Publicity, provides for the payment of the cost of general advertising and publicity by the Department and also the cost of notices by the Registrar of Friendly Societies, the Labour Court and the EU. A significant part of the expenditure on advertising arises from the statutory obligation to have public notices. Earlier this week I answered a question from Deputy McDowell about how much money newspapers received and informed him that the Independent group did not get the largest slice, unlike The Irish Times. I cannot remember the precise figures but there was a large margin.

Is the Minister happy that she has sufficient access to parliamentary draftsmen or draftswomen given the seeming lethargy in bringing forward vital legislation. When we were embarrassed by the American threat in regard to copyright the Minister rushed the recent Bill through the House. I thank the officials for their good briefing and I know we are expecting a new Bill, but does the Minister require further help in relation to parliamentary draftsmanship?

As the Deputy is aware, we have fallen behind in our world trade obligations on this issue for some years. One of the benefits of having experienced people on this committee is that we can be very upfront about this. The last Government did not bring the Bill forward to its rightful place - where it is now.

The Deputy asked a question about drafts-people. A fast track mechanism was put in place in the intellectual property unit within the Department as soon as this Government took up office and that expedited matters.

The Tánaiste and the Taoiseach were very supportive in ensuring we had adequate staffing levels and that the system worked well. The key aspect of the fast track system is that it works in conjunction with the AG's office. As the Deputy is aware from his experience in preparing legislation that is a crucial element. We have managed, as the Deputy rightly said, to bring forward the short Bill which will deal with copyright rights holders' position and the whole question of fines which will be dealt with in the Seanad next week. We intend then to proceed with the substantial Bill, and hope to have it published during the summer and have a very important opportunity for consultation with Members and other interested people to try to bring this complex legislation forward before the end of the year. Having regard to our obligations to the WTO, our consciousness of the importance of the IT sector and the need to move on this Bill from the time we took office, we have managed to bring it to this stage. Through the staff of the Department and the AG's office we have also managed to use our resources and potential.

Subheads B-D3 is the subject of an Industrial Development Bill in the Seanad. As the Minister will be here on 30 June and as it is a very big item I do not think justice could be done on taking those subheads this morning. I therefore ask for agreement that they be noted and can be taken up fully with the Minister on 30 June.

Is the Chairman referring to the Enterprise Ireland Bill?

No, the Industrial Development Bill.

There is also the IDA.

If the IDA comes under that.

It does not. We are talking about Enterprise Ireland and the IDA is a different ball game. We would pre-empt the discussion on Enterprise Ireland when it comes into the House next Thursday. I am happy not to discuss that now but I will refer to the general performance of the IDA and Forfás and on aspects of their current operation. It is important to ventilate those issues today.

If that is the wish of the committee we will go ahead with it. I understood that once the Industrial Development Bill was introduced everything could be discussed together.

I would prefer to deal with this when the Minister next attends the committee. The Tánaiste is quite reasonable on most of these matters.

We are not talking about IDA but about the reorganisation of Forbairt. It is nothing to do with IDA.

Everything can be taken together. Has the Deputy specific questions he wishes to ask?

What is the cost per job? For instance, as Rank Xerox is opening in Dundalk, how much will it cost the country? How much less or more expensive is it to attract a high tech job to this country and what is the cost benefit? We are spending a great deal of money this year, £135 million minimum in that whole area. Will there be ongoing consideration of the cost benefit of the policy which everybody acknowledges played a big role in modernisation and industrialisation. Is there concern about the significant increase of £3 million to £8 million - a 40 per cent increase -in 1998 in the IDAs administrative and general expenses?

I understand a decision was taken in recent years that the IDA should dispose of its property portfolio. I presume companies have been contacted about this. Is this a wise policy decision given the transience of some multinational companies? Happily, I live in a heavily industrialised area near Dublin Airport. It seems IDA managed industrial estates are usually top class in the context of environmental friendliness, appearance and interaction with local communities. Estates not managed by the IDA often left much to be desired, with roads being left in a bad condition and no liaison with local authorities. Industries coming to the country could get a bad impression from them. How will the issue of attracting foreign industry be managed if the IDA does not have a property portfolio?

Can the Minister explain the huge increase of £3 million pounds in the administration costs of the IDA?

The increase of £3.338 million in the administrative budget of the IDA is due to reduced rental income as a result of the disposal of property. The Department had to make up the shortfall as the administration was being subsidised by rental income on the property portfolio. It is not appropriate for the IDA to be involved in managing industrial development sites, building advance factories, etc. The job of the IDA is to promote industrial development and foreign direct investment in the economy. There is an evaluation of every project and not just of the overall performance of the IDA. A thorough cost benefit analysis is done for every project which is also reviewed by the Department of Finance and my Department before approval is given.

The average cost per job decreased from £32,419 in the period 1981-87 to £11,714 last year, one third of the original figure. This is as it should be as we clearly want to ensure that we get jobs as cheaply as possible.

Ireland is not competitive for low value added industries in comparison to Poland and some countries in central and eastern Europe, Singapore and Porto Rico. Our competitors are not just EU countries and often we compete for and win projects from Singapore, Porto Rico, etc. because we have people with skills. Skills, including those in technology and engineering, is as attractive a selling point as the corporate tax regime. Both are key factors in attracting industry.

Earlier a Deputy asked about Seagate. This was a big disappointment. The company only operated for two years, but it made disc drives, a very low value added product, and it was no longer competitive for it to make them in Ireland. At present there are other pressure points. I will travel to the US in two weeks on a mercy mission as well as an industrial development mission. There are constant pressure points and we loose approximately 5,000 jobs in such companies annually. However, we gain about 15,000 jobs annually resulting in a gain of 10,000 jobs. It will continue like this and we must keep rolling things over.

We try to ensure new companies deepen their roots in the economy by moving new activities such as research and development to Ireland. The more a company's activities are based in Ireland the more Ireland becomes part of its strategic decision making process. In such a situation it is more likely that companies will be retained and we have had great success in having projects like Dell and Boston Scientific, etc., expand their operations.

Deputy Daly and others raised the issue of peripheral regions. Balanced regional development is a priority in the Government's programme. We want to see projects locating in the regions. Of the 22,000 new jobs announced over the past 11 months, 74 per cent have gone to regions outside Dublin. I am particularly conscious of the six Border counties. The business and development mission led by US Secretary Daly will have an impact on bringing employment to the region. The mission was deeply impressed by what it saw in Sligo and I hope some of the companies will invest in the Border regions. In the context of the peace agreement we want to ensure there is a dividend in terms of investment and employment as that region, has been cut off from its natural hinterland, and has suffered more than most over the past 30 years. Employment growth in manufacturing and internationally traded services in Border counties has been much lower than elsewhere in the country. The population of the region is 400,000 with 4,000 primary educated people entering the workforce each year. There are three outstanding third level institutions in Letterkenny, Sligo and Dundalk which will act as major attractions for inward investment.

Clearly we are concerned about the Apple company. A cloud has been hanging over the company since 1992 as it is losing substantial sales to competitors in recent years. I have had discussions with the management in Ireland and will meet the management in the US within the next two weeks. We want to ensure as many jobs as possible are retained in Cork, that the work there is sustainable and the jobs are kept well into the future and not just on a temporary basis. Our discussions will be on that basis. Apple has disposed of its circuit board manufacturing process everywhere except in Ireland. There is no doubt about the pressure on the Cork facility, something the company has made clear to me. Decisions will be made within the next month about its future.

I welcome the Minister's statement and have no doubt about her commitment to the Border counties. The British-Irish Agreement provides an excellent opportunity and we look forward to catching up with the rest of the country in relation to job creation.

The Cavan advance factory is a very high priority. There were a number of visits to the site in recent times and the IDA is optimistic it can get an investor, something which is a priority, although I do not know if this will be very soon.

Regarding employment grants, I spoke to a tool maker yesterday who employs 38 people. He said he spent £300,000 on capital expenditure for equipment and received no grants. He felt he was under pressure despite the existence of business as the market for his product was small.

If the Deputy speaks to me later regarding the company to which he refers, and if it is Irish, we can put it in touch with Forbairt. One of the reasons for reorganising the structures is to have an integrated and focused approach to assisting industry. If the capital expenditure was embarked upon with a view to increasing employment or sustaining the operation it would qualify under existing criteria for grant aid assistance. I cannot respond immediately to the Deputy until we know the details, the record of the company and the money it received in the past. Through the Deputy I will put the company in touch with the agency.

I welcome the comments the Minister made regarding Apple. I presume she will meet the key person in the company. Regarding the Microsoft disaster which occurred a few weeks ago, it is hard to know if the media hype was valid, but it seems we lost the famous mirror website which Microsoft was going to base here. Is the Minister happy that by the end of the year such a situation will not reoccur and that we could become the host country for vital software industries such as Microsoft?

I am not sure I agree with the Minister in the context of the property portfolio. I visited Silicon Graphics - which has not yet come to Ireland - in San José some years ago.

Part of its attractiveness was that the industrial estate in which it was based was an attractive place for the 10,000 or 11,000 employees to work. Perhaps the Minister should keep that under review.

We lost the Microsoft Mirror project because we did not have the telecom infrastructure. It is not only an issue for Telecom Éireann but it also relates to the fact we did not have competition or enough players in the market. That is why the Government's decision to end the derogation in voice telephony a year in advance is significant. The decision to privatise Cablelink will also have a significant impact on our capacity to attract inward investment.

We will not win every project we seek. It is a competitive world and no Minister or Government has won every project. We do not even proceed on the basis of winning them all. Although we wish we could win every project, it is not realistic. In many cases, we might not have the capacity to sustain all the projects available for investment in Europe, in particular. Projects in certain sectors are more likely to go to some of the larger economies in Europe.

In terms of winning investment generally from the United States, the chief executive of the IDA said yesterday that we are winning 20 per cent of all the greenfield projects coming from the United States to Europe, although we have less than 1 per cent of the European population. That, by any standards, is an outstanding performance. The challenge is to sustain it and that will require much hard work on many fronts. It will require investment in education and technology, maintaining the competitiveness of the economy and keeping corporate taxes down. There are many characteristics which make all that possible and the key is to ensure we continue to get it right and maintain our competitive position.

We will move on to subheads E1 to F3. I will ask the Minister of State, DeputyTreacy, to respond to statements made.

Will the Minister of State explain the increase in the money for the Dublin Innovation Centre?

On SFADCo, which will be under discussion next week, is it the Minister's preferred option to maintain a separate regionally based enterprise development company and how will it affect the remit of Enterprise Ireland? I notice expenditure for it has been reduced. The budget for science and technology is at the same level as in 1997. Deputies have had many queries recently from people in the business and academic communities who are unhappy with the level of spending in this area.

Deputy Lenihan has a particular interest in the Dublin City West project. He can be assured of the interest and support of the Tánaiste in bringing it to fruition. The Government took a decision to proceed and provided £100,000 in 1997 for the project. The bulk of the construction costs, £1.8 million, will be provided this year and we expect the balance, circa £100,000 to £200,000, to be provided next year. The project is on target and a tremendous board of eminent people is driving it. We hope it will make a major contribution not only to the location in which it is based and to the capital city, but, ultimately, to the country in providing a huge opportunity for scientific and research based projects to locate here from an indigenous and international point of view.

On Deputy Broughan's and Deputy Owen's point, there is much confusion in the scientific community and I do not understand the reasons for it. I have an idea from where certain people may be coming. We are spending about £820 million on science research, R & D, across various Departments and State agencies. A huge amount of money is being spent but there is little collaboration pertaining to this money. The Tánaiste, at my request, has done much work at Cabinet level to ensure a new national science innovation fund of £2.5 million in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment.

We asked all the Departments to examine their expenditure and to put forward projects which are sustainable, imaginative and realisable along with matching fund proposals to draw down this money in 1998. This new fund which will gross at £5 million - £2.5 million from the Exchequer and £2.5 million from the £820 million already allocated across State agencies and Departments. We hope the fund will streamline the situation. That is the way Europe is thinking. As the fifth framework programme is being considered in Europe and as Europe is putting much emphasis on R & D in the next round of Structural Funds, we hope we will have created the microstructure which will allow Ireland to draw down more resource from Europe to support R & D in the future because that is the way in which we see this country going.

A new fund of £5 million has been created in the Department of Education and Science. I negotiated the fund and got tremendous support at Cabinet from the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Martin. The Minister for Finance has agreed to both those funds. We have two new gross funds of £10 million in total. On 6 May I announced those funds and set down the conditions for them. Going back to the points made by Deputies Boylan, Daly and Perry, we told the institutions we will give them this new fund but there will be certain conditions. We want them to look at the strength of the third level institutions and at the regions, to make a strategic statement about what they can contribute to the region in which they are located in terms of job creation and linking education, science, research and development, innovation, enterprise and entrepreneurship and to put forward proposals making this core statement in a strategic way. We will allocate £3.5 million to all the institutions for that purpose.

We have provided £0.5 million for studentships in science and technology which will involve direct support for doctoral and post doctoral students. We are providing another £0.5 million for proposals relating to humanities and social scientists. A further £0.5 million is being allocated through the Higher Education Authority to fund projects approved by the national research fund board. Some people thought the traditional situation whereby their pet projects and students could be funded arbitrarily may be impinged upon and there was some resentment at that. However, we are spending public money for which we must account. We must ensure certain conditions are laid down so there will be transparency and the funds spent in this area will serve the country.

Funding for the national research fund board was increased by 10 per cent to £8.8 million. We had commitments to fulfil from last year because it takes about three years to bring a research project from initiation to conclusion. It cost £2 million to fulfil last year's commitments on basic science. As a result, £0.5 million only was left for new projects. On top of that, there are the two new funds which is extra dedicated funding. In addition, the Government took a strategic, mammoth and historic decision to allocate £250 million for an education, science and technological investment fund. This is dedicated funding guaranteed over the next three years for first, second and third levels with a major emphasis on equipment replacement and new opportunities at third level.

We are putting a huge amount of money into R & D. Never before has the scientific community had these opportunities with three new funds available, the national innovation fund in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the science fund in the Department of Education and Science, and the £250 technological investment fund. The Measure 4 board comprises excellent people drawn from Forbairt, my Department and the Office of Science and Technology. The board has prioritised various projects although it has not yet made decisions on them. Certain people, who felt their projects might not receive funding, attempted to create some difficulties for us. I have asked the Higher Education Authority and the newly appointed board to re-examine this situation because the Government is anxious to ensure linkage between the investment taxpayers and successive Governments have made in education and science and its contribution to economic growth through enterprise and entrepreneurship. I have asked the Higher Education Authority to form a new committee to examine these projects in detail on which it, the Department and the Office of Science and Technology would be represented.

The Department hopes to make approximately £1 million extra funding available for basic research this year in addition to the £2 million outlined for ongoing commitments. Further, I have asked the new committee and the two Departments to which I am attached to strategically examine the direction in which we are going on basic research, applied research and strategic research for the coming three years and to make recommendations to the Department and the Minister in regard to the Estimates. I hope the scientific community can see the tremendous opportunities which exist while recognising the Department must account in a clear fashion for all moneys allocated. To that end, we are setting down criteria we believe will best serve Ireland in the short, medium and long term.

Is the Minister of State liaising sufficiently closely with the universities on this issue? Most of the complaints we have received have come from people who would be primarily academic but would have joint academic-business links.

There is liaison with the universities, and the Department has received recommendations from ICSTI, the Irish Council for Science, Technology and Innovation. The council members are eminent people drawn from the science area and most of the country's third level institutions are represented on the council. ICSTI made clear recommendations to the Department and set a target that, by 1999, we should be in a position to spend £6 million on basic research. Not alone has the Department achieved that target one year in advance, it has exceeded it by £2.8 million.

The people involved in the HEA, the Office of Science and Technology and Forbairt are tremendously dedicated. My responsibility is to facilitate the merging of all thinking in this area into one clear stream of opportunity between the Departments of Education and Science and Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the relevant State agencies. Only one small group within the scientific community is dissatisfied and I can understand its problems and frustrations. The Department has no intention of depressing the opportunity for individual or collective intellectual capacity or peer review. Under the newly established Enterprise Ireland, the Minister and I will be committed to enhancing the system for the support of peer review projects in the future.

This is the last round of questions to the Minister of State so I urge Members to put any remaining questions to him.

I was impressed by the Minister of State's comments on research and development and the importance being accorded to it. Will the Dublin Innovation Technology Centre be replicated in other parts of the country? The Minister will be aware of the MNRC in Cork, a research and development centre under the auspices of the university. There is also an innovation centre based in Cork. When the success of the Dublin centre has been evaluated, will other areas throughout the country be considered for the development of research and development and innovation centres? There would be room at the Horgan's Quay site in Cork for information technology and research and development projects if the Minister had the will and commitment to replicate what has happened in Dublin.

There is excellent co-operation between the technological park in Limerick, which is attached to the university, and SFADCo. Skill shortages in the hi-tech area must be addressed. Some new technological institutions could be established in some of the larger towns, Ennis for example, in order to alleviate that problem. If the shortage is not addressed in the near future, we will witness an escalation of salaries in this area.

There was a link programme in Ireland at one stage. Companies which came into the country were purchasing materials abroad and the linkage sought to ensure that many of those components were produced in Ireland.

I am curious as to how directed research and development is in Ireland. Has the Department considered areas in which tremendous potential exists and which would be of enormous benefit to the economic well being of this country? As someone who comes from the third-level sector, it always appeared to me that the identification of such areas depended on an individual lecturer's or college's standpoint. It also appeared to me that a great deal of commissioning came from Europe and that the link between industry and third level institutions was not as strong as it might be. Is there any pro forma arrangement in place whereby our third level institutions could be informed that real opportunities existed in a particular area in terms of research and development? That would allow us to focus our attention on what was necessary and achievable in the short, medium and long-term.

I note the very significant increase in the funding being made available for research and development and have a vested interest in it. My daughter is a postgraduate science student and she and other students in the postgraduatescience area have been informed by the universities that no funding will be available for such courses next year. Why is this when more funding has been provided? It appears the £50 per week currently available will not be forthcoming next year.

A basic research programme carried out by a Brighton-based company shows the importance of research and development in creating employment. The Minister indicated that £3.5 million is being made available to third-level institutes to engage in particular types of research. If universities pick one area in which to carry out research, will they be obliged to continue researching in that area in years to come or will they have an opportunity to vary the type of research done?

I thank the Minister for his positive comments. Is there any possibility of joint ventures or links between similar bodies in Northern Ireland on this issue? The development of such cross-Border co-operation would be welcome and opportune.

I thank the Deputies and I will do my best to answer all the questions posed. On Deputy O'Flynn's question regarding replicating the Dublin science park in different parts of the country, I could stay here until tonight naming the places putting proposals to us. There are at least six other huge proposals to replicate thescience park in the capital city. There are a number of proposals including a good one from Cork, some from the midwest, and some from the real West and other parts of the country. The park in Dublin will make a major contribution to the capital city and the country and will be model of excellence on which we can replicate in a smaller way, but it will cost a great deal of money to do it. If we put one science park beside the capital city, the next should certainly go to the regions. We need funds, an infrastructure and the semi-State agencies like Telecom must have the infrastructure that will allow us to proceed in that way. We cannot give any commitment but will give consideration to all of these projects as they come on board. It is important that we create opportunities in every region.

A number of Deputies raised the skills issue. The purpose of the £250 million technological education investment fund is to fulfil the skills needs. As soon as this Government came into office, we examined the situation pertaining to job opportunities, skills needs and shortage of skills. The Tánaiste led a major initiative in co-operation with the Minister for Education and Science and got absolute co-operation from the semi-State bodies. We pay a special tribute to IDA and Forbairt Enterprise Ireland for their tremendous co-operation. As a result of the co-operation we got from the third level institutions we have agreed a three year programme where 2,000 people will be skilled and re-skilled and trained at third level so that they are available for these jobs that will come on stream.

On Deputy Daly's point about creating new third level institutions, we do not need any more third level institutions. Perhaps we may need more PLC colleges. Deputy Boylan comes from an area where there is an excellent PLC college which did an outstanding job in Cavan. Guinness has a number of very good proposals and is closely linked with University College Limerick. In the new information age town there are tremendous opportunities from primary, secondary and third level and right into the community. I am not sure that they are grasping those opportunities. I know they are very involved with the University of Limerick and they have good proposals and some of them should be supported. There is major potential right across the country. As education evolves and facilities come on stream due to rationalisation and demographics there is a need to create other PLCs like Cavan to fulfil the skills needs at local level. We can do that without spending huge amount of taxpayers' money on creating big institutions. We are well served by the institutions we already have and do not need to create more of them. Deputy O'Keeffe wanted to know where the universities were coming from. That is a big question. They have made a major contribution to the country. There are many opportunities in the international arena for the huge number of graduates leaving our third level institutions. A huge effort is being made to hold the talent in the country. All of this is creating a complex situation because of the commitment of the universities and the Government to holding talent in the country, there is serious competition for the available money. That creates difficulty for us but we will do our best to fulfil the needs. Deputy Owen said we were rushing and not giving institutions time to prepare their plans. We made the decisions in the Book of Estimates last Autumn that these moneys would be available. There was a public announcement of them. When the budget came out we confirmed it so people should have been ready. With the co-operation of the higher education authority and the commitment from Dr. Thornhill and his team, I am confident the universities will be able to respond to the opportunities that are there and by next year people should be more than happy with the environment in which they find themselves and the resources available to them.

Has the Minister envisaged any cross-Border ventures?

There are cross-Border initiatives with co-operation from the Universities in Coleraine, Derry, and Queens in Belfast. There are a number of projects particularly under the fifth framework programme so that we will have collaboration right across the Island. We are quite committed to that.

Is the Minister satisfied with the integration of industry and third level institutions, the links between them and the identification of opportunities for research and development. Is he satisfied the approach is as well structured and integrated as it might be? Is there a level of identification of possibilities within or indeed between industry and third level institutions?

The universities and third level institutions have to be commended. The tremendous academic work done, the outstanding research and development that goes on and the creation of campus companies in the universities has been excellent for the country. Our difficulty is that because we are a small country with a finite resource in cash, some of these campus companies cannot have the capital to develop quickly enough. As a result of the great work being done on the creation of enterprise funds by the Tánaiste and the Department and the other semi-State organisations there will be more funds available for joint ventures and other opportunities in the future. When we join EMU, over the next three to five years there will be a much greater opportunities for bringing those campus companies into the public arena and getting greater capitalisation for them more quickly. It will take about three years to reach that stage. I am confident the universities and third level institutions are focused on the link between education and enterprise, R & D and on ultimate job creation. Without them we cannot hope to continue to grow this economy.

On Subheads G-J inclusive, in relation to the county enterprise boards, does the Minister accept these are completely underfunded. They are doing a very good job. The Department could put in a little more money and get a very good return from them. Does the Minister accept that the partnerships and Leader programmes are duplicating the work of the enterprise boards. There is a certain clash between them. I am prepared to accept that neither the partnerships nor Leader boards are under the Minister's remit but they are more or less working within the same area practically in every county.

As we have a good deal more work to do I ask Members when asking questions to be brief.

I echo your comments and earlier comments on county enterprise boards. Does the Minister agree the county enterprise boards will have a critical role in the way Enterprise Ireland has been restructured in that the micro companies of ten people or fewer will come under its remit? What will the Minister do to strengthen the services it can provide. We are very unhappy in the four Dublin counties about the level of support we get. Proportionately we always get the rough end of the stick in relation to supports for Dublin small businesses. Perhaps the Minister could tell me what proportion of those funds goes to the Dublin counties?

How much of the activities of Forbairt will go to the National Standards Authority of Ireland? Does the Minister think that given the complaints regarding access to finance for small business there are still initiatives that need to be taken? There is a movement in the country to set up a small business co-op on the lines of the continental experience, a sort of mutual society. Does the Minister think a mutual society is needed in relation to a small business start-up?

Additional funding would be welcome for county enterprise boards which complement the Leader boards and encourage small enterprise. I note there is a reduction of £200,000 in the loan subsidy for small business which is administered by the ICC Bank. People with good ideas should be able to access funds without the need to provide large collateral. Such funds should be considerably increased. Perhaps the Minister could clarify if the EU support measures for small businesses are for services or manufacturing. They would be of great benefit to the service rather than the manufacturing industry. There is a big increase in INTERREG funding for community initiatives. Who will administer the additional £2 million and what counties will benefit?

As regards the NSAI, I note there will be a balanced budget in 1998. The NSAI administers ISO 9000, ISO 9001 and ISO 9002. What plans are Departments and semi-State bodies making to receive ISO accreditation? Industry recognises the importance of the certification which is a tremendous tool of management and of the workforce in many companies throughout the country. The company in which I am involved is ISO approved and has been for the past two years. The NSAI is doing important work in helping to improve standards in companies. I hope the Minister passes on our comments to NSAI.

As regards Shannon Development, the grant span this year will probably be more in the region of £8 million than £3.380 million. We will either have to introduce a Supplementary Estimate later in the year because of the new job announcements there or there may be surplus money in IDA Ireland's budget. The 1998 Estimate for Shannon Development will be significantly higher because of the creation of new enterprises in the region.

As regards funds for business, we do not want the re-establishment of Fóir Teoranta. At present the economy is booming and it is relatively easy to get money. In addition, a large number of venture capital funds have been established. An interesting one which I recently launched in conjunction with Allied Irish Banks and Forbairt is a campus based venture capital fund. The idea is to commercialise the research being done in universities and, therefore, to generate jobs. Much worthwhile work is being done in universities and we want to encourage its commercialisation. This fund is for campus based companies.

We launched another fund last week with Bank of Ireland for high risk endeavours. This £10 million fund will be jointly funded by Forbairt and Bank of Ireland; each will contribute £5 million over the next three years. The interesting thing about this fund is that the directors will not have to give any personal guarantees. A decision will be made within six weeks after the assessment. It will be flexible and it is for high risk ventures, particularly by young people, which we might not normally support under other venture capital funds. In addition, there are the £60 million worth of funds which were launched under the Community support framework of the operational programme. The Stock Exchange has a new company development market where funds are available. There are few gaps in this area at present, other than enterprises which probably cannot be sustained.

Almost all the former Eolas will transfer to the National Standards Authority of Ireland where it should be more appropriately located. Deputy O'Flynn asked about ISO 9000. Irish companies in the private sector have higher than average accreditation rating under ISO 9000; it is also higher than that in the United States. I would like the State sector to get the ISO 9000 equivalent for the provision of services to its clients, the public. With the new SMI process and freedom of information, we will see a huge improvement in the service given by the Civil Service and the wider public service to the citizens. It should be part of the mission of every State agency to be able to apply for and get an appropriate accreditation. We would have to devise a new accreditation process to deal with the State sector but it is worth examining. The Deputy made a valid point. Perhaps I could revert to him on another occasion when we have considered how the agencies under my Department could get a quality assurance certification to show that everything is being done to the highest possible standards and that excellence and quality assurance are part of their remit in delivering the service to the public.

I ask the Minister to mention that to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey because local authorities need to look at the way they carry out their business.

I thank all Deputies, particularly the Opposition Deputies, who commented on the county and city enterprise boards. We are happy with the success of these boards since I set them up in August 1992.

We are always reminded of that.

Since the boards were initiated they have approved 8,000 projects, including more than 1,500 feasibility studies worth over £66 million in grants. The employment potential of the projects is over 12,500 full-time and over 2,100 part-time jobs. Most importantly, the jobs have supported projects which now employ 11,000 people. A further 7,000 jobs will be added during 1998-99. The fact that in 1992 we spent £75,000 on local enterprise and in 1997 we spent £21.43 million shows the capacity for the boards to service the entrepreneurs at a micro level. In the same way that scientists can avail of opportunities because of the funds available to them, we created the technical assistance grant to allow people to bring their idea to fruition and to decide if it can be converted into a project which will create jobs, products and services.

I agree with the Chairman that there are too many agencies. The enterprise boards are democratically appointed. They consist of high quality local and community representatives and public servants. We are fortunate that every board has outstanding chief executives and staff. The leadership shown by the chairman and boards of directors is great.

As regards the point made by Deputy Broughan about his area, there is no reason to doubt our commitment to the board's functional area. Criteria, such as demographics, capacity to deliver, projects coming on stream and past records, must be taken into account in the allocation of funds.

High unemployment.

That is also taken into account. There are two outstanding boards in the Deputy's area and great chief executives who organised a national enterprise exhibition of products and services for the past two years which is a credit to this country. The exhibition was based in Dublin last year but it was nationally based this year and it was one of the finest exhibitions I have seen. It is a credit to them and to the boards which have done tremendous work. These two boards spend about 18 per cent of the budget.

We will fulfil any sanctions and requirements as far as we can. We have the support of the operational programme for local urban and rural development which is funding the boards to the tune of 75 per cent from Europe up to 1999. We cannot guarantee what will happen beyond that date. The boards have to remain. We have to look after the small entrepreneur and the micro budget to deliver jobs at local level. The difficulty which Deputies Broughan and Owen may have is that there are a larger proportion of multinational companies in their constituencies so comparisons may be odious.

That is not true.

I think it is true. The big companies are doing great work but that does not mean they should not get support. They are entitled to support and if the projects come forward they will receive support. The boards are here to stay. They are doing a great job. We should rationalise local agencies and avail of pilot programmes from Europe. They will terminate and they should then be absorbed into the existing structure. I hope that local authorities will push the case that the boards are the only organisations with the capacity to assist the small entrepreneur and to look after local interests.

INTERREG is very important. It would not have been sustained were it not for the support of former Commissioner Millan and the tremendous commitment from this country. We are disappointed with the draw down and the number of projects coming forward from the six Border counties - Donegal, Sligo, Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan and Louth. Money is available if projects arise. However, we are worried that the projects are not coming through. Unless we are able to produce sustainable projects which can deliver jobs and draw down money we would be worried about the future. We do not want to lose INTERREG as it is more important than ever to the country due to the British-Irish Agreement and the great opportunities which lie ahead. Border Deputies should focus on this matter and put forward projects so that we can ensure that they are supported.

If an entrepreneur sets up a business and gets a grant there is a ten year holding clause stipulating that if the business changes hands the grant has to be repaid. We want people with flair who will set up a business and hand it on to someone else to develop. The entrepreneur can then move to another area which, in turn, he develops. However, the entrepreneur is not allowed to get a grant for the new business and has to repay the original grant. There is a need for flexibility. I am not suggesting that we give out money wholesale to the same people. However, we should use common sense. We should trust in local county development officers. They are excellent people doing a great job. Will the Minister of State use his common sense and examine the possibility of showing some flexibility?

I will look at this issue but I do not think the Deputy need worry.

I asked the Minister of State about enterprise boards and other such boards which need to be more proactive. I have come across people who do not even know they exist. They are doing great work but the Minister of State should examine the need for the boards to advertise their operations.

I wish to raise the monitoring of the EU and the evaluation of EU programmes - £758,000 seems a lot of money. Is this an independent group?

That is all EU money. We just handle it.

We are moving on to subheads K1 to M5 - Labour Force Development.

Why was the INOU grant cut under subhead M2 in 1998? I am not sure how liaison with that organisation is proceeding. It has contributed much to developing awareness, particularly of the plight of the long-term unemployed in urban unemployment black spots. What relationship does the Minister have with the INOU?

Community employment has not increased substantially since this Government took office. There is a slight increase in the 1998 budget. The Minister mentioned that she is conducting an ongoing review. Could she report on that review and what she hopes will develop? A number of people have asked Deputies to see if there is a possibility of extending the three year programme to five years. Some of these programmes require a training period longer than three years, for example, those involving people working through Trinity College and DCU.

Subhead L1 - the Local Employment Service - shows a significant increase but this is the first year in which the partnership has considerably expanded the service. Local employment services have been very successful on the north side of Dublin. My partnership area embraces the Dublin North-East and North-Central constituencies and is chaired by the former head of the IDA, Pádraig White. We have a very successful LES. However, there are concerns about what will happen in 1999 to which the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, has just alluded. The partnerships are the remit of another Department. What is the Government doing to ensure that the valuable local development which has taken place will be allowed to continue after the end of next year? How does the Minister envisage implementing the structures she has promised our European partners concerning the employment action plan? I do not see the necessary resources being made available, not only to facilitate the under 25s but to assist the long-term unemployed.

Deputy Treacy referred to county enterprise boards and so on. The Minister also referred to the IDA. Will an evaluation take place on the back to work scheme or the area based allowance schemes and their impact on employment? There are 11,000 on the back to work scheme. I mentioned job assist and Minister McCreevy's new scheme. Has any research been conducted, particularly on people setting up small businesses and utilising the back to work or the area based allowance scheme and to what extent they succeeded after three years?

I also raised the INOU grant and I would be interested to know how the Minister interfaces with that organisation. There was some annoyance when it was not given representation on a board on which it felt it should be represented. It is important to keep in touch.

A vast amount of money is spent on training and employment schemes and there is a constant need to assess the value we are deriving from them. When unemployment levels were higher, one could see that people who were ready to go back to work received the advantages of all these schemes. We are now getting to the hard core of the 230,000 people who are unemployed and there is a need for a more targeted approach.

I want to ask about subhead K.2 which concerns training for the employed. A very small disproportionate amount of money is available for training the employed as opposed to training the unemployed on the various schemes. We should increase the level of money available for training the employed. It will become even more relevant when issues such as the minimum wage begin to factor into how employers pay people.

There is a need for employed people - perhaps in low skilled or semi-skilled work - to receive training on the job so they can become more skilled employees, thereby releasing the less skilled jobs for those who are coming off the unemployment register. We would see a consequential improvement of employment based on training the employed. Many employers have said they would like to be more involved in improving the skills of their workforce.

Under this subhead also I urge the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to consider an aggressive information campaign to inform people about these schemes and the fact that so many secondary benefits remain if people leave unemployment. The fear still is that they will lose medical cards, will be taxed out of all proportion to the amount they earn and will not receive benefits for dependent spouses and children. The situation regarding secondary benefits has improved greatly over the last three to four years but no effort is being made to inform the unemployed that they will not lose certain benefits if they return to work. In my clinics I meet people who fear they will be worse off if they go back to work.

About 75 per cent of those on the unemployment register receive the basic rate of £67 per week. There is no way that anybody could be better off on unemployment benefit, even with secondary benefits, than they would be if they went to work every day. It has been easier to sell the schemes but now we are getting to the hard core of the unemployed. We have to face the reality that many of those on the unemployment register, either because they left school early or they have not worked for a number of years, have lost many of the basic skills they need to work.

Does the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment know from the unemployment figures what percentage of people have difficulties, for example, with basic reading and writing? When people attend interviews, employers find they must get them to fill in application forms again because people have lost that skill, if they ever had it. They send in applications forms which are beautifully filled out, but they have been completed by relatives or friends. When the applicant comes to do the interview, it is now necessary to see how skilled they are in basic reading and writing in order to do the job on offer.

These are basic matters which are not easy to discuss. When I mention them I am accused of saying that people are not able to work. We must face the reality that people are not available to employers when they come to the coal face because they do not have these skills.

Will the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment elaborate on the £85,000 for the Programme for Peace and Reconciliation? On what will it be spent? It is obviously a new subhead for this year.

The grant to get Tallaght working seems to have been dropped. Is that the last part of a three year package? I understand it might be. Is that why there is no such subhead?

A requirement to qualify for to the back to work scheme is that one must be unemployed for at least 12 months but numerous people have been unemployed for over a six month period. I know there are inherent dangers in moving back from the 12 months period nevertheless, at the moment many people would have opportunities to get back to work if the qualification period was six months. Would the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment consider that?

I will deal with issues globallyand if I omit something Deputies can come back to it.

Deputy Owen is right in saying that there are over 230,000 people on the live register - 9.3 per cent of the labour force. In addition, over 40,000 people are involved in community employment. That is a huge resource of people who do not have a real and sustainable job in the commercial world, notwithstanding the high growth in the economy.

We must begin to intervene directly with many of those people. Instead of giving them a welfare cheque, we have to give them counselling and mediation to help them access the world of work and opportunity. One has to begin somewhere and the system could not cope if we intervened with everybody. Starting this September, we will intervene with people aged 25 or under, once they hit the six months unemployment mark. The purpose of that intervention is to stop them drifting into long-term unemployment. All the statistics show that the longer one is unemployed the more difficult it is to access work, no matter what training, help or assistance is available. That is why some of these schemes are really for people who probably have no possibility of ever returning to work.

We have increased the number of places on the Jobs Initiative, for example - which is for people over 35 who have been unemployed for three years - from 1,000 to 2,000. It is to stop the further marginalisation of people in that category. Unfortunately, the chances of those people ever accessing work is quite remote. The challenge is to stop more people drifting into that situation.

Deputy Broughan asked earlier if I had been talking to the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs because someone who came for their welfare cheque was told to go to a building site to find work. To qualify for unemployment benefit under our existing regime, one is supposed to be looking for a job. One is not entitled to unemployment benefits regardless of whether one is available for work. That is one of the criteria and, although we have not always enforced it, we are beginning to do so now.

Conditionality is an element of our employment plan. If somebody refuses to take a job and refuses to get involved in training, education or employment support, we cannot expect taxpayers, who are working, to continue to subsidise them. We have new opportunities now and we must begin to intervene and introduce conditionality. That is part of the Government's approach and it required refocusing FÁS.

Deputy Owen is right; we have not had the focus we should have had in the past. The White Paper made strong references to the need to re-focus the whole State support system, to ensure that the people who intervene with the unemployed have the skills to help them to get work. At the moment we are negotiating a new productivity agreement with FÁS to change and reallocate many of its staff into the employment area and to have that linked in with the local employment service.

We have made provision in 1998 for nine or ten local employment services throughout the country. The LES has worked extremely well but we have to integrate everything. For example, in one part of Clondalkin, with which I am very familiar, we have a FÁS employment office and just around the corner near the round tower we have a LES employment office. That causes huge confusion among the unemployed. They do not know if they must go to both offices. We must integrate those two offices. It will be a big resource once they work together on the same agenda and have the same vision of getting as many people back to work as possible.

We have almost doubled the budget for training the employed from £8.2 million to £15.9 million. The training of the employed should be the major responsibility of employers. They must see the training of their workforce as part of what they must do to remain competitive. Multinational foreign direct investors have a good record in relation to training their staff here. Every such company I visit has a human resource manager and quite a big human resource team.

Irish companies do not have the same record, particularly small ones. They may argue that they do not have the resources but they should see training as being as important as maintaining their bottom line position of making their products competitive in the global market place. Part of the focus of Enterprise Ireland will be to give grant aid support but not just on the basis of company development. We will also look at six different areas including training workers. The State's support package through Enterprise Ireland will include a focus on training. At the moment that is done through FÁS's services to business. Most of that which is relevant to Enterprise Ireland companies is now transferring to Enterprise Ireland.

The support that companies will receive from here on in will be based on research and development, finance, training and company development generally. It will be across a wide agenda. Six different criteria will be used to assess companies' needs and training will be one of them.

The reason the provision for the INOU is down in 1998 is that they got a grant last year of approximately £30,000 to purchase and refurbish a headquarters. It was a once off payment. The grant for get Tallaght working was made last year, but much of it was made on foot of the task force established by my predecessor after the closure of Packard Electric. We have also introduced for the first time this year a grant of £3 million under subhead K8 - Training Networks - to employers to provide training.

What about the Programme for Peace and Reconciliation?

A sum of £85,000 has been allocated to that. It was agreed in 1994 after the first IRA ceasefire. Its purpose was to promote social inclusion, exploit the opportunities and address the needs arising from the peace process to boost economic growth. To maximise take-up, especially among the socially and economically excluded, the Government made a commitment to provide funding of 25 per cent of project costs to attract EU Structural Fund aid.

It is disappointing that there are not enough projects under INTERREG and many other such initiatives. Although my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, emphasised the Border counties - it must be a cross-Border initiative - it is not exclusive to Border counties. Projects of a cross-Border nature in Dublin would qualify. For example, a group in Tallaght concerned with the training of women returning to work which was linked to an operation in Belfast accessed money. Probably all Deputies know of an initiative that could qualify. In addition to the loss of the initiative, it would look disappointing if we were unable to access all this money.

How is the implementation of the Organisation of Working Time Act proceeding? Are any problems arising?

A sum of £8 million is provided for training for the employed and the unemployed. Much of this money could be focused at employers who could take on the unemployed. This is a big difficulty. There has been much criticism that some FÁS schemes break for six months. Perhaps the Minister would look at that.

Deputy Broughan asked about the evaluation of community employment. We are expecting a report later this month from Deloitte Touche.

As Deputies we tend to deal with all these schemes together. Has an evaluation of their success been done? I asked the Minister for Finance about the job assist scheme and the extent of take up. If the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs is sending people who sign on to workplaces from which they are sent home it appears to cut across the work of the Minister or FÁS and the local employment service. People undergoing training who continue to sign on may find that they will be taking up work. The Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs places them in a job as he sees fit without reference to the local employment service, FÁS or the Minister. That is a heavy handed approach, which is contrary to the remit of the Minister's declared strategy to move towards full employment.

I ask the Minister to consider those points and my point on the reduction in the provision under the back to work scheme from 12 to six months.

My previous question is pertinent to subheads N to P2: Industry and Industrial Relations.

Would the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, comment on Sunday trading?

We decided to implement the Organisation of Working Time Act on a phased basis to give all parties involved time to become accustomed to the legislation. There have been some queries. The social partners are monitoring the ways it will affect workers and business. Overall, it is being implemented in a satisfactory manner. The process of monitoring is a useful way of dealing with the matter.

Deputy Broughan and I have disagreed on the issue of Sunday trading. Since we last spoke on the matter I informed the House I established a committee chaired by an eminent industrial relations expert, Seán Healy, who brought IBEC, ICTU and Mandate together to look at ways of dealing with the right of workers in the retail sector to opt out of Sunday work. The history of this is well known. The Deputy stole my Bill and reproduced it. Perhaps I could have pursued him under the copyright legislation. It is ironic that Senator O'Meara who was then an adviser to my predecessor, Ms Eithne Fitzgerald, advised strongly against my Bill but has now reintroduced it to the Seanad.

Seán Healy has managed to bring the parties together and in recent weeks has produced a draft code of practice which constitutes satisfactory progress on an issue that has been with us for some time. It will now go through the industrial relations machinery, especially the LRC. I am satisfied with the progress made under the partnership approach. This committee and those involved in the debate want to achieve something. It is better if we can proceed by way of agreement than by trying to enforce measures through legislation. I recognise the bona fides of Members of the Opposition who were involved in this.

The Minister of State had a change of heart.

No. I put my case to the Dáil. The Deputy and I had an acrimonious debate. I have consistently persevered with this in an attempt to bring it to fruition. Given that social partnership has served the country so well we will do a good day's work if we can bring it to fruition by agreement rather than by legislation. I am confident it will be brought through the industrial relations machinery, but it will take a number of months. These things take time. We have been working quietly behind the scenes.

I was involved in steering through the action plan, referred to by the Minister, at EU level. The EU Commissioner, Pádraig Flynn, singled out the Irish action plan as one of the better ones. There is a surveillance system at EU level on employment issues.

It could not have been said there was any partisanship.

The Commissioner did not single out Ireland without mentioning others. The system goes to Cardiff for consideration. The plan focuses on employability, entrepreneurship, adaptability and equality, which are fundamental policy areas. The issues discussed here, such as youth unemployment and long-term unemployment, are included and are clearly focused. We have been using new and existing schemes and systems. The views expressed and proposals made here are part of that dynamic plan.

Deputy Broughan mentioned the plan for those under 25 years of age. Young people who are unemployed for more than six months will be given the option of work experience or the possibility of a job. I remember the Deputy's party leader, Deputy Quinn, strongly advocating that type of proactive manner of shifting the onus on to the individual to go out to seek employment. I commented at the time on how forthright his position was. The Deputy's views and those of his party are accommodated within this new national plan.

If people refuse to co-operate with the scheme, the Department of Community, Family and Social Affairs will review their position. FÁS and the Department interact well together here and it is an important step in creating employment.

Deputy Owen made a point about the plan. There are times when we cannot secure the approval of the Oireachtas for a negotiating position in advance because that would tie Minister's hands but we have a conservative approach. I will give an undertaking that we will have a debate on this issue in the future. Parliament is supreme and a matter of this nature should be put before the national Parliament in advance rather than being presented to it as a fait accompli.

It is embarrassing to hear others saying that, when they discussed this in their Parliament, this or that happened.

The three Ministers are skating on thin ice on the issue of trade union recognition in relation to the future hopes of the partnership. Clearly the preparation for a national minimum wage will be built into the partnership. The success of the Programme 2000 negotiations depends on agreement on this and it will be used as a carrot or a stick on the trade union movement because it is dear to the hearts of the representatives of working people. Equally important to them, however, is the issue of recognition.

The UK Government has tried to grapple with this issue following negotiations with the CBI, the trade union movement and other interested parties. They seem to have reached an agreement on how to proceed to legislation. Why has the Minister set her face against this? There is speculation that we may have a united left in the House but for the small body of 25 Deputies who represent working people primarily this is issue is not being addressed.

Who does the Deputy think the rest of us represent?

That is a good question.

The Government represents working people as much as the Deputy.

Both Government parties are conservative.

The Deputy uses that as a big stick with which to beat people.

This legislation is vital to the trade union movement, we make no bones about that. A nasty situation developed in Ryanair which has yet to be settled. We are waiting for a report and the problem is ongoing. With the difficulties which lie ahead with the euro it will become a serious matter, given that less than 30 per cent of private sector workers are professionally represented. This will come back to us and I would like to know what steps the Minister has taken.

In my capacity as Minister for Labour Affairs, I object to Deputy Broughan suggesting that his party has a monopoly on workers' rights or trade union activists. All parties have credibility in this area. My party founded social partnership. A two hour motion in Private Members' time will not resolve this issue; it is more complex than that. During that debate we quoted what the Deputy's party representative said about the whole process of voluntarism which underpins the social partnership process.

Tributes were paid here to Ciarán McGowan and I associate myself with those tributes.

I spoke to him.

He would be concerned about any major shift on this issue without involving the social partners. It is my view that is way to proceed. Debates are taking place at EU level on this issue and I look forward to being involved in those debates. The high level group is still looking at this issue. At the time of the debate Deputy Owen's party agreed with us on the need to proceed carefully on this issue and many in the trade union movement share that view. The Deputy represented a particular view which he was entitled to bring to the House but we must proceed with this in co-operation with the social partners. Many companies now involve their workers in shareholding schemes.

The Deputy rightly referred to the taxation system, the position of low paid workers and the minimum wage. They are all interlinked. We want to ensure that low paid workers benefit from the tremendous economic growth in this State. It is not beyond our competence to deal with it and we will deal with this issue at some stage but we must do so with a partnership approach. The high level group is still looking at this and we are waiting for its report.

The Deputy referred to the Ryanair dispute which is a separate matter with important issues to be addressed. The Minister and I look forward to receiving that report and dealing with the issues it raises.

What is the purpose of the grant for trade union education and advisory services? It is a substantial amount.

A grant is paid which provides training for union officials and activists in affiliated unions. It covers approximately 50 per cent of the cost of ETS courses covering a broad range of topics. Annually, 4,000 participants attend 200 courses.

The courses are run in conjunction with the trade union movement.

Will the Estimate for An Bord Tráchtála be transferred in its entirety to Enterprise Ireland?

We now come to subheads Q1 to Q3 and R5 - Trade and Commercial Regulations.

We were represented at the world exposition in Hanover. There was some controversy recently that we were not participating in the world exposition in Lisbon. That decision was taken before the Minister's time but I would like to know how we decided which one to go to and whether expositions are of benefit.

The decision on the Lisbon exposition was made in the lifetime of the last Government. The theme of the Hanover exposition is humankind, nature and technology. It comes under the heading of sustainability. It is linking technology with mankind. It is an important theme and it is very interesting and innovative. The money involved is £500,000 but the overall running cost is £5 million to £6 million. We have to staff and run the Irish pavillion.

Is it an anomaly? How does this qualify for lottery funding? I thought that was for sport, youth and health only. Perhaps sustainability could come under health?

As Deputy Owen suggests, given the huge budget within this Department, it is a pity that the £500,000 was not left with sport because it would be of considerable benefit to many small groups looking for funding.

We have stopped providing insurance cover for exports - has that been replaced with anything else or is it anticipated that will happen?

The important point to make about Expo 2000 is that it will be of huge benefit to Ireland. It is a significant millennium programme and it is important that our private sector becomes involved and uses this opportunity to show modern Ireland. We talked earlier about the emphasis the Government placed on technology; this gives us a valuable opportunity to project a modern, progressive Ireland. It is money well spent and I do not think we should apologise for it. The Lisbon option was not pursued by the last Government and this Government followed that policy but the Minister and I were keen that we get involved in Expo 2000. Regardless of where the money comes from it is well spent. The Minister might deal with export credit insurance.

I am concerned about the digitalisation of our heritage, music, etc., because after the Copyright (Amendment) Bill is passed copyright can be quickly and easily claimed on it by outsiders. I raised this in the House and we did not want to cause a problem with that legislation because it is important, but we should do something as soon as possible to ensure that fly by night companies do not steal our heritage from under our noses - it could happen with a tape recording of a session.

This issue has also been raised by a number of Deputies in my party and we will give it close attention in the context of the more substantial Bill which will be introduced soon. The "breakout" Bill, as it is called, will deal with fines and create a presumption in favour of copyright holders. It is complex legislation and my approach will be to ensure greater awareness of the issues involved. The Deputy has raised the position of traditional musicians in a pub being taped by someone else and part of my responsibility, and that of everyone in the debate, will be to put across the message that this in effect stealing. We will do our best to deal with it as comprehensively as possible. I have discussed it with my officials and it is not easy to deal with these issues but we will do our best.

The submissions we received indicate that the "breakout" Bill will make it worse.

Yes, and we were not receiving those messages before the "breakout" Bill was published. People like Senator Ó Murchú are worried about this and the Vintners Federation of Ireland has written to us on numerous occasions.

It may be that media comment on the Bill has made people aware of it. This has huge implications for many people, including employees of software companies. The process of informing and raising public awareness will be a huge part of the debate in the coming months.

My concern is that, between the implementation of the Bill which went through the House last week and the enactment of the major legislation, there will be a window of opportunity for fly by night operators to attack our heritage. Is there any way the Government can introduce an interim measure to safeguard that culture? If we lose it we will not get it back and we are creating this opportunity.

The relevant bodies, such asComhaltas Ceoltóirí Éireann, have been in touch with me. The only commitment I can give is that I will keep in touch with them and discuss the matter with them.

How much has been spent on the major legal case on export credit finance, and what is the likely prognosis in that area? This is the case against the Goodman organisation.

My information may be six to eight weeks old at this point. That case lay dormant for years but I understand it has been reactivated recently. We have employed senior and junior counsel - I do not know how much that has cost but it will come from the budget of either the Office of the Attorney General or the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I can check that and return to the Deputy.

Before turning to subheads T, U, V, W, X1, X3 and Y, relating to health and safety matters, does anyone wish to raise anything on subhead R?

The Director of Consumer Affairs has expressed concern about staffing levels and not having enough resources to deal with the work on hand. I do not see any dramatic increase in these figures to indicate he might receive an increase in either resources or staff this year. Could the Minister comment on that?

On subhead T - Occupational Health and Safety - there has been general concern both last year and this year about the level of accidents in the building industry. There were a number of highly publicised deaths and the rate of accidents is still unacceptable. Does the Health and Safety Authority have enough resources? During a recent Adjournment Debate I compared our figures to those in the UK and we did not seem to have enough inspectors. Building sites are supposed to produce a health and safety plan but these are not being assessed before work begins because we do not have the resources. Is the £4.8 million provided in the Estimates enough?

I will take questions on all other subheads, including subheads R and S.

Will the metrology services come under Enterprise Ireland? There is no subhead for them.

No - there is no subhead because they come under Forbairt's administration budget.

There are no dust extraction systems in schools. I have raised matter on numerous occasions with the Minister for Education and Science who said his Department was introducing a pilot study. New materials being used in schools could cause cancer - the Minister said as much in a reply to a parliamentary question - yet he refuses to install the required mechanisms in school woodwork rooms to extract this dust. This would not be acceptable in factories and yet it is acceptable in schools. Will the Minister ensure the Health and Safety Authority gets its act together and that the health of children and teachers is not put at risk through such dust floating in the atmosphere.

On the issue raised by Deputy Stanton, I am happy to consult with the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Martin, to check the position and to report back to the Deputy.

I will stay on the point of health and safety and then deal with consumer affairs. The total staff in health and safety numbers is 119 with effect from 1 January 1998. The amount of Exchequer funding amounted to £2.3 million in 1990 and £4.7 million in 1998.

I read horrific reports of accidents in construction and farming. There is no question but that we would all like to see additional resources made available. My officials have ongoing discussions with the Department of Finance and have made submissions. There is a continuous review of the operations of the Health and Safety Authority.

The issue must be examined not just in financial terms but also in terms of the many good things being done by the Health and Safety Authority. I remember being involved in some of them. As I mentioned the farming community, I appeal to all those involved in the farming sector to be extra vigilant during this period. Some of the reports which arrive on my desk are disturbing, especially those involving young children which are often fatal unfortunately. It comes down to the need for greater information and awareness. Many good things are being done by the farming organisations and by the construction sector working closely with the Health and Safety Authority. We have had debates on funding in the Dáil. My officials are in constant contact with the Department of Finance and are constantly reviewing the operation of the authority.

Funding the Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs was raised. A new principal officer has been appointed, has settled in and is working well there. Following on the report of the Director of Consumer Affairs we have had discussions on resources. I differ with the director on his assessment of the use of the resources. There were management deficiencies. It is a question of how resources are used. We had discussions with the director and his office recently which have been fruitful and have led to a greater understanding and agreement on the use of resources. It is important the resources of the director are used to protect the consumer's interests because there are so many issues which need to be dealt with quickly and speedily. I am satisfied agreement has been reached with the director concerning management deficiencies which existed in his office.

Why did the Minister slash the funding to the Consumers' Association of Ireland?

The European Commission did not provide the necessary funding to the Consumers' Association of Ireland for the coming year. I invited the director of the association to meet me and we met in the past week. We advised the association how it might make applications for funding to the Commission. I have also contacted Commissioner Bonino who has responsibility for Consumer Affairs. I am confident that, with our help and that of the Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs, who has also agreed to assist, there will be funding for the Consumers' Association of Ireland in the following year. Primarily, it amounts to submitting the application in a certain way, by focusing it on projects. Applications for funding must be based on projects rather than just global funding. It is the same in many other areas.

Will the Minister of State make up the difference if there is a delay?

The funding, which was the subject of public comment, was EU funding for the Consumers' Association of Ireland. Having met with the director I assure Deputies that she is satisfied with the type of assistance we provide.

That concludes the discussion on the Estimates. I thank the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Ministers of State for the forthright way in which questions were answered. I thank the officials for providing information and back-up information. I thank the Members of the committee. Does anyone wish to say something before I make the final announcement?

I thank the Deputies and the Chairman for their co-operation. Deputies Owen and Broughan criticised the manner in which they received published departmental reports. I apologise for that. Unlike other Departments, no system was in place which gave Opposition spokespeople advance copies. I hope that has changed.

I thank the Minister and the Ministers of State for their co-operation in agreeing these Estimates. Next week we will have an opportunity to discuss Enterprise Ireland. We must target the unemployed to match the jobs available. The Government can take all the praise it likes for reducing the numbers of unemployed but 236,000 people are still out of work and 40,000 more are on community employment schemes. They should be participating in the economy by working full-time. When we return next year, I hope a big hole will have been made in those numbers.

I thank the Minister, Deputy Harney, and the Ministers of State, Deputies Tom Kitt and Treacy, for their interesting presentations. I also thank the officials. We in Opposition appreciated the briefing we received on the Copyright Bill. We would appreciate such co-operation in future if possible. It makes for a more interesting discussion in the Dáil for interested parties.

Barr
Roinn