Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 10 November 2010
277 Deputy Joe Carey asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation the present number of companies in County Clare that are in receipt of the employment subsidy scheme first call; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41822/10]
Amharc ar fhreagra278 Deputy Joe Carey asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation the present number of employees in County Clare that are subsidised by the employment subsidy scheme first call; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41824/10]
Amharc ar fhreagra279 Deputy Joe Carey asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation the reason the employment subsidy scheme first call did not facilitate the acceptance of additional information after the closing date; the number of companies in County Clare that were refused access to the scheme because of this clause; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41827/10]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Question Nos. 277 to 279, inclusive, together.
Under the first call for the Employment Subsidy Scheme (ESS1), 24 companies in Co. Clare were approved for support. This resulted in 353 full time job subsidies and these companies committed to maintain 2,038 employees to 30 November 2010. Enterprise Ireland was the state agency tasked by Government with the management of all aspects of the Employment Subsidy Scheme. This was a competitive scheme and to ensure fairness and equity, the requirements for a complete application were clearly stated throughout the process. The public call for proposals had clear and unambiguous deadlines and failure to comply with any of the requirements resulted in an application being deemed incomplete. The rules of the Scheme as clearly set out at all stages did not allow any additional documentation to be submitted after the call close. The strict rules were applied to every application in the administration of the scheme. Under the first call for the Employment Subsidy Scheme (ESS1), three companies in Co. Clare had incomplete financial documentation accompanying their application and no further information was accepted in these three cases.
