Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The 500,000 people to whom I refer want to work. There is an impression that they are on the dole because they do not want to do anything else. It might have been possible to make statements to that effect in the 1980s without people being in a position to contradict it definitively. However, we can contradict them definitively now because the majority of those who are unemployed were working when there was work available. They are not unemployed because they are lazy, it is because they cannot obtain employment.

The Minister referred to getting people back to work, which is essential. However, one of the most important aspects in that regard is to create the environment whereby employment opportunities will be available for them. If such opportunities are created, there will be no need to push people out the door to get them to work. They will do so under their own steam, regardless of whether it is because they are sick of looking at repeats of "Dr. Phil" on television or as a result of the fact that they do not have a red cent in their pockets. These people want to work. It is as simple as that. I meet them in my office all the time. A couple of weeks ago I met a man - a big individual - who had tears running down his face and who informed me that he was going insane at home. He had spent six years on a FÁS scheme, which is the maximum period allowable. The man in question is a machine driver and he was wiling to remain on the scheme for no pay but it was not possible to obtain any work for him. This is also a mental health issue. People are suffering because, on top of everything else, they are bored. I know the Minister is aware of that fact. In light of the mental health aspect, there is a need for action.

It has been stated that the level of unemployment is decreasing. One of the major reasons for this is because people are leaving the country in their droves. This cannot be denied. If those who emigrated had not done so, the unemployment figures would not have fallen. If the country was hit by a tsunami tomorrow and if half the population was wiped out as a result, the Government would come along in a couple of weeks and inform us that the unemployment figures had decreased. This would, of course, be due to the fact that half the population had been killed, which is not really how one would want to reduce unemployment. Why not try to keep people in the country while reducing the level of unemployment? People would like to remain in this country because they like it here. It is not for reasons of leisure that they are going abroad.

The 19 out of 20 people in my and my wife's households who emigrated did so because they had no choice.

However, it appears that, by tinkering with the system, the Government is taking positive strides towards making it more likely that entrepreneurs will create work, in that they will not be denied social welfare. As everyone agrees, people who are of an entrepreneurial spirit should be encouraged. When they visit my office, their story is that, even though the people next door to them did not even work during the boom, those people are getting something while the entrepreneurs are getting nothing. The Minister needs to change this situation quickly. It is not on and does not encourage people to create work when I am sure that she would only be delighted to encourage them.

When trying to return to work, many of the entrepreneurs in question - I am sure that they visit other Deputies - apply for contracts to build something or other, but are told that they cannot because they do not have turnovers of hundreds of thousands of euro. It is a catch-22 situation - even though they are well qualified to do the work, they are knocked out on the basis that they have not been working and do not have the turnover. If anything can be done to change this unfair situation, please do it.

Harmac Medical Products - I am unsure as to whether I can mention its name - employs hundreds of people in my town of Castlerea. Its HR section asked me to highlight the fact that it has been trying unsuccessfully to fill 12 part-time positions for the past six months. It is easy to criticise and get PR from running down the Government, but if it is doing something good, it deserves praise. I hope that its plan for single parents will help. Harmac Medical Products is offering five hours per day, three days per week during the hours when kids are at school and parents have some spare time. They would be paid €187 for their 15 hours and would still be able to mind their kids. Perhaps it would be useful for someone else in the social welfare system. I am unsure as to how this approach fits with what the Government plans for single parents, but I hope that it would rectify the situation. There is a problem with the social welfare system in general, namely, it is so rigid that one is not even allowed to get one hour of work per day without losing one's payments. This situation needs to change.

The company is offering other positions. These involve working two 12-hour shifts at the weekend at €12.50 per hour, which is not the minimum wage. This work is worth €300 per week, but the company cannot find people to take these positions because working more than 19 hours per week removes one's entitlement to a social welfare payment. This is the company's understanding of the situation. The social welfare system needs to be changed to cater for such situations. If a few hours of gainful work were available without impacting on social welfare payments, no social welfare recipient would turn them down.

Perhaps we should consider a suggestion made by the Jesuits' Milltown Institute and Fr. Seán Healy years ago. I presume they are still pushing the same idea of a guaranteed basic income. Some people will trash this and question how every adult could be guaranteed a minimum payment. If someone had earnings from additional work, the guaranteed income would be taxed to the point that he or she would not actually get it. If an unemployed person - someone in receipt of a social welfare payment - had a guaranteed basic income, one could take up a job because one would be gaining all of the time. There would be implications for the tax system, leading to higher taxes in certain respects, but no one would be disincentivised from working. If someone had a money-making idea, one would not need to worry about losing more money than one would make. The system would be less rigid. I do not have anything close to all of the answers, but this idea needs to be discussed.

As the Minister is well aware, places like Castlerea have dire unemployment levels. At the same time, there is work that people cannot accept. The Minister must address this issue. Not only would she increase people's incomes, she would improve their self-esteem by allowing them to add to their communities. They would also pay tax. I do not agree with people who claim that we must consider taxpayers as if they are separate from the unemployed. It is as though the latter do not give anything to society. We should be looking out for citizens in general. Something needs to be done to make it possible for people to accept casual work without losing their social welfare payments.

A Deputy mentioned the cut to farm assist payments. Negotiations on the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, are well advanced. If proposals by organisations such as the United Farmers Association, UFA, were listened to and payments under the policy were capped at €35,000 per farmer, close to €92 million would be returned to the less well-off farmers. By providing them with this income, the State would save money in terms of farm assist. These savings could be put towards smaller farmers under pillar 2, as I am dubious that the Government can find the matching funds otherwise. Overall, there would be a better package for everyone.

A major mistake was made when the Government cut the fuel allowance. Genuinely, I have no problem with the Government cutting its own costs in this regard, but it did not seem to be open to other ideas. For example, if it provided the money to people in single lump sums, they could get better value and there would be no additional cost to the State. Someone could purchase a few trailer loads of turf or, with a big lump of money in hand, get a better deal from a co-op on cheaper briquettes. I know this for a fact. While saving money, the State would not increase the person's hardship. I would love to see the Government pursue this idea next time.

A number of people have attended our office about the idea of front-loading social welfare payments so that they could start businesses instead of staying on social welfare indefinitely.

People's reluctance to take up courses has been mentioned. Who knows why they might be reluctant, but one can surmise that they do not view training as relevant or believe that they will get anything out of it at the end. Training for training's sake is demoralising. We need to get away from that approach.

It has been stated that we need to train people who used to be in the building industry to do other jobs. That is 100% correct. In the past week, I heard in the news that the Government was considering investing €1 billion in shovel-ready projects. Many of the projects in question might be important, but is it not time to stop viewing projects that involve concrete as the only work that is shovel ready?

There are many shovel-ready projects that do not involve building or using a shovel. There are shovel-ready projects involving work with young people and the provision of youth services. Several youth organisations have come to me and said their funding has been cut. We cut their funding, reduce the amount of people working with them and then we use the money for more building. Have we not done enough building in this country for a while? Could we not start thinking about shovel-ready projects that will help people in more ways than just getting them mixing concrete? The Minister must examine that as well. That is what I have to say on the Bill. I hope my tuppence worth is worth something to the Minister.

See this speech in context