Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The members of the Technical Group were in possession and there are ten minutes remaining in the slot.

Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sharing time with Deputies Catherine Murphy, Boyd Barrett, Wallace and Clare Daly.

I fully support the sentiments in the motion put forward by Sinn Féin. In 2008 Dublin City Council had 7,500 employees. It now has 5,000. By September next, it is due to have only 4,800 employees. This means that more than one third of the staff of the council will have left during a six-year period. That has had a huge impact on all services offered by the council, including parks, maintenance, etc. On Monday night last, a family home was attacked and a number of windows were smashed. Staff from the Ballyfermot maintenance depot arrived at the scene of the crime and stated that they had neither the staff nor the money necessary to replace the windows. Instead, they are going to board up the windows with wood. The family involved continues to live in the house.

The staff of the parks department of Dublin City Council in Dublin South Central has been cut by 25%. There are now no staff available to open and close the gates to or to maintain the playing area at Drimnagh pitch and putt club. The course will now be left open all the time, with no support available.

Dublin City Council has no training, transport or education budgets in respect of the Gateway scheme. What the council needs to be able to do is employ proper gatekeepers rather than being obliged to operate the Gateway scheme. Participants on Gateway will be paid an additional €20 for 19.5 hours work per week. This translates to a little more than €1 per hour. The Government describes it as a labour activation scheme but it would be that only if there were jobs available at the end of it. When it reduced the jobseeker's allowance, the Government encouraged its backbenchers to defend the move by saying that those in receipt of it are at home watching their flat screen TVs. On this occasion they are defending Gateway by stating that it will allow people to experience what it is like to get up in the morning. How shameful it is that the Labour Party is playing a role in facilitating the introduction of this scheme. That party is really scraping the bottom of the barrel and Gateway is nothing more than a slave labour initiative.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Just before the previous Government left office, Deputy Ó Cuív introduced a scheme that was quite similar to JobBridge. There were screams of disapproval from the Labour benches at the time as a result of the way that scheme was introduced. Essentially, they voiced their disapproval on the basis that individuals who were unemployed would not be given a choice with regard to participating on the scheme. I do not understand that transformation which has occurred. While the Labour Party may have objected to the scheme to which I refer, it is now introducing something even more draconian in the form of Gateway.

The Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government has launched an initiative in respect of workforce planning in the area of local government. It is clear that some local authorities have staffing complements which are extremely disproportionate in size to the populations to which they are obliged to provide services. Some of the workforce planning to which I refer is happening at present, which indicates that there are real jobs available. If people are be asked to participate on a scheme such as Gateway, then there should be a possibility of progression. In addition, they should be given a choice as to whether they want to take up a place on a labour activation scheme rather than being stigmatised if they do not sign up. What is at issue here is the fact that people are being placed for being unemployed, while those who are long-term unemployed are being singled out, told that they need to be taught how to get out of bed each morning or informed that they have become lazy from sitting in front of their plasma screen TVs. All of these individuals are essentially being informed that if they do not participate, their welfare payments will be cut. That misses the point completely. People want jobs and they do not need to be demeaned any further when they are already feeling quite vulnerable with regard to the lack of opportunities available to them. What is being done in this instance is disgraceful.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no doubt that Gateway is a blueshirt fantasy. Those in Fine Gael must be becoming terribly excited about the prospect of forcing people to work for next to nothing. They probably dreamed about this for years but never thought they could get away with it. Suddenly, however, they have their opportunity. They are going to displace real, proper, permanent, secure, well-paid and trade-union supported jobs with what effectively is slave labour. People are going to be dragooned into doing work which desperately needs to be done. There is no doubt about the latter because how could we not need individuals to work for local authorities whose staffing complements have been drastically reduced in recent years? In that context, 20% of the workforce of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council have been axed as a result of the prevailing policy of austerity. There is a desperate need for maintenance work to be done on people's council houses, for repairs to be made to roads, for parks to be cleaned up, for graffiti to be removed, for bins to be emptied and for flood relief works to be carried out. There are construction workers and hundreds of other people in every area who would be more than willing to do this work but they should be paid for doing it. These individuals should not be enslaved and forced to do the work to which I refer on the cheap.

What the Government proposes to do is completely outrageous. One would expect this from the blueshirts because they would probably confine all of us to boot camps if they got the opportunity. However, for the Labour Party to have anything to do with what is proposed - particularly in light of its historic relationship with the trade union movement - is simply beyond belief. Essentially, the Labour Party is scraping the absolute bottom of the barrel in order to undermine proper jobs and facilitate both job displacement and what effectively is slave labour. That is an absolute disgrace.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Gateway scheme is certainly workfare. The only choice individuals will be given is to either participate or risk having their social welfare payments reduced or cut off altogether. The Unite trade union has stated that the scheme may well place Ireland in breach of the UN Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which relates to the right to freely choose one's work, and the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that no-one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour. Last week the Taoiseach was at pains to tell us that people love to do things for their communities. Of course they do. In the region of 50 people are involved with the Wexford Youths football team on a voluntary level. If I stated that I would give them €1 per hour for what they do and that they would be paid members as a result, I do not think many of them would stick around. These individuals take pride in being volunteers. People like to and take pleasure from contributing to their communities. However, informing people that they must do certain work for which they will be paid €20 per week in addition to their dole is an insult. How in God's name do those in government expect people to put up with that?

Andreas Fischer-Lescano, a professor of European law and politics at the University of Bremen, recently indicated that as a result of the way we have implemented antisocial austerity policies, placed financial stability above all other considerations and ignored social stability, we may be actually breaking the law.

This country is eager and interested in some laws being kept but not as interested in keeping others. Looking after those who most need the Government's help is no longer high on the agenda. This should be reversed. It is an insult to the people.

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We often hear bandied about the expression of asking people to work for nothing. This scheme is even worse than that because the reality of what the Government is proposing is that it will cost people to go to work and they will end up poorer because of this mechanism. It is a disgrace that such a proposition is even on the table.

We must look beyond the consequences for the individual, bad and all as they are. These people will be frogmarched out onto the streets, no doubt in high visibility jackets, to pick up some litter as a warning to the rest of us to be careful about what might happen. Far more serious is the undermining of public sector jobs that this mechanism facilitates. It is a cover-up for the erosion of council services which the public sector recruitment embargo has facilitated. Not only that, it is economic lunacy, because it is replacing what were secure permanent and pensionable jobs with a chain gang. The result is that young people have no choice but to leave the country.

The Fingal County Council area, where I am based, has the lowest and youngest population in the country. Only 21 out of the 1,300 council employees are below 30 years of age and I imagine most of these are 29 years of age. Therefore, by next year there will be no one under the age of 30 years in the council. Is it any wonder young people have to emigrate? The functions that were being done are now either being outsourced to yellow pack companies with no decent terms and conditions or the jobs are not being done at all.

I offer one example, that of libraries. This is probably the only public service that is available in our area. A total of 50% of the librarians are over 50 years of age and several of them are retiring. What will be the consequence? The Government is not going to recruit librarians. The services will get cut at a time when people need them. Meanwhile, potential librarians are on the dole queues while those numbers are being whittled down. This is lunacy and for the Labour Party to be part of it is almost beyond belief. I note the Labour Party has conned some of the unions into going with the scheme in return for the right to fleece people with union subscriptions. It is a disgrace and the people will not stand for it.

Eamonn Maloney (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

All schemes, irrespective of which Department they come from, deserve to be scrutinised and, if necessary, criticised. I take some of the points made just now and those made by some Sinn Féin Members yesterday evening in respect of this scheme. However, if we are to discuss labour initiatives and work placements, etc., then it would be remiss of us to sweep aside where we are and the fact that the country was destroyed by a handful of spectators, politicians and bankers. They got us where we are, that is to say, thousands of people have left the country and thousands of people are on the dole. In such an environment, irrespective of what jurisdiction a person is in, this changes things.

I do not blow the trumpet for this scheme. However, we should consider the circumstances. The lights of the country are being kept on by money borrowed from our neighbours to pay the wages of public servants etc. including politicians. This is being paid out of money from the British, French and Belgian taxpayers. Sometimes we have debates in the House, parts of which are good and I will go with those parts. However, it makes no sense to discuss these things in a vacuum. A former Taoiseach said in the House one night we were the richest little country in the world. If we were, we are not the richest little country in the world now. There are limitations to this scheme and to how far embargoes can go with local authorities. I do not believe any local authority, including my local authority, South Dublin County Council, can afford to lose any more staff. It is difficult for a local authority to provide a service in such an environment. Naturally, politicians on this side of the House and on the other side of the House look forward to the day when the embargo is gone and when local authorities can once again take on a full placement of people, whether in the environmental department, library services, cleansing or whatever. I look forward to the day we arrive back at that place and the sooner it happens, the better.

Some of the comrades have been at it again. They have used the opportunity not so much to discuss the scheme or what type of alternative scheme they would put in its place. Rather, they used the opportunity to slag off the Labour Party. The Labour Party has been slagged off for a hundred years and it is nothing new. Those of us born into the great tradition of the trade union movement and the Labour Party - the trade union produced the Labour Party in this country - and its proud tradition of a hundred years learn to live with it. In fairness, not all of them have done it. This applies to Sinn Féin Members, some of whose contributions last night were quite balanced. They use every opportunity to slag off the Labour Party and that is okay because we are used to it. The church does it and the political establishment did it for a hundred years. William Martin Murphy did it.

The comrades in Sinn Féin have referred to low wages and workers' rights and so on. They might be better off putting their heads into the trench and pulling them down a little more. The greatest event for the labour movement in this country was the Dublin Lock-out. What happened during the Dublin Lock-out? Sinn Féin did not turn up. On the first day of the Lock-out, 31 August 1913, when Jim Larkin, James Connolly, Helena Moloney, Rosie Hackett, Thomas Foran and so on were leading the workers who had been locked out, where was the leader and founder of Sinn Féin, Arthur Griffith? He was in his back garden reading ancient Irish poetry. The Sinn Féin Members should reflect on that. I understand that parties reinvent themselves and historical circumstances change.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is true of the Labour Party too.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy, you must conclude now.

Eamonn Maloney (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That touched a nerve. Sinn Féin was not there for the Lock-out. Perhaps some of the Deputies who have been most critical of the labour movement might reflect on the relationship between William Martin Murphy and the Sinn Féin founder, Arthur Griffith. Then, and only then, perhaps they will drop their heads into the trench.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is far from the trench Deputy Maloney is now.

Eamonn Maloney (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The labour movement has survived. It does not try to reinvent itself. However, I understand the dilemma of some of the Sinn Féin Members present.

Michael McNamara (Clare, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Unlike Deputy Maloney, I will not go back far in history. I will not go back beyond the last election, save to say that I am proud to be a member of a party that engages with the duty of government once in a while, rather than throwing stones from the Opposition side. Our party engages with ideas and seeks to move them forward just as, I am happy to acknowledge, Sinn Féin is doing in Northern Ireland at the moment. After a long period of not engaging in government it is now in government there. Sometimes decisions are difficult in government, as those in Sinn Féin in Northern Ireland would accept.

One of the darkest moments of the last election for me was meeting a man in a housing estate between Ennis and Clarecastle. He was packing up a car to drive to England to begin to try to find work there. He was a tradesman. He was not a happy man, he was desolate about leaving a mortgage, a wife and children behind.

He pointed to a common area in the estate in which he lived and said that he could not even mow that grass. There are community employment schemes in the area but they do not employ him or many others.

I am proud that this Government has increased the number of community employment schemes. I take pride in this initiative which has been criticised so much on the Opposition benches. I am not saying that painting walls, mowing grass or fixing roads are jobs that anybody should be forced into. The dignity of such work, however, should not be belittled in this House because many people undertake such jobs. If they did not do so, our communities simply could not exist.

Councils can and do pay for work but there is much work that needs to be done in our communities that councils are not paying for and have never paid for. Even in the boom times of illusionary surpluses and full employment, those works were not done. It is important to bear in mind that this Gateway scheme has been agreed with the trade union movement to ensure there is no job displacement. Gateway is facilitating works in our cities and rural areas, including smaller towns and villages across the country, that otherwise would not get done. Such works improve the living standards of all in society.

Like the Labour Party, Sinn Féin talks a lot about rights on both sides of the Border. I agree to some extent with them that it was the lack of respect for rights, though not only that, which contributed in large measure to the instability in Northern Ireland. In considering rights in any republic, we must also look at duties. We all have a duty to pay our taxes. There is a lot of talk at the moment about philanthropists. It is all well and good to be a philanthropist and give money once in a while over and above that which one has a duty to give. However, every citizen in this State has a duty to pay his or her taxes. In addition, every company resident in this State - I do not believe in so-called non-resident companies - as part of the social contract has to pay its taxes. That is the way in which people fortunate enough to have employment can fulfil their duty to the common good in our Republic.

What most annoyed the man to whom I spoke in Ennis was that he could not even contribute to society. Not alone could he not get a job, there was no mechanism by which he could contribute. There was no way he could go out every morning and do something useful to make his community a little bit better. To the extent that the Gateway scheme achieves that, I am quite proud that the Government has introduced it and I make no apologies to anybody for that. Of course, I would be against slave labour or any of the draconian measures the Opposition would like to portray this scheme as, but that is simply not what it is.

The Sinn Féin Private Members' motion points out that "when the Government came to power 55.1 per cent of those unemployed were long-term unemployed, after three years of this Government 61.4 per cent of those unemployed are now long-term unemployed". I do not dispute the veracity of that fact, but that is all the more reason to give people who are long-term unemployed something to do if they so wish. We should give them a mechanism by which they can contribute to their areas and society generally. Some people on these benches may not want to avail of that mechanism but some of the people I met while canvassing for the last general election did want to avail of such a scheme. They were quite annoyed by the fact that there was no such mechanism, but there is now.

As regards the figure for the long-term unemployed, if we can learn anything from the 1980s it is how detrimental is long-term unemployment. There is an absolute necessity to introduce labour-activation measures to give people hope and a mechanism by which they can contribute to society if they cannot get a job at the moment.

John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am glad to make a brief contribution to this debate. I will support anything that helps to get people back into employment, including a vehicle allowing them to improve their skills-set and restore the confidence and self-esteem of the long-term unemployed. In the past I urged Ministers to introduce more CE, Tús and rural social schemes. Gateway is on the same lines. We need more rather than less schemes of this kind.

When I saw initially that 80 schemes had been allocated to the local authority in Mayo I asked whether we could not have obtained more. I have made representations to Ministers about the Tús scheme to try to get it extended from one year to two. That is because people on the scheme were enjoying what they did and contributed to the organisations they worked for.

Schemes can always be improved and fine-tuned. If there is something wrong with Gateway when it is rolled out, let us change it or tweak it. Sole traders do not currently qualify to take on internships even though they would not be replacing anybody else, so that needs to be tweaked. In recent weeks, new social protection offices were opened in my constituency, but an area in east Mayo is without a community welfare office as a result. That situation needs to be tweaked because the area concerned is bigger than some counties. Mayo is the third biggest county so that matter needs to be re-examined by the Minister for Social Protection. I urge her to take a look at it.

I was listening to what Deputy Jim Daly said yesterday about the North of Ireland where there is a youth employment scheme. Under that scheme unemployed youths receive an extra £15.38 per week in addition to their benefits. I assume that is something like the situation here, but if I am wrong I apologise in advance.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Well wrong.

John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If it is, I will take it back because I am not aware of it. I take the simple attitude that those things need to be nailed if they are wrong. I just wondered why one thing could apply in the North, while Sinn Féin is opposing it here. However, if that is wrong, I stand corrected and will take it back.

Paul Connaughton (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, for the welcome opportunity to speak on this motion. When we came into Government three years ago the biggest issue facing us was unemployment, and it still is. While or intention to create many more jobs is proving to be successful, we have simply not yet created enough. The overriding ambition would be not to need a scheme like this and that no one would be two years unemployed. We would prefer if that situation had never happened and that is what we are trying to get back to.

We would also like to believe that anyone working for 22 months on this scheme will not last the full period, in that they will move on to another job at some opportune point. That proviso is built into the scheme and we are moving towards it. As we all know, local authority staff have been reduced so a lot of work that would normally have been done by such staff is not being done at the moment. That is causing huge concern in a whole range of issues.

For a scheme such as Gateway to work, we will have to ensure that councils have as many resources as possible. There is simply no point in creating opportunities like this unless they are sufficiently resourced so the work can be carried out. I implore the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, to put as much money as he can into local authorities so this work can be carried out.

Quite a number of people enjoy being on the schemes and want to extend their time on them. Those who are unemployed cannot be classified in one group as there are a variety of backgrounds, ages and qualifications among those who are unemployed. We must devise a system of schemes that will work for people. Local authorities have a range of work and the Gateway scheme is one option. I acknowledge that the issue of Garda vetting of participants in the scheme needs to be dealt with. There is a vagueness associated with the system of Garda vetting which needs to be clarified. The unemployment issue needs to be dealt with and this scheme is a step in the right direction. I ask the Opposition to be careful of the use of language when speaking about this scheme. The motion uses terms such as "forced labour", "hard labour" and "punishes". This country is not like a North Korean prison camp. This scheme is a legitimate effort to deal with an issue. I do not have a problem with opposition to the scheme but some of the language used is over the top. I suggest the Opposition should put forward some alternatives to see how people can get back to work because that is a project on which we can all agree.

Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have experienced the worst economic crisis in the history of the country which happened under Fianna Fáil-led Governments driving policies that promoted the property bubble and drove our economy onto the rocks. In 2011, when this Government took office, 1,600 jobs were being lost every week. After much focus and progress, 1,200 jobs a week are being created but we still have more to do and more progress is needed. Job creation is a priority for the Government. I come from the Waterford constituency which has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, not through any fault of its own. Its manufacturing tradition became uncompetitive and there was a dependence on construction. When both collapsed, there was a void which needed to be addressed. To achieve progress and to create solutions, we need to hear from the Opposition as well as from Government about realistic solutions that will help to create jobs. All I hear is the Opposition in a permanent state of protest constantly trying to undermine a Government that is working hard to create jobs. I listened to Deputy Boyd Barrett criticising the Government. I wonder what he has ever worked at in his life to be such an expert on job creation or whether he has ever worked outside of this House.

There needs to be a range of options to assist those who are unemployed. Gateway is not an isolated solution. JobBridge is one option and 61% of interns who have engaged with JobBridge have achieved full-time employment on completion of the programme. This information has been compiled by Indecon. I refer to Tús schemes and CE schemes which have been very successful in acting as stepping stones for long-term unemployed people to get back into the workforce. I refer to the MOMENTUM programme and the Steps programme for the self-employed and the back to education schemes. The solution needs to be found by means of a holistic approach.

Sinn Féin has been critical of the Government with regard to the jobseeker's allowance and the Gateway scheme. The Sinn Féin Members like to deny it but in Northern Ireland, 16 to 24 year olds are paid £56.80 per week which is equivalent to €67, yet they are very critical of this Government reducing the rate for those under 25 years to €100 a week. Those over 25 years in Northern Ireland are paid £71.70 a week as jobseeker's allowance, which is equivalent to €85, for a period of only six months, while in the Republic it is paid for nine months. This is typical of Sinn Féin Members speaking out of both sides of their mouth. I support Deputy O'Mahony's comments that Sinn Féin supports the youth employment scheme in Northern Ireland which pays £15.38 a week in addition to benefits, yet its Members come into this House and are critical of a Gateway scheme that actually pays more. This scheme is a stepping stone which is part of an holistic approach to getting the long-term unemployed back into the workplace. It is solutions we need here and not just protests.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I confess I have often sat here during Private Members' time and, having considered the motion, would have been able to agree with aspects of it but for obvious reasons I do not get the opportunity to agree with it. I must say with complete conviction that on this occasion there is not a single iota of this Private Members' motion with which I can agree. It is gratuitously insulting to people who are unemployed and to anyone who participates in Gateway, a Tús scheme, a CE scheme or JobBridge. It is based on a flawed political miscalculation in that Sinn Féin believes a cohort of those unfortunate people, who find themselves unemployed through no fault of their own, do not want to work. I can tell Sinn Féin that in my political experience in my constituency office, as late as my clinics last Monday night, I had people who want to stay longer on schemes and who want to get onto schemes. I have had conversations with supervisors who have constructive suggestions to make about how to improve schemes. However, this motion is gratuitously insulting to communities who organise schemes, to local authorities who will provide a range of opportunities to participants on schemes, but it is insulting most of all to the more than 180,000 people who are long-term unemployed, for whom Sinn Féin Members allege to care but to whom, by virtue of their motion, they are giving a slap in the face.

The motion refers to the portion of the unemployed accounted for by those who are long-term unemployed having increased from 55% to 61%. What is Sinn Féin's solution to this issue? Deputy Clare Daly said that people need a job if they are to get back to work. Of course they need a job. However, it is clearly established that the prospects of getting a full-time job are significantly diminished the longer a person is unemployed. That is what labour activation programmes seek to address. It is about giving people a pathway back to work by offering opportunities to upskill and retrain. If Members opposite were offering a constructive criticism of the schemes in terms of their training input, for example, there might be something to debate. However, this pejorative language of "frog-marching", "forced labour" and "hard labour" is gratuitously insulting to those people who want to participate in the schemes and see them not as a hard labour, but as an avenue back to work.

Sinn Féin needs to get real. I urge Members opposite to get in touch with the constituencies where unemployment is a serious issue and with the communities that are offering these people some hope of getting back into the workforce. Our economic recovery is fragile. Any local social welfare officer will say that employers are nervous but are gradually putting their toes back in the water. These employers are saying they do not have sufficient confidence to take on a full-time employee, but they can offer two or three days work per week. Participants who work for 19.5 hours per week under the Gateway, Tús or community employment schemes will receive an incentive to do so and can take up opportunities elsewhere on the back of the experience they gain.

In an ideal world, we would have work for everybody and there would be no need to debate these issues. Unfortunately, ours is a far from ideal world and we cannot adopt the head in the sand, all or nothing approach of Deputy Clare Daly or Sinn Féin. We are giving participants an additional €20 per week. I wish we were in a position to give an extra €50 or €100, but we simply cannot afford it. Who would pay the taxes to support that increased allocation? Employers are beginning to get up off their knees and offer people opportunities, but Deputies opposite want to nail those people to a lifetime on social welfare. It is a betrayal like none I have ever seen in respect of people who are unemployed, and it is coming from a party that purports to articulate the needs of marginalised people. In previous Opposition motions I have generally found elements that I would like, in my heart of hearts, to support. In this instance, however, there is not a single shred of content that offers anything to the people it is claiming to represent but further long-term unemployment. The bottom line is that we need labour activation measures to improve the employability of people seeking work.

I will conclude by offering a constructive criticism, which I hope the Minister, Deputy Phil Hogan, will convey to his colleague, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Employment, Deputy Richard Bruton. There is a proliferation of schemes, including Tús, community employment schemes and Gateway, which, because they were introduced at short notice, feature a degree of overlap and inadequate co-ordination. I have spoken to supervisors who are crisscrossing County Cork, with one supervising a single Tús worker on a GAA pitch, for example, and another coming onto the same pitch separately to supervise three Tús workers or community employment scheme workers. We need to extract from the current pool of supervisors people who will assume an oversight role in terms of the implementation and co-ordination of scarce resources. We are putting €19 million into Gateway. I wish we could allocate €90 million, but that is not possible. This is a labour activation measure with significant merit. As I said at the outset, the content of this motion from Sinn Féin is gratuitously insulting to long-term unemployed people and to participants in these schemes the length and breadth of the country.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to share time with Deputies Brian Stanley, Sandra McLellan, Pearse Doherty and Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is agreed.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Like Deputy Creed, I have people coming into my constituency office looking to extend their participation in community employment schemes and so on. However, the difference between Gateway and the CE schemes is that participants in the latter are doing things like child care which allow them to obtain a qualification at the end of it. In other words, they are upskilling.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is not accurate.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In most cases-----

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask Members to make their remarks through the Chair. There is too much of this type of carry-on this evening.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In most cases there is a training and educational aspect and a qualification at the end of it. That is why people find value in those particular labour activation schemes. In the case of Gateway, on the other hand, there is no training element.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not true.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no training budget.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, there is not.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no training budget for this scheme. As I understand it, a sum of €200 or so will be given towards health and safety aspects for anyone who is participating in the scheme, but there is no training and education budget and participants will not receive any qualification at the end of it.

The website of the Department of Social Protection includes the following statement in its description of what Gateway purports to do:

Work can only be undertaken on specific purpose projects or work that the County and City Councils used to undertake but no longer have resources to carry out...

The Department's website also states, "The work opportunities are intended to benefit the local area and are identified and provided by County and City councils". Local authorities, the website indicates, are to match the skills of those being offered positions with the work that requires to be done. A series of Government backbenchers have pointed to this scheme as allowing participants to gain new skills. There reality is that no new skills will be gained by anybody partaking in a Gateway scheme, because one of the criteria is that local authorities must match the skills of participants with the work that needs to be done. When a work placement is matched with somebody who has a particular skills set, that individual is not learning any additional skills. Claims to the contrary that have been spouted from the other side of the House are a falsehood.

Deputy Michael McNamara criticised Sinn Féin and other Opposition Members for belittling the work that will be done by participants in this scheme. Far from belittling the work these people are being asked to do, we want to reward them by paying them properly for that work. The only people doing any belittling are Members opposite who support these people being paid €1 per hour.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They will be paid €10 an hour for 19.5 hours of work.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Catherine Byrne said she welcomes the scheme because it will give encouragement to people to go back to work. I do not know who she has been talking to but any long-term unemployed person to whom I have spoken does not need any encouragement to go back to work. People in that situation wake up every day dreading the bills the postman will drop through the door and worrying about how they will pay their rent, put food on the table and clothe their children. That is all the encouragement they need to get back into employment. In fact, they do not need encouragement; they need a damn job. This Government, however, has not been very successful in providing them with jobs.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We only provided 60,000 last year.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If the Deputy wants to look at and debate the figures, we can do that. It is very easy to say 60,000 jobs were created. If one breaks down the figures, one will see exactly how many net full-time jobs were created in this State last year.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am talking about 60,000 full-time jobs.

Sandra McLellan (Cork East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What about emigration?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am quoting the CSO figures.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy should show some respect.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy O'Brien is peddling half-truths.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We should have a proper debate with all of the information on the table.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy should get the CSO figures.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Maloney recognises that this scheme has limitations.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So do I.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He is damn right. It does have limitations. The Government's response to this unemployment crisis also has limitations. I do not know whether it was Deputy Creed or Deputy Anne Ferris who said these places should be offered to people if they choose to take them up. There is no option to take up these places. There is a compulsion to take them up.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is right.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When I was talking to a guy in my constituency office recently - believe it or not, people come into our constituency offices as well to discuss these schemes - he asked me whether, if he is selected to go on this scheme, he will be able to take up a day's work as a chippie on a building site if he is offered such employment. According to the criteria, as published on the website of the Department of Social Protection, one cannot avail of part-time work if it interferes with one's Gateway scheme. Deputy Creed can shake his head, but I am merely referring to what it says on the Department's website. I am not making this up. If the Deputy has an issue with that, he can take it up with the Minister for Social Protection. The reality is that if a person who is working almost four hours a day on this scheme five days a week, to make up the 19.5 hours, is given an opportunity to work on a building site next week to earn €100, which is what they would get for five weeks' work on this scheme, he or she will have to turn it down.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is not true.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is true.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is true.

Sandra McLellan (Cork East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is true.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If Deputy Creed wants to have a debate on the facts, I suggest he should visit the Department of Social Protection's website.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He should inform himself.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He should download the exact criteria for the scheme. The question and answer document that comes with the criteria, which provides answers to 33 questions, states categorically that one cannot avail of part-time work if it interferes with one's participation in a Gateway scheme. This is not a case of the Opposition making something up. I am referring to what the Department of Social Protection has published.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Most people on these schemes work for two or two and a half days a week.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy asked for some clarity.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did not ask for confusion.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no confusion. If the debate on this issue is being confused, I suggest the Department of Social Protection is responsible for that. I am getting my information from the Department, just as anyone who is asked to participate in this scheme will do. One of the questions in the question and answer document to which I referred relates to whether participants have to adhere to the work that is set out for them when they are first recruited. The answer makes it clear that there is some flexibility in this regard, as all areas of local authority activity can be considered. It is not confined to areas which are not currently covered by the present workforce. All areas of local authority activity can be considered. I reiterate that those who want to contribute to this debate should inform themselves, rather than spinning falsehoods about what this scheme can and cannot do.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Hear, hear.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. There has been a substantial reduction in staff numbers at local authority level. I have discussed this with the Minister, Deputy Hogan, on many occasions. Some local authorities have lost up to 25% of their staff over the last four or five years. That has resulted in huge gaps in services. Local authorities in some areas are finding it difficult to mobilise crews of outdoor staff. It has been clear recently that there are shortages in many areas, including housing maintenance, libraries, parks and - critically in the context of the recent storms - road maintenance. The existing staff that work for local authorities across the country did Trojan work during the storm, especially in light of the resources that are available to them. I know from the few counties I have contact with that absolutely powerful work was done by short-staffed local authorities.

As I have mentioned to the Minister previously, routine maintenance has been absent in some areas. A small amount of routine maintenance - clearing from gullies and culverts the branches of trees that have been washed downstream - would have prevented some areas from being flooded recently. We need to start looking at preventative maintenance in this country. The staff shortage to which I have referred explains why local authorities are being forced to take on 3,000 people under the Gateway scheme. We saw the same thing when they took on 836 people under JobBridge placements. It has been argued that this does not result in displacement. I will explain what happens. When a worker retires at the age of 65, or 66 as it is now, he or she goes out and is not replaced. There is displacement through natural wastage, which is an awful term that is used to describe retirement. If there are fewer positions and fewer workers, there is the same end result. It does not make any sense. The staff in the lower grades, as they are called, and the outdoor staff provide critical services in local authority areas.

Anyone who took the trouble to read the full Sinn Féin motion will be aware that it recommends that proper training schemes, alternative activation programmes and intensive community employment schemes should be put in place. I was involved in running two of these schemes in the late 1990s. One of them, which was organised by a branch of the Conference of Religious of Ireland, was run on a "rate for the job" basis. It was the same rate as community employment, but the difference was that one got the rate for the job. In other words, if one was working side by side with another worker who was getting €15 an hour, one worked for the number of hours needed to clock up one's total pay to that level. The critical aspect of this scheme was that people got third-level qualifications out of it. Almost all of them got jobs out of it. The scheme had a huge success rate. I want to highlight this. Sinn Féin wants to see good activation and training programmes. We want educational opportunities to be afforded to people. I have been involved in this area in the past. I have seen its benefits. I benefitted from it myself. I can see how it works. I just think this is where we need to be going.

Participants in this scheme will receive €20 a week. It costs money to go to work. One has to travel to work, bring a lunch and pay PRSI. When all of that is taken away, some people will lose money. We do not want to disadvantage people who are already at the pin of their collar. We want to help such people. That is what the Sinn Féin motion is about. The problem with the Gateway scheme is like the problem with the Tús scheme. While the community employment scheme has some good aspects, Sinn Féin would argue strongly that it should be improved along the lines I have set out. The problem with this scheme, like the Tús scheme, is that it does not do anything about activation. The embargo is making activation in local authority employment impossible. It is good that the Minister is here as it gives me an opportunity to remind him of the need to lift the embargo. I appreciate that the state of the public finances means it is impossible for recruitment to be opened fully. It would make sense at this stage for the embargo to be lifted gradually in crucial areas, such as the local authority sector and the HSE. I ask the Minister to consider that. I would like the Government to withdraw this scheme and put in place a proper intensive training scheme with proper activation measures that treats people with a little dignity. These people have had their noses rubbed in it over the last three to five years. They have been ground down. They come into my constituency office all the time. We need to help them.

Sandra McLellan (Cork East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Gateway scheme has nothing to do with jobs and everything to do with spin. On coming into office the Government claimed that job creation was a priority. Since the Government made that idle promise in 2011, its job creation strategy can be summed up in one word - emigration.

It is important to dispel the myths about Gateway. It is not voluntary; it does not involve training or upskilling; it does not lead to a real job; and it is not about putting something back into the community, as the Taoiseach would have us believe. Far from being part of the solution, Gateway is part of the problem. This Government programme is an attack on workers' rights. While I can somewhat understand why Fine Gael might support this programme, I am shocked at the Labour Party's commitment to this workfare. It undermines workers' rights by sending message that it is acceptable to pay €1 an hour for someone's labour. Trade unions must join us and send out a clear message. Gateway is a shot across the bow of organised labour and we will organise to oppose it.

Some 3,000 positions have been identified as available for Gateway. If 3,000 jobs are waiting to be filled, these jobs should be filled in a transparent and proper fashion. Gateway forces unemployed people to carry out work for local authorities through the threat of cuts and suspensions to welfare payments. Gateway is not about creating real sustainable jobs. There is no structured or formal training involved. It is expressly intended that the participants will do the work that local authorities can no longer do as a result of the recruitment embargo.

In my constituency of Cork East, people are genuinely worried that they may be forced to travel long distances to take up Gateway workfare. As there is no travel allowance, the extra €20 will have to be spent on travel. Between Cork City Council and Cork County Council, a total of 325 places need to be filled. One of my neighbours in Youghal could well be forced to take up a position with Cork County Council in Bantry, which is a total round trip of 262 km and a three-hour journey. The extra €20 would go nowhere to cover travel costs. In fact, a person would be far poorer on one of these Gateway placements.

Sinn Féin calls on the Government to abandon the Gateway scheme and instead adopt activation programmes that are based on the principle of equal pay for equal work. We welcome the passing of a Sinn Féin motion in Donegal which commits Donegal County Council to not using Gateway placements. Gateway does not provide for brighter futures for those who are unemployed. It does not include training or education mechanisms and as such does not enhance the employability of participants. This reality is sharpened by the fact that local authorities cannot provide sustainable employment opportunities owing to the public sector recruitment embargo.

The progressive, sustainable alternative would be to adopt an activation programme that has training and education at its core and which genuinely seeks to enhance the employability of participants. Sinn Féin believes that job creation must be the centre of our economic recovery. To do this, we propose to ring-fence the money raised from the wealth tax to ensure every young person in the State can avail of a job or a training place. Sinn Féin proposes what amounts to a stimulus of approximately €10 billion to be spent over three years. This would help to create in the region of 100,000 jobs, based on Government estimates of between 8,000 and 10,000 jobs created for each €1 billion invested. In addition, we would make no further cuts to capital expenditure.

Sinn Féin is calling on the Government not only to abandon the Gateway scheme, but also to abandon the mode of thinking that has produced a series of programmes which has ultimately led to the persecution of unemployed people in this State. Gateway is nothing more than State-sanctioned slave labour. It is a product of a Government that wants to massage the unemployment figures to suit its own political and ideological goal. The Government want to use the recession and high unemployment to drive down wages and reverse any gains made by the trade union movement in the State. I urge Government Deputies, in particular Labour Party Deputies, to think long and hard before they vote here tonight. I urge them to support our motion and get focused on real job creation.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an díospóireacht seo. Caithfidh mé a rá go bhfuil eagla orm anocht do chomhairleoirí contae Fhine Gael as Contae Dhún na nGall agus do chomhairleoirí contae Pháirtí an Lucht Oibre as Dún na nGall mar vótáil an dá pháirtí sin, agus ina measc, Páirtí Fhianna Fáil agus na Neamhspleáigh ar chomhairle contae Dhún na nGall, i gcoinne na scéime seo agus dhein siad cáineadh láidir uirthi. Chaith siad vóta nach rachadh an chomhairle contae i ngleic leis an scéim seo i nDún na nGall. Ó bheith ag éisteacht leis an gcáineadh láidir atá déanta ag an Rialtas agus Teachtaí Dála an Rialtais ar ár rún anseo anocht, tá eagla orm faoi cad é a bheidh le rá ag na Teachtaí Dála lena gcomhairlí contae féin sna laethanta amach romhainn.

I commend the councillors in Donegal County Council who unanimously passed a Sinn Féin motion condemning the use of Gateway in that county and pledging the council to distance itself from its use. I congratulate the Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Labour Party councillors who had the conviction to stand up and be counted, and supported the motion. Councils across the State will get their chance to vote on similar motions. Unfortunately, we are hearing that councillors in other local authorities are not similarly disposed. It is clear that senior party figures have had a word in their ears and told them not to support this type of motion, which is unfortunate.

It presents a huge challenge for the management in Donegal County Council. As I said on that evening, it puts it in conflict with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. However, the council's management needs to stand with the members of that council who were unanimous in echoing the view of the people of Donegal. It is important that the management comes down on the side of the people and not on the side of the Minister, Deputy Hogan, and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and abides by the unanimous decision of the council.

That council like many others has borne the brunt of cuts not only to services, but also to staff. In 2008, the council had 1,243 core staff and today it has 810, a cut of 34%. Some 433 core local authority workers have left that council in the past five years. The Government in its wisdom has assigned 80 Gateway positions to the council. This is a lucrative scheme that allows the council to fill posts that cannot be filled because of the recruitment embargo in areas that have not been serviced because of the imposition of the policies of the current and previous Governments. The council will regard it as an addition to the 84 JobBridge places it has used in recent years, which is the second highest use of the JobBridge scheme among local authorities.

My colleagues have pointed out that our motion proposes an alternative scheme, focused on intense training, similar to the community employment scheme. We are suggesting alternatives despite what Deputy Creed and others might say to the contrary. We are asking the Government to introduce activation schemes that respect those who are long-term unemployed and provide opportunities, and crucially training for those who are long-term unemployed. It also needs to be non-compulsory, another area where this scheme fails.

An issue that really gets up my nose is the issue of unfairness. I heard Deputy Creed and others say they would love to give more than €20 to these long-term unemployed, whom the Government is going to force to take up these schemes, but they say they cannot because they say they live in the real world. I say this to those Deputies, some of whom may be sitting in their offices watching this. Where was the real world when they had to deal with their super-junior Ministers of State? Where was the real world for them? They are on €130,042 per annum. However, for them, because they got the title of "super-junior" and had the privilege of attending Cabinet meetings with no other responsibility, they got an extra €17,205 - and, of course, one went to Fine Gael and one went Labour. Where was the real world for them?

Where is the real world for Richie Boucher on his €839,000, which the Government refused to vote against last year, and he received the exact same pay this year? Where is the real world for the advisers of the Ministers who bring forward these schemes and who breach their own pay caps? This is something which really annoys me and many people. It is disrespectful that the Government has two levels; there are those who need to be protected at all costs and the others who will be forced into these schemes without any training or real financial support.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One of the main purposes of austerity, from the point of view of those who impose it, is to lower people's expectations. I could cite many examples of how this has happened not only since the Government took office, but in the preceding years. This is the mentality which lies behind the Gateway scheme and other such schemes or scams, call them what one will. This is what is at the back of these schemes dreamed up by the Government which we in Sinn Féin quite rightly target in tonight's motion.

This mentality was very much on show in the debate yesterday when Deputy Jim Daly spoke. He proudly claimed Gateway as his idea. Whether this is the case or not, he defended his statement on "Prime Time", that the scheme gives people an opportunity to learn what it is like to get up in the morning. He thinks this statement was taken out of context by us because he also mentioned going out to work, being part of a team and working as part of a group. Last night, Deputy Daly repeated on the Dáil record what he stated on "Prime Time" and it is still, irrespective of the change of setting, patronising and insulting to treat unemployed people, particularly young unemployed people, with contempt.

Deputy Daly and others argue many people will be glad to take up places on this Gateway scheme and there will be high demand-----

Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You have them on it in the North.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----but I remind the Minister there was high demand for soup kitchens also when the need was there. When the expectations of unemployed people are lowered so much, it is to be expected that some people might welcome such schemes in the lamentable absence of better training, education and employment opportunities. When Government Deputies point to whatever number of people might be willing participants in the scheme, they conveniently gloss over the compulsion attached to it and the penalties which will apply to those who do not take it up when required to do so. They wilfully ignore the fact social welfare officers will select candidates for the scheme and not the other way around.

Let us be very clear this is neither training nor is it a gateway to employment. It is a cheap labour scheme. It sends unemployed people to local authorities to do work many of the 25% of their staff laid off since 2011 would have done and would still be doing today if they were employed. A scheme offering €20 on top of a dole payment for 19.5 hours per week for 22 months, doing work once done by unionised workers in local authorities, begs the question if this is what the Labour Party has sold its soul for in coalition with Fine Gael.

A community development activist in my home county of Monaghan has already done a study on Gateway and similar schemes. He points out the State is a party to the Forced Labour Convention of 1930 and thus "undertakes to suppress the use of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms". This is what the State signed up to. The European Convention on Human Rights states, "No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour".

What has the Government learned from schemes already in place? It has learned nothing from JobBridge where a €50 top-up applied. Even the top-up is significantly less in the Gateway scheme. It must go and new measures need to be introduced.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I never heard such political hypocrisy in all my life than from the Deputies opposite in Sinn Féin.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You are in Fine Gael. That cannot be true.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Silence for every speaker.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sinn Féin speaks against a scheme in the Republic of Ireland, but as an all-Ireland party one would imagine it would be consistent and not hypocritical about what it does in Northern Ireland, where jobseeker's allowance is available for only six months and those aged over 25 receive €85.73. The youth employment scheme in Northern Ireland is a voluntary scheme to get people active before they are forced onto the steps to work scheme. Initially, no top-up payments to benefits were made until a review was carried out. Last October, a briefing took place and three Sinn Féin members were present in the Assembly for a meeting of the Committee for Employment and Learning. Not one of them asked any questions on employment schemes, let alone why people are being forced - to use their words - onto schemes such as these for less than €20 a week. I agree with Deputy Jonathan O'Brien that one must be accurate about these schemes. These are the facts in Northern Ireland and Sinn Féin should be consistent and implement the same philosophy in the Republic of Ireland if it is seriously interested in having an all-Ireland approach. Obviously, it has an à la carte approach also.

It is clear Sinn Féin has a different political philosophy to Fine Gael and the Labour Party in government. I welcome this because we want people to be labour participants and gainfully occupied in society and making a contribution rather than doing nothing. If Sinn Féin wants people to do nothing, why did it introduce a scheme similar to this in Northern Ireland? However, it is opposed to this scheme in the Republic of Ireland.

We were honoured with a mandate from the people and we took it up on the basis that we would do everything we possibly could to get people back to work. We have made significant progress, but not enough progress because one wants to do a lot more for any citizen who is unemployed. Schemes are part and parcel of labour activation measures required to get people active in the community, maintain their skills, learn new skills and obtain full-time work. The Ministers, Deputies Burton and Bruton, are doing this through Pathways to Work and the Action Plan for Jobs. A total of 60,000 full-time jobs have been created in the past year. The level of full-time unemployment will have reduced from 15% to 10%-----

Sandra McLellan (Cork East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is called emigration.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----by the end of this year and this is a significant change. I know the politics of failure of Sinn Féin are what makes Deputy McLellan's constituency grow, but it certainly does not make the country grow.

Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Trading in misery.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In Pathways to Work we set out a number of strategies to ensure people who find themselves out of work, particularly the long-term unemployed, do not become permanently disenfranchised in our society. This is what Sinn Féin wants. The aim is to ensure Ireland's greatest resource, its people, will no longer remain on the live register for lengthy periods without an appropriate offer of assistance from the State in a voluntary way. In return, individuals will be made aware of the responsibility to commit to a job search and other employment, education or training activities. This is it, and there is no other hidden agenda which the Deputies opposite would have one believe exists. If the growth in long-term unemployment is to be halted, and the number of people unemployed for more than 12 months reduced, trends must be reversed. Put simply, no one who loses his or her job should be allowed to drift with no support into long-term unemployment.

Activation policies should seek to increase the employability of jobseekers and encourage them to be more active in their efforts to find work. In Ireland, we have traditionally adopted a passive approach to supporting jobseekers compared to other OECD countries, so internationally Sinn Féin is out of step. One of the consequences of this passive approach was the development of a significant phenomenon of long-term unemployment, even in the midst of an economic boom, and the deskilling of many people in the labour market. It is even more urgent we address these challenges in the current economic climate.

The Government will place 3,000 people on the scheme this year through local authorities. They will do work which must be done in every community in the country. The Deputies opposite will make representations to ensure they get their constituents on these schemes. I can see Deputy Ferris already making representations to Kerry County Council. The people who will be on the schemes will be the better for it as will the people in the community. Its environmental enhancement will be to the benefit of many communities. The Government will do whatever it can to implement measures which will provide a stepping stone to full-time employment.

We will do so without the support of Sinn Féin, if necessary.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister alluded to the latest figure of 11.9% unemployed in the State. However, if we focus in on the figures, a different story emerges. If it were not for the abundance of these dubious activation schemes-----

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Abolish them in Northern Ireland then.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----and record emigration, the unemployment rate in this State would be double the actual published figure, and would come in at 22.7%.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Then abolish the schemes in Navan.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will explain it very simply to the Minister so he will understand.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy should tell the lads in Navan he is against them.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Order, please.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To establish whether someone is employed, the quarterly national household survey asks the question: "Did you work even one hour in the last seven days ending on Sunday?" In addition, the survey manual states that a person on internships, Tús, JobBridge or community employment is considered to be in paid work. The unequivocal result is that the employment rate is seriously inflated by the number of people on activation schemes and, conversely, the headline unemployment rate is significantly understated in a similar manner.

The recent report from the Oireachtas Library and Research Service considered what the real unemployment rate would be if jobseekers engaged in activation schemes were no longer counted as employed. It looked at the period ending in the third quarter of 2013 and found that, in the absence of these schemes, the unemployment rate for that quarter would have been 15.9%, not the 13% reported. The Government's new ecosystem of phoney activation schemes means that the rate of unemployment is a full 3% higher than reported.

In the three years since the Government has come to power, 266,000 Irish people have emigrated. That is over 80,000 people a year, 1,705 people a week, 243 people a day or ten people an hour. This figure alone is a shocking indictment of the Government's job creation failure. It is a stark figure and no amount of spin can soften it. The vast majority of the people in this statistic have been ripped out of their family environment by economic necessity and thrown into an uncertain future abroad. As far as the Irish economy is concerned, these figures reflect the effective inactivation of 250,000 Irish people by this Government. Some 127,000 people of working age have emigrated since 2009. Had these people stayed in the State, the unemployment level would be 19.7%. If we add this figure to the Government's phoney activation schemes, the unemployment rate increases to 22.6%, double the one promoted by the Government.

It is important to say that we in Sinn Féin are not against activation schemes per se. However, the ones coming from the Government, such as Gateway, Tús and JobBridge, are objectionable on a fundamental level. We are on record with regard to welcoming initiatives such as Intreo and JobsPlus, but with Gateway citizens are getting €1 an hour to work alongside others who are on multiples of that wage for doing exactly the same work, and there is no training involved. This is a coercive salary swipe. The Government shed thousands of waged people in local authorities to replace them with 3,000 unwaged people. It is blatant job displacement. In fact, this programme costs real jobs in local authorities.

While the Government is cynically busying itself massaging the unemployment figures, the real indigenous enterprise sector, the real engine of job creation in this State, has still not experienced the necessary reforms with regard to the dangerously distressed levels of credit provision, the cost of doing business and progressive rates. Three years since the announcement of the much-heralded strategic investment bank, it is still in limbo, and promises to insulate over 1 million homes have yet to be seen. Where is the necessary urgency on this issue?

A total of 500,000 Irish families are the victims of the Fine Gael-Labour Government's and the Fianna Fáil Government's economic policies. I ask the Government, for the sake of these people, to focus on energising the real economy and stop massaging these unemployment figures.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leo siúd a ghlac páirt sa díospóireacht. Bíonn sé i gcónaí go maith éisteacht a thabhairt, ní hamháin dóibh siúd a aontaíonn ach chomh maith leo siúd nach n-aontaíonn, in ainneoin an chacamais a bhí á rá ag roinnt acu.

I was disappointed the Government could not find any Labour Party Minister to present the case for this. It found a few backbench Labour Party Deputies who had not a clue what they were talking about, but the Minister, Deputy Joan Burton, could not even attend. The reason she cannot attend is that not only is this scheme wrong, but she has been misleading the Dáil and the public in regard to it. I will deal with this first before I go back into all of the other aspects of the Gateway programme. The Minister, Deputy Burton, has repeatedly claimed in parliamentary debates and in replies to questions that participants will receive a €20 top-up and that, basically, they will be €20 better off. That is the way she and all of the spin doctors have put it across. However, she knows full well, yet fails to mention, that many will be far worse off due to taking part in this, and that it could cost some participants money.

I received a document from the Department of Social Protection which shattered the Minister's €20 claim. I had raised concerns about the Gateway scheme because the supposed €20 top-up could potentially be eroded entirely by PRSI. The Department provided me with a table which specifically outlines each and every payment and which confirmed my fears. That document demonstrates that the more children a person has who is on Gateway, the smaller the top-up, if any. For example, after PRSI, an unemployed couple with one child will get a top-up of €5.50 for 19.5 hours work, a parent of three children will get only €3.11 for their week's work, while a parent of five children sees the entire top-up eroded to be only 75 cent. If the person happens to have more children, it will cost them even more dearly. There is no €20 top-up. I urge the Minister, Deputy Hogan, to explain that to the Minister for Social Protection whenever she appears again.

Once we strip away this supposed top-up benefit, it is hard to see what else is left, if there was anything there in the first place. There is no soft benefit in terms of enhancing participants' employment prospects because, as I and others on this side of the House argued yesterday, this scheme involves no meaningful training and it actively displaces jobs, in particular paid employment opportunities in the local authority sector. The public service recruitment embargo, which the Minister, Deputy Hogan, is still responsible for, along with his Government, means there are no jobs in the context of those who are going to be on Gateway schemes in the host councils. We also see there is no hard benefit in terms of financial recognition through the supposed wages of €20 they are getting.

Last night, I listened to Deputy Jim Daly and we had a bit of banter about it. I thought he was perhaps a one-off. However, I then heard the other idiots coming in here tonight to repeat it, which was scandalous. At least, Deputy O'Mahony had the respect-----

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy should show some respect.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Ó Snodaigh cannot refer to Members of the House as idiots.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They are not idiots. Tá brón orm. Ní pleidhcí iad. Tá brón orm go ndúirt mé sin.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy should have brón air.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Measaim go nglacfadh an pobal gur fíor an méid a dúirt mé.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy should withdraw his remark.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did withdraw it. Ghlac mé leis nár chóir dom é sin a rá agus tharraing mé siar é. The Minister repeated what Deputy Jim Daly said. He is trying continually to distract from the issue at hand. With his newfound interest in the North, he might stand in elections there because he does not have a clue what he is talking about. The Youth Employment Scheme he spoke about is solely a matter for the Minister for Employment and Learning who is an Alliance Party member, Stephen Farry. Aside from that, it is a three to eight week voluntary scheme - not 22 months. In addition, participants can also get an additional top-up.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did not interrupt the Minister too often. Participants can also receive a top-up to deal with their transport and child care issues for a three to eight week scheme. However, this scheme that the Minister keeps mentioning is in stark contrast to the one he has introduced which is compulsory, workfare and hard labour because it is 22 months.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The one in the North is-----

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Seeing as the Minister is so interested in the Assembly deliberations, Sinn Féin representatives on the employment and learning committee have repeatedly called on the Minister to introduce a properly waged, community-based employment scheme to give unemployed people a properly waged position and to allow them to carry out work for the benefit of the local community.

In reply to the bemused Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation whose comments last night were bizarre, there are good activation schemes which I have acknowledged. They are not just ones that have been introduced by this Government. They include ones introduced in the past. Well-funded community employment schemes are one of the key elements in job activation but the Minister should not forget that his Government has already cut the training and education budget for those same community employment schemes. Shame on the Government. We also welcomed the introduction of JobsPlus, which is the subsidy given for the creation of full-time paid positions, but the Minister will not even listen to that. There are activation schemes that are based on meaningful accredited training as in the case of community employment and much more could be done to enhance community employment and equal pay for equal work in the case of JobsPlus. We have supported the likes of Springboard and Momentum in most cases. They are relatively good activation schemes. However, the bad activation schemes and the ones this Government has been responsible for - Tús, JobBridge and now Gateway - are not good activation schemes because they intend to punish the victims of the economic crash who will be targeted and compulsorily sent on these schemes.

This Government has misread the mood of the public because this scheme is a step too far even for those whom the Government says might have sat on the fence to date with regard to JobBridge. Even for them, Gateway is very difficult to swallow because it is low-cost hard labour. It is workfare and I make no apology for using that terminology. Deputy Pearse Doherty has outlined how the councillors in Donegal have already acted on behalf of the public and rejected the Gateway scheme and this will happen elsewhere. I urge the Government, backbenchers and particularly the Labour Party to do likewise and back off the unemployed. Get off their backs, set up proper schemes and give them training opportunities instead of scams like this which is workfare. It is an absolute disgrace that any party in Government but particularly the Labour Party would pursue such a scheme. The Gateway scheme has no structured training, is compulsory, displaces jobs and is a breach of international law, namely, the Forced Labour Convention. I demand that this Government look at that before it proceeds any further. Otherwise it will probably end up in an international court. A good activation scheme is one that does not exploit and displace existing jobs. A good activation scheme is one that first and foremost offers meaningful training and experience to the participants, enhances their future employability and allows jobseekers to apply. Shame on the Government. I appeal to Members to vote for our motion.

Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As a teller, under Standing Order 69 I propose that the vote be taken by other than electronic means.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As Deputy Jonathan O'Brien is a Whip, under Standing Order 69 he is entitled to call a vote through the lobby.