Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I congratulate the delegates on their presentations. This is probably the most important presentation we have heard in recent times because youth unemployment is an important and sensitive issue. Youth are impressed by what they see around them. In terms of a determination of what is likely to happen and what has happened, they have a short perception of history. Montgomery said in the 1950s that in 1939 Britain was capable of fighting the First World War. In 1993 or 1994 we were capable of dealing with the unemployment problem in this country that we had inherited from the 1980s. That was the sad part about it and Mr. Stokes is a fitting example. I do not say he lost the hair on his head for that reason, but my hair changed colour in the intervening period. It is amazing the lessons we learn over a huge period. We saw in the early 1990s that graduates came from other European countries, both from within the European Union and outside, to seek job opportunities in this country. They worked at any job that was available. They worked as waiters and waitresses, although they were laden with degrees. It was embarrassing at the time and they were ideally placed to fill positions that became available. We discovered during the 1980s that we had to deal with the problem on the basis of applying sticking plasters. One assessed and tried to deal with issues one by one and moved on to the next group that was coming on-stream to address the matter from the point of view of the person who was unemployed and had few prospects. The changes that have taken place in meeting market requirements in terms of job skills are hugely important. All of us have tabled questions on the issue in recent years and it is clear that there was a disconnect somewhere along the line. In order to meet the requirements of the market there should be some relationship with the education system to find out what is required and how to plan accordingly. That is what we must do. I accept that the delegates are doing this and I congratulate them on it.

We also had another important issue to face. During the late 1990s and 2000s a huge number of young people with great expectations, ability and capabilities were in the education system which, unfortunately, they left early. They went into the marketplace to fill jobs in areas where there was a big demand at the time. Huge salaries were available to people with relatively few qualifications and people were attracted to them. How could one say to a young person that he or she should stay in education for another three or four years and that there would be a nice job for him or her or that there was the prospect of a job at a fairly attractive salary? We must ask ourselves what are the options. To my mind, the options are stark and simple. We must, first, encourage young people to move in the direction which is in their long-term interests. Two colleagues referred to outreach schemes. That is a conduit we must explore to a greater extent.

We have done all of that previously but the Government schemes are now beginning to focus on the issues that are affecting the young people of the country.

The emigration issue distorts our situation to some extent. We all know young people who were in painful circumstances in that they had the option of remaining on the dole for long periods, perhaps doing the occasional nixer and being caught, or emigrating with a view to doing something for themselves and trying to get back some dignity. It is very difficult and heart breaking to have to deal with those situations from the point of view of parents, the educational system, the youth services that are doing a great job throughout the country and the individuals themselves.

I would like to have the opportunity of having a longer debate on this subject because what is happening is not new. It has happened throughout history, and it will continue to happen because every generation makes a mistake, even though the previous generation did so and did not learn lessons from it. We try to introduce the finger in the dike to stop the flow at the time it happens and sometimes it works, but sometimes it does not.

I refer to the group of people throughout Europe who are disaffected and disconnected. They are not interested. The people in that group do not see any reason to continue. All the people here deal with young people in that category, and they do not see any prospects for themselves. They believe there is nothing available for them.

We must separate from that group the people with addictions because they are different. There is a tendency to encompass the people who are disconnected and disaffected in the same group as those who have addictions. The people who have addictions need to be dealt with separately. Their addictions and other problems have to be addressed. They must be helped to understand their particular circumstances and that their addiction will not be a help to them.

The people who are disaffected are slightly different. They have no confidence in the system. They believe that politicians are a shower of so-and-sos. We hear that on a regular basis. They believe the system does not address the issues of young people, but that is wrong. When I first came into this House a colleague of mine was the later Professor John Kelly who told me that he felt very sorry for young people, but they were not the first young generation. We were all once part of the young generation. Looking at the colour of the hair on my head the Chairman probably thinks I was never young, but I was. All these situations presented themselves to us in very difficult circumstances because there were very few options available at that time.

Why is there not enough places in education and training? I know the answer, but I would like to hear it again.

I referred already to the question of the most disadvantaged and those most in need being pushed to the back of the queue but what is the reason for that? I will contribute again later.