Charlie McConalogue (Donegal North East, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I join with previous speakers in welcoming Mr. Kevin Walshe and I commend him for his work and initiative in submitting his petition and getting it to this stage. It is great to see the Oireachtas being open to average citizens to come here and have an audience with legislators and those who set policy and with departmental officials who are responsible for overseeing it, and suggesting reforms and taking on board the issues of what is working well and what is not. I also welcome Ms O'Brien and Mr. Lynch and the departmental officials, Mr. Spellman, Mr. Fleming and Mr. Egan.

Most Oireachtas Members have come across cases such as the one Mr. Walshe has brought before us. A genuine person has lost his job and is trying to engage as best he can to better himself, get back into the workforce and retrain, but he is told he must be on unemployment benefit for at least nine months before he can avail of the back to education allowance. It is an exceptionally difficult situation to be in and unbelievably frustrating. Many people who have found themselves in the position have spoken to me. At the same time, I see the rationale for it. Availing of an education course is expensive and can be very difficult. It is very difficult for someone to keep up with work while completing an education course. If the benefit were immediately available how would we deal with cases whereby people may give up their jobs? This is the flipside. If it were immediately available people would look at the option. This is the difficult scenario. I have no doubt this is the reason behind the nine month condition.

In recent years many people have ended up on the dole queues and find themselves in a very difficult scenario. At the very beginning, with no immediate job options available and no immediate prospects, it is very clear they need to retrain to find opportunities. At the first engagement with the system they are told they must be unemployed for nine months before they can receive many of the benefits, which it is understood and known they need and that they are genuine. We must address this.

Several speakers spoke about ensuring we tailor the offers made to each person who becomes unemployed, and the State is weak in this regard. People undoubtedly feel very alone when they end up on the dole queue and look to see where to go next. The services we provide to them are quite limited. I know the departmental officials are very stretched, but we have never properly engaged with people on an individual basis to assess their needs and as a State give them the best opportunity suitable to them and help and manage them along the way.

The establishment of Intreo is an opportunity, but I have not yet seen any evidence it is what is required. The concept is a recognition of the general need for such a service, but whether it operates in this way is another issue. Unemployment benefit can be given as a payment to a family comprising a man, woman and three children as a substantial weekly payment over a significant length of time, but our engagement with them is to ensure they are seeking work, and as long as a letter arrives every now and again stating they are seeking work they can be left there and this can drag on. They may end up being sent on a course which does not address their needs but which is thought will suit them, but only gives them something to do without necessarily leading them down the path which best suits them. It is a real pity we do not have a tailored system because it is what we need. We need everybody to be considered on their own merits and helped by the State with people qualified and trained to assist them. What Mr. Walshe has brought before us today is the crunch point, and an example of the first frustration many people face. It is a very sharp manifestation of our failure in how we work with people who are unemployed and how we help them back to the workforce.