Joe O'Reilly (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Yes; I am coming to that. The people wishing for sensationalist, populist and other reasons to misrepresent our policies - the idea that we have adopted austerity as a happy ideological position - must know we are far from that. We adopted our policies with a view to putting our people to work and we are delighted that it is happening. I accept the Chairman's interjection, and he is right to insist that we should not be complacent. We are far from that.

In that context, I will ask Dr. Ivory some questions before moving to Mr. Ginnell. He mentioned investing in strategic infrastructure, and I take it he agrees with the Italian Presidency's view that such strategic infrastructure should be put outside the Lisbon rules, once it is productive. It should be considered as job creation and necessary expenditure. We could all guess what is strategic infrastructure, but Dr. Ivory has the professional expertise. What would he identify as very important strategic infrastructure for this country and Europe? I promoted the view in every forum that we should have an economic stimulus package across Europe, as we must match prudence to such a package. Does the witness agree that such a process should be outside fiscal rules?

We are talking in a European context and this question applies to Ireland and, I suspect, across Europe. There is a problem in job creation in that it lacks a regional dimension. Foreign direct investment tends to gravitate towards centres of population. In Ireland's case, it is the east coast which is very ably represented by the Chairman and others. Border constituencies such as mine do not attract foreign direct investment as readily. We suffer in that way. Will the delegates comment on this? I presume it is a Europe-wide phenomenon, but that does not make it any more acceptable; in fact, it makes it less so. I would be negligent if I did not raise this issue on behalf of the people I represent for whom it is a major issue.
Without labouring the point, I would like to ask about the youth guarantee scheme. What is its potential and are we using it correctly? My suspicion is that it is not up and running properly or as adequately as it should be. I had the privilege of leading the Irish delegation last week at the Council of Europe debate on education. Now that we need all of these houses, we will not have enough plasterers or blocklayers and the education system is not geared towards providing them. Should we have simulated conditions for training when we do not have master craftspeople? Should we train apprentices in simulated conditions and look towards the German model of education? Many young boys drop out of second level education because they are frustrated on the academic road. Our society and value system are oriented towards valuing only the academic route. Could we combine the two? The academic side, the humanities and the arts, are a critical part of the formation of any human being. In the case of boys and girls who are less academic - it tends to apply more to boys - can we marry the two approaches, with a focus on the practical, and address the skills shortage and, thus, increase economic activity?
I endorse what my colleague, Deputy Eric Byrne, said about the lower paid and people being in a poverty trap. Is it not the case that people on lower incomes invest all of their income in consumption? Their money re-enters the economy at once, compared to those on high incomes who might put money into equities, long-term investments and blocks of land. The ordinary person in a lowly paid job immediately spends all of his or her money on basics. Thus, the money re-enters the economy. On this basis and from the perspective of IBEC and the economic good, is there a reason to consider higher wages at the lower end? This runs contrary to the simplistic view among some employers that offering lower wages is better. Is it not the case that there is a multiplier effect if people are on decent wages? If someone is earning more than €100,000, it will be invested offshore and in equities. A person on €25,000 spends money on essential products, mostly home-grown and indigenous products that are eaten immediately. They may also be clothes, but they tend not to be foreign goods.
I have a number of questions for Mr. Ginnell. I accept all of what he says about creating a social Europe, a Europe in which there will be equality and the social charter applies. In education, the way to create equality is to get to children when they are very young. My background is in education, but practical observation also suggests the younger one intervenes, the better, particularly in the case of children from problematic homes. Hence, the early childhood care and education scheme is available to all citizens and was funded by the State during the worst of the recession. It is one of our great achievements that we kept it going. Does Mr. Ginnell agree that it is a wonderful mechanism across Europe to create equality of opportunity and that the period should be doubled to two years? Rather than investing at third level or the in upper tiers of primary level and second level, investing in preschool education first and then pro rataat later levels means that children living in difficult homes can be away from home for a few hours, have a proper diet and have difficulties identified. The child gets to live in a good way, away from family conflict.
Carers in our society are undervalued. They provide a quality of life for the people for whom they care, which is critical, and also save the State enormous sums on institutional care. The potential of carers in this country and across Europe is underestimated. If we paid them better, valued and celebrated them more, gave them the social benefits that go with medical cards and made it more attractive to be a carer, we would make it a decent job that is valued and has a great effect on society, but we would also attract people in low paid jobs into it. This would create jobs in these sectors. The people in relatively low paid jobs who are not in love with their job could become carers if they were to receive a decent income from caring. This would save on expenditure on institutional care and create a good society. Investment in young children and carers is the way to create a social Europe.