Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am due to be in the Dáil shortly so if I am not here for them I will read the answers in the record. I will put my questions in the order of the presentations.

The National Youth Council produced a report earlier this year on JobBridge. It was quite critical but also highlighted the need for a further analysis, so it is good to hear that the analysis is about to take place. Has the witness seen anything since the publication of that report that allays the fears that were raised in it? Has the witness any view on the First Steps programme, which is the equivalent of JobBridge for young people but with a compulsion element as far as I recall? The report stated that there was a range of poorly designed internships, inadequate mentoring, instances of unacceptable treatment of interns and lack of rights clarity concerning terms and conditions. Other issues identified included insufficient monitoring and auditing of the scheme to prevent job abuse, job displacement and inadequate income support.

The programme undertaken by the Ballymun group under the Youth Guarantee was comprehensive. It is a model that could be followed, but I am dubious that it will be, particularly given that the Government at the same time as it was encouraging the Ballymun group was developing the JobPath scheme which would take away many of those who could benefit from the intensive work the group was outlining. Is the group concerned about the development and roll-out of JobPath, which involves private companies taking on some of the role the group would have had previously? There is an incentive for the company to locate them.

With regard to the Department's representatives, I have highlighted my views of JobBridge so I will not elaborate on them in detail but I will offer a quick calculation. My view is that JobBridge is a subsidy for private industry equivalent to over €400 million in the years since it was established. I supported the Minister when she announced JobsPlus. If the same subsidy had been put into JobsPlus there would have been more sustainable work. On the Indecon report, and thankfully there will be a new report, with 43,500 people having participated in JobBridge if one looks at the figures in that report the survey is only based on 5% of the total number of interns. It was carried out a few years ago so at this stage it is not reflective of the experience and in some ways has been discredited. It would serve everybody well if we did not use it as a tool. It was carried out very shortly after JobBridge was launched and probably prior to many of the headline JobBridge cases of abuse or wrong internships being created. There was one last week where a veterinarian was being sought under JobBridge. I doubt that was ever the intention of those who designed it, but it has been abused in that way.

Finally, how many companies have been blacklisted as a result of the monitoring the witness outlined in the presentation? Why do we not name and shame the companies that have been involved in abuse of the scheme or abuse of the interns on the scheme?