Mr. Jeff Rudd:

I am from Drogheda, County Louth. I am accompanied by Damien Fagan. We would like to thank the committee for the invitation to make a presentation and for the public call for us to speak. We have conducted an investigation into JobPath over the past several years. The vast majority of citizens who have sought that help have come from all levels of job skills and have worked for years if not decades. Many examples of this will be found in the victim statement reports supplied. As outlined in our two separate submissions, due to the EU and International Monetary Fund, IMF, agreement any response to unemployment and long-term unemployment on the part of the State is restricted due to contractual terms which will not be lifted until the full recovery of the funds and interest provided via Ireland's bailout programme. The figure in that regard currently amounts to €42,000 from each man, woman and child in the country.

The Government and Departments claim that the purpose of JobPath is an approach to unemployment activation which caters mainly for the people who are long-term unemployed - that is, for 12 months - to assist them in securing and sustaining full-time employment or self-employment. There are, however, other agendas which the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection will not explain. Those are to honour the EU and IMF agreement to reduce long-term unemployed support costs for the Department and to reduce the cost of staff needed to support those who are long-term unemployed and in receipt of payment from the Department. One should question which takes highest priority.

The full set up of the JobPath programme is outlined in our written submissions. I refer to the example of Tuesday, 11 February 2014, when Turas Nua, a joint venture between FRS Recruitment and Working Links, was set up. On Tuesday, 28 October 2014, Seetec Employment and Skills Ireland Designated Activity Company was established.

As this was happening, both Seetec Business Technology Company Limited and one part of Turas Nua called Working Links were under investigation by the Public Accounts Committee of the British House of Commons over claims the companies were committing fraud and the heavy use of sanctions, as revealed by three whisteblowers.

Under Irish Water legislation, people's personal data became legally classified as an asset. In 2017, the judge in the JobPath High Court case determined that the JobPath companies were not by legislation operating a public service. These two points are very important. A business that does not operate an official public function is not equally legally covered under the amended Social Welfare Acts of 2005 and 2006 or accountable to the Ombudsman. Therefore, the companies have no legal right to demand people's private details. When members of the public try to regain their legal right over their personal data, their legal asset, they are accused of not engaging. They are trying to hold on to something they own - their personal data - however, others are demanding these data, often with menaces.

People are told they have been randomly selected for JobPath. This is possibly wrong. The 2013 JobPath tender exposes that citizens are silently targeted through a probability of exit, PEX, State assessment process. The State has put this on record, as members will see in the 150-page report on JobPath from United People. It is at this stage of the JobPath programme that the person's data are transferred to companies without the consent of the person to whom the data refer. Under the GDPR, the State has further become a data processor under JobPath, not just a data storage entity. The importance of this is also not explained to newly enrolled citizens. The adviser, who is a private company employee, begins asking questions about the person. The answers are to be saved to a server. Again, this is legally important. This data help make up a personal progress plan, PPP. Clients are not informed that they are now giving away a legal asset they own. This is a form of legal possession of consent given away by a citizen who has deliberately been kept in the dark.

The personal progress plan is defined on page 137 of the 2013 JobPath tender document. It states that the plan is developed by the personal adviser with the client and the aim is to provide a clear route for the client to re-enter employment. Information that is required to develop a PPP can be found on page 23 in the section on JobPath services. The progression plan given by the private companies is a general power of attorney contract. Clients are not informed of this legal aspect. A general power of attorney contract is defined by the Department's publication on self-guiding one's money - general power of attorney - which has been provided. The contractual terms for this general power of attorney are the following: failure to comply with the company's job search conditions and targets may lead to sanctions; full access to all appointment records from past and future employers of that person; and failure to provide personal information regarding that person and close family members, including financial circumstances, may lead to prosecution. These contractual terms are not defined and are not even a requirement of the creation of the PPP in the 2013 JobPath tender document.

The greatest frustration with the privatisation of public services for companies seeking profit is that when such privatisation occurs, the needs of the people are overlooked in favour of the wishes of the companies operating such services. A number of victims' statements today will bear this out. The two private companies - Seetec and Turas Nua - are contracted to deliver JobPath based on their skills, abilities, experience and contacts. Since the beginning, both Seetec and Turas Nua have further subcontracted the JobPath programme out to additional companies. Seetec subcontracted to People First and Turas Nua subcontracted to Working Links. All of these companies are operating today.

Private companies operate a business practice which regards the use of sanctions on the public using public services to be the most effective method of saving. This practice was adopted from a previous UK model, the Irish Water model and the incoming waste management legislation. The document outlines the JobPath protocols placed not only on members of the public but also on the staff who are to enforce these protocols. In an additional request for tenders, instructions are provided on how to get the application of sanctions applied to a person. Translated, this means the word of the companies is taken over the word of citizens who are referred for sanctions. The Oireachtas Library and Research Service report from 2015 highlights this problem.

The Department has stated that in designing the JobPath programme, safeguards were put in place to prevent malpractice. What safeguards exist? There are no safeguards to prevent the companies from enforcing unobtainable targets or meetings on the person to justify referral for sanctions. The worst aspect of the absence of safeguards is that when the referral for sanction is made, the Department does not carry out any investigation into the grounds for that referral. When a meeting is called, it is conducted in the manner of a disciplinary procedure instead of a grievance. In the document and visual presentation, we expand on this issue. The appeals office does not provide any safeguards against further sanctions. Another safeguard that was meant to be in place has failed as the committee will discover in the submission from Damien Fagan.

One of the fundamental flaws is a creative loophole that allows the Department to override the natural flow of justice, as defined in the Constitution. This is outlined in detail in the documents provided by Mr. Fagan and me. This loophole in the Social Welfare Act allows the Department and companies to operate a system based on the principle of guilty until proven innocent. The operation of such a system is unlawful and unconstitutional and breaks international law and human rights treaties signed by Ireland. It is the belief of Irish citizens that a person is entitled to a fair hearing. The Social Welfare Act, in official interpretation and subsequent action, contradicts this.

By signing a PPP, the private companies profit by €557 per signature. A total of €60 million has been paid for signatures alone, with no service provided to clients. According to Chapter 12 of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2017 report, between July 2015 and the end of December 2017, the JobPath programme cost €83.8 million. This breaks down to €15 million for PPP signatures and €32 million in job sustaining fees. The figure of €50 million for registration fees is made up of just one type of payment, which is received through the signing of a PPP with no services provided. This payment is only meant to account for between 10% and 15% of the overall JobPath cost. The €32 million in JobPath sustaining fees is made up of four payments for supports given to people in employment for 13, 26, 39 and 52 weeks, respectively. Translated, this means that the Department has spent more money on companies doing nothing in a single payment than on four separate payments combined for actual services they are meant to be providing for people. Therefore, the argument has to be made on behalf of the Irish taxpayer that if it is costing €32.9 million to support the person into sustained employment, why are we spending more than €15 million on signatures alone?

The operation of JobPath indicates that substantial fraudulent behaviour is occurring on a regular basis with the full knowledge and encouragement of the Department. The programme is meant to be for 30 hours of employment per week. The companies are only required to assist for 30 hours over four weeks. This allows the company to retain the citizen and receive taxpayer payments for him or her and the citizen can be referred back to the programme. The document provided features a variety of victims' statements regarding this practice. The use of sanctions is a method of saving. It is being used to repay Ireland's bailout programme. With regard to sanctions, the money is transferred back into central funding where the Minister for Finance has already used central funding to lower Ireland's bank bailout costs. It is fair to ask whether the contractual terms of the bailout programme are not just terms to agree and honour but are another method of having taxpayers repay the debt.

The JobPath companies contracted by the Department have been hiring referred clients for JobPath staff. For this, the companies receive all JobPath payments as each company is required to shoulder the cost of its staffing for the JobPath programme. Doing so permits additional bonus payments to be made. This is a breach of the JobPath tender contract. Translated, it means the companies are gaining two separate taxpayer payments for each staff position. This permits them to control the number of payments they receive for each staff job. This issue is referred to in the United People JobPath 2019 report.

Another issue is that unemployed people are sent a letter stating they are invited to attend JobPath while the real message at the bottom of the letter is effectively that they must turn up or else suffer financially. Translated, this means that people are allegedly being press ganged as a result of financial threats from the State. Many of the victims' statements bear out this view. At the initial meeting, people are instructed to sign the PPP. They are not told at any point that they have the legal right to decline a request to sign a PPP. There are two main criminal offences committed by JobPath companies that occur in respect of a person's legal right not to enter into a private contract.

Where a person is forced into a private contract under any form of threat or sanction it is a criminal offence under the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997. Where a person is coerced and sanctioned it is a criminal offence under the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001. This has been proved to the court's satisfaction in Damien Fagan's High Court case. We speak for many who do not have a voice and who have allegedly been the targets of bullying, coercion, intimidation, financial starvation and more by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection on the rash say of companies. A case in point is Gerry Tobin and we have included the details in the report we have supplied.

Additionally, people are told to apply for any job and, in many cases, it does not matter whether they are suited for the job or not. They are ordered to apply and if they do not do so, more threats are issued via the private companies. State services are supposed to work with citizens on their day-to-day requirements, including family schedules and health conditions. In reality, the opposite occurs in JobPath. Too many times, people have been sanctioned or cut off for having the cheek to go to hospital or drop their children to school first. Subsequently, they have been unable to make very poorly assigned appointment times.

As JobPath has continued, hundreds of people, and possibly thousands, have allegedly found themselves abused and shouted out, had their children shouted at and made to feel inadequate and treated as if they were second-class citizens to kick about. They have been treated harmfully, allegedly with assaults and sexual harassment, their personal data abused and illegally deprived of money that has left them hungry and perhaps homeless and at the mercy of others and more. Committee members will find examples of all of this in the documentation I have supplied. In some cases, people have tried to kill themselves on JobPath property. They have cracked from the physical and mental abuse they have allegedly suffered so the two companies and their additional funds can make massive private profits. This is a simple scratching of the JobPath surface. If the committee delves deeper, it will find far more shocking issues. This is nothing worse of ongoing mass State-sanctioned abuse.

With regard to why speaking up about JobPath is important and why an investigation should take place, the State is knowingly and unknowingly, openly and covertly, allegedly abusing human rights, law breaking at a national and international level while further undermining the present and future rights of all those employed and unemployed carers, parents and individuals. JobPath exposes inherent flaws in the departmental systems that allow this to happen. In reality, private businesses are further profiting while a nation of citizens loses quality of life rights to self-determination. We have spoken to victims of JobPath from all walks of life. We have heard their pain and seen their distress and financial hardships due to JobPath. Many have had mental breakdowns. Some have ended up spiralling into depression, which has resulted in legal and illegal drug taking. We have supplied victim statements on this. As they have explained their current situation they have cried and, to be brutally honest, I have cried with them. JobPath encroaches on the rights of every citizen in Ireland. We say without a shadow of a doubt that in the vast majority of cases, JobPath is not of benefit to citizens. However, it is a future inquiry in the making and a drain on taxpayers' money.

For the past few years, as our investigation has continued, our families have had the patience of saints but they all completely understand why we persist in helping the many citizens who have been wronged. It is the duty of every citizen in Ireland not only to hold those who have been elected accountable but also to hold accountable the Departments and programmes they oversee. How can we do anything less? I thank the committee for allowing us to come before it today. We look forward to any questions members may have.