John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses and thank both the ILDN and SIPTU for their very insightful opening statements.

I agree with everything contained in their opening statements. The critical part of this process will be the Minister's appearance before us on Thursday. As such, it is important that we hear what the groups have to say so that we can put their concerns, observations and questions to the Minister.

Unfortunately, this is an ideological battle, the seeds of which are long planted. In 2012, the unemployment rate was 16%. There was a 6.7% decrease in that rate through schemes before the onset of the privatised model, that being, JobPath's Turas Nua and Seetec. When the Minister claims in the Dáil that JobPath has been the most successful labour activation scheme in the history of the State, I refer her to these statistics. They raise a question about why the then Government did not consider expanding the successful schemes. It did not do so because it was ideologically driven to privatise and hand this work over to the payment-by-results model. We are here because of JobPath.

Let us consider other statistics. The Indecon report showed a placement rate of 28.8%. This related to employment of over 30 hours and did not include other activation measures, for example, training, education and other key components that break down the barriers facing individuals who have been away from the workforce for a time and address their specific needs. These critical components have not been taken into consideration. Under JobPath and the privatised model, a mere 14% placement rate has been set as the target for Turas Nua and Seetec. These figures are polar opposites. The Minister deems them successful even though they are not reaching their target of 14%. The number of people who have engaged with Turas Nua and Seetec and have been placed in long-term employment of 12 months or longer shows a massive fall. According to the figures provided by our colleagues in SIPTU, finding someone a placement in full-time employment of 30 hours or more costs €2,544 under the LES, which does not take into consideration savings from other activation measures, for example, training and education. This is money well spent and represents just a fraction of the cost under JobPath, which is in excess of €3,718.

Reading through the Indecon report, I was struck by the role of the mediator. I deal with many people who have gone through JobPath not once, but twice. Now people are being referred to JobPath for a third time. Their individual needs in terms of upskilling or mental health issues are not being taken into consideration. The mediator can refer someone for counselling. That is important, as it cuts to the chase and deals with individuals' needs, yet there is no scope for it in a privatised setting. This is another stark difference between JobPath and the LES.

I agree with most of what our guests stated. However, I wish to make a couple of points on procurement. In the Indecon report, no argument is put forward for opening this sector up to public procurement. Not even the suggestion of EU procurement rules stands up. This recommendation seems to have come out of thin air. We need legal clarification from the Minister. The €20 million condition for the JobPath tender cannot be used if the Minister puts it out to public procurement. The not-for-profit model is the one that works. As Deputy O'Dea stated, if it is not broken, do not fix it.