Mr. Conor Mahon:

On the question of the one-year Tús schemes, when Tús was initiated it was seen as a coercive scheme. It was for people who were not engaged and the aim was to get them up and running. CE schemes, on the other hand, are self-selecting. Our view is that instead of giving Tús schemes a second year, people could progress into CE. The first three months to which the Deputy referred in terms of barriers could be overcome on Tús and if there was a better working relationship between Tús and CE, then the CE sector would be taking on people who were much more ready to begin in terms of jumping straight in to the training and progression. There could be a choreographed transition between Tús and CE rather than an extra year for Tús. That is my personal opinion.

In terms of what we ask of the committee, as Mr. Kearney said, the level of engagement between us and the Department of Social Protection is close to non-existent. It does not exist. When Ms Rohan referenced the networks that we have, these tend to be in place because of the union. They involve people who are very engaged and who have gotten to know their peers nationally. While we have some people in our networks who are not union members, the vast majority that are very engaged are. Given the age profile of the schemes, some of which have been in place for 30 years, we are losing between 80 and 100 supervisors annually just through the natural process of them reaching pension age. However, because there are no official linkages, we may never touch base with the newer people coming in. Therefore, the network shrinks. The partnership companies have the Irish Local Development Network, ILDN, to represent them as a representative body but we have nothing other than ourselves as representatives within the union. We feel there should be a structure put on the way we communicate with the Department.