Mr. Joe Saunders:

With regard to the proposed new contracts for local employment services, we obviously have not seen the details. We have noted the responses to parliamentary questions. I will go back to my earlier statement that the voluntary boards of local development companies operate on a not-for-profit basis. They are not interested in profiteering through costs per unit for jobseeker placements or assistance.

The SICAP model is a costs-met model, which provides the oversight that the funder and the taxpayer is due and needs but it does it in a way that is not based on a per-unit cost; there are some penalties, or what are called remedies, involved. Therefore, there is a way of providing oversight on the one hand, minimising bureaucracy for the provider and having a fair funding model. There is a way to do that and even at this point, we would encourage that whatever eventual contracts come out should utilise the best of each of those aspects on a community-based not-for-profit service that puts the jobseeker at the heart of the service.

On food poverty, I think we are all aware that the issue has not abated. The service continues, it morphs slightly in different areas as needs settle down in particular areas or different distribution mechanisms are put in place but this issue is not going away. In that regard, we look forward to playing a role on the working group the Minister has set up and we would welcome an opportunity for membership there while taking into account, however, the goal, which I mentioned in my replies to Deputy Donnelly, that this is an issue we should be seeking to address in a more permanent way. From our perspective, we can play a role in that but the Deputy has identified income improvement or income augmentation as being the key here and that is something we do not have any particular role or control over.

On the CE issue and the issue of age, of the 800 or 900 plus CE schemes around the country, just 34 of those are within local development companies so we do not have the broad breadth of experience on this. Of course, the issue of unclear delineation between schemes, the older age cohort, the issue Deputy Ó Cuív mentioned of those who will not get a place in the open job market, they all need to be seen in the round but a basic principle is that people can do and provide valuable community services, as well as services to their own health, well-being and personal development outside of the open labour market. We think these schemes should continue to facilitate that community benefit and that personal development, not least from a cost-effectiveness viewpoint, given the savings in health costs that arise from people's full participation in their communities.