Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)

The motion being taken in Private Members' time this week is slightly overshadowed, perhaps, by other political events, but is timely, nevertheless, and should be part of an ongoing debate in this country. Sometimes it is easy to forget that the timeframe of Ireland's relative prosperity is very short, indeed. We should never forget what "the good old days" were like and none of us, either in Government or Opposition, wants to return to them. This is most evident when we meet delegations from other countries who wonder how we managed to pull off what has become known internationally as the Celtic tiger. A combination of factors were responsible, not just one. Stability in Government was one and, as such, cannot be dismissed. The rainbow Government made an enormous contribution. I recall the heads of the institutes of technology talking to the then Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte about the lack of science places. At that stage we were talking about computerisation, programming and the whole information technology sector. They called for specific spaces to be put in place as regards science and recommended how it should be catered for within third level institutions. I realised at the time that as long as we had academics such as the heads of the institutes of technology who knew where the future lay and where the investment should be targeted, we should always be at the cutting edge when it came to employment and creating opportunities for our communities.

I listen week after week in this House to debates on education in particular, as well as debates on disadvantage and justice. I believe they are inextricably linked and one cannot be separated from the others. A party colleague recently said that teachers in primary schools can now distinguish children who will have difficulties in later years as early as first class. This is not a new phenomenon, as the Ceann Comhairle and I know, and it has always been the case. I do not believe the theory, incidentally, that one can tell, at the age of six, whether a child will end up in jail. Not all children who have difficulties or come from disadvantaged backgrounds end up in jail. To suggest otherwise is to take forward planning to unsustainable levels. Nonetheless, it is possible to tell which children will have difficulties because of their circumstances. It is not always true that they will have difficulties because they come from disadvantaged areas, rather it is due to a combination of circumstances. Given that we know this, I am always astonished that we have not yet managed to deal with the problems and resolve the issue. Surely, if the problems can be detected early on, we should be planning a proper targeting of resources to ensure they do not continue.

We will always have children with difficulties due to various causes, if not due to disadvantage. This has a great deal to do with unemployment. I see people who have been working, say, for eight or nine years and have never known unemployment except for short periods. The unemployment they will encounter in the future, in the event, will be entirely different from what was experienced in the 1970s, 1980s and 1950s because the needs of people will have changed. They will have mortgages and cars and children attending third level. I sometimes make the point that the only education that does not have to be paid for is third level. At other levels many people put their children into private primary and secondary schools. This is ridiculous because the primary education system is quite good, in my opinion. However, the type of unemployment they will meet will be entirely different from that encountered in the past. Their needs will have changed and the type of debt ratio they are managing is entirely different.

That is why there should be a permanent committee of the Oireachtas discussing on a continual basis how the economy is going and how people on a lower socio-economic level to bankers and construction bosses will deal with unemployment when it hits them. The children who can be identified at age six as liable to encounter difficulties in the future will be the same people who will find themselves unskilled and unemployed when there is any type of economic downturn, and we should keep a close eye on that. The slump is not inevitable but the changeover is in respect of needs. We should surely be developing initiatives involving the State agencies that upskill and train employees, including FÁS, formerly AnCO. It will be a question of promoting different skills, a different approach to employment, mobility and flexibility. We should consider this as much as we consider those who find themselves unemployed. In this respect, playing games with employment and job announcements is outrageous and disgraceful.

Just before the 2002 general election, my husband was walking through Blackpool, where we live. Where else would he be walking? He was almost knocked down and said it would have been okay because the Taoiseach's car was involved. It was part of a cavalcade on the way to Macroom on "Golden Thursday" to announce 300 additional jobs. The day would have been fairly memorable in itself, therefore, had the near accident not happened. The jobs announced were to be created by Elan in Macroom. The then Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Micheál Martin, was in the car with the Taoiseach. The jobs were never created.

On the same day, the Tánaiste did a midlands tour that included Limerick. A thousand jobs in total were announced but they never materialised.

See this speech in context