Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)

We now are reaping the whirlwind. The Minister is not present to face the music but has sent in the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Devins, who was not party to that decision. It would surprise me were he party to it.

In Sweden, a worker made redundant is immediately entitled to a training place or further education. Ireland still has a Victorian attitude to the unemployed, whereby they must be made suffer a period of deprivation before being entitled to enhance their employment prospects. It is time to move into the 21st century.

Last week, the Government acted with great alacrity to prop up the banks. It stayed up several nights to do so and Members also were so obliged. My Labour Party colleagues and I do not see a similar sense of urgency in dealing with the rapidly rising level of unemployment. Unless effective action is taken quickly, we may soon have unemployment levels similar to those of the 1980s. In rural areas of my constituency, as well as those of Deputies Sherlock and Kathleen Lynch, most non-agricultural employment is in the construction industry, in which large numbers of jobs are being lost weekly.

One must accept that at least in the short run, construction employment must be sustained. This is the reason the Labour Party has come forward with positive proposals. It is not carping or giving out and the party leader and deputy leader, who is spokesperson for finance, have costed the proposals. One third of the expenditure involved would be recouped through taxation. Moreover, the human benefit that would accrue as a result of Labour's proposals, the uplift that would be provided for the construction industry and the resultant availability of competitive tendering certainly would lead to significant savings for the Exchequer in the long run. On any cost benefit analysis, the Labour Party's proposals are positive. I do not wish to hear any more suggestions from the right wing media that the Labour Party merely carps and is negative. It has brought forward its proposals without the benefit of the mandarins in the Department of Finance or anywhere else. We worked hard on it with our limited resources, tabled it on the floor of this Chamber and published it for the people to consider. That has been acknowledged by some of those journalists and others involved.

The Labour Party proposes that the Government should embark immediately on a school building programme, which is needed in every constituency, every county and every bloody town we go to. The Loreto Convent in Mullingar needs refurbishment work to begin and a new 1,000-pupil community college in Athlone is required, to be rid of a completely inadequate old school that was built in the 1970s. While I can give several further examples, such as Loch an Ghair national school, Sonna national school and Ballynacarrigy national school, I wish to retain a national focus in this regard. The Labour Party wishes to provide proper accommodation for the 40,000 children who are in prefab classrooms at present. Every September witnesses the pitiful spectacle of children, for whom no classroom is available, being accommodated in prefabs, halls or GAA clubs. For real progress to be achieved in school building, it must be taken out of the hands of the Department of Education and Science, which seems incapable of projecting how many children need schools, much less building the schools quickly and efficiently.

The Government also must ensure that sites for schools are acquired quickly and in good time. A shocking situation obtains whereby builders of new housing developments are allowed to charge the Department the housing value of the land, thus greatly increasing the cost of building schools. It should be a requirement of all planning permissions for large housing developments that sites be provided at the original value of the land, not only for schools but for other social amenities. Many schools built in the 1970s and 1980s are poorly insulated and have high heating costs, much of the money for which must be raised by parents and volunteers.

When I hear the Government or its friends in the Construction Industry Federation — dear friends they are — boasting about how many housing units have been constructed, the phrase, "never mind the quality, feel the width" comes to mind. Despite the belated introduction of building regulations, much of the housing built over the past decade is of poor quality and is not up to standard. I read in a newspaper recently of a builder who shamelessly boasted of his wealth and who revealed that on one development, he made 50% profit. In no other developed country do builders make such profits because they are required to build to much higher standards, particularly in respect of insulation. A national insulation scheme, which has been proposed by the Labour Party spokesperson and leader on behalf of the party, would go some way towards reducing energy bills for individual households, as well as reducing Ireland's carbon emissions and frightening dependence on imported oil. The building industry should have been paying for such measures at the time. However, were one to indicate that a levy was required, Members should imagine the squealing from Mr. Parlon and others. Telephone calls would be made in the middle of the night to stress how difficult is the present position. The boom of the last decade has allowed the Government to ignore structural problems in the labour market that now have re-emerged. We have become almost wholly dependent on foreign-owned industry to generate exports and for the building industry to provide local jobs in rural areas. Many more sustainable jobs in local communities must be generated and while county enterprise boards have been effective in such job creation, they are hampered by limitations on the types of enterprises they may assist and on the number of jobs such enterprises may create. The boards' measure 1 budgets in respect of capital and employment and feasibility studies are inadequate. The demand for budgets from new and expanding business far exceeds available funds. Were further funding available, undoubtedly it would result in a greater number of business development opportunities.

I refer to the development of the small business sector. Enterprise boards operate what are known as measure 2 budgets to directly and indirectly support all sectors of small business, including retail, services, manufacturing, construction, health care and transport. The primary focus of this budget is to increase business skills and acumen through training, mentoring and marketing programmes. Investment in such skills leads to better management of business, which in turn leads to growth in job creation across all sectors. Demand for mentoring and information technology support programmes is very high and has a positive and immediate effect on business growth. However, budget constraints mean that county enterprise boards cannot meet the demand and such supports are not available on a year-round basis, thus hindering the growth of the small business sector when it is most needed.

The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment has imposed quotas in this regard. County enterprise boards are restricted in the allocation of their measure 1 budget. A maximum of 25% and 10% of such a budget can go towards employment grants and feasibility study grants, respectively. Moreover, 30% of grants awarded must be repaid. These quotas are not conducive to small business developments and county enterprise boards should be allowed to facilitate customers' needs and should not be restricted by being obliged to meet quotas.

I refer to the issue of refundable aid. All recipients of grant aid must repay to the enterprise board 30% of the grants received. This reduces the attractiveness of the grant received and increases the level of administration for the client. The level of bureaucracy and regulation is strangling enterprise and must be removed. The issue of having a nanny state and widespread paternalism must be tackled and a root and branch review must be undertaken in this regard.

County and city enterprise boards cannot provide direct financial assistance to any business employing more than ten employees. I have toured the country with Deputy English and some of the Minister of State's colleagues, such as Deputy Ned O'Keeffe, and this has created a critical gap in the level of service provision for businesses with ten or more employees serving the domestic market as no agency has official responsibility for their development. Enterprise Ireland deals with exporters, while IDA Ireland, under Barry O'Leary, is doing an excellent job, with 18 or 19 projects in the pipeline. IDA Ireland has worked hard to do this and I salute it. I also salute Frank Ryan of Enterprise Ireland, which has done a great job. The county enterprise boards also have done a good job. However there is a chasm between the agencies and I ask that this be reviewed. It is important because there are no opportunities for businesses falling within this category to receive financial support towards their expansion and development.

The small business forum has recommended that the enterprise boards should be the first stop shop for all small business needs and should take primary responsibility for information dissemination. This has not yet been implemented. A single source to obtain business legislation, start-up information, training, advice, mentoring and finance would be highly useful to all new business owners and would use the expertise contained in enterprise boards to maximum effect. In changing economic times, enterprise boards should be in a position to offer higher levels of grant aid to businesses that offer high potential in new growth areas, such as the alternative energy, information technology, health management and scientific development sectors. At present, county enterprise boards can offer no additional incentives to those who display enthusiasm or initiative in such areas.

These limitations should be removed and the county enterprise boards must be given more resources and enabled to co-operate with FÁS and the institutes of technology more effectively. Ireland still has many opportunities to develop sustainable and environmentally friendly rural enterprises that are not available to other developed countries. The county enterprise boards are well placed to exploit these opportunities.

Therefore the Labour Party has brought before the House another imaginative initiative in this regard. It proposes loosening the rope, removing levels of bureaucracy, streamlining administration and permitting county enterprise boards to fill the gap that exists between Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland. This is particularly crucial in the newer areas to ensure that opportunities are provided in this regard.

IDA Ireland has much surplus land nationwide in sites of five and seven acres and many people want small incubator units. It is wonderful to be able to roll out the red carpet when 200 to 250 jobs are brought in. Everyone is delighted with that and I salute the Minister of State's efforts in this regard. I heard him speak at the Small Firms Association and I carefully considered his speech. The Minister of State knows, on reflection, that small is beautiful. We must start thinking small and realise that three, five, seven and ten-unit jobs are critical to the country. This is particularly true in rural areas, where the sustainability of the rural fabric of the community is of vital importance.

We in the Labour Party will give a voice to that community because it is critical to sustain the rural fabric by ensuring people get an opportunity to work in their own environment. The idea is environmentally friendly and carbon neutral, so it will serve in the reduction of carbon footprints. There are so many positives that we see it as a no-brainer. We call on the Government to withdraw its amendment and support the Labour Party motion. It is positive in terms of ensuring that people get an opportunity to return to gainful employment as quickly as possible.

See this speech in context