Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)

I studied the Government amendment to see what was common to it and to our proposal. What is in common is that we all find it totally unacceptable to have an unemployment rate of 14.5%. We all recognise the toll increasing job losses are having on families and individuals. We also recognise that meaningful action must be taken to reduce that rate. I do not doubt that the Government wants to reduce unemployment as well as restoring sustainable economic growth and job creation capacity. I acknowledge some of the Government's actions in that regard. It is unfortunate, however, that the JobBridge internship scheme is being abused by some employers who are letting employees go in order to take on intern staff. Robust action is required to ensure that such abuse does not continue.

In its amendment, the Government commends itself on its work to increase access to credit for viable businesses. Yet we hear of small businesses that are unable to obtain the credit needed to continue, not to mention expand and take on more employees. The dots are not being joined up between what is being said and what is happening on the ground.

It is easy to blame previous Governments, but the Government must also take responsibility for continuing to make good the gambling debts of unguaranteed bondholders. We need State funds to be invested in job stimulus initiatives. We cannot isolate the loss of jobs from what happened in the banks through overextending and risky deals that put the jobs of ordinary workers at risk and which led to the current 14.5% unemployment rate. Jobs are central to our recovery and it is very important to debate this issue now.

It is disappointing that no sooner does a Minister announce X number of jobs in an area, than they are followed by the loss of a wide number of jobs in another area. We must examine why we are losing these jobs. Job retention is vital but it means more than words in the Government's amendment about implementing policies to stimulate the development of new businesses and facilitate the retention of jobs. We must see this actually happening and the more examples, the better.

I want to make two points about the labour force. First, the constant harping on about turning out robotic youths is doing a total disservice to our young people and their second-level teachers. The science exhibition, young entrepreneurs and mini-companies provide just a couple of examples of how creative, inventive and innovative our young people are. Let us not be totally negative about the system.

Second, I cannot understand the rationale of "encouraging" - and I use the word loosely - experienced older people in the public sector to take to the hills. We need their experience and a balanced approach should be adopted in this regard. It is disappointing that we are not encouraging them to stay and give the benefit of their experience.

The national unemployment rate is 14.5% but in Dublin Central, which I represent, it is as high as 28% in some parts. Some areas of central Dublin have been devastated jobs wise because they have been let down in the regeneration initiatives and lost community projects. Long-term unemployment has trebled since 2008 in parts of Dublin Central. Many skilled and unskilled construction workers have been left with very few opportunities for meaningful work. The potential and capacity is there in Dublin Central for building because we are short of houses that have long been promised. In addition, water and sewerage systems are required as it improved social housing by insulating homes to make them more heat efficient, particularly for senior citizens. We are all agreed on what has to be done but the difference lies in how we are going to do it.

See this speech in context