Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for raising this matter. This is unusual in that I am not sure I have before seen such a consensus across a number of Members of the House on a Topical Issue. I apologise on behalf of the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe, who is unavoidably unable to be here, but I think people recognise that he is dealing with particular issues of significant urgency at the moment. I am, therefore, taking this matter on his behalf.

I have seen throughout my fairly lengthy political career the benefit of the role of the community employment, CE, scheme. It has been a huge support for many communities at a time when neither the State nor the commercial sector could fulfil certain needs. It has also been a great opportunity for progression for many of those who participated. It gave them a chance to do useful work as well as access to training and skills. I, therefore, acknowledge the combined support of the House for the work it does.

The position is that, following a meeting with the trade unions SIPTU and IMPACT in late 2015, the community sector high level forum, which had ceased operation some years earlier, was reconvened by the then Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, in order to fully examine certain issues pertaining to the community employment sector, having regard to the consequences for costs and precedent. The community sector high level forum is chaired at assistant secretary level by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. The membership also includes a number of other Departments, namely, the Departments of Employment Affairs and Social Protection, Health, Education and Skills and Housing, Planning and Local Government, as well as the agency Pobal and IMPACT and SIPTU, the two unions which represent the community employment scheme supervisors and assistant supervisors.

An issue which has been under discussion by the forum relates to community employment supervisors and assistant supervisors who have been seeking, through their union representatives, the allocation of Exchequer funding to implement a Labour Court recommendation relating to the provision of a pension scheme. This Labour Court recommendation was issued on 22 July 2008 following a hearing on 11 July 2008 in relation to a claim on behalf of community employment scheme supervisors and assistant supervisors, as supported by their unions. FÁS, the then funder of the community employment schemes, was not a party to the Labour Court hearing on the matter.

At the most recent forum meeting in April of this year, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform outlined its intention to conduct a detailed scoping exercise in order to comprehensively examine and assess the full potential implications of the issues under consideration. In considering the particular matter referred to, regard must be had to the costs and precedent of such an arrangement, were one to be created. This exercise is currently being progressed and will be completed shortly. The next meeting of the high level forum is on 2 November and the results of the scoping exercise will be made available to all members of the forum on that date.

It continues to be the position that State organisations are not the employer of the particular employees concerned and that it is not possible for the State to provide funding for such a scheme. The employees in question are, or were, employees of private companies, notwithstanding the fact that the companies concerned are, or were, reliant on State funding. In considering the matter, regard must be had to costs and the precedent of such an arrangement, were one to be created, given that the individuals employed in that sector are not employed by the State, even if many of the services they provide are funded by the State.

See this speech in context