Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important matter. The Minister, unfortunately, has had to leave, but she was in attendance, as Deputies would acknowledge, for the vast majority of the debate. She spoke comprehensively on the Government's approach to the expansion of employment service provision and the extensive engagement with the sector. I commend the quality of the employment services the Department of Social Protection currently contracts. All these services are important in assisting people from all walks of life to progress towards employment. They offer the necessary support and direction to persons requiring assistance to gain and sustain employment. Each success, where a person gains employment, is not only important to that person, through enhanced self-esteem and financial independence, but it also benefits his or her family and the wider community. For some, the journey to employment is longer than it is for others. It is important that we have the right services in place at the right time, irrespective of the county in which people live.

It has been heartening in recent weeks and months to see the continued fall in PUP recipient and jobseeker numbers as more people returned to work. We recognise the important role local employment schemes and job club services play in our communities. I want to make the next point clear for certain Deputies who, in effect, were close to misrepresenting our position. The Government is not opposing this motion, only the spirit in which it was brought forward. The fact remains, of course, that we cannot ignore the legal advice from the Attorney General. Indeed, a number of Deputies who know very well what the legal situation is in respect of the Attorney General's advice chose to muddy that fact in their contributions. They know the restrictions on the Minister in terms of what she can say on the Attorney General's advice. As she outlined, the Government has no option on this matter. The clear, unambiguous legal advice is that these contracts must be subject to a competitive procurement process. The simple truth of the matter is that the State cannot bury its head in the sand and ignore its legal obligations. It must, therefore, procure these employment services in an open and competitive manner. However, we are doing so in a sensitive way that reflects the inherent strengths of the current providers.

Several speakers talked about the need for engagement on this issue. In fact, there has been very extensive engagement, including with SIPTU on up to six occasions since 2019. In total, there have been 140-plus engagements. The Government is working with people and engaging on the issue. In that context, I welcome that the new regional employment service has as its heart the delivery of social value through the harnessing of community linkages. The two-phase procurement process currently under way will deliver an expanded employment provision across the State that better supports the customer journey, sets real and achievable performance targets and ensures all contracts are placed on a sound legal basis.

The motion cited the substance of the recommendations from the Indecon reports. It is important to note that those reports also recommended the open and competitive procurement of services. Surprisingly, or perhaps not surprisingly at all, that aspect was ignored by Sinn Féin in its motion. Indeed, it was sad to hear one Deputy having a personal go at the Minister, slagging her off and comparing her to political figures in other countries. As a credit union manager before she entered politics, she knows a lot about dealing with people and has a very good ethos to the way in which she does her job and helps people in need. Some of the contributions were very disappointing in that regard.

Local employment services and job club services have always, from a legal perspective, been contracted services. As such, they are subject to public procurement rules. I have read what the motion says concerning the new procurement directive and - I suspect, again, that it is wilful - there is a misunderstanding, as in some of the contributions, of what the directive requires. On the basis of the legal advice received, there is no escaping the obligation to contract out the delivery of services in the context of services that have already been contracted out.

See this speech in context