James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta for the amendment. I thank him for his engagement on this matter on Committee Stage and again today. I fully understand the intention behind the amendment.

If accepted, the amendment would impose a procurement condition on contractors to provide apprenticeships or training opportunities for NTF-funded works related to the acquisition of land, premises, furniture or equipment and the upgrade, construction, reconstruction, repair, maintenance, etc., of premises. I am unable to accept the amendment. I have looked at and engaged on it and I have taken advice on it, including legal advice from the Attorney General and advice from the Office of Government Procurement.

I will set out the reasons I cannot accept it. Essentially, Ireland's public procurement framework is a matter of EU law as well as domestic law. The awarding of contracts must be conducted in accordance with the general principles of EU law, emanating from the case law of the CJEU, including principles of non-discrimination, equal treatment, proportionality, transparency and mutual recognition.

Closer to home, the Office of Government Procurement has provided guidance in the area. In 2023, it issued an information note on apprenticeships and public procurement. These guidelines are based on established Government policy, which envisaged the adoption of any conditionality in respect of apprenticeship to be on a case-by-case basis, rather than being enshrined in legislation, which would be very restrictive and could create a risk of unintended consequences. It could be considered discriminatory or disproportionate and may lack flexibility for different types of tender, contractor or contracting authorities. I know this is not the intention but it could have the result of excluding smaller contractors and the supply chains which flow from them, which could reduce competition and undermine opportunities for SMEs to get involved. There would also be a need for an SME test and full regulatory impact analysis to be performed, which would be quite a complication and take considerable time. Unfortunately, it would require significant re-examination to consider accepting it and extensive legal parameters would have to be explored, along with a regulatory impact analysis. All of those other measures would have to be considered.

The guidance note on public procurement is something that can be examined. We can look at whether there are ways outside of a legislative amendment to achieve the same goal without binding legislation but by including within the guidance note some of the intention of the amendment, which is very fair.

On apprenticeships more broadly, the Deputy is right they should never be seen as second best or a second-choice option. It was interesting to look at our neighbours across the water in the UK. Prime Minister Starmer had a goal that one in every two students would progress to university and recently revised that at his party conference. The goal is now, rather than one in every two going to university, two in every three will go on to either university or an apprenticeship. That is exactly the right approach. They are not equal and opposite but are equally valid and strong career paths.

The Deputy knows because we have engaged on this a number of times in policy debates that there are many apprenticeships now across a range of areas. I think we are up to 78 apprenticeship courses, having started in the low 20s or 30s not so many years ago. It continues to broaden and I continue to be amazed when I visit training centres around the country at the range of apprenticeships available, everything from cybersecurity to planning digital marketing and wind turbine maintenance. New areas are being identified all the time. My Department is continuing to explore further opportunities to create apprenticeships and using that tried and trusted methodology as a pathway into careers across many areas.

I agree with the Deputy on advancing and supporting them as a career pathway but, unfortunately, I cannot accept the amendment for the reasons outlined.

See this speech in context