Derek McDowell (Labour)

Not only did the Minister of State make such a statement, but he exhorted his colleagues on the backbenches to overturn the policy, which he is responsible for defending and implementing, at a Fianna Fáil parliamentary party meeting. He came in here today to claim that we are engaged in a political stunt. The Minister's actions represented the most remarkable political stunt I have seen in these Houses for quite some time. We can return to the substantive issue of whether the Minister of State won the argument at that time, but the cheap political point he made at the tail end of his speech does him no credit and does not do our debate any good.

I think all speakers, including the Minister of State, agree that the essential difficulty with community employment is that it tries to do two things which are complementary but which pull in opposite directions from time to time. Community employment was initially designed as a labour market intervention and has been reasonably successful in that regard. I read again this afternoon the report prepared by Deloitte & Touche for the Minister of State's Department some years ago. The report was an examination of the success rates, in terms of progression into full-time employment, of those who participated in community employment schemes. The numbers increased throughout the 1990s, until they reached approximately 40% in the last year covered by the survey, 1997-98. This means that approximately 40% of participants in community employment schemes could expect to be in employment some 18 months later. That is a decent level of progression and success, by any reasonable standards.

The report, which was quite comprehensive, asked participants in community employment schemes whether they thought the schemes were helpful in terms of training, upskilling and, ultimately, finding a job. Some 40% said they were very useful and approximately the same percentage of people said they were quite useful. Only 20% of people felt they were not useful at all. Community employment can be said to have been quite successful over the years if one measures its success as a labour market intervention. It has been particularly successful with particular groups. It has been successful recently in terms of giving useful work and training to lone parents. As long-term unemployment has decreased nationally, the number of lone parents participating in community employment schemes has increased quite considerably.

The second purpose of community employment, on which we quite understandably tend to focus in these Houses, is to support communities. All of us are aware of communities in our local areas which depend on CE schemes. The parochial hall in Donnycarney, in my local area, will be reopened in the next few weeks by the President, Mrs. McAleese, after its recent redevelopment. This substantial facility consists of a large hall and 20 ancillary rooms. I understand that with the exception of the full-time manager, the facility, which cost several million euro, will depend for its operation largely on community employment schemes or on voluntary work.

The Minister of State mentioned volunteers in his contribution. He is right in principle to say that we do not want to supplant volunteerism, but the truth is somewhat bleaker than that, unfortunately. In some parts of this city, volunteerism is dying on its feet. This is partly because people do not have time, partly because people working with children feel under pressure in a way they did not 20 years ago and partly because people are working to a greater extent than once was the case. The level of female participation in the workforce is much higher than it was before. It is sad that volunteerism is very much diminished. We need community employment not only to support volunteerism, as the Minister of State suggested, but also to replace it. We have to confront this inevitable fact.

I read with interest the Minister of State's contribution to last December's Dáil debate, which was initiated by the Labour Party. I do not intend to comment on the more controversial aspects of the discussion. In the course of the debate, the Minister of State referred to a presentation he made to the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Social Inclusion about how he would like to see community employment reformed and restructured. He has repeated some of his points this evening. I will not repeat everything he said because we agree on it, generally speaking. He said that labour market intervention measures will be restructured to place greater emphasis on training matters and that he will try to structure community support measures in a way that is sustainable, rather than stop-start, and that ensures that communities can rely on community employment on an ongoing basis.

I am disappointed that the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, did not take his ideas further in his unscripted contribution this evening. When he spoke on this matter in the Dáil in December, it was clear that the presentation he made to the Cabinet sub-committee had not been progressed to the point where he could make an announcement. The Minister of State should tell us whether the restructuring of community employment, which he has proposed, has been agreed. When he spoke in the Dáil in early December, he made it quite clear that the Minister for Finance did not agree with him. He patted himself on the back by saying it is important on occasions to take a stand by standing up to the Minister for Finance.

We need to know whether the Minister of State has resolved his problems with the Minister, Deputy McCreevy, and the Tánaiste. If he has not dealt with these difficulties, much of what he has said this evening is simply guff and aspiration. I hope the Minister of State wins his battle, if that is what it is, with the Minister for Finance. We need to structure the supports for community employment schemes so that communities know what is happening from year to year. They need to know that they will have people to run services such as meals on wheels, support for persons with disabilities or crèches. They need to be sure that they will be able to continue to provide such structures in communities.

It is important that I state that I support the Minister of State's point, made in the Dáil in December, that community employment incurs very limited additional costs. The difference between sustaining somebody on social assistance or unemployment assistance, and sustaining somebody on community employment, is €24 or €25 per week. In that light, we are entitled to ask why the Minister of State or some of his colleagues are seeking to reduce the numbers of participants on CE schemes. One has to come to the conclusion that the decision is ideologically driven, essentially, by the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, who is the leader of the Progressive Democrats Party, and her soul mate in the Department of Finance. This makes no practical or political sense to me nor, I suspect, to many Members on the Fianna Fáil benches.

I wish the Minister of State a fair wind if he is still fighting the battle. If he has lost the battle, which I suspect may be the case, he should have the courage to put his hands up and say "I fought the battle, I lost and I am off now".