Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

I welcome this subject being put down for discussion because community employment schemes are of great value. On Monday, the last day I was in Tipperary, two people raised this issue with me, one being a man over the age of 50 who drives a bus for disabled people. He got an extension of a further six months to his position after three years, but was concerned about still having a job next May. In all probability, I believe his place will be rolled over. I also visited a sports pitch in the county and the point was made that it was maintained by FÁS community employment schemes. Such schemes are important for the people participating on the them, especially older people, and for communities.

I am glad the Government did not act, despite some expert advice which it was suggested, at least in the newspapers, was offered to it that community employment schemes should be slashed. The reason there was such concern in the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party in this regard, which was not well understood by the media, is that there was a leak of a report of an expert group last September recommending severe cutbacks in the community employment schemes. The Fianna Fáil parliamentary party was not in favour of that and made that clear. It was not clear to me at any stage that the Government had taken that view on board, but people were concerned about the advice that was offered.

As a trade union official in Tipperary said to me during the week, one cannot always say that a scheme employing 20 people could not be equally effective employing 19. It must always be open to Government to make slight adjustments in accordance with overall conditions. One of the factors that has worked reasonably favourably in the past year is that the unemployment position has hardly deteriorated, certainly not to the extent that many people feared given the downturn in the economy. That does not alter the fact of the great social importance of the scheme.

The importance attached by members of the Government parties to maintaining schemes is well understood throughout Government because there are gaps in provision. There are many activities covered by such schemes which are not, by any stretch of the imagination, commercial but, nonetheless, have a community value. In some cases over time they will be converted into permanent jobs and that is fine, but a gap exists and, in that respect, community employment schemes are vital. While accepting there continues to be concerns in the community and among constituents, most of those concerns are not so much about people being let go but uncertainty about what their positions will be in a few months' time. I hope that will clarify itself for the vast majority of participants in a benign way. I am glad the Government decided to maintain community employment schemes.

There is a little restructuring for the rural social programme but the scheme is broadly as is. There is no basis for claiming some kind of doomsday scenario with the schemes are being slashed and so on. Broadly speaking there is stability, which is good, and on that basis I am happy to support the amendment.