Séamus Brennan (Dublin South, Fianna Fail)

I reiterate that I have reduced the qualifying period from 15 months to 12 months. The reason is that it was originally intended to be an assault on long-term unemployment. Long-term unemployment is generally defined as 12 months. With unemployment at 4.4% and a long-term unemployment rate of less than 1%, it is very tightly focused. I thought 12 months made sense given where the scheme was originally intended to be focused.

I have said in this and in the other House that I would be interested in reducing it not to six months at this point but to nine months, I need to examine what funding would be required. I am told it would cost approximately €1.4 million, excluding a cost of education allowance. With that included the cost would rise to approximately €5 million over a three-year period. That is something I need to consider. I expressed the hope that I could reduce it to nine months, which would be a considerable improvement on 15 months.

I accept the principle referred to by Senators Terry, Cox and others that we must make it easier to move from unemployment to education and from unemployment to work. Education is a critical weapon in the fight against disadvantage. This refers to third level education. Second level is not affected — the qualifying period is still six months in that case. We are talking about a scheme that is very attractive to people. It will cost €40.1 million next year. That is taxpayers' money. We have choices as to how we spend it. We are spending it on this scheme. Someone who qualifies for this scheme will have funds available for a number of years through the duration of their period of education. It is, therefore, attractive.

Senator Cox recounted her personal experience and impressions from her professional background. What she says is borne out by the statistics available to me. Those who were nine months or less unemployed accounted for 36% of the people in receipt of the back to work allowance. If the qualifying period is 12 months that is another 14%. In all, 50% of those in receipt of back to work allowances from the €40 million would have been unemployed for less than 12 months. If the period is reduced to six months the percentages are even higher. There is considerable evidence to back up what Senator Cox says. Once the six months elapses the number of people in receipt of back to work allowance swells. That was the thinking behind my predecessor's decision. We are acutely conscious, as every Senator is, that every euro given out to people who abuse the system is a euro taken directly from the social welfare budget.

I am conscious of Senator Terry's point that people might miss out on the opportunity of a third level place because of the academic calendar. I am actively examining, and will report my finding within weeks, whether I can identify funding to settle on a period of approximately nine months, which I believe would be reasonable. We have made progress and we can examine these statistics as they evolve to see what basis there is for improving matters. I would not agree to reduce the qualifying period to six months at this stage, given the statistics. I would be interested in taking it to nine months if I can secure funding to do that and I will make an announcement regarding that in the coming weeks.