David Cullinane (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The discussion of this section dominated many of the Second Stage contributions. Sections 9 and 10 are linked and we have tabled amendments to section 10 that also affect section 9. We will wait until we get to them.

Section 9 cuts young people's jobseeker's rates. I reminded the Minister that when the previous Fianna Fáil-led Government cut dole payments for those aged under 25 in budget 2010, both Fine Gael and the Labour Party voted against the proposal, arguing, and the Minister was quite vociferous, along with my party and many others that it did nothing to address the shortage of jobs and that because there were insufficient places in education and training, it would drive even more people to emigrate. Apart from having different parties in government nothing has changed since then and the logic unfortunately seems to be the same. Some young people will be forced to emigrate because of the provisions in this section.

The measure still does nothing to address the shortage of jobs. Some small progress has been made in employment in recent times, but when emigration is considered, we still have a long way to go to create the jobs that people need, especially young people and graduates coming out of college. We do not have enough training and education places. Despite the Government pledge and the allocation of funding in the budget, which I will discuss shortly, it will still not cater for the volume of young people who will need opportunities. Those people who will not get those opportunities will incur a significant reduction in their jobseeker's allowance.

As I said on Second Stage, people from disadvantaged communities and backgrounds will lose out disproportionately because they will be furthest away from the education and training opportunities and labour-activation measures to get jobs. However, their benefits will be cut. Therefore, I cannot support this section.

In discussing these cuts, the Minister spoke about funding for the European youth guarantee. The National Youth Council of Ireland reckons it represents just 5% of the estimated annual cost of what is needed for a genuine youth guarantee scheme that would cover all of the young people who are unemployed. It estimates that the cuts will impact on 20,853 young job seekers in 2014 and that the numbers will increase thereafter. While the Minister can confirm or deny the number, I understand the budget only guarantees an extra 3,250 places in education, training or work experience. There are 32 job seekers for every advertised job vacancy. Young people cannot be incentivised into places, paid or otherwise, that do not exist. The Government often uses that word "incentivise". It is even included in one of the Fianna Fáil amendments and while I do not think it was intentional on the author's part sometimes it can give the connotation that young people need to be incentivised to get work. I believe it is the reverse. Young people want to work and would be the first to take up work when given the opportunity. The age profile of those who have emigrated indicates it is young people who have taken the risk to leave their families and go abroad.

I believe young people want to work and be in training. The Government is being disingenuous in pretending that by cutting the rate of social welfare for young people, as it is doing in this section, it is somehow helping or incentivising young people to go into training, education or work. That does not stack up at all and is deeply unfair on those young people who will be affected. Some 18,000 fewer young people are in paid employment compared with when the Government came to office. I come from Waterford in the south east. The Minister will know that while we have high levels of unemployment across the State, we have very dangerously high levels of unemployment in Waterford city especially, but also across the south east. The most recent CSO figures for Waterford city indicate a rate of unemployment of about 24% with youth unemployment at about 35%. Therefore, a disproportionate number of young people in my city and county will pay the price because of the cuts in this section.

The JobBridge scheme has led to around 20,000 unpaid internships over a similar timeframe. The €50 top-up on top of the €100 young person's dole equates to approximately €3.75 an hour for a 40-hour week. That is what we are offering young people.

The National Youth Council of Ireland is not happy with some of the claims the Minister has made, the first being that existing welfare payments for those under 26 represent a disincentive to work. I do not believe that is the case. I made the point that many young people want to work. There is plenty of incentive for people to work. A young person who takes up a job paying €300 or €400 a week is very much incentivised to go and work if those opportunities exist.

I imagine the Minister would agree that for the vast majority of young people if those jobs and opportunities were available they certainly would take them.

The Minister has also said that she will implement the youth guarantee scheme. However, the Minister is only putting aside €14 million for this while the is estimate that this would only represent 5% of the necessary cost and that in fact €273 million per annum would be needed for a genuine youth guarantee scheme. In the context of this section I call on the Minister to update us on the scheme. I gather Senator van Turnhout has called for a debate on the issue and the Minister has generously offered to come back to the House and take part in a more constructive debate when we have more time. This is an important stand-alone issue. Anyway, I call on the Minister to take some time to briefly bring us up to speed on the position at the moment. I could say a good deal more but I am conscious that other Senators want to make their contributions. I will wait until the Minister responds before I say more.

I believe this cut is wrong. The Minister took the view that the cut was wrong when she was in opposition, like many of the other cuts. If it was wrong when Fianna Fáil imposed the cut why is it right now? Why was Fianna Fáil wrong and the Minister right in 2010 when she vociferously opposed it, yet she has cut it further and it is the right thing to do now? That does not stack up and perhaps the Minister can enlighten me on her logic in this regard.