Seanad debates

Wednesday, 27 May 2015

Springboard Programme: Motion

 

10:30 am

Photo of Damien EnglishDamien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will try to deal with most of the questions I have been asked. I want to thank Senator Jim D'Arcy and other colleagues for putting forward this motion, which gives us a great opportunity to discuss the success of Springboard and the whole initiative in that regard. It is also an opportunity to contribute to the debate and to acknowledge all the great work that was done by many people around this initiative.

Springboard is one of the best initiatives I have come across. When in opposition, I often spoke about trying to get good value for money, and if we can solve two problems with one initiative it is a great idea. In this case, we are doing that. We are getting people who are unemployed back into work - a new career or a new start - but we are also filling a skills gap. Industry and business do not have the skills they need, and they need a quick conversion course, such as Springboard's ICT conversion course, to provide those skills. Therefore, we are solving two problems with the same money, which is what we should try to do across as many Departments as possible.

It is a great initiative and one I cannot compliment enough. I was delighted to be part of the recent launch and to have been part of the team working on that. The HEA does great work, with Tom Boland and Mary-Liz Trant leading the charge for Springboard, along with Senator Feargal Quinn and his team of experts, who are judging this and choosing the successful people to provide the Springboard courses each year. They have done great work in recent years and I want to compliment them on that. It is a very sound programme. Senators Craughwell and Cummins are right that anyone who tries to detract from this is wrong or misinformed and needs to be corrected.

The whole agenda of further education and training needs to be talked up a lot more, as people can sometimes turn their backs on it. Senator Mooney is right in saying that people did turn their backs on it during the boom times, when it was put to one side and forgotten about. It is a question of the blend. We will only solve our skills shortage with a blend of further education and training, as well as higher education. This must come at the right time and it will suit different people in different places. It is wrong to say that further education and training is only for those who are not academically suited. Further education and training is suited to anybody, no matter what their academic skills are. For me, further education and training is a great way to develop a career. If people want to add higher education they can do that, and go up to any level they want. It is not only for those who are not academically suited. That is the problem. Most of us start our comments with that line, but we need to make sure that is not the way it happens. Very often, a start on a PLC course is the best way to prepare a person to go on to higher education, get them ready for university and enable them to cope with all the demands there. A start on a PLC course can equip people to become very academically minded and ready to take on any course, including a degree course at any university.That is what we need to understand. It is a question of the mindset and conversation about this. We are spending almost a billion on further education and training, FET. Although Senators may not realise it, we have a massive spend. We do not sell it enough or explain what it actually stands for, where it is or where we want to go with it. I would disagree with the Senator's report of people's thoughts on SOLAS. I think SOLAS is one of the best authorities we have set up and it is only warming up. There is a great team of people there who are very in tune with what is needed. They have their strategy plans and their five-year plans and lots of consultation; they are on the ball and are ready for this. It will mean changes in many cases with education and training boards, ETBs, that might not always like it. As the driving authority behind FET, SOLAS is right and I am happy with its work. I would dispute anyone who says they have doubts around it.

I asked the Senator to repeat what he said about the number of ETBs that applied to be part of these new apprenticeships. There is something wrong there; it is a wrong statement. It was not a secret that there was a public call-out for anybody to submit a proposal through the new apprenticeship council. There is new, independent apprenticeship council to design and take proposals for all the new types of apprenticeship. Its work is facilitated by SOLAS.

We really want to change our apprenticeship agenda. For too long we have had a limited number of apprenticeships - fewer than 30 in the areas of construction, mechanical and engineering. That is not good enough. We are looking to Germany and Austria, where there is a choice of 300 or 400. While I cannot see us having that number - I do not think we would need it - there is no reason we could not have up to 100 types of apprenticeship route.

Over half of the 86 proposals that came in were industry led, as they should be. Apprenticeships have to be employer led or they will not work, although they should be facilitated by ETBs, institutes of technology and everybody else. The ETBs should develop and provide the courses. I refute the comment that they were not encouraged. The Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, took great time to pick the right people and, as far as possible, every sector is represented on the apprenticeship council.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.