Seanad debates

Thursday, 28 February 2019

National Training Fund: Statements

 

10:30 am

Photo of John HalliganJohn Halligan (Waterford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Senator Boyhan said exactly the same thing and I will do that. I know the Senator is a great supporter of the education and training boards, ETBs, and they do valuable work for us. Our association with employers is very important in this regard. I asked about the whole fund a number of years ago so that when I faced questions like this, we would have had an independent review carried out. I do not think we could go too far wrong with having independent reviews of all the funds that we spend in the Department. We had a concise, independent review by Indecon. The Department and I decided that we would follow through on almost all of Indecon's recommendations. We will work through that over the next couple of months.

Senator Gavan spoke about the impact of businesses and whether they have too much of a say. I looked into that. It is important for businesses to come to us to tell us where there is a shortfall in skills, whether in engineering, hospitality or pharmaceuticals. They are the experts. We continually engage with businesses through our nine skills fora. They regularly meet with businesses, whether pharmaceutical, agricultural or whatever else, on behalf of our Department and then come back to us to say that we are short on skills for a business sector. In my engagement with employers throughout the country, I have not found them taking advantage of apprenticeships or skills. They work within the sector.

A number of Senators asked if we should find some way to help to finance apprenticeships and skills through the employer. I think that is a valuable suggestion, to see if a fund could be set apart to help once we make sure that apprentices and employees are treated well and paid the required wage, whether the apprenticeship wage or the cost of living at the time. I am unsure whether the apprenticeship levy stays under the new public service pay agreement or if there is an increase in it but I will find out. I agree with Senator Gavan in that sense, that we have to make sure all employees are treated respectfully and paid what they are entitled to. Up to now, we have not had any indication from the independent report that there are apprentices who are not being treated well.

A question was asked as to whether we have apprenticeships in agriculture, which is very important. We have applied horticulture, which is maybe not agriculture, farm management, farm technician and agricultural mechanics apprenticeships. We are doing very well for the first time in the last number of years. I do not think there is an area of business for which we do not have an apprenticeship. The question was asked as to whether we can be as good as Germany. We are dealing with 4.6 million people and a very buoyant economy which came from a recession. We do not have the same big car manufacturing firms or engineering companies that Germany and such would have, where there are an awful lot of apprenticeships. We cannot match that percentage because we do not have those big companies. All the top pharmaceutical companies in the world are here in Ireland and a different level of skills is required for pharmaceutical companies. Up to seven or eight years ago, pharmaceutical companies which were upskilling their workforce or doing research would have gone back to base if they were from Israel, America or France. They do not do that now. They engage with our universities, institutes of technology and with this Department through the skills fora that I mentioned, to look for our apprentices and skilled workers.

A shortage of skills was mentioned. There is absolutely a shortage. I have been to all the top companies, including one that wins huge contracts from the European Space Agency. Most of its top workers are from outside Ireland because it cannot get the skilled workers here. It advertises for them here. We need to talk about that. I firmly believe that if we are not innovative in our economy and do not invest in innovation and in the high skills factor, we will suffer. There is no question about the advancement of technology across all sectors, including agriscience, pharmaceuticals and so on, in which we are doing well, being number one in the world in agriscience. The point remains that if we do not upskill in all these areas, we will suffer since we are not meeting the educational requirements of our workforce so that they have abilities to use when employed by companies, including top pharmaceutical companies. There is a lot to be done.

I think straight and say it as it is. The National Training Fund has been fantastic. It has done exceptionally well. The small contribution that the employer makes, the 0.1%, is significant in a sense and it is balanced. We meet employers all the time who say they are happy and get good apprentices. There is a question of whether we pay apprentices enough. I worry that with a buoyant economy, which is doing exceptionally well, people may not want to go into apprenticeships.They can get a ready-made job in a factory that pays well or a ready-made job elsewhere. We have to consider the possibility of upping the apprenticeship payment. We may have to do that over the next few years if we see numbers dropping. Right now the numbers are increasing and we are ahead in some apprenticeships, as I said earlier. That could, however, be an issue down the line for apprenticeships. Would we have to entice more people into apprenticeships? A sure way to entice people into employment is if it is good employment with a reasonable rate of pay. We will have to look at that issue in the coming years.

Reference was made to whether we check with employers. There is a review every quarter from my Department. I am part of that review. When it is carried out, I look at every part of the review to make sure there is accountability across all the sectors I deal with around apprenticeship skills and so on. On all the money being taken from the National Training Fund, there is no doubt that there is accountability with regard to every cent of it. We make sure of that.

Some have questioned why we have the surplus. I explained why we need the surplus. It is due to the fact we could be headed into uncharted waters with Brexit. The sum of €430 million may sound like a big surplus but it is not. In the greater scheme of things, that surplus would be eaten up in normal economic output in one year. The money needs to be held and we have ring-fenced €300 million. I will outline the reason. In my opening remarks, I said the NTF had to be transferred, to a degree, because unemployment had dropped so the fund was not being used. However, we are unsure of what will happen with Brexit and if unemployment figures will rise again so rather than having to go back to the employers, for the first number of years we have a surplus we could use to deal with that. While some people may not agree with it, I agree with the surplus and if I had my way it would be increased until we are out of this uncertainty with regard to the economic position we may be placed in due to Brexit.

I hope I have answered the Senators' questions. Over the coming months, my plan is to get representatives from all the Departments to meet my Department to talk about skills and apprenticeships. Many of the proposals and suggestions made by the Senators should be brought to that meeting. They would be best brought by the Senators rather than second-hand by me. Over the coming months, I plan to have that meeting. I will certainly write to the Senators on the apprenticeships payments.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.