Ivana Bacik (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move:

That Seanad Éireann notes with concern the rise in joblessness in Ireland, in particular the rise in youth unemployment; and calls on the Government to implement a jobs strategy, including retraining and back to education support, to tackle this crisis.

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator has 12 minutes.

Michael McCarthy (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On a point of order, as there is nobody present on the Government side of the House, if I second the motion, will it be carried? Will the Cathaoirleach the matter?

John Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, as there is no one against it.

Michael McCarthy (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I second the motion.

John Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Cathaoirleach should put the question.

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State will have the opportunity to respond to the motion. If Members wish, the Minister of State can respond now.

Ivana Bacik (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to propose the motion.

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It has been moved and seconded. If the Senator wishes to speak to it, she has 12 minutes.

Ivana Bacik (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

By agreement, I will use eight rather than the full 12, as I want to allow colleagues speak also. As Senator McCarthy said, there is nobody present on the Government side of the House to counter the motion we are putting to the House. As a result, I hope the Government will just agree to it, although that is unlikely to happen.

The motion tabled by the Labour Party calls on Seanad Éireann to note with concern the rise in joblessness in Ireland, in particular the rise in youth unemployment, and calls on the Government to implement a jobs strategy, including retraining and back to education support, to tackle the crisis. I welcome the Minister of State and hope the debate will not descend into platitudes. All too often, when we have debated the issue of unemployment in recent months, as we have seen horrific rises and the great human tragedy behind the figures, we have heard platitudes. Everyone on both sides of the House has condemned the rise in unemployment without offering any ideas on how it can be targeted or a real analysis of the figures. Too often the debates have been bland.

I want to change this by focusing on youth unemployment. We need to recognise the generational impact the unemployment figures have. We should move beyond speaking about unemployment, although I do not wish to dismiss the real problem and tragedy of unemployment for those at a later stage in their careers. The figures clearly indicate that the unemployment crisis we face is affecting school and college leavers particularly heavily, people who are seeking to enter the workforce for the first time. Over 74,000 people under the age of 25 years are unemployed. It was reported in a CSO quarterly household survey last year than more than one third of those aged 15 to 19 years and 23% of those aged 20 to 24 years were in neither full-time education nor employment. We are facing the reality of what has been described as a lost generation — a generation of young people for whom their only prospect of getting work lies overseas. Once again, we are facing the spectre that was present when I was in college in 1980s when many had to emigrate to find work. Happily, as things picked up, many of us were able to come back. Without any sign of an upturn on the horizon, it is difficult to see the prospects for so many young people lying at home.

The measures we adopt to tackle unemployment must be targeted at supporting school and college leavers in retraining, improving their education and skill levels and, ultimately, assisting them in finding work. If we speak about unemployment in too general a way, we will miss the point on the need for targeting. Interestingly, there has been more of a debate on this issue in Britain. Two weeks ago an article in The Observer by a young unemployed graduate, Andrew Hankinson, aged 29 years, caused a great impact. He did not pull punches and argued that graduates were picking up the tab for their parents' lives. The subtext of his article was that baby-boomers took all the good jobs, availed of free education and cheap housing, leaving their kids with nothing but the credit crunch and the bill for their pensions. His anger was focused on an older generation. This clearly expressed the fact that in Britain unemployment figures were particularly high among younger people. The article generated a significant response, mainly from older people who argued they should not be blamed for the recession. I will pick up on some of his points which are pertinent to this country. Ireland is set in a very different context because we had very severe economic problems in the 1970s and 1980s, when the rate of unemployment was much higher than it is now. The older generation did not have it easy and it would be unfair to suggest it did.

There are serious considerations in how we should tackle youth unemployment and focus our economic policies to take account of the generational impact of unemployment. We must remember that a significant portion of the population, largely an older demographic, have paid off their mortgages and are not facing the same massive credit issues as many younger people. We may say it is their own fault as they took out mortgages and bought big cars. I know from canvassing in different areas of Dublin that there are people still in work who are very concerned about their futures as they see jobs being lost through redundancies in the private sector and pay cuts in the public sector. Such persons may have enormous outgoings on mortgages and other loans. They are being squeezed nearly as much as the twenty-somethings who are finding it difficult to find work in the first place.

The idea that events have a different impact on separate generations is recognised in the tourism industry which specifically targets the grey pound or euro. Fáilte Ireland has been offering packages to older tourists, in particular. There is a recognition that younger generations have less disposable income and wealth. It is important we look at this to try to find solutions to the current crisis. For example, there are questions to be asked about reforming tax policies and focusing on assets rather than income. That nettle has not been grasped. As the motion states, a focus on offering educational opportunities to younger people is critical to the solution.

The Government amendment to the Labour Party motion commends the Government on implementing policies and an employment subsidy scheme, etc. There are some impressive figures but the reality is different. The new graduate employment scheme can be condemned as tokenistic. Despite the figures given by the Government in the amendment, we still see very small numbers actually being helped by any of the measures announced by it with great fanfare.

In December Labour Youth produced a very useful document entitled, Tackling Youth Unemployment, in which it brought forward a critique of the Government's policy, pointing out that although the FÁS work placement scheme for graduates, announced with great fanfare last April, had been a welcome step, only 85 positions out of a potential figure of 2,000 had been taken up, even though nearly 2,000 individuals had applied to take part in the programme. Clearly, there was an inadequate number of placements available. I do not know what the Minister of State will say to me, but there certainly has been a much lower take-up of what was offered. The Government has not put its money where its mouth is in order to attract people back to education, especially part-time courses. If the Government was to expand the scheme of free third level tuition fees to include part-time courses, that would help to ease people back into education and an environment in which they would be likely to gain greater skills. Ultimately, they would become more employable.

The Government could adopt other measures to ensure greater opportunities for young people who are otherwise facing the dole. I urge the Minister of State to look at some of the more radical measures proposed by Labour Youth, especially the removal of tuition fees for part-time education courses, offering real work placement programmes for graduates, addressing the cuts in social welfare payments to young people that will have impacted on them very severely and not ignoring the social impact of unemployment. This applies equally to people of all ages if they are made redundant. There is a serious problem with increasing levels of depression. As such, we need to ensure there are counselling services and social supports available to those who are made unemployed.

While we need to recognise the impact of unemployment on our youth, we should note that those who criticised Andrew Hankinson for blaming the baby boomers pointed out that he should be counting his blessings for having an opportunity to write that article and to work in journalism. However, many others who were very angry responded favourably. One letter writer to the The Observer stated:

The politicians have devastated an entire generation. It was obvious that policies that favoured the financial industry and diminished all else would bring us crashing down – and they did. Get the heck out of England, kids. The wealthy have won; you have been pushed out of your own country.

That expresses the anger felt in Britain and clearly places the focus upon the difficulties for young people. We will also see increasing levels of anger in Ireland among young people who equally feel they are being forced out of this country like previous generations. It is important for all of us on both sides of the House to work together to make sure that does not happen. I, therefore, urge the Minister of State to take on board the more creative solutions and suggestions offered from all sides of the House.

Michael McCarthy (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I second the motion. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, and congratulate him on his appointment. One need only look at him to discover that he is nearer my age than many others in the House.

Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Maybe he is younger.

Michael McCarthy (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He is someone who might have a insight into youth unemployment, an appalling aspect of the current economic downturn. Returning to the dark, black and bleak days of the 1980s when we lost a generation of people to emigration owing to high unemployment is something we absolutely need to avoid, an issue on which there is consensus in the House.

I have become an active supporter of a Facebook campaign entitled, Grants for mature students. A number of individuals in NUIG, some of whom are present in the Visitors Gallery, are looking at the Access programme and the possibility of allowing mature students into third level institutions. It is clear from the current economic downturn that the place to be for many is back in third level institutions, they be institutes of technology or universities. The Government needs to look at ways of providing supports for those who have been made unemployed. It would be much better if we could provide grants for mature students and as much financial support as we can to up-skill and retrain them and give them a qualification. The only thing that is certain about this recession is that we will come out of it. It is a question of how well equipped we will be when that happens. What we do now will have an impact in that regard.

I have constituent who is in the fifth year of a degree course in University College Cork. That person left the workplace and has a young family but they never received one cent from the State in going back to do that degree which is nearing completion. They are on a placement in a hospital and will be paid by the HSE. That individual obviously has a burning desire and ambition to improve. Schemes such as the back to education scheme were designed in a very different economic climate and could not possibly have taken cognisance of people's circumstances today. The individual to whom I referred had to find as much part-time work as they could, has to go through the process of travelling to a university 50 miles from home and depend on casual employment to complete their degree. That is not good enough. They could easily have elected to revert to the social welfare system. Why not offer some other form of full-time education programme? Why pay people to stay at home and do nothing? A change of mind-set is required.

Just 257 people have taken up job placements under the FÁS work placement programme, despite moves to attract people to the scheme. The most recent figures show that there are 995 work placements available, in spite of a decision by the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to relax the eligibility requirements. The slow take-up of place on such a scheme in the current environment almost beggars belief. The Government needs to look at this issue. Large numbers of unemployed people whom I meet in west Cork are completely unaware of the scheme. Not only do we need it, but we also need to communicate its importance, the eligibility criteria and advise people on how they can become involved.

In my home town of Dunmanway we have an employer who is ceasing operations and transferring them to Macroom. These two towns are in different Dáil constituencies, but that is neither here nor there. Job losses in a small town leave a black hole in the local economy. The Tánaiste met a delegation from the area. If an arm of the State such as the IDA can promote a situation where employers can leave one town and move to another, that has huge socioeconomic implications for the town they leave. We wish any town that attracts jobs in the current climate the very best, but when that type of thing happens, it is ominous for rural towns.

The social welfare office in Dunmanway closed three years ago owing to the untimely death of the branch manager. The office has never been reopened, as a result of which people in the town now have to travel to other towns in west and north-west Cork in order to sign on for and collect social welfare payments. I know there is a ban on recruitment in the public service, but the reality is we must relax the ban, as practical circumstances should override such a policy. We were in a very different situation in 2007. Many of those on the live register in the area do not have access to transport. We do not have interconnecting orbital routes in a rural area. It is very difficult for people to go elsewhere and pick up social welfare payments. I ask the Minister of State to refer to this in his response.

Senator Bacik rightly points out the onus on us to provide policies and to show the way out of this jobs crisis. Our pre-budget submission considered enterprise support, including a PRSI scheme for new jobs, an additional 60,000 training and work experience placements and the fast-tracking of labour-intensive capital projects. I hope the Minister of State will take these points on board.

Ivor Callely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That Seanad Éireann" and substitute the following:

commends the Government for implementing policies which aim to support enterprises, protect jobs and stimulate employment creation, including the introduction of:

the employment subsidy scheme which will between 2009 and 2010 invest €135 million in directly or indirectly supporting approximately 80,000 jobs;

the enterprise stabilisation fund that will invest €100 million in supporting viable but vulnerable companies in these difficult economic times.

Acknowledges Government actions in support of activation and training for the unemployed through:

its €1 billion funding for a range of labour force measures which will assist those who have lost their jobs;

the doubling of capacity in job search support services for the unemployed,

the continued increase in the number of training and work experience places for the unemployed, now standing at 147,000 places,

that 30,000 trainees or 36% of those who participated on the FÁS training programmes in 2009 came from the under 25 age group,

the introduction of new initiatives such as the workplace programme which includes special provision for graduate places,

special arrangements to assist 4,000 redundant apprentices progress their apprenticeships,

the provision of 40,000 full-time places in our further education sector,

the 140,000 full-time enrolments in our higher education sector an increase of 4.5% over 2008-09 academic year,

the significant increase in the numbers of back to education allowance recipients, up to over 18,000; and

the introduction of a new €20 million labour market activation fund aimed at supporting innovative proposals that are progression orientated for the unemployed.

It is important we understand the position that prevails in our community and the impact this has on individuals and families. As the last speaker and Senator Bacik indicated, I hope we gain meaningful suggestions that can be taken on board. It is important we acknowledge what is happening, especially in the light of the motion referring to specific areas of the jobs strategy, the retraining and the back to education scheme. I will not address every point but the motion refers to the Departments of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Social and Family Affairs and Education and Science. A number of additional measures have been taken beyond those to which I referred. I do not have time to address each and every issue but I have no doubt the Minister of State will do so when he has the opportunity.

We must take account of our domestic situation and the global situation that has an impact on us. It is all around us. The stark reality is that we are witnessing an exceptionally difficult period, with output reduced and stressful financial circumstances. There is no doubt we have lost our competitiveness, which is under serious pressure. I refer also to high unemployment across every community. Like many countries throughout the world, the United States has spent trillions of dollars in stimulating the economy but one issue that continues to cause difficulty is increasing the numbers in employment. The United States is not reaching the targets set in this regard. I agree with those who have proposed sensible measures to address the situation. I approve of a jobs strategy, retraining and back to education schemes along with all the other measures taken by the Government. Let us not lose sight of the fact there are the ingredients of a massive storm in our domestic situation. These are compounded by the global storm. We must take stock of where we have come from.

There is no doubt individuals, groups and their representative bodies have enjoyed rates of remuneration and conditions of employment that are no longer justifiable. The real answer is that we must create jobs and address our competitiveness. We know what the Government is doing with regard to debt and trying to get the banking situation under control. Unless we address the issue of competitiveness and create jobs at local level, there is no point in having a jobs strategy, retraining or a back to education scheme. We must ensure we can create opportunities and that people are prepared to accept the prevailing conditions, rates of remuneration and conditions of employment that go along with these opportunities. We must come to a clear consensus on what is just, reasonable, sustainable and what can be supported. We need to examine where we are and what we have tried in the past with a fresh pair of eyes.

I will not get into whether figures should be measured by the live register or the quarterly national household survey. The figures for unemployment are——

John Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Appalling.

Ivor Callely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——unacceptably high. I am struck by the terrible waste of time and energy these numbers represent. At the same time I am conscious of the real input some of these people can contribute to our community. Yesterday I met a solicitor who was unemployed and the day before I spoke to a qualified accountant who is unemployed. We are aware of the impact unemployment or underemployment has on individuals. In my area I witnessed the effect unemployment has on health issues, family issues, marital breakdown, addiction and mental health.

There is a pressing need in the community and voluntary sector for additional support. I propose the Minister of State examines how community and voluntary groups can be encouraged to provide short-term employment opportunities. I have referred to this as a national community volunteering scheme for the unemployed to carry out work in the community that would not otherwise be done. Community groups could pay the unemployed person exactly the same money he or she is claiming from the Department of Social and Family Affairs. The scheme would operate similarly to the community employment scheme run by FÁS with a number of key differences, primarily related to eligibility. I would be happy to forward the scheme to the Minister of State.

John Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister of State. I support the Labour Party motion. It was interesting to note there were no Members of the Government parties present when the motion was proposed. I am not sure I agree with the ruling of the Cathaoirleach that the motion could not be put and carried at that juncture but I must have that discussion with him at a later time.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The ruling of the Cathaoirleach may not be questioned.

Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We still have a full complement of Members around the House.

John Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to speak in support of the Labour Party motion as it is one of the most important motions to come before the House in some time. After listening to Senator Callely it is my view that neither the Government Members of this House nor the Government fully grasp the level of desperation among unemployed younger people in particular and the seriousness of the situation for the future of the country, the economy and the social fabric of Ireland. Unemployment is a very destructive force. It is not solely to do with people working and contributing taxes but it affects their health and future and the future of the community to which they belong. The Government in its recent budgets has not shown any regard for the disastrous consequences of unemployment on individuals and communities. This is the reason I fully support the Labour Party motion.

I listened with interest to Senator Callely's comments. He spoke about people having to accept the position. They might have to accept the position but the Government's duty is to make choices. The Government made a decision a number of months ago to inject capital into a number of our banks, some of which will never function properly again and yet the taxpayer has already invested €7 billion or €8 billion in them. The Government has not taken the same measures to address the issue of unemployment. If the economy and the country are to be anything like they were two or three years ago, we have to get people back to work. I do not agree with all the measures in the recent budget but the Government has taken necessary measures; I do not agree with some of the methods used to reduce the public service wage bill but it did not take the other necessary measure which was to promote employment. The Government amendment to the motion refers to what I regard as the pathetic little it has done and it refers to the employment subsidy scheme. It took six months before the first round of payments under this scheme were paid out. The Government has restated the projections that it would support 80,000 jobs but within its first six months the scheme was only supporting 8,000 jobs. This is a sign it is failing in what the Government set out for it to achieve and this is very worrying. The Government also announced a work placement scheme which, to the best of my knowledge, has fewer than 200 applicants. This is a pathetic result.

Ireland has the second highest unemployment rate within the European Union with approximately 88,000 people under the age of 25 unemployed, that is, one third of all men under the age of 25 are currently unemployed. This is completely unacceptable and young people are bearing the brunt. Senators on the Government side of the House as well as on this side deal with schools and educational institutions in the course of our work. I left school in 1997 which was a time of great opportunity when the Labour Party and Fine Gael had been in Government for three years. It was a time when 1,000 jobs a week were being created, there was free third level education and people like me had opportunities which existed for the following seven or eight years. It is a different situation for those doing their leaving certificate this year or coming to the end of their college education because those opportunities are not available.

The Government decided in the recent budget to cut welfare payments to younger unemployed people. The Government's message to that generation of Irish people was that they should get out of the country. For many years people were our biggest export and I never thought we would see the day when the Government would officially endorse by its own policy position that emigration was the best road for young people to take. Some of the measures taken so far clearly endorse the message that young people should head for the emigration boat. It is pathetic that the Minister of State in charge of employment does not seem to have any proposals of any constructive nature as to how jobs might be created. I am not suggesting this is an easy task but if parties in Opposition such as Fine Gael or the Labour Party or other individuals can come up with some realistic proposals, I do not see why the Minister of State and the Tánaiste cannot have some form of original thought on this issue which is the most significant crisis facing Ireland as a nation.

Fine Gael has proposed a national internship programme involving both the public and private sectors, where young people would be given roles within the public and private sectors on a part-time basis and also given the opportunity to continue on to further education and study at master and postgraduate level while in the national internship programme. Fine Gael has also proposed a second-chance education scheme. The Government has proposed a work placement scheme but this does not seem to be working and a radical rethink and change of direction is needed in that regard.

I refer to the community employment schemes which were much denigrated for many years. In the 1980s during the last economic recession, the Government of the time made moves to expand the remit of community employment schemes but it is not planning to take such action on this occasion. I presume the Minister of State can see the sense of giving somebody a small bit of extra money to do some work and contribute to the community. There are many unemployed people who would be willing to do this work if given the opportunity but the Minister of State could not even come up with this idea, which is not even new.

I have spoken about FÁS on other occasions as have other Members. It is very disappointing that at the time we need the State training agency more than we have ever needed it for the past 20 years, it finds itself embroiled in controversy. The Government has introduced legislation to reform the operations of FÁS but this is not sufficient. We need to restore confidence to the State training agency and I do not see that confidence being restored. The organisation is still receiving significant funding and I commend its excellent work and its training staff. However, that budget needs to be refocused on aspects of the economy which hold out the best prospect of success and recovery.

I support the Labour Party motion and I urge the Senators opposite to support it.

Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I join others in welcoming the Minister of State. I will be supporting the Government amendment. I wish to use this opportunity to make a few suggestions of my own and to thank the Labour Party for using its Private Members' time to have a discussion on this important issue. I apologise for using a script but I wish to cover some ground and I am conscious I may not have sufficient time to deal with it.

In October 2009, Ireland's unemployment rate was 12.8% with a eurozone average of 9.8% and Ireland's youth unemployment rate for under 25s was at 28%, which is obviously unacceptable. As we contemplate this issue there is no question that the destination for all of us is the same and what divides us, perhaps, are the vehicles or use of the vehicles to get us through the journey.

This rate is one of the highest youth unemployment rates in Europe. One in three men under 25 are now unemployed. Many of these were affected by the downturn in the construction industry. Many people who believed their future was in the construction sector now find they do not have the necessary skills to secure employment. A total of 18,400 Irish nationals emigrated last year, the majority being young people. This does not take into account in terms of net immigration the number of Irish people who returned but nevertheless, an unacceptable number of Irish people emigrated last year, which is more consistent with the trends of the 1980s than recent years. Unemployment harms young people in their psycho-social development. It reduces their opportunities to find a stable place in society and there are connections between unemployment and anti-social behaviour, substance abuse and crime.

In order to battle the jobs crisis, the Government must focus on reskilling these people so they may find a meaningful, fulfilling and self-sustaining role in society. We should not only reskill those who are now unemployed but be cognisant of those who are coming through the education process as they contemplate their futures.

With a number of others, in the last 18 months I was involved in preparing a paper on the country's entrepreneurship education strategy which was discussed in this House. If we are to develop a true entrepreneurial culture that encourages people to view entrepreneurship as a positive career option, we must start with education and young people. Among the recommendations we presented to the Government was the introduction of a field research project as an element of business studies subjects; the use of multiple and emotional intelligence theory as part of social, personal and health education; the launch of a young entrepreneur of the year competition, known as the Lemass award — that part has already happened, which is very encouraging; the establishment of a school awards scheme; and the development of an on-line entrepreneurship education resource for teachers. As we had an opportunity to discuss a variety of other proposals in this area previously, I do not want to dwell further on this aspect of the issue.

There is a growing body of international evidence to demonstrate that students who receive entrepreneurship education as part of their schooling show improved academic performance, school attendance and educational attainment; have increased problem solving and decision making abilities; improved interpersonal relationships, teamwork, money management and public speaking skills; are more likely to find employment; and have enhanced social and psychological development. Students achieve these benefits because the primary goal of entrepreneurship education is not to ensure everybody starts his or her own business but to encourage young people to think positively, look for opportunities, make things happen, have the self-confidence to achieve their goals and use their talents to build a better society, economically and socially. Entrepreneurship education should be an integral part of the country's ambition achieve a smart economy.

Education must remain to the fore in any effort to curb youth unemployment. It should also drive development and growth. Senator Callely has mentioned a wide variety of the schemes that are being undertaken. I suggest more work should be done to ensure it is compulsory to finish second level education. It is unacceptable that 12.3% of Ireland's youth leave school after the junior certificate examination. The Senator mentioned a number of schemes such as the FÁS work placement scheme, the back to work enterprise scheme and the higher education and labour market activation scheme, which the Government should be commended for initiating.

We need to target the internships in which many under the age of 25 years find themselves. Many internships are being offered by firms which cannot afford to pay full-time staff. They offer graduates a chance to learn to work in an environment appropriate to their college qualifications. Subsistence is offered by many firms to cover travel and lunch costs. If a graduate takes up such an offer, however, he or she may lose his or her dole payment. As we know, the under-25 rate has been increased to €150. Internships offer between €50 and €80 a week. Highly qualified graduates with degrees or master's degrees are earning less than they would on the dole. Dole payments should be maintained for those engaged in internships, as they are under the IBEC GradLink programme.

While the initiatives I have mentioned are very welcome, we need to reassess our labour market policy to meet the future needs of the economy. Redirection of labour, reskilling and training in high skill areas will create the basis of the smart economy. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment has responsibility for labour market policy, while the Department of Social and Family Affairs has responsibility for unemployment. Unemployment is seen by the Department of Social and Family Affairs as a welfare problem, rather than a labour market problem. This is an issue.

The division of responsibility for labour market policy between the two Departments has led to a variety of anomalies such as an absence of a focus on low skilled workers; a possible imbalance between the minimum wage and jobseeker's allowance; and co-ordination difficulties, including computer incompatibility between officials with responsibility for the jobseeker's scheme and officials in FÁS. It has been calculated that between 2000 and 2010 jobseeker's pay increased by 106%, with just a 55% increase in the minimum wage. In 2009 a person working 39 hours on the minimum wage would have earned €337.35 per week. If that person is an adult with an adult dependant, he or she is entitled to a dole payment of up to €326.10 in 2010. Even though we have one of the highest minimum wages in the world, a person with an adult dependant receives just 3% more for working a 39-hour week on the minimum wage than he or she would get on the dole. I am not saying we should decrease dole payments, nor am I arguing for an increase in the minimum wage, but we need to focus on this issue. A substantial debate needs to take place.

The labour market policy issues I have highlighted could be addressed by establishing a new Department of Labour. In addition to discharging the labour market responsibilities of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the new Department would also take responsibility for the unemployment and jobseeker's schemes from the Department of Social and Family Affairs. The transfer of the planning, research and development unit of FÁS, with its six economists, to the new Department would largely solve this problem without additional costs. A similar step was taken by the Blair Government in the United Kingdom when it established the Department of Work and Pensions which I believe has worked very well. I would like us to move in that direction.

I welcome the proposed establishment of the international content services centre. I also welcome the innovation task force which will examine ways of increasing innovation, accelerate growth through research and development and strive to make Ireland attractive to knowledge-intensive direct investment. As a digital innovation hub, the international content services centre will liaise with IDA Ireland, Enterprise Ireland and other agencies. It has the potential to create thousands of jobs. Digital literacy will play a pivotal role in getting people back to work. Ireland has one of the youngest populations in Europe. We are at an advantage because the level of digital literacy here is high. The youth of Ireland have the most to gain from the digital economy. The Government has taken many initiatives that will lead us on that path. I would like some of the suggestions I have made — provocative as they may be — to be considered by the Minister.

I have worked with the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, in business and in the chamber of commerce movement for many years. In my eight years as a Member of the Oireachtas no other Minister or Minister of State has been better suited or better equipped to deal with the challenges of today, or has better expertise to do so. I wish him well in his endeavours.

Shane Ross (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Senator Norris.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Shane Ross (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is no quick fix to this problem. One of the gloomy results of debates such as this is that people offer peripheral answers to a fundamental problem. Unemployment has spiked at a level that is quite uncontrollable. The Government, like everybody else, has been taken by surprise. The spike in unemployment cannot be solved by a short-term solution. In the 1980s, mentioned by Senator John Paul Phelan, we had an emigration outlet which we do not really have now. Therefore, we need far more imaginative solutions. Senators have been tackling the edges of today's debate by talking about small-term employment schemes. Everybody knows such schemes will not solve the problem — the unemployment of hundreds of thousands — that has suddenly popped up in a tragic way.

It is probably useful to look back at how the last unemployment crisis in the 1980s was resolved. It was not resolved by jobs strategy schemes such as the community employment programmes and other schemes mentioned. It was resolved in a twofold fashion. First, we have to admit that the take-off in the construction industry helped to solve the unemployment problem. We now regret our dependence on it, although if we had depended on it completely, we would be in an even worse employment situation than we are. Second, I do not think people like to admit that the arrival of the multinationals marked a fundamental change in the structure and planning of the economy. It had nothing to do with all these little schemes, FÁS or anything else mentioned. Donagh O'Malley went out on the plinth in 1966 to announce the introduction of free secondary education. It was a wonderful thing to do. It bore fruit in the 1980s and 1990s, when multinationals created whole industries here on foot of the reduction in the corporation tax rate to 12.5%. We should be mindful of this. It may not be very popular to say it, but if those guys go, we will be completely bunched. The twin pillars of the Celtic tiger in terms of employment were the construction industry which is now absolutely flat on its back and the multinationals which are still here — thank God — and providing a huge amount of jobs. Perhaps we should look to that historical event rather than local efforts, not to find a solution because this problem will not be solved overnight, but to devise a means of attacking unemployment in the long term. The possibility of reducing corporation tax further should be examined. The current rate of 12.5% will become uncompetitive if we are not careful. For this reason, we should consider reducing the rate further to create employment and attract more multinationals.

Senator John Paul Phelan raised the issue of FÁS. The tragedy of FÁS is that the high profile discoveries we have made have penetrated the whole organisation. Senator Phelan, like all politicians, prefaced his remarks on FÁS by noting the wonderful work it does. While I accept it does wonderful work in certain areas, there are real problems in the organisation, especially in its expenditure and budget. Many of us who have visited FÁS courses and buildings have noted that there are empty FÁS buildings throughout the country. What the hell is going on? Moreover, courses are being given without subsequent checks or follow-up and in some cases those providing training are not properly qualified to do so. These types of problems have emerged.

FÁS is sloppy and uncontrolled from top to bottom. If the problem extended only to travel, it would be possible to solve it but it extends to the courses the organisation provides. The absence of controls means educational standards are deficient. This is not adequate. The FÁS budget needs to be used properly and the organisation needs to train properly to meet the requirements of particular jobs.

I overlooked to welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, to the House. Let us put pressure on banks to provide more money to small businesses which are the creators of employment. The banks are not giving out money and do not intend to do so. There is no prospect that they will lend unless the Government, which virtually owns them, insists that they do so. If the Government adopted such an approach, it would create employment at this critical time.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator Ross for kindly sharing time. I do not need to welcome the Minister of State as the Senator already did so.

The Labour Party should have been allowed to call a division on the motion as it would have won it. That no Government Senator was present when the motion was moved created a rather awkward situation in such a serious debate. I remember winning a vote against the Government in similar circumstances many years ago on the basis that the Government benches were empty. It was argued that the Minister of State should be allowed to speak. Why? If the motion is proposed, seconded and unopposed, it should go to a vote. That option is no longer available.

I do not see a reason the Government side should not agree with a motion which states: "That Seanad Éireann notes with concern the rise in joblessness ... in particular the rise in youth unemployment". Is the Government not concerned? Of course it is, as are all decent Senators on the Government side. The motion also calls on the Government "to implement a Jobs Strategy, including retraining and back to education support, to tackle this crisis". Given that Senators on all sides have made that point, why are we going through this ritual farce of engaging in Ding Dong Denny O'Reilly, tit-for-tat rubbish every Wednesday night? Can we not grow up, put ideas together and get the country going again?

Ireland is in a serious position. According to the latest figures, unemployment increased in January by 3.1% to 436,936 compared with 423,595 in December 2009. The unadjusted live register increased by 110,664 or 33.9% over the past year. Dublin was hardest hit by the increase, with the number of people on the live register in the capital increasing by 38.1% in the past year. On a county basis, Kerry had the highest percentage increase of 6.2%, while Leitrim experienced the smallest increase of only 1%. There are not many people in County Leitrim and presumably most of them are employed. Men and women have been badly affected by the increase in unemployment. Figures show that 291,648 men and 145,288 women are on the live register.

I uncovered a very interesting statistic which shows that the number of workers from outside Ireland who are signing on increased by 5% or 3,876 in January. The number of Irish nationals on the register increased by 9,465 in the same month. A sizeable proportion of those signing on are from abroad, although many workers from outside the country have returned home. Underlying the figures is the serious problem that not only are we confronted with immediate unemployment but a large number of unskilled workers, the most vulnerable group, will be permanently on the dole. Even when the economy recovers to positive growth, it is likely that the jobless rate will never return to a level of 4% unless serious action is taken. The general estimate is that we will be left with a permanent unemployment rate of between 7% and 8%, most of whom will be unskilled workers.

The House earlier debated education, an area which is being squeezed by reduced funding, caps on staffing and cuts in courses. The issue is not being addressed by the Government. In addition, emigration to Australia and Canada has increased significantly with the result that more people are leaving Ireland than are arriving. We have, therefore, the beginning of a haemorrhage.

Recently, the Governor of the Central Bank, Professor Patrick Honohan, addressed the launch of the Trinity alumni career network, a group which is trying to secure jobs for Trinity College Dublin graduates. The Governor spoke about the ways in which we could boost the economy, including recapitalising the banks and so forth. However, even Professor Honohan had to note that employment levels among young Irish people have deteriorated much more rapidly than in other countries. He provided facts and figures on youth unemployment which I do not propose to repeat.

The type of black hole economics which counts profits from multinationals generated abroad does not reflect the true economic position. I was interested to read what Dr. Craig Barrett, the former chairman of Intel, had to say about the Irish economy. Addressing the emergence of China, India, Asia and so forth, he stated that the idea of bringing in large multinational corporations was now unimaginative and Ireland had to rely on entrepreneurs, start-ups and new ideas to drive economic growth, especially in areas such as nanotechnology, micro-electronics, photonics, biotechnology and alternative energy. This is precisely the argument made by many Senators in this afternoon's debate.

Why are we having this divisive debate when we should have allowed the Labour Party to win a division on the motion before having a free and wide-ranging discussion? Everyone in the House agrees with the sentiments in the Labour Party motion.

Dan Boyle (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

While I do not disagree with the sentiments in the motion, having a debate of this nature allows the Government to explain its policy on the relevant issue which demands that we go through the same process every Wednesday. The contributions thus far have reflected this.

There is no doubt the unemployment rate is the economic indicator of greatest concern to everyone involved in public life. Unemployment is the consequence of economic collapse, the position of the public finances and the decline in economic growth and spending in the economy. It is also true that as and when the indicators improve and we restore growth and stability in the economy, unemployment will be the last indicator to improve. This may not occur until one year after signs of growth in the rest of the economy have emerged.

The motion is well framed in the sense that youth unemployment is of particular concern. Unemployment among young people has reached one third and anecdotal evidence — we need to address the lack of concrete evidence — indicates that many of these workers are semi-skilled and low skilled. Not only is it a matter of finding new jobs for such workers but also of ensuring that such workers are appropriately skilled for such jobs when they are provided.

The one ray of light in the restructuring of the economy in coming years is that we cannot go back to where we were; it cannot be a construction-based economy depending on semi-skilled and unskilled people. The Government's smart economy document points out the growth areas from where jobs will come, particularly in the green economy with retrofitting housing and utilising our natural resources for better energy generation. There is consensus in the House that this is the road to take but to do so we need training opportunities. Senator Ross has been a trenchant, and very often justifiable, critic of FÁS. However, we should not confuse governance issues and the misappropriation of public funds by that agency in recent years with the valuable work done by many of those who work for the agency in providing useful and necessary training. That is the road we need to take. FÁS, as the State agency with responsibility for this area, should be particularly directed by the Government to offer training opportunities in the areas outlined in the smart economy document, in particular in the green economy.

It must be acknowledged that we have a difficulty with third level education that will come to a head next year. It is unfortunate that it will be more difficult for new entrants to qualify for formal university education and degree courses offered in institutes of technology. This will create further pressure and will reduce the opportunities for people to be armed with appropriate skills for when the economy improves. We must use the other parts of the education sector more efficiently, in particular further education which provides opportunities to upskill and reskill people in one or two year courses that will meet evolving needs in the economy. The Government would do well to seek specific resources for this area in the coming years.

Senator John Paul Phelan is not in a position to respond but it is not helpful in a debate such as this to describe the Government's policy as being framed on emigration. That is a trite political charge thrown out from time to time. The nature of the difficulty we have with youth unemployment is that unlike in other recessions the country has suffered, emigration does not exist as a stop-valve. The economies to which young Irish people would have gone in previous generations are, if not equally then almost equally, in similar economic situations. The unemployment rate in the United States is 10% and the rate in the United Kingdom, while lower than ours, is still 8% or 9%.

While one third of those available for work in the 18 to 25 year old category are unemployed here, the overall statistic for youth unemployment in the 27 member states is 21.4%. The variations between various countries indicate how the problem is being dealt with elsewhere and we are far from the worst. Admittedly, the lowest is 7.6% in the Netherlands but the highest, in Spain, is 44%.

Dominic Hannigan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are second last.

Dan Boyle (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are well behind Spain in terms of absolutes and——

Dominic Hannigan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are 26th out of 27.

Dan Boyle (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Other countries among the newer members also have high rates. Part of the difficult we have is the lack of a standard measurement in many European countries and the fact that social welfare is not taken to be a European competence which skews the pitch.

During the debate I heard mention of the budgetary decision to make a lower rate of unemployment payment available to younger workers. A payment being previously higher than it is now will excite political comment and cause controversy. However, a number of reasons exist for this being necessary. We do not have emigration as a safety valve and the call on the public purse is greater than it was during previous periods of economic stress. More importantly — we lack this debate — it can be established as a principle that unemployment payment for younger workers is not a standard payment in terms of not getting into a culture of dependency and a young person's first income being a welfare payment. A lower payment is a form of incentive. We must remember that in comparison to our neighbouring jurisdiction the full rate of unemployment benefit here is three times the level of what is paid in the United Kingdom and even the reduced rate of unemployment benefit for younger people is still twice that level.

If we concentrate on what we pay as welfare and income support for younger workers we miss the wider picture. I accept the Labour Party's motion is framed in a wider sense. It is not about what we pay people in welfare, it is about creating employment opportunities for them and about the training offered to them to avail of such opportunities as and when they arise. In having a more constructive long-term debate on this I ask that we get away from the trite excuses and political charges about emigration and the structure of the welfare system and discuss common approaches to employment creation and the training opportunities that are necessary in the economy.

I accept that there are still deficiencies and gaps in services but there is also an intent to meet many of those inequities and a plan is in place on how we can get there. It is the nature of Opposition to point out how and when the Government does not do this. I believe that as and when economic indicators improve internationally and nationally within the next year we will have put in place and set in motion the environment required for an ongoing reduction of unemployment and youth unemployment in particular of which we will see the benefit towards the end of 2011. On these grounds, I support the Government's amendment to the motion, which states what the Government is doing about this in a proactive and positive sense. It should not be read, as it has been interpreted, as an outright rejection of the motion tabled by the Labour Party.

Dominic Hannigan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Senator Prendergast.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Dominic Hannigan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister of State and the opportunity to speak in this debate on the unemployment crisis that is hitting the country and the lack of implementation by the Government of a coherent jobs strategy. The most recent statistics from the CSO show that more than 400,000 people are out of work and seeking work in the country, which is almost 13% of the workforce. My home county of Meath has seen a dramatic increase of more than 200% in the number of people out of work in the past two years.

The day he assumed office the Taoiseach, Deputy Brian Cowen, stated that a focus on young people and their needs would be a particular priority for his Government. However, now more than 86,000 young people are on the live register, 2,000 of them in County Meath. As was stated by Senator Boyle, we have the second worst youth unemployment rate in Europe. One out of every three people under the age of 25 is unemployed. I do not accept the Green Party line that we should be cutting their payments. Young people are finding it increasingly difficult to survive. I am surprised at the Green Party espousing the notion that they can afford cuts to their social welfare payments.

Senator Boyle is correct that the spectre of forced emigration has returned. Up to 60,000 young people have left our shores in recent times. It is of benefit to many people; I spent many years outside the country and I think I gained significant experience from doing so. For many people emigration can be a positive experience but I worry about the impact that forced emigration can have on people, particularly those leaving Ireland with poor qualifications, little money and no support or social network at their destination. It is easy to fall on hard times and difficult to get out of situations when one cannot afford one's next month's rent or tomorrow's food. That is why we need to provide proper supports for the Diaspora. That is why I am concerned. I have previously pointed out in this House that we are cutting back on funding for organisations such as the Federation of Irish Societies. I have called for a debate on the funding of our Diaspora groups and remind the Leader that he agreed to arrange such a debate in the near future.

The longer young people remain out of work, the harder it will become for them to find employment, even after the economy recovers. That is why I am appalled by the Government's response. In the absence of employment opportunities, internships and work experience opportunities are badly needed. The Government has reduced allowances for those participating in vocational training opportunity schemes and Youthreach programmes and cut support for those who want to return to education. I note the presence in the Visitors Gallery of mature students from NUIG. A key concern for those participating in third level access courses is the reduction in maintenance grants. Approximately 2,000 students are severely affected by these cuts, to the tune of several thousands of euro.

Last week I learned that FÁS had established a working group to develop a youth framework for the unemployed and school leavers. It is not fair to say the Government is doing nothing because it has implemented a number of worthwhile measures but more needs to be done. The ideas and proposals brought forward by Opposition Members can help in this regard. On the few occasions the Government has taken action it has been unplanned, poorly executed or on an inadequate scale. Some time ago my party leader, Deputy Eamon Gilmore, proposed a work placement scheme for graduates. While I welcome the fact that the Government accepted our idea, its strategy was poorly designed and provided for an inadequate number of places. We must do better.

We have to consider ways of increasing employment opportunities in particular sectors. We were overly reliant on the construction sector during the boom but there are opportunities in regard to green energy and retrofitting houses. Our counterparts in Westminster are implementing such a programme in the United Kingdom as a key element of its strategy to reduce energy wastage. This programme will present opportunities for Irish house builders and construction companies if they can retrain their workers in the necessary skills because millions of houses will be retrofitted as a result of the UK Government's fiscal stimulus package.

We urgently need a jobs strategy. The Government needs to demonstrate the political will and leadership to implement such a strategy at the earliest opportunity.

Phil Prendergast (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator Hannigan for sharing time with me and welcome the Minister of State. I wish to add to Senator Hannigan's comments on the position in his own area of County Meath by outlining the situation as it affects the people of south Tipperary, in particular Carrick-on-Suir and Tipperary town.

Since the bubble hit the fan after the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008, the Government has been consumed by the white heat of activity focused on bailing out the bankers and the builders who contributed greatly to the meltdown. However, it seems to have been too busy dreaming up a scheme that will lead to the taxpayer stumping up more than €13 billion to buy the banks to implement measures aimed at saving the real economy. When the Labour Party first proposed nationalising the banks, they could have been bought for around €3 billion but now we are on course to nationalisation by stealth at a cost of up to five times the original price. One can imagine what could have been achieved if some of the €10 billion the Government is overpaying for the banks was spent on training and job creation measures. This money could have had a massive impact not only on our competitiveness but also on the lives of the people. It would have gone a long way towards addressing the problems of leaking water pipes, an inadequate electricity grid and broadband network and shabby public buildings and schools, as well as constructing community facilities such as youth cafés, centres for the elderly and homes for the homeless. Much of it would have gone into the pockets of the largest cohort of unemployed, namely, construction workers.

The male unemployment rate is around 40% among 15 to 19 year olds and 30% among 20 to 24 year olds. Many are construction workers who could be earning money, supporting the economy and building a better and more competitive Ireland but, as studies consistently show, there is instead a real danger that some of these young men will turn to crime. Even further social damage will be caused and financial cost incurred by the Government's decision to draw the wagons around the golden circle. If the Government could go into overdrive in tackling the fiscal crisis, why was there not a parallel effort made to tackle the jobs crisis? We have seen an bord snip nua and the Commission on Taxation but where is the equivalent to tackle the jobs crisis?

Since the start of the crisis, the Labour Party has been consistent in pointing to the need for a blend of policies if we are to achieve recovery. Central to these policies are ways to get people off the dole and keep them in employment and education. We were not alone when we said this and we are not alone now. Unlike the Government, we can honestly claim support for our policies. Since the turn of the year, US President, Barack Obama, and Nobel prize winning economists, Paul Krugman and Joe Stiglitz, have expressed the belief that jobs and investment are the key to recovery. However, the Government believes jobs can be created with virtually no investment.

My colleague, Deputy Seán Sherlock, and I have raised the example of the FÁS work placement scheme on previous occasions. This is a six month work experience scheme for 2,000 unemployed people. Participants must be unemployed for six months or more and, although they can retain their welfare entitlements, they receive no other remuneration. The Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment with responsibility for labour affairs, Deputy Billy Kelleher, described the scheme as an innovative approach to providing support and training for job seekers. It is worth examining what is on offer in order to determine how much support the scheme, in fact, offers. Among the placements recently advertised on the FÁS website was one in a hospital in Tallaght which offered a position as a medical typist. The skills required included experience as a medical typist. A café in County Westmeath advertised a position in which the successful applicant would learn how to make and serve lattés and cappuccinos, while a shop in Cavan kindly offered experience in stacking and cleaning shelves. I wonder who benefits at the County Meath firm which seeks a sewing machinist with previous experience in clothes manufacturing or the pre-school in north Dublin which is seeking someone with pre-school teaching qualifications? What about the County Louth facility which wants a caretaker who must take on key holding and security duties, as well as take charge of the disposal of internal and external waste and maintenance of toilets?

The Government's recovery plan comprises bank bailouts and bog bailouts. This is a valuable programme in principle but it is being used as a free labour scheme. In practice, it is another FÁS farce. Rather than reduce unemployment, it could actually increase it where cynical employers seek to pocket the wages they should be paying by hiring somebody for free. There is every likelihood that people who are casually employed will actually lose their jobs to those participating in the work placement scheme. Of course, there is little incentive to take up these positions because they offer little or no useful experience, even though they cost the worker money in terms of getting to work and other arrangements for household duties and child care. However, someone who refuses an offer of a place on the scheme will be liable to a cut in his or her jobseeker's payment under the terms of the Social Welfare Act 2009. This flawed scheme is a microcosm of the Government's approach to job creation. It is a no-cost programme which suffers from a lack of planning, monitoring and common sense. In short, when it comes to jobs, the Government does not appear to be interested.

Paschal Donohoe (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With the permission of the House, I wish to share time with Senator McFadden.

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Paschal Donohoe (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary. I commend the Labour Party on its motion. It is important that we are discussing the matter. As I was getting ready for this debate I was reminded of the film title, "No Country for Old Men". That was adapted over the weekend by a newspaper which said it is no country for young men and women.

One of the figures I came across in my preparations is one that many of my colleagues have used this evening, namely, that one in three men under the age of 25 is unemployed. I spent some time trying to understand the reality of that headline figure and to get beyond it. That work was done yesterday by Ronan Lyons, an economist who works with the website, www.daft.ie. He has carried out a chilling analysis of the Central Statistics Office, CSO, figures to show what is happening to young people. I wish to focus on three points from his work that have not been made in this debate.

His first point is that in 2006 there were 175,000 people under the age of 25 at work. He estimated that 100,000 or 55% of the jobs available to people under the age of 25 are now gone. The second point is the degree to which emigration is hiding the extent to which unemployment is savaging young people. There has been some discussion about that in this debate. He estimates that emigration is hiding the disappearance of a further 20% of jobs that would have been available to men under the age of 25. He also made a point which is terrible to contemplate. He indicated that the population of men under the age of 25 — I am sure it is the same for women — was 325,000 but it is now 290,000. We have lost 35,000 of those people who were at their most productive in terms of working hours and the commitment and enthusiasm they brought to what they were doing.

He has carried out an analysis of what is happening on a county basis to try to understand where the real pressure points are. I am most familiar with what is happening in Dublin. Over the weekend it became apparent 22,000 people under the age of 25 are without work. Almost two out of every three young men in Limerick is signing on. The position is similar in counties Clare, Tipperary, Donegal, Louth and Waterford. Half of the young men living in those counties are signing on. My colleagues touched on the major blight this represents and the way it is scarring the ability of the State to move forward. The engines of economic growth in the past were the quality of the young people and the education, skills and understanding of computers they had accumulated. That stock of human knowledge and capacity to move our economy forward is in this state with half and, sometimes two thirds, of young people signing on in some cities and counties. That is deplorable and must be recognised for what it is — a huge loss of human capital at a time it is needed to move the economy forward.

All the work done by economists establishes that if a person leaves the labour force when he or she is young, it is much more difficult for him or her to return. Danny Blanchflower is an economist in the UK who was formerly a member of the Bank of England monetary policy committee. He identified a group of people entitled NEETS, not in employment, education or training. The fact they are not working not only represents a tragic loss of human capital but also a loss of spending power and tax revenue because they are unable to contribute, and this is at the heart of the fiscal difficulties we face. Our party has identified that 40% of the budget deficit is due to unemployment and it is deplorable that much of that burden is falling on our young.

Nicky McFadden (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator Donohoe and welcome the Minister of State. I would like to touch on two groups — lone parents and young farmers. Lone parents have always been an issue and a problem but I am more concerned now because it is even more difficult for them to find a job. One Family, the organisation that advocates on behalf of lone parents, conducted a survey, about which the Minister for Social and Family Affairs is well aware. The most outstanding fact in the report is that the majority of lone parents want to get off the one-family payment and into work. The impediments they face include access to quality child care. A total of 84% of lone parents are working, are in education or are actively seeking employment. How does the Minister propose to create employment for one-parent families? A cycle has developed where generations of single parents depend on welfare and are unable to access satisfying and stimulating employment and, therefore, contribute to society. They do not want to be on welfare. I would like the Minister of State to comment on how we can assess, help and motivate these individuals.

The issue relating to FÁS was referred to by my colleagues. I have come across individuals who had to take up a FÁS course to secure a social welfare payment. That condition is not tailored to long-term employment. It is a waste of money and bad value. For instance, the notion that somebody should take up a construction course now is farcical.

Significant employment has been lost on the land and rural Ireland is being eroded because young people cannot afford to stay at home. Farmers have lost the early retirement, installation aid, suckler grant and other schemes, which has led to emigration and young people having to leave the land. Boundless opportunities are available in agritourism and quality food production. These are two sound and accessible ways to keep young people on the land and in employment. Farmers' markets could also be used. There are ways and means to be innovative and to think outside the box.

Pearse Doherty (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit chuig an Teach. Gabhaim buíochas leis an bPáirtí Lucht Oibre as ucht an rún seo a chur síos toisc go dtugann sé deis don Seanad an cheist seo a phlé. Beidh mé ag tacú leis an rún. Sin ráite, dá mbeinn féin ag scríobh an rún, rachfainn i bhfad níos faide na an Páirtí Lucht Oibre ag cáineadh an Rialtas. Tuigim nár chuaigh siad chomh fada sin ionas go mbeimid uilig in ann tacaíocht a thabhairt don rún. Tá an leasú atá curtha síos ag Seanadóirí as páirtithe an Rialtas náireach, go h-áirithe ós rud é go bhfuil siad ag iarraidh ar an Teach comhghairdeachas a dhéanamh leis an Rialtas nuair atá fios damanta maith againn agus acu go bhfuil slad déanta acu ó thaobh fostaíocht ar fud na tíre, go h-áirithe ó thaobh daoine óga atá dífhostaithe agus gan todhchaí breá rompu toisc na fadhbanna eacnamaíochta a chur an Rialtas sinn ann.

I welcome the motion tabled by the Labour Party Senators and I congratulate them on facilitating this important debate. The tone of the motion is one that seeks to achieve consensus and I do not see why we cannot do so. Last Monday, my colleagues on Donegal County Council tabled a motion calling for action on youth unemployment and they secured unanimous support on the issue. Relatives of Senators voted in support of the motion. The reality is that behind all the statistics is a human story and a story of hardship. It is important for us to ensure we do whatever we can in whatever capacity or role we have to address this terrible situation in which so many people find themselves unemployed.

The Leader must have seriously blushed when he drafted the amendment. It is beyond the best work of fiction to think the Seanad would commend the Government parties on their work in tackling unemployment when every month the CSO figures reinforce the fact that unemployment is escalating drastically, with 50% of young males unemployed in some areas. There is a need to take serious action. We all understand the position the country is in and the decisions the Government must make. Politics is all about decisions and priorities. I acknowledge it is easier for the Opposition to put forward proposals because we do not have to implement them but the decisions made by the Government have a serious effect on people's lives. I say confidently the Government has not implemented the right policies or taken the right decisions. We have seen this time and again, unfortunately, through the different policy proposals the Government has led, always favouring those who are most well off. It has dealt with the banking crisis but, unfortunately for the hundreds of thousands of unemployed and young people, it has not placed the same focus on dealing with their problems.

I have been talking about the high levels of unemployment in my own county of Donegal for the past decade. I have had to endure the sight of the Taoiseach or former Taoisigh and other Ministers coming to my area, whether it is to the MacGill Summer School or other events, and talking about how great the country was, saying they could not find people in during they day when they were canvassing because we had a zero unemployment rate. That was at a time when in County Donegal, at the height of the Celtic tiger, there was an unemployment level of around 18%. Elected Members from the west know we have always had higher levels of unemployment than in the rest of the country, but Donegal is the county that has been hit the hardest and the position is particularly bad in Donegal South-West. As I said, at the height of the Celtic tiger,the unemployment rate in County Donegal was 18%. Since then we have seen unemployment levels double in the county. In my constituency 2,269 people under the age of 25 years are registered with the social welfare office. State-wide, we know that more than 85,900 young people are signing on. I am being parochial, but County Donegal has been at the bottom of the barrel in terms of employment. Even when money was available, we did not see any substantial effort to create or sustain employment opportunities for young people in the county.

A number of years ago, when Deputy Mary Coughlan was given the role of Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, it was welcomed by everyone in Donegal South-West because if there was anything we needed in that constituency, it was jobs. However, when I asked the Minister about the number of companies supported by the IDA in County Donegal, I received the answer that there were 12. On being asked the location of these companies, she would not answer. The reason she did not answer this parliamentary question from my colleague was she did not want me or the people of Donegal South-West to know that out of the 987 companies supported by the IDA in the State, only two were in her constituency.

I am sure she does not want us to know either that since she became Minister, not one site visit has been conducted by the IDA in the constituency. Donegal South-West is the constituency with the highest level of unemployment in the country and the most young people unemployed, yet there has not been one site visit in the last three years and only two companies supported by the IDA — one quarter of 1% of the total — are located in that area, although it is the Minister's home constituency. This shows the lack of imagination, application and policy decision-making on the part of the Government, all of which are needed if we are to tackle the problems experienced not only in Donegal South-West but throughout the State.

The decisions taken by the Government, particularly in the recent budget, have hit the 2,500 people in my area under the age of 25 years who are unemployed. The decision to cut jobseeker's allowance to €100 for 20 and 21 year olds and €150 for 22 to 24 year olds is one of the worst it has made. How can it differentiate between a 24 year old and a 34 year old? It has targeted young people because it thinks they are easy pickings. We saw this again with the 5% reduction in third level maintenance grants. Some 2,500 students still have not received the first instalment of their grant. I know from trying to help people in my own area that, unfortunately, some of them have dropped out of college. These are all statistics. We can talk about figures until the cows come home, but unemployment destroys lives. It destroys opportunities and the chances that these young people could enjoy. What we need to do is not simply to attack the Government and say it is not doing enough. Last year we offered 80 costed proposals on how to get Ireland back to work. I ask the Minister of State and his colleagues to consider this.

I will finish with an example.

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Senator's time is up. I am trying to hold Members to eight minutes.

Pearse Doherty (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It will take one sentence. A colleague of mine in County Donegal went to school with 31 other children. There were 32 children in her class. She is now 29 years of age and only seven of those 32 are still in the county. Of the seven, only two are in full-time employment. That is the impact the lack of a policy on unemployment is having in rural areas such as west Donegal.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Gabhaim buíochas le Páirtí an Lucht Oibre as ucht an rún seo a ardú. I am not particularly interested in the mechanics of amendments and counter amendments. I agree we have a problem and I am interested in addressing it. There have been some good ideas and suggestions which I will deal with. The aim of the amendment was not, as Senator Hannigan said, to clap ourselves on the back but to point out that there were initiatives under way and that we were implementing policies in this regard.

The stabilisation fund represents an investment of €100 million this year and will support more than 148 companies. Senator John Paul Phelan referred to the temporary employee subsidy scheme, in which we are investing €135 million. We are happy that we will be able to sustain the figure of 80,000 jobs supported under the scheme. There were 2,700 applications for the second call under the scheme and up to €9,100 will be awarded for each subsidised job some time in March. I will happy to come back to the House and discuss the impact of the scheme around that time.

The Finance Bill which is on Second Stage in the other House and which will be taken in the Seanad imminently contains details of the employer job (PRSI) incentive scheme. Senator McCarthy referred to the need for such a scheme. The scheme provides that when an employer creates a new job and takes on somebody who has been unemployed for six months or more, that employer will be fully exempt from PRSI liability for the first year of that employment, which will provide a 8% to 10% saving on employment costs for each new job created.

Our enterprise agencies, together with the local enterprise boards, are involved in specific initiatives in their regions. Enterprise Ireland has prepared a recovery strategy to identify the actions that will be undertaken to help clients in 2010 and refocused its efforts on strengthening and sustaining companies of strategic importance through a wide range of initiatives, all of which will sustain and create jobs.

A review of a new strategy for the future direction of foreign direct investment, developed by the IDA under the instructions of the Minister, will be published shortly. The strategy will identify new opportunities in foreign direct investment markets which are, as Senator Ross said, the foundation of the economy and which we should encourage and foster. This will restore our international competitiveness. Last year was a challenging one in terms of inward investment; however, the IDA still won 125 investments. Already in 2010 there have been several announcements of decisions by companies to create at least 280 jobs in Dublin, Galway and Tullamore. As I said, the local enterprise boards are working on initiatives in their areas.

The new director general of FÁS is in place and the new board has been appointed since I was last in the House. A new chairman has taken office and the board met for the first time yesterday. This morning I met the new chairman — Mr. Michael Dempsey, a man with considerable experience in the corporate world and change management — and I am confident he will bring that experience to managing the board and his work with the director general in refocusing FÁS and addressing the issues referred to by Senators. It is important to remember that we will invest €1 billion this year in a range of labour force measures. We have already spoken extensively in the House about the specific programmes undertaken by FÁS and the doubling of capacity. Yes, there is a need, as Senator Boyle and others have said, to match that capacity and match the new training courses to the new jobs. I will happily discuss with Senators how we can change the first interaction with job seekers when they are first referred to the employment services.

The issue of community employment was raised. An extra 500 places on community employment schemes were provided for in this year's budget and they will be allocated accordingly. I support the community employment scheme, under which, as Senators said, much good work is done. However, it would probably be worthwhile having a debate — perhaps not in the Seanad but at committee level — about the actual impact of community employment schemes on the labour market. Are we training people for the labour market or providing a social economy service? A debate on this aspect of the community employment scheme is necessary.

Much work is under way under the Youthreach programme, with €110 million invested and 6,000 places. The Youthreach programme is directed at unemployed young early school leavers aged 15 to 20 years and provides them with basic skills and work experience. It facilitates them with opportunities to progress to further training or employment and continues to be a key element of our labour market activation provisions for young people. I engaged with some of my local Youthreach programmes before Christmas and found them to be excellent. We will invest further resources in this area next year.

In the region of 30,000 trainees or 36% of those who participated in FÁS training programmes in 2009 were from the under 25 year age group. I have asked FÁS to continue giving priority to this age cohort in 2010 and beyond.

Since there has been much discussion about the work placement programme, I will refer to several matters raised. Senators Bacik and McCarthy stated they had a number of ideas in this regard and I look forward to them sharing them with me. Senator Callely referred to the need for such a scheme. One is in place, but Senator Prendergast raised the concern that it was being used to displace those currently in employment. With FÁS, we invest considerable time locally in ensuring the places available under the scheme do not displace those of existing employees. This is an important aspect of every work placement programme. A number of Senators referred to the need for communities to be involved in FÁS work and for people to be available to do community work. I would recommend any community organisation to use the work placement scheme to register with FÁS in order to provide people with work experience.

Senator Carty referred to the matter of apprentices, a particular challenge which I will spend much time tackling this year. Apprentices are affected more than most, with many being made redundant, having partially completed their apprenticeships or having only been taught the basics. The majority of apprentices are under 25 years. Given the nature of the apprenticeship system where being employed is a key requirement, the Government has initiated several measures that will enable 4,000 redundant apprentices to progress in their apprenticeships. We have agreed with ESB Networks that it will take on 400 redundant apprentices at phases 5 and 7 over a period of 18 months. We have amended the rules for off-the-job training to facilitate redundant apprentices to progress in their apprenticeships. We have also introduced the employer-based redundant apprentice rotation scheme to facilitate and support employers in providing on-the-job training for redundant apprentices. I am open to ideas where apprenticeships are concerned. As Senator Carty stated, there will come a time when we will need every apprentice. I am anxious that they complete their apprenticeships and that we keep them in the country.

This weekend we will give preliminary notice of our intention to advertise for proposals under the labour market activation fund which will involve a sum of €20 million in 2010. The fund which is being managed by my Department will seek to support innovative proposals over and above current provisions for the unemployed. We expect that this year the fund will support 3,500 training places. It specifically targets the low-skilled, those aged under 35 years and those formerly employed in the construction, retail and manufacturing sectors. Many Senators have referred to this cohort as potentially being the lost generation unless we intervene. I look forward to proposals being made under the fund. If it is successful, I will campaign to have it expanded next year.

The measures are not limited to training and work experience. There has been much discussion about education. There were people in the Visitors Gallery interested in the matter of mature students. The number of back to education allowance recipients has increased to 18,000. In the further education sector this year an estimated 125,000 learners will benefit from part-time learning opportunities, in addition to the 40,000 learners who will benefit from full-time further education opportunities under the vocational training opportunity scheme, VTOS, in PLC courses and the Youthreach programme. There is clear evidence of increasing numbers participating in the higher education sector, as there is in other economies.

During 2009 more than 900 unemployed young people participated in short courses in institutes of technology, while 160 students undertook accelerated level 6 programmes. In 2009, 1,800 unemployed people were supported to embark on part-time undergraduate and postgraduate courses in areas that support work on the smart economy.

Many Senators made points about the banks. Let us be clear that our intervention was to ensure a viable, functioning banking system which forms the basis of any economy. Working this out does not require a rocket scientist. We must see this intervention through to ensure the banks will lend to small businesses again. I reiterate the call made by many Senators and earlier this week by the Governor of the Central Bank on the banks to lend to viable small businesses to give them a chance to create employment.

I appreciate the large number of ideas expressed by Senators. It is regrettable that Senator O'Doherty felt the need to launch his by-election campaign with a personalised attack on the Tánaiste who is leading many of the initiatives under discussion. If the Senator is half the representative during his time in this or the Lower House that she has been to the people of County Donegal, he will do a good job, but I am sure we will have more of the same in the coming months.

I thank the House for this discussion. I want to engage at committee level — I see Senator Ryan present — on this issue. Youth unemployment gives me great cause for concern and I will invest much time and effort this year in dealing with it. I am open to considering new ideas and suggestions in so far as that is possible.

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I must call the representative of the Labour Party to conclude at 6.58 p.m. As approximately eight minutes remain, I will call on Senator Ryan next.

Brendan Ryan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will only take four minutes and can share time.

Alex White (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about Senator O'Malley?

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Unfortunately, I will be unable to call her in the time allowed.

Alex White (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On a point of order, if I have two minutes, I will be happy to give at least one to Senator O'Malley.

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is okay.

Fiona O'Malley (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Senator.

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Senator Ryan has four minutes.

Brendan Ryan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I had intended to be parochial, but I will skip that part in the interests of time.

I wish to raise two issues associated with employment and unemployment. The unemployment figures, quoted by many, are distressing, but the trauma of being unemployed is more harsh for many. Anxiety, depression, stress and low self-esteem are just some of the social pressures with which an unemployed person may need to contend as a direct result of losing his or her job. People are forced to deal with social welfare services for the first time, possibly a lengthy process and soul destroying experience. It is a disgrace that it can take up to 22 weeks to receive job seeker's allowance. In the meantime, many of our constituents believe they must go cap in hand to community welfare officers to tide them over until their claims are processed. The social welfare system should act as a support system during this difficult period. However, owing to the massive increase in numbers, it is under considerable strain.

Those unlucky enough to be turned down and who appeal the decision must face a wait of six months on average, longer if granted an oral hearing. These waiting periods are too long for those who find themselves out of work. In 2008, 39% of appeals were granted in respect of jobseeker's benefit. The people concerned should not have been kept waiting. The statistic is too high and must be addressed urgently. Some 39% of deciding officers' decisions were found to be incorrect. The decisions in some 28% of jobseeker's allowance cases, equating to a figure of 660, were overturned, with the decisions in respect of 41% of jobseeker's allowance means tests. The number of successful appeals means there is an issue that must be addressed. If this is not the Minister of State's responsibility, I ask him to take up the matter with the relevant Minister. I could raise it elsewhere but doing so in this context is important.

The Minister of State has responsibility for another matter. Many employed persons are not receiving their legal entitlements and are being exploited by unscrupulous employers. The National Employment Rights Authority, NERA, revealed in its review of 2009 that more than 6,000 full-time and part-time workers — I am particularly concerned about the latter group as the people concerned are trying to earn a few extra bob to get themselves through — had been paid less than their statutory minimum entitlements to the tune of €2.5 million in total, or an average of €410 per person. Despite NERA's good work, Government cutbacks have forced it to reduce the number of labour inspectors from 80 to 69. Does the Minister of State believe like me that this is only the tip of the iceberg? Many are of the view that NERA should not be intervening and that in doing so it puts pressure on employers, but it is merely enforcing the legislation enacted in these Houses. It is examining these serious problems. Immediate action is required.

I will conclude on that point, as I want to share the remainder of my time with my colleagues, Senators O'Malley and Alex White.

Fiona O'Malley (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank my Labour Party colleague for sharing his time. More importantly, I thank him and his party colleagues for raising this issue, the consideration of which needs a good deal of time. A lot of our energy in dealing with the economy has been spent on addressing the banking crisis, which has also been necessary. As Senator Ryan said, unemployment is a scourge and it is truly appalling for a person to find that he or she no longer has a job. We, therefore, need to focus on addressing the issue.

I applaud the initiatives commenced by Minister of State. Clearly, he is somebody who is not interested in quoting statistics but in arriving at solutions. I accept that some of the initiatives, about some of which Senator Doherty spoke at length, are not easy to deal with. Under initiatives to tackle youth unemployment social welfare payments will be cut to encourage young people to participate in training, but that is what the Minister of State must do, as we cannot train people for a lifetime on benefits; we have to give them an education and some training. While such an initiative may not be appreciated by a young person who was on a certain level of income, it is in his or her best long-term interests. Therefore, our focus should be on education and retraining.

I am glad to hear the Minister of State will focus on apprenticeships. A person who learns a trade will have that skill throughout his or her life. While there are short-term difficulties, I am glad the Minister of State is taking a long-term view.

We must stand by small and medium-sized enterprises because it is through such enterprises that employment will be provided. I will welcome whatever initiatives can be taken to assist this sector.

I again thank Senator Ryan again for sharing time with me.

Alex White (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank all of my colleagues who participated in this important debate. I also thank the Minister of State for attending, being attentive and what he had to say in responding to the debate.

As Senator O'Malley said, job creation should be at the core of the economic debate we need to have. However, one could be forgiven for thinking otherwise in observing the Government's communication of its economic strategy. It has been successful in public information terms in communicating the necessity to deal with the deficit which we all agree it is necessary to address. It would churlish to suggest that should not be a central economic imperative for the country at this time. Obviously, it is, but it is what one does after that to genuinely and seriously address the jobs crisis that people want to hear about.

I welcome what the Minister of State had to say. He appears to be engaged with the issue, which is important, but that is the job he was appointed to do. However, there is no sense that there is a job crisis and it can be described as such. It can be described, as Senator O'Malley and others have done, by giving an account of the truly dreadful experience of individuals faced by unemployment. Young people are faced by it with little prospect of a future. The Government is in the peculiar position where it is able to address the issue and do something about it, but I do not get a sense from it that there is a genuine jobs crisis. There are lists of various initiatives that have been taken, some of which are not new, having been in place for some time. Some of the initiatives detailed by the Minister of State only skim the surface. He has said the IDA has made seven announcements in 2010 involving the creation of 280 new jobs, which I welcome, but practically every second day a similar number of jobs are being lost. I am not saying it is not important that jobs are being created and that foreign direct investment is being attracted to Ireland — obviously that should be pursued — but we are only skimming the surface in terms of the problem with which we have to cope.

The motion was deliberately kept short and tightly drafted and is to the effect that we need a job strategy. Does the Government agree that we need a full-blooded strategy which is coherent and which people can understand? Instead, in the amendment to the motion, there is list of various initiatives, some of which are old and some of which do not address the issue with the strength of purpose required.

I thank Senators Bacik, McCarthy, Callely, John Paul Phelan, MacSharry, Ross, McFadden, Norris, Prendergast, Boyle, Hannigan, Carty, Donohoe, Doherty, Ryan and O'Malley, in the short time she had available, for contributing to the debate. It is vital that the Houses engages on the issues at the heart of the jobs crisis. I again thank everybody for participating.

Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When is it proposed to sit again?

Donie Cassidy (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ag 10.30 maidin amárach.