Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

"That Dáil Éireann:

acknowledges:

— the commitment, hard work and professionalism of those working in Job Clubs and Local Employment Services (LESs) across the State, many of whom have given twenty-five years of service to the communities in which they serve; and

— the importance and value that not-for-profit, community-based job activation services provide for users, especially for those furthest from the labour market;

notes:

— the Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands' report entitled "Examination of Employment Services" which recommends the continuation of Job Clubs and LESs in their current format;

— support from both the Mayor of Dublin, Alison Gilliland and the Mayor of Cork, Colm Kelleher for Job Clubs and LESs;

— the failure of the current payment by results service, JobPath, provided by Turas Nua Limited and Seetec Limited; and

— that of the 376,964 people referred to JobPath between July 2015 and July 2021 just over 26,000 found employment which lasted for at least 52 weeks, a success rate to date of 7 per cent, at a cost to the taxpayer of €275 million;

further notes:

— the Department of Social Protection's decision to tender out the services currently provided by Job Clubs and LESs is based on an unpublished report carried out by the Institute for Employment Studies in England, unseen legal advice, and European Union (EU) procurement rules;

— that EU procurement rules clearly state that there is no obligation on any Member State to contract out the provision of services that they wish to provide themselves or to organise this by means other than public contracts;

— that many Job Clubs, local partnerships and Local Development Companies currently providing employment services were unable to participate in Phase One of the Request for Tender due to the tender restrictions or did not tender as they could not meet the financial commitments related to same;

— that existing employment service providers have raised serious concerns regarding the design of Request for Tender 1, the impact the proposed changes will have on employment services and the potential job losses it poses to this sector; and

— that there are 26 LESs and 40 Job Clubs in existence with 307 full-time equivalent posts in LESs and 81 full-time equivalent posts in Job Clubs, a total workforce of 388; and

calls on the Government to:

— protect the not-for-profit and community-based ethos of employment services;

— suspend all plans to tender out employment services;

— establish a stakeholder forum between the Minister for Social Protection and representatives from Job Clubs and LESs to examine the current services, identify issues of concern and bring forward solutions that will allow current services to be maintained;

— examine the possibility of merging Job Clubs in their existing structure and LESs, as recommended by the 2018 Indecon International Economic Consultants reports which commended both services; and

— divert Department funding set aside for the new employment services to expand LESs."

Given the number of times I have raised this issue with the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Heather Humphreys, I hope she knows that this motion is brought forward in good faith and I hope she will keep an open mind to the case being put forward in it. I bring this motion on behalf of the more than 380 staff in local employment services and job clubs throughout the State, many of whom have given up to 20 and 25 years of service to their communities and are highly skilled and educated with vast experience. I am proud to bring forward this motion having met and engaged with many of those workers. I do so as someone who firmly believes in the not-for-profit community-based ethos of the job clubs and the local employment services, LESs.

When the plan to tender out these existing LES and job club services became apparent, we were repeatedly told this was a legal requirement due to EU procurement laws and I presume this is an argument that will be put forward by many Government Deputies in this debate. Yet, the same EU directive is crystal clear in stating that no member state is obliged "to contract out...the provision of services that they wish to provide themselves or to organise by means other than public contracts". Legal advice sought by the Irish Local Development Network, ILDN, from a leading law firm in Ireland confirmed this and concluded that the Department is not required to tender out these services. This legal advice was shared with the Minister. She is aware of it. The ILDN has written to the Minister on three occasions and she has yet to respond.

Added to this is the fact that the unpublished report from the Institute for Employment Studies in England, which the Minister contracted to review all current public employment services and to propose a new design, was clear that a decision needed to be made on whether to use powers to reserve the award of some or all of the contracts for non-profits. The Minister made that decision, which she was neither obliged nor required to. Even if it was the case that she was legally obliged, she was legally obliged to bring forward a public and open competition tender for these services. She was not obliged to dismantle and change the current model entirely. She was not obliged to move from a not-for-profit to a for-profit model. That was a decision the Minister made.

The Minister has also repeatedly cited advice from the Comptroller and Auditor General. A recent letter I received from the Comptroller and Auditor General confirmed that a different contracted service was brought to the Department's attention as not being compliant with procurement and the Department then expanded the non-compliant procurement disclosure to the LES and job clubs. The Institute for Employment Studies also warned that if the Minister were to open the market to full competition, it would clearly need to be done carefully in order to maintain the support of stakeholders and command political support. What stakeholders support the Minister in what she is doing? Who are those stakeholders? As regard to commanding political support, the Minister will know that the cross-party Oireachtas committee on social protection looked at all this. We brought in those involved, including officials from the Department, and recommended that the LES and job clubs remain in their current form.

The same report on which the Minister has based many of her new proposals for employment services also stated that requiring financial qualifications criteria will likely make it more difficult for many existing providers to achieve a pass. The report recommended that the Minister set low financial criteria thresholds and offer an advanced payment to level the playing field, as they put it. The Minister did neither. She required an annual turnover for the four lots that have already gone through phase 1 of between €1.2 million and €1.9 million for community not-for-profit organisations that have charitable status. They were locked out of phase 1 of this tender process. The economist Jim Power, on looking at the first phase of the tender, concluded that the proposed model is for-profit and that the model put forward in phase 1 is "not likely to prove viable for charitable not-for-profit companies" and that is exactly what has happened.

Many issues have been highlighted in phase 1 of the tender process, such as the annual turnover about which the Minister was warned in the institute's report more than a year ago. The Minister also said in the Chamber last week that she has done everything "to ensure the importance of social value and community linkages are reflected in the procurement process." I would love to know how private companies Seetec or Turas Nua proved or showed any link to the community or social values, and perhaps the Minister will share that with us. We have seen what privatisation has done to employment services. We have seen it through JobPath, which has had a success rate of 7% in the last six years. Of the more than 370,000 people referred to it, there was a cost to the taxpayer of €275 million for 7% of those people to be sustained in a job for 52 weeks at least. What the Minister is doing is a mistake. I ask that she look at it again. Everybody involved has asked that she look at it again. The staff on the ground in the local employment services are not happy. The Minister is aware of that and she needs to listen. There are no stakeholders on board with what she is doing and the vast majority of Members of this House are not on board either. This motion asks the Minister to look at this again and I ask her to consider that.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support the motion. The Government's stance is mind-boggling. The tendering process does not make sense and the community not-for-profit model must be preserved and not dismantled. I find it hard to understand why the Government would do something like this from a community point of view, a jobs point of view and a political point of view. Taking the decision to commercialise these schemes and introducing targets and quotas and commissions means that staff will have little incentive to ask what is actually best for a person coming through their doors and would seek to make a profit from them. It will cause a loss of jobs. Groups such as NEWKD, South Kerry Development Partnership and IRD Duhallow have gathered knowledge and skills over the past 25 years and have become experts in career guidance. They have guided our communities through the financial crash and subsequent Government austerity measures.

Since 2008, more than 2,000 people have gone through the doors of the South Kerry Development Partnership. The organisation never said no to them. It kept its doors open when everyone else was turning people away and suggesting they go to Australia. It trained these people and brought them back into the jobs market. The Government says that there is nothing it can do, which translates as "there is nothing it will do". The Government says it has legal advice. The Minister has seen the legal advice that states the Government is not obliged to tender.

These schemes, such as the rural social scheme, have been of great benefit to rural communities. They support the essence of community work, activities such as driving buses, taking the elderly to centres and maintaining sports grounds. Kerry social farming has also seen massive success. The six-year rule will send men in south Kerry away from fulfilling, life-enhancing work in their communities that gives them a sense of pride and return them to the dole, leaving them with nothing to do in these isolated areas and limited social interaction. Why pay them to stay at home? Why not keep them on the schemes? The Minister should admit now that this is a mistake. Who is going to do the community work in deeply rural areas when her 2017 payment structure rules are in force? Rather than helping employers to get cheap labour and introducing a system she knows will fail - and the Minister has heard the statistics in that regard - she should broaden and top up the schemes. She should commission an independent review. A 2009 report said that for every €1 spent, the quantifiable benefits amount to €2.89. The Minister should act now for her own sake.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In 2014, I told the then Minister for Social Protection, Joan Burton, that her JobPath scheme was the stuff of nightmares for the unemployed. After €300 million has been spent to achieve a success rate of just 6%, I have been proven correct. I also said the same about her other madcap scheme, JobBridge. I was also right when I highlighted at the time the concerns among the local employment services and jobs clubs that they could face extinction as the type of privatisation that underlay JobPath would likely expand into their services and now here we are. Where will it end? What is next? Is it the disability services? I will say it again; this scheme is the stuff of nightmares for the unemployed. The latest tender is aimed at dismantling community-based not-for-profit services and doing away with the wealth of knowledge and expertise they have built up in working with local unemployed people, addressing their issues, lending them support and often going beyond the call of duty to help those whom private contractors look upon as cash cows rather than people in need of supports to re-engage with employment. A for-profit ethos should have no role in community services but this Government and all governments since the days of the Progressive Democrats have had blind faith in the market to deliver for struggling communities. It does not do that and everybody in this House should know that.

Dessie Ellis (Dublin North West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Government's proposal to consolidate the community-based local employment services into regional employment services will have a devastating impact on existing local services. In my constituency of Dublin North-West, local employment services are provided by the Ballymun Job Centre and similar services are also provided by the Dublin North West Area Partnership in Rosehill House in Finglas. Both have provided an immensely valuable service to the community in helping to assist people in seeking employment and in the creation of jobs and supports for small businesses. These local services provide what the services themselves would describe as a walk-in, person-centred, community-based employment service. The local element of such services is very important and will be totally lost if such services are regionalised. The proposed closure of these centres will be a blow to the clients of such facilities including those seeking employment, the long-term unemployed and those seeking employment who are in addiction or recovery. There will also be a great loss to the community in terms of the local knowledge and experience of those working in these local services. The present model of local employment services works well. Why change something that is not broken? Privatising these services will make such services profit-driven, to the detriment of the individual seeking assistance. I do not see how an unemployed person will benefit from the proposed consolidation of these services. The considered opinion of those with experience in local areas is that this will simply not work. I agree with this view. Centralising resources will mean that local areas will lose out in direct funding. The proposed model has been rejected by stakeholders, expert organisations and the Oireachtas committee. The model lacks transparency, is untested and will be a results-based process that will put profit before people.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Kerrane has set out the implications of the proposed tendering of local employment schemes. I commend her on bringing forward this motion. Rather than dealing with the situation State-wide, I will point the Minister to a service she knows very well, the Monaghan local employment service. This service has been in operation since 1998. It has secured the esteem and goodwill of the wider community. More important, by any matrix or standard, it has proven to be effective when compared to operations such as JobBridge and JobPath, about which you hear terms like "disconnected" and "out of touch" used. You never hear such terms in respect of the Monaghan local employment service because it works. It is a good service. Rather than putting it under threat, we should be expanding the local employment service in our county. I am asking the Minister not just to support the Sinn Féin proposal today, but to actually implement it to ensure that services such as the Monaghan local employment service are driven by a not-for-profit community-led ethos so that they can actually secure jobs for those who need them, where and when they need them. We have a model that has been proven to work time and time again. It has operated under the auspices of Monaghan Integrated Development, which is probably one of the best integrated development companies in the State. It works and I ask the Minister to ensure it continues to work. She should implement the motion put forward today and end the practice of introducing for-profit elements to our unemployment services.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the motion that is before the House this evening. The Government is proposing the total privatisation of employment activation services through the JobPath model. JobPath was introduced by the former Labour Party Minister, Joan Burton, and the Labour Party has stood over it for years. It has failed to provide quality employment for the vast majority of those who have used it. Since 2015, 283,000 people have used JobPath but only 22,000 of them retained employment for more than 12 months. Its success rate stands at less than 8% with the cost per job coming in at €11,227. That is not value for money. Research carried out by our party has exposed the terrible experiences of many people who have been forced to accept jobs that are totally unsuited to their backgrounds or the areas in which they wish to work. Others have been forced to give up education or part-time work for fear of losing their welfare entitlements. Included in this cohort are substitute teachers. The service is focused on making money rather than on helping people to get sustainable jobs. In contrast with JobPath, we want more investment in jobs clubs and local employment services. These are run on not-for-profit models and are more effective. A 2018 Indecon report concluded that jobs clubs could source full-time employment positions at a cost of €2,444 per person, which is far better than the JobPath cost, which is more than €11,000. In Laois-Offaly, workers and companies respect jobs clubs such as those in Portlaoise, Birr, Tullamore and Portarlington but these are now to be closed down and replaced by a Thatcherite for-profit model. This is a bad decision based on right-wing ideology from Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Labour Party, which put it in place. It is not good for workers and not good for taxpayers. I bring it to the attention of the Minister that the Committee of Public Accounts will be launching a report on JobPath on Thursday which will underline many of these matters and set out clearly what the committee found when it brought in the Department and others to discuss this subject.

Maurice Quinlivan (Limerick City, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I represent the constituency that has the highest number of unemployment black spots in the State. Eight of the top ten unemployment black spots are in Limerick city. I recently commissioned a report on unemployment black spots across the State and it makes for stark reading. Many people rely on the local employment services in Limerick. They have done a great job and would have done a much better job with even a portion of the funding given annually to JobPath in its different incarnations. These services are vital to many Limerick communities. They are a crucial service particularly for those who are furthest away from the labour market. Aside from providing the necessary skills people need to get back into the labour market, they also offer hope. We have yet to see the external review conducted on behalf of the Department of Social Protection on the basis of which the request for tender was introduced in May. The Minister has demonstrated her intention to privatise employment services and undermine the not-for-profit ethos of the existing services. This is a mistake and I think the Minister knows that. The Government is putting profit margins before the well-being of those who have been marginalised. Limerick deserves better as the black spots I referenced earlier are nothing new. Over six years, €275 million was spent and only 7% of those on the scheme found employment for a year or more. Can the Minister imagine the effect it would have had if the local employment services had a fraction of that €275 million?

The Minister stated that she was obliged for good governance and by public procurement rules to put the LES contract out to tender. There was no need to take this approach, and no need to approach the tender process in this way. While employment services should be extended across the State, that should be done under the current LES model, which, if funded, that model will deliver better results. In Limerick, over the years, the People Action Against Unemployment Limited, PAUL, Partnership, of which I was a board member for several years, has done a fantastic job with the LES scheme. I hope to God that we save it.

Pauline Tully (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I recently submitted a parliamentary question regarding the need to halt the tendering process for the LES until a proper engagement with the relevant stakeholders could develop a more suitable model. In her response, the Minister stated that "extensive consultations" had taken place. However, representatives of SIPTU informed the Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands that its engagement with the Minister’s Department took place on 17 September 2021, which was after the tendering process for the operation of regional employment services had commenced.

The response went on to state that "clear legal advice" had been obtained from the Attorney General that the current procurement "process is not in keeping with our procurement obligations". This legal advice, however, has not been released to the joint committee for examination. The committee noted that Directive 2014/24/EU, regarding public procurement, states that it should be recalled that "...nothing in this Directive obliges Member States to contract out or externalise the provision of services that they wish to provide themselves or to organise by means other than public contracts within the meaning of this Directive".

The Minister’s reply further stated that the new regional employment service, RES, "is not privatisation of employment services" and that her "officials are striving to ensure that the new model does not create any barriers to the community and voluntary sectors or inhibit their ability to submit a [...] tender". Yet, a report commissioned by the Irish Local Development Network, ILDN, CLG, found that the model used in the initial request for tender, RFT, is a for-profit model and that it is not clear that this approach can meet the needs of the long-term unemployed, excludes some cohorts of people, such as carers, lone parents and those referred from complementary programmes, and is unlikely to provide viable, for-charity, not-for-profit companies. This is plainly a privatisation of this service, with minimal consultation and the withholding of relevant documentation. I commend the motion, therefore, which aims to protect our local employment service from privatisation and to let our communities know they are not for sale.

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to address the House. I fully recognise the hard work, professionalism and commitment of all those working on the front line in providing employment services and supports to people who are out of work. I know very well the good work that the LES does in my home county of Monaghan. The services throughout the country provide valuable support and assistance to people at a time of need and it is important that should be recognised tonight.

What I cannot escape, however, is the clear legal advice from the Attorney General that these services must be subject to a competitive procurement process. Representatives of the ILDN have written to me to state that it has legal advice to say that there is no legal requirement to tender. The legal advice from the ILDN was not shared with me or my officials. Instead, the organisation provided a high-level synopsis of the legal opinion in a letter to me. This was shared with the Office of the Attorney General and its view is that its original advice still stands: there must be an open procurement process. I must follow the legal advice of the Attorney General, and whether the Government likes it, we have no choice but to put these contracts out to tender. We must all remember that the most important people in this debate are the jobseekers. My first job as the Minister is to ensure that quality services are in place and available to help them. I cannot do that if there is a question mark about the legal status of the contracts or if there is a lack of transparency about how those contracts are awarded.

Of course, any change requiring existing service providers to submit tenders in a situation where they have not had to do so for more than 25 years will be unsettling. I recognise these concerns, and that is why my Department has engaged extensively over an extended period, going back as far as 2018, with representatives of the service providers. We also split the procurement process into two phases. The first phase extends coverage into areas where there is no LES provider at present. In this phase local partnerships were successful in two of the three lots where they submitted bids. This shows clearly that the community sector can bid successfully for these services. I have no doubt that this success will be replicated in the second phase.

Members will be aware that my Department commissioned an external review of LES and job clubs provision. This review, led by Indecon, involved extensive consultation with the service providers and culminated in the production of two reports in 2018. These reports recommended the consolidation of the LES and job clubs into a single service, which is the basis of the new regional employment service model. The Indecon reports also recommended improving the governance of existing services, along with the need for open and competitive procurement for contracted employment services. As a next step, the Department then commissioned the Institute of Employment Studies and the Social Finance Foundation to advise on how best to proceed, taking account of the wider employment services landscape. These are not-for-profit organisations with international expertise in delivering employment and labour market and social change policies, and, again, these bodies consulted with service providers. They recommended a revised regional employment services model consolidating the services currently provided by LES and job clubs and focusing on people who are very distant from the labour market. While the report is confidential, because it contains detailed costs analyses that it would not be prudent to disclose prior to or during a procurement process, a redacted chapter of the report, relating specifically to the RES model, was provided to the members of the Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands.

Some Members mentioned the need for further engagement with the sector. There has been extensive engagement, and I will give a brief overview. In 2018, the CEOs of all the local partnership companies were briefed, while, in January 2019, my Department hosted a briefing on Indecon's recommendations. The Institute of Employment Studies also consulted with representatives from the sector and the Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed, INOU. In 2019, my officials visited every provider to inform them of the process and to garner their views and suggestions. Briefings then took place on the first RFT process and a further briefing session on the approach to phase 2 was held this month, which was exclusively reserved for staff or board members of parties interested in bidding. As part of this session, feedback was sought on views with respect to the design of the first procurement phase. I also instructed my officials to meet with representatives of SIPTU, Fórsa and the ILDN in a forum to discuss their issues, including their feedback on the first RFT. I also met with representatives of the ILDN, and I will again meet with them, and with representatives of all the local partnerships, later this week. Therefore, there has been and continues to be a significant level of engagement in this regard.

The bottom line, however, regardless of this major degree of engagement, is that existing providers would, understandably, prefer if the tender process could just be halted. I have no doubt that every Deputy would also like to have their contracts renewed continuously, regardless of performance, but that is not how the world works.

Stopping the tender process is not an option and everybody in this House concerned about compliance with EU law and proper standards of transparency and governance knows that this is not an option. However, I assure Deputies that suggestions arising from the extensive consultation with the sector have been incorporated into the design of the RES model and feedback from the first phase of procurement is informing the finalisation of the tender design for the second phase. In particular, the design will address issues such as cash flow and minimum referral volumes, and will include a strong emphasis on social value and linkages.

The Sinn Féin motion once again attacks JobPath, a contracted employment service delivered by Seetec and Turas Nua. The two companies involved are community and staff-based enterprises.

One is owned by a farmers' co-operative and the other is majority owned by its staff via a staff trust. Between them the two providers employ over 480 staff all around country.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Useless.

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sinn Féin Deputies are doing a disservice to those 480 people who get up every day, go to work every day and do their best to help people across this country. The evidence from the OECD report clearly shows that individuals who were supported by JobPath were more likely to enter employment, remain in employment for longer and have higher earnings from employment. I encourage the Sinn Féin Deputies to speak to their party colleague in Northern Ireland, the Minister for Communities, Deirdre Hargey, MLA, who clearly recognised this when her Department recently awarded employment service contracts to one of the JobPath providers, Turas Nua. That is the same JobPath provider Sinn Féin is so critical of in this House. It is happy to give it contracts in Northern Ireland.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Who oversees that? It is a Tory Government.

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My priority is about delivering the best possible employment service for the people who need our help and ensuring we do so on a sound legal basis. I think it is important in the context or this motion to note two important facts that are central to an informed and accurate discussion. First, LES and job club services are not delivered directly by the State. The decision to establish LES and job club services on an externally contracted basis is not a new decision but was in fact taken 25 years ago. These services have always been externally contracted. That is a simple fact. On the basis of the legal advice received, there is no escaping the obligation to contract out the delivery of services. I am aware that some observers think that there might be an escape clause of some type. There is not. This advice comes from the Attorney General and has been discussed at Cabinet. There is an obligation on the Government, myself as the responsible Minister and my Department to act in accordance with this advice and adhere to procurement law.

My number one priority as Minister is to provide the best possible service to help those who are unemployed. I value the work of all the staff and services providers who work with my Department to deliver on this important objective. I want to support them and help them to ensure that they can continue this work. However, I must do this in way that is compliant with the law and that adheres to the necessary standards of transparency and good governance in public procurement. My Department has listened carefully to all of the concerns expressed. In particular I emphasise that the regional employment services tender includes a strong focus, with a high level of marks awarded, on delivering social value through clear embedded linkages with the local community. Despite Sinn Féin's assertion to the contrary, the evidence from the phase 1 process is that community and voluntary groups can succeed in securing contracts. I have no doubt this will be replicated as part of phase 2. The Government and I are committed to expanding the provision of high quality services across the State so that we can support all those who need assistance in progressing towards employment. It is imperative that we deliver the best possible services to our people, that these services are available, effective and are procured in a way that meets the State's legal obligations.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sharing time with Deputies Mythen, Patricia Ryan, Gould and Clarke. I know a little more than most about this subject. I was on the national executive of the Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed many years ago when these job clubs and local employment services were being put together. We were part of the team that worked around a community based response, working with people who were unemployed to put together tailor-made training programmes to help them get back into the world of work. This is good for unemployed people and good for businesses, which get workers who are fitted and want to stay in that career path down the line. This makes sense from every perspective. The importance of the motion of my colleague, Deputy Kerrane, is that it is about community working together. I will tell the story of our local job club in Buncrana. It is 20 years in place. In all of those years I have been a public representative and not once have I had a complaint about that service from people who are unemployed or from businesses. It was a tremendous service that is serving our community for 20 years, a whole generation. When it comes to JobPath and the Tory, right wing privatisation model, I could not tell the number of people in the community sector who are unemployed and have had a terrible, demeaning, dehumanising experience within that Tory model.

Does the Minister know what she sounded like when she was speaking earlier? She sounded like Margaret Thatcher. The lady is not for turning. This is right wing, anti-community politics dressed somehow as prudence. It is not. It is anti-community. The Government is dismantling services that work for unemployed people, businesses and communities. For that reason, I say shame on the Minister if she is not going to reverse that position.

Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a wise old saying that if it ain't broken, don't fix it. This is certainly not the case here. The new regional employment services are no match for the local employment services and job clubs. With over 25 years' experience under their belt, they are far better placed to service their communities than profit-driven private entities. I do not see how the Minister can tender out services currently provided by job clubs and local employment services based on an unpublished report and incorrect reference to EU procurement of contracts. This is based on the previous record of JobPath, which had a success rate of 6% between 2015 and 2021, costing the taxpayer €275 million. Worst of all, it is based on the ethos of privatisation, throwing citizens into a cauldron of box-ticking exercises with the whole purpose being driven by financial results and massive profits while simultaneously taking out walk-in and wrap-around services. This disproportionately affects lone parents and people with disabilities, including those with limited education.

I have spoken with my local employment service officers. They are a tremendously hard-working group of people providing vital walk-in and wrap-around services, particularly to those on the lower employment scale. They have been cost-effective for over 25 years. The services they provide are totally person-centred and community based. The Minister must foster and protect the not-for-profit local employment services, not deplete them or replace them with an alien entity whose goals we all know will be far removed from the welfare of our local communities.

We ask that the tender process be re-examined as it is stacked on the commercial privatisation side. Local employment services are not-for-profit organisations with charitable status. Therefore, they will not be able to compete with the current austere terms and conditions, one of which is that they must have a turnover of €1.2 million. This multiplies the risk which is held individually by each manager and therefore will threaten the existing 26 branches and exclude them from the tendering process along with closing 40 job clubs.

With this in mind, we are asking the Government to see the merit and true value of our local enterprise services and to support our motion. I wish to acknowledge the Trojan work of my colleague, Deputy Kerrane, in preparing the motion.

Patricia Ryan (Kildare South, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Kerrane for bringing this motion forward. It is fantastic work. The Government thinks it has a Midas touch where it can turn everything into a money-making opportunity for its friends and squeeze a profit out of issues such as homelessness, the health crisis and asylum seekers. Society is not supposed to turn monetary profit. It is supposed to support social goals like low crime rates, support the vulnerable, especially our older people although that is for another day's work, and the provision of vital community services. One such vital service is the local community employment service. It provides an excellent service on a local level and has a supportive and sympathetic approach, unlike the suspicion that the likes of the disastrous JobPath scheme encourages, a scheme which has cost close to €300 million since 2015. If only local employment services could get similar funding. Of the almost 400,000 people referred to JobPath since July 2015, just over 26,000 found employment which lasted for at least 52 weeks. That is a success rate to date of 7%. Privatisation is not working. Commodification of local employment services will not work. Sinn Féin remains strongly opposed to the Government's most recent move to commercialise those seeking employment, which would put profit margins ahead of the needs of ordinary people. Private companies receiving bonuses to tick a box when someone gets a job - any job - leads to poor outcomes for jobseekers. Some 40 job clubs will close their doors at the end of next month and 81 people will lose their jobs. This cannot be allowed to happen. The Minister can be sure that we in Sinn Féin will continue to stand against a harmful model of private employment services that this Government has put forward. Now more than ever, our employment services are not for sale and our communities are not either. I will finish on this.

Athy, Newbridge and Kildare town, all in County Kildare, and Portarlington, County Laois, are in my constituency. Their job clubs will be closed.

Thomas Gould (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have met the local employment services staff in Cork. They have been under Cork City Partnership for over 25 years. Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Green Party councillors in Cork have come out in support of them. The Taoiseach made clear his support for them in the past. The local employment services provide valuable services for those seeking employment, including vulnerable groups, those returning to the workforce after long periods, carers and lone parents. Why, therefore, is the Government still pushing the privatisation agenda? We need a stronger community sector, not profit at all costs. Local employment services provide a vital service that helps people to get work in communities that desperately need jobs and the services provided.

There is so much more I want to say but what I am saying is that what is happening to the local employment services in my constituency, which provide valuable work for the people of Cork, is completely wrong. Shame on Fianna Fáil and the Green Party because this is Fine Gael's privatisation agenda, which it had pushed in respect of Irish Water, bin collections, addiction services, recovery services, homelessness services and local authorities. Ultimately, Fine Gael is the privatisation party in this Dáil, and Fianna Fáil and the Green Party are allowed to get away with daylight robbery. It is about time that they stood up and said to Fine Gael that there should be no more privatisation of our community services.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on my colleague Deputy Kerrane's motion to protect local employment services and the not-for-profit and community-based ethos of existing local employment services.

The proposed model set out in the Government's recent tender process is not the person-centred approach that was successfully fostered by the local employment services and job clubs. The proposed changes will result only in a process of commercialisation which will leave those who most need the services behind. The Government parties' continuous attempts to commercialise those seeking employment are both out of touch and utterly bizarre. The Government puts profit margins above the needs of the people the service was designed to support. From speaking to those involved in day-to-day operations, I am aware that the Government's approach results in people being pushed into unsuitable, short-term positions to tick a box or move them from one column to another.

The Government's tendering process risks pricing the local employment services and job clubs out of the process entirely. That would be a tremendous loss to the public. The community approach, the walk-in option available through local employment services and job clubs, meets the needs of the community in a way that profit-focused models never can. It appears to even the most casual observers that Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, in particular, are enamoured with a profit-driven business model for everything from healthcare to homelessness. It is no surprise, therefore, to see its tentacles spread into the provision of employment supports. What is not clear, however, and what has never been adequately explained is why the Government is insisting on removing local employment services and job clubs from the picture to promote a privatised model of service provision that has no proven record of success.

Having listened to the Minister's speech this evening, it has become incredibly clear to me that she is determined to try to fix a system that is not broken but is crying out for genuine supports to reach its full potential.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak for the Labour Party on this motion, which we will be supporting. I thank my colleagues — including Deputies Howlin and Sherlock, councillors Níall McNelis and John Maher and others in the party — who have contacted me to express their concern over the tendering process proposed by the Department and to express their support for this motion, which I am glad to support. I have received other representations from individuals in local employment services and those affected in Dublin, Cork, Wexford, Galway and other locations right around the country, including my area, Dublin Bay South.

I spoke this afternoon to SIPTU's public administration and community division organiser, Mr. Adrian Kane. I am grateful to officials in Fórsa, whom I am aware have also been working on this matter. I know from engagement with SIPTU, Fórsa and others that we will see SIPTU members in local employment services in County Offaly, including Tullamore, and in Portarlington, County Laois, engaging in industrial action next week owing to a dispute resulting from the Government's termination of its contract with the local community sector companies that employ them. I am aware of the great concern of so many over the prospect of redundancy as a result of the tendering process. I ask the Minister to engage with the unions to ensure redundancies do not occur as a result of the decision.

I am aware that the Minister has spoken about engagement but further, meaningful engagement is clearly necessary. The call from SIPTU is for the Minister to instruct her officials in the Department of Social Protection to put concrete proposals on the table to deal with the job losses in the sector that have already resulted from round one of the tendering process and to halt it or pause it, as the motion requires, before it moves on to round two. All of us will be cognisant that it is a stark situation for local employment staff to be in. They fear they will lose their jobs. Many of them have worked for many years in a system in which they have built up institutional knowledge and know-how on behalf of the State in assisting those who are out of work. There are now fearful that they themselves will lose their jobs. They provide many services in assisting people's transition to full-time employment or additional training. In many cases, these are simply not quantifiable in monetary terms. We are anxious that the baby not be thrown out with the bathwater owing to the change in process.

What many of those in the sector genuinely feel is that the net effect of the creation of the new service and process will be that a set of metrics will be put in place that will specify impractical and unrealistic targets and milestones. There is genuine concern that the new tendering processes will lead to the wholesale privatisation of local employment services and effectively force out community-based, non-profit providers. While I accept that the Minister says that is not the intention, there is clear and genuine concern that this would be the effect of the process. Although we are still working through the devastating Covid pandemic, we are all conscious that these sorts of community-based, not-for-profit services are needed, now more than ever, in local areas. That is why I stress again the need for meaningful engagement with representatives of staff, service providers and service users. We want to ensure the services provided are not monetised in a way that results in job losses and takes the heart out of them. What is unique about the current circumstances is that both employers and trade unions are effectively united on this issue. That does not happen often.

Let me refer to the multiple local employment services that carry out vital work in my area, Dublin Bay South, particularly at St. Andrew's Resource Centre, Pearse Street, which I have visited many times. The service at St. Andrew's, Eastside & Docklands Local Employment Service, is a joint enterprise of St. Andrew's Resource Centre and the Inner City Renewal Group, Dublin 1. My colleague Senator Marie Sherlock commended this service in the Seanad when addressing the Taoiseach last week.

It is really worth mentioning some of the work done through the St. Andrew's centre. Staff there told me they spotted significant demand some years ago for construction skills. We are all aware of shortages in that sector. The service started a construction-skills programme that takes in 20 men every week, many of whom are from backgrounds of severe disadvantage, in some cases involving prison terms or addiction issues. The individuals can start work on a construction site after the intensive training provided on the course. They start work in a skilled job that pays well and that will see an increase in income as time goes on. This is transformative in the lives of the individuals concerned, but the intrinsic value of such a transformative service often cannot be measured in the monetary terms or by the metrics that may be prescribed as a result of the new process.

The service I have mentioned is just one that I am familiar with in my area. I am conscious that there are services in Crumlin, Dolphin's Barn and the Liberties. Among the many individuals who have contacted me — and, I am sure, others — is Ms Una Lowry, the CEO of the Dublin South City Partnership, Dublin 12. She has expressed her concerns and those of her organisation regarding the new models being rolled out. She has said they are being rolled out without establishing any forum that would research and scope out the best model of employment services for those outside the labour market and without seeking sufficient engagement with a stakeholder forum to build a robust new model. When we examine the kinds of models that exist, including the partnership in Dublin 12 and the service at St. Andrew's, Pearse Street, we see genuine engagement with local communities and businesses.

To give credit to Dublin Port, it has given St. Andrew's Resource Centre a site from which to operate its construction skills programme free of charge. We see real engagement at a local level on the ground because these services are community-based and, therefore, have access to funding for a variety of activities that might not be available to privately run or commercial providers. That is the crucial transformative programme that is functioning so well under the current model.

There are, therefore, real concerns that the changes will lead to a deterioration in levels of engagement, community involvement and community benefit. The Minister referred to the ILDN. It is seeking meaningful engagement on the advice secured from third parties on procurement, the financial model, the impact of citizens and the sourcing of funding for redundancies if they arise. The network has reiterated concerns that the model proposed is an unsuitable for-profit model that has not been proven to work anywhere in the world, particularly for those who are distant from the labour market and who will need additional supports to become employed or to enter the labour market again. The ILDN is concerned that the model is not evidence-based, has not been tested or piloted and has not received endorsement from academic researchers. It is also concerned that it will transfer risks from the funder to the contract holder, thereby jeopardising not-for-profit community organisations not just at bid stage but also in implementation as there is considerable risk of operating at a loss that cannot be addressed by reserves or alternative income. These are real concerns that highlight the difficulty not-for-profit community providers face in seeking to enter a competitive procurement process that is very likely to have the effect of favouring the bigger, for-profit providers, which, realistically, will have more experience in making these sorts of tender applications and will, therefore, bring very different kinds of measures to the table. The Minister has said phase 2 will refer more to social value and social engagement. That is welcome but it still does not go far enough in answering those valid concerns that have been expressed by so many entities, including Fórsa, SIPTU, the ILDN, the individual service providers, the CEOs of the services and, most importantly, those who are being given the chance to make transformative life changes through the work of the services.

It is unsustainable to continue on the current trajectory. I ask that the Minister consider, as the motion requires, suspension of plans to tender out services and consider, with her Government colleagues, supporting the motion, as we in Labour Party do. The sector is united against the current trajectory and we ask that she listens to all those who are on the front line.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The next speaker is Deputy Gannon but he is not with us, so I call Deputy Bríd Smith, who is sharing time with Deputy Barry.

Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not sure about the level of interest in this motion in the editorial rooms of the corporate media. I do know that in many hard-pressed working-class communities across the State this will be seen as an important issue being debated. For example, in my constituency, Cork North-Central, thousands of people's lives have been improved by the quiet and painstaking work of local employment services and job club workers down through the years. It is not an exaggeration to say there are many people out there in our communities whose lives have been turned around by those workers.

The Government's plan has two key components. The first is to rip these services out of our communities. There are six local services in Cork, which will be replaced by just one centralised office. The second is to privatise the services. The Government can huff and puff all it likes about how the existing services can compete through the tender process, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. There have been four competitive tendering competitions to date; the private sector has won out in half of them.

In fact, the winners will tend to be not just private sector operators but big overseas private sector corporations who operate on a pure and unsentimental for-profit basis. Local employment services that do win tenders will only do so on the basis of cost-cutting, job losses and redundancies. Workers in the LES in Cork city have already been told as much.

The argument the Government has no choice in the matter and is bound by a European directive will only wash with people who came up the Liffey yesterday in a bubble. The legal advice provided by Arthur Cox that local employment services and job clubs cannot be considered external contractors in any sense by which that term is normally understood is compelling, given these services were fully integrated into FÁS and now the Department of Social Protection, and that has been the case for 25 years.

A Fine Gael pro-privatisation agenda is being pushed here. The fact it is being supported by both Fianna Fáil and the Green Party is testament to the fact that Fianna Fáil, a party that once had its ear to the ground in working-class communities, has lost it completely. The radical image previously portrayed by the Green Party has also fallen by the wayside. No faith can be placed in any of these parties. Faith can only be placed in the strength of the workers' fight and the support they win from the communities. The ballot for strike action in Offaly is a positive step. When workers throughout the country step up the pressure on the Government on this issue, they will have my full support and that of all the People Before Profit-Solidarity Deputies.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Often in here, the Government accuses us in People Before Profit and Solidarity of being very ideological. How else can the Government's approach to local employment services be described except as purely ideological? The basic approach of the Government is what is the point of doing anything if it does not create a profit for some private company? On the other hand, the essence of the work done by local employment services, those who work there and job clubs etc. is to provide a service for people and to assist people in getting into decent jobs. It is what most people would perceive the purpose of social protection to be. It should not be there to make profits.

What is being prepared here is JobPath 2. The estimated cost of JobPath was €11,000 per successful participant. There is a model of incentivisation not for people to end up with the best possible jobs and to be given every possible support possible, but instead for companies like Seetec and Turas Nua to make massive profit from the public. People power and workers' power can defeat these attacks. I welcome the ballot by Offaly local employment service workers, who were due to lose their jobs and are prepared to go on strike on 6 December and 7 December. We need to build solidarity here. The trade union movement should mobilise to protect the jobs. If the Government can outsource these jobs, it will push to outsource more and more of our social welfare and protection services. Workers' power needs to be mobilised in action against this.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Sinn Féin for bringing forward the motion, which I will be supporting. I have had lots of engagement with people in local employment services since these proposed changes were published. It is safe to say the changes have not been met with resounding approval by them. One such email I received recently was from a lady in County Wexford who works at Wexford Local Development, WLD. She pointed out that, on 9 November 2021, the Oireachtas committee published its report supporting the retention of LES, while on the same day the Department of Social Protection was hosting an online information session for prospective tenderers for employment services.

Some of the main issues that were highlighted in the email I received are issues I have already represented in writing to the Minister's Department. The Department did respond. The issues include the following. Impossible timelines have been set without any back-up plan to support long-term unemployed individuals who need one-to-one support. Wexford is about to lose a highly regarded quality-assured local employment service. The effects of this decision will be felt from 2022 onwards, when it will be too late to correct the damage. The LES contractors have been informed they will only receive a six-month contract for 2022, then the service will end. This service will be replaced by a model which will operate similar to the current JobPath, and with the price paid per client instead of a not-for-profit model. If we look at what happened in the past as a good guide to future behaviour, we can see there is not sufficient time to have this in place by 1 July 2022. For example, the JobPath request for tender was issued in December 2013 and successful bidders were only announced in July 2015, commencing operations in late 2015. The uncertainty for the skilled local employment service staff throughout the country is extremely stressful. Every day, LES staff professionally assist unemployed individuals to identify their strengths, develop new skills, boost confidence and find employment. The feedback from clients keeps the LES positive, but the current cruel uncertainty is taking its toll.

Wexford Local Development provides local employment services. It is a not-for-profit organisation that was set up in the early 1990s to help those in long-term unemployment. If the proposed changes are introduced, organisations such as WLD and others throughout the country will be placed in an invidious position. They essentially have two choices. They either tender for the LES or they do not tender. If they tender, they will not be able to provide the service within their budget and therefore will be financially unsustainable because the costs are front-loaded. If they do not tender for the LES, their main purpose for existence will be lost.

Organisations such as Wexford Local Development have done fantastic work through their existence. They have great experience in getting people back and ready for work and are invaluable to society from that point of view. One of the key aspects of the work done by WLD is the time and effort it puts into helping those with special educational and employment needs to develop themselves into a position where they are ready for employment. Under the new scheme, the time will not be available for such work and those who benefited from it will be lost in the system and will find it difficult to be in an employable position, possibly ever. It can take up to two years to help get an individual ready for the world of work. The new scheme only provides for a time period of 12 months.

The other issue raised with me by members of Wexford Local Development is that the new scheme allows for a maximum of 438 clients per year for the entire county of Wexford. To put that into context, there are currently nine guidance officers in Wexford, with a caseload of approximately 150 cases each, which represents 1,350 cases, not counting walk-ins. A reduction of 900 cases is very concerning. We cannot allow hundreds of people in need of employment support to slip through the net.

Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am delighted to get the opportunity to speak on this very important issue. I thank Sinn Féin for bringing forward the motion. In the past year I have received a huge amount of correspondence from people in my constituency, right across County Galway and the west, expressing their concerns, not least the local employment services workers. They have highlighted to me that the new scheme will see the demise of the voluntary, non-profit local employment services. It will also see the introduction of more for-profit ethos into the employment services. I have heard all the speakers today, including the Minister, compliment the local employment services for what they have done in terms of the services they have provided. The question has to be asked if there is an issue with these local employment services. What are they doing that another organisation could do better, if they are doing it so well? Often, we talk about people bringing in rules and regulations and wanting to improve structures and introduce more accountability.

That sometimes gets lost because we introduce all of these systems, paper chasing and paper ticking exercises, and now computer ticking exercises. People cannot go any place without a laptop or an iPad to make sure they have their paperwork up to date. While the whole place could be falling down around them, the computer and the system is right. We must look at this in a common-sense way.

I refer in particular to JobPath. Over my time as an elected representative I have received many representations from people who found that JobPath is actually depriving local community services of the ability to access participants for the schemes. This is because JobPath is based on a numbers game and a particular way of doing things. One incredible aspect is where people who are in their late 50s are being asked to go back on JobPath to train up for jobs they probably will never get. We should be concentrating the employment services on the younger people in their 20s, 30s and 40s to make sure they gain sustainable employment into the future.

The argument is always made that we must train people for employment. There is no better way of training people for employment than by putting them out on a community employment scheme, a rural social scheme or a Tús scheme so they can actually interact with people. They might end up finding a job before the scheme is finished, perhaps through their interview with a local man delivering the blocks or a load of fill from the quarry, and there is work available for them. We need to make sure we get people employed rather than having the paperwork right. I believe the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, understands where I am coming from with all of this.

With this whole tendering process we may lose the local knowledge and we may lose the whole area where the local people know best and they know the local people. Regionality is great, and it is great to read about the regionalisation of services. The problem, however, is we will lose the common touch and the local feel. We will lose the local interest. We will have a service and a system whereby if we want to talk to somebody, we will not be able to ring them. We will have to email them. We will be back to the same old codology we had for a long time.

I put it to the Minister that it is important to listen to what people are saying. The trade unions are saying they are not happy with this. I am aware the Minister has engaged, but further engagement is required. She has said she cannot stop or suspend the tender process. I ask the Minister to consider, whatever happens after this, that it is important the local employment services are available and used because of the asset they are for us in creating jobs. We should not lose sight of that. A huge amount of effort goes into lots of things and into creating something that will probably be no better than what is there already. I have not heard one Member in the debate saying it is time to get rid of local employment services. No one has said that. Why do we try to fix something and change it when it is not actually broken?

Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support the Sinn Féin motion tonight. Workers' representatives in local employment services and job clubs have been outlining their concerns about a new proposed tendering process for local employment services by the Department of Social Protection. The trade unions SIPTU and Fórsa have said the process will lead to possible redundancies and a disruption in services as people return to work following the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Department is arguing the range of service providers for the provision of employment services and supports for jobseekers in returning to the labour force fall within the provisions of Directive 2014/24/EU governing public procurement and must be procured through open competitive tendering. The Department's argument rolls around a determination that to comply with the provisions of the EU directive governing public procurement, there needs to be a competitive procurement process for employment services contracts. However, the Department of Social Protection seeking to tender the services will directly mean workers are now preparing to lose their jobs.

The overarching objective of this Private Members' motion is to end the Government plan to privatise and greatly scale back local employment services. Ultimately, many people believe that a tendering process will more likely suit private contractors who will provide a generic type of employment service. The local employment service, LES, has been working in the community throughout Ireland for 25 years. It means the structure of the scheme is aware of the barriers faced by people from disadvantaged areas and the service is familiar with the people it works with. It is believed private contractors would not have same knowledge or experience of working with people within the community as the current community employment structures do.

Some staff have already left their positions because of the insecurity around their future. Fórsa and SIPTU unions who represent the workers are seeking the establishment of a stakeholder forum and a stay of execution on the public tendering process. They say the Department has told them a tendering process is necessary because of EU law. I ask the Minister to stop hiding behind the Attorney General. This is the way and means around it. There are ways and means around it if the Minister wants to try. The Minister is, however, backed by Fianna Fáil and the Green Party, and they have backed the Fine Gael agenda by doing this.

The Department has said it is working to expand its provision of employment services capacity to deliver high-quality employment services that are designed to meet individual employment assistance and support requirements. We believe the Government should abandon its plans to privatise the local employment services. The new State-wide services expect to begin in January and it appears this will see the end of all job clubs and possibly many, if not all, local employment services. Staff currently employed in these centres are understandably very worried about the prospect of losing their jobs. The new proposed model will see the end of the not-for-profit, community-based, job activation service supports. It will also see the end of walk-ins without referral, impacting on those furthest from the labour market, as well as carers and lone parents, alongside the existing wrap-around supports that are now more important than ever as we emerge from Covid-19.

The Minister has repeatedly said it is open to local employment services and job clubs to tender for the new model, but the majority are priced out from this tendering process. The first tender saw a turnover requirement in the millions of euro with many LES and job clubs unable to take this financial risk.

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Sinn Féin and Deputy Kerrane for bringing this very timely motion and allowing us to speak on it tonight. I will be supporting this motion. I honestly feel the services we have are good enough. While perhaps at times they could have been better, I am very worried that what we will get will be worse. When something is for profit, I am afraid the people who will suffer are those who are on the margins and seeking employment in trying to get going. We know how people are fixed after the virus and the lockdowns. Many people who had not recovered from the breakdown of the economy in 2008 and 2009 still need assistance.

I put it to the Minister that if something is working well enough, why do we not leave it alone? I give as an example Turas Nua, a company that was employed to deal with people in trying to get them back to work. In reality it was about getting people off the dole, regardless. It made it impossible for them. I know of one young man who was about 30 miles from Tralee out on the side of a hill at Knocknagashel. He had to thumb every Monday morning from his house, along the side of the main and dangerous road where many people have been killed, and go into Tralee to present himself, prove what he had been doing and who he had asked for employment. This went on for more than 12 months. Many people would not understand the torture this poor young fellow went through, only if they stood where he left to go into Tralee every Monday morning.

I believe the Government should now abandon the plans to privatise local employment services. Staff currently employed in these centres are understandably extremely very about the possibility of losing their jobs. It will also see an end to people walking in without a referral. Many people do not have a referral and that is how some of the services worked.

The Minister has said it is open to local employment services and job clubs to tender for the new model. The majority, however, will be priced out of this tendering service. We have seen in the past where privatisation of job activity services like the disastrous JobBridgescheme has failed. That particular scheme has cost close to €300,000 since 2015.

The local employment service is and was a vital service in communities throughout the country and is a far more holistic service than the standard profit-driven employment service.

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First of all, I thank Sinn Féin very much for bringing forward this very important motion.

If you were ever to stand back and watch a kamikaze Government engaged in kamikaze-style activities, this is one of them. If you had a death wish, you would not be doing more than what it is proposing to do here. It has already been stated over and over again that if a system or something is not broken, why in the name of God would you want to go at it to fix it?

I am proud of the work that is being done in County Kerry in the schemes there and in the way they have worked, organised their work and the way the walk-ins have been facilitated. Walk-ins are a very important aspect of the employment opportunities that have been given to people over the years and I will explain why that is the case. I am sorry and very surprised that nobody in Government seems to understand it. It suits the people who work on schemes very well in many cases. They are very talented in certain ways and the people who are organising the work can get the most out of those people because they can put them into situations that suit their own particular fields of expertise. In every part of the county that I know, come from and represent in Kerry, we have people who are greatly talented in varying and different ways, and the schemes and the way they were organised suited them.

This privatisation of the jobs activation services will be greatly detrimental to the excellent model that is there. I will be very interested tomorrow night to see who will vote for the Sinn Féin motion, but more importantly I will be acutely watching who will be voting with the Government in this. Any person who calls him or herself a public representative, a Teachta Dála, a messenger of the people, and who will come up here tomorrow night and vote against this motion, I will tell the House what they can be doing when they go back to their constituencies and I am laying it very clearly on the line to them. They can explain to the people who voted them in and sent them up here why they thought this motion was wrong, why they thought it was unfounded, and only they can explain how they would go against the very people who sent them here in the first instance.

This is really getting to the heart and soul of the nub of the issue of a Government being completely out of touch with reality. I ask the Minister again to please publish any advice obtained from the Attorney General in respect of the need to comply with these EU procurement rules because she has failed to do so so far. Sinn Féin would not be bringing forward this motion and would not have to if the Minister brought forward written advice and said this is why we are doing this. She cannot and I do not see why she is not doing it.

Again this is a kamikaze Government engaging in something that will have what I would call disastrous consequences for it. We will account for ourselves here tomorrow night but how the Government will face the people after doing this, I do not know. It is beyond me and I do not understand it.

Marc Ó Cathasaigh (Waterford, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are the three Independent Group Deputies sharing time?

Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, we are. Tonight we are speaking of the value of community-led local development, of community knowledge, response and support to our long-term unemployed. The Minister’s proposal will undermine this community approach and replace it with a for-profit model that will not put the unemployed person at its core. This model will force the providers to provide inadequate services to those who so badly need good quality services with wrap-around supports that are tailor-made and services that facilitate their transition, often from long-term unemployment or underemployment, to a job that is suitable for them.

One of the crucial aspects of the current scheme is that it is local and that people feel comfortable in approaching their local job club and local LESs. The approach is informal. Now, the focus will be much more commercial and the drop-in days will be long gone.

Nobody is saying the current system is resistant to change. It would welcome reform but two things should be noted. The Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands has asked the Minister to halt this process. Why will she not do so? Second, I have consulted job clubs and local development companies in Sligo, Leitrim and across the north west and they are very dissatisfied because they do not believe their views or those of the sector were taken on board in the consultations referred to by the Minister. Was it a box-ticking exercise, the obligatory consultation process, and a case of we will do what we planned to do in the first place?

I have spent long enough dealing with issues around the public procurement directive to know that member states are not under any obligation to contract out the provision of services they wish to provide themselves or to organise this by means other than by public contracts. I remember very clearly the tendering of the last LEADER programmes, which was started by one of the Minister’s predecessors, former Minister Phil Hogan. It took a letter from the European Commission to ensure we had an open tendering process rather than the preferred Government option of local county development committees, LCDCs, running LEADER. We know some governments, at least, have form when it comes to using European legislation to achieve their own policy objectives.

We have another European directive, the transfer of undertakings directive. How will that apply to those who are currently working in job clubs and who may lose their jobs? I put down a parliamentary question to the Minister on this very issue and she told me that in phase 1, it was likely those people would be employed by the successful bidders, with appropriate terms. My question is: will that employment be on the same terms? Can she guarantee this to those workers? She said that in phase 2, should the possibility of redundancies arise, it will be the primary responsibility of the employer. The Minister and I know the employers, namely, the current job clubs and LESs, have no resources whatsoever to provide any redundancy payments. If that is the situation, will the Department stand up and fulfil its obligations to workers in Leitrim, Donegal, Roscommon and throughout the country under another European directive, the transfer of undertakings directive?

I was not happy that the Minister in her comments said many Deputies would like to remain in this House irrespective of performance. Obviously, she used this as a direct comparison to the current job clubs and LESs. That is a very strong statement. It is easy to have a go at Deputies in this House as she is on very safe ground there. She is on thin ice, however, when it comes to making that comparison with those who spent ten, 15 or 20-plus years serving the most disadvantaged into employment. Yes, job clubs are not perfect, but for the vast majority of people who work in those services, it is not a case of them wanting to remain in their jobs irrespective of performance.

I must comment on Deputy Michael Healy-Rae’s statement, and he will not mind if I quote him again when I say that I believe this is a kamikaze action on a system that works well.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I strongly support this motion to protect employment services from privatisation. I was greatly concerned to hear about the new tendering process that the Minister for Social Protection is introducing, which favours for-profit providers over the current community-focused non-profit providers.

This will affect those working in local employment services and jobs clubs, who have been loyal to the service for years and whose livelihoods are now potentially at risk. I have been contacted by staff in my constituency who are incredibly concerned. Services in areas such as Donegal are ending on 31 December, with no plan in place for the demobilisation of those services. This would be a huge blow to our community. The staff there have been left in limbo as they have not been informed of any new job opportunities or any potential redundancy that may be offered. It is completely unacceptable to have staff left in the dark, not knowing whether they will have a job in the new year. The Minister obviously has no sympathy or care for the stress and anxiety this is causing people. I urge her to give reassurances to those staff members as soon as possible.

By allowing a tendering process for the provision of these essential public services, she is failing to recognise the crucial knowledge and skills of the staff in this sector to support jobseekers, particularly those furthest from the labour market. This is particularly concerning at a time when youth unemployment is so high. Both SIPTU and Fórsa have called for a halt to this process but have been met with silence from the Department and the Minister. I completely disagree with allowing private companies to bid for State contracts. How many times must we allow this to happen before we realise it just does not work? We only have to look at the disastrous roll-out of fibre broadband to see that. It is clear that privatisation does not work, including in the provision of community services. I urge the Minister to commit to continuing to provide community-based, non-profit services to local jobseekers in our communities.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Sinn Féin for bringing forward this motion, which I support without hesitation. I know the Minister is busy but it is unfortunate that she did not wait for the end of this important debate. The ideology is all on that side of the House, which is extraordinary given the constant jibes across the floor that we are ideologues. This is a very moderate and reasonable motion. It notes the commitment, hard work and professionalism of the people working in job clubs and local employment services. The Minister did the same in her speech, before going on to endorse a model that will undo all of that professionalism. The motion acknowledges "the importance and value that not-for-profit, community-based activation services provide for users". The Minister, however, went on to say she is going down the for-profit route because, first, experience tells her it is better and, second, we have no choice but to do so under European legislation, without providing any evidence whatsoever to back up that statement other than the advice of the god who is the Attorney General. We are not privy to that advice. We cannot see it and are not even told its context. We are simply told the advice has been received and the Minister is going right down that route.

The Acting Chairman, together with Deputy Kerrane, is a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands, which produced a report on this issue. I had a priority question on it last week and I am glad of the opportunity to raise it again in this debate. We have all read the committee report, which includes nine recommendations, some of which overlap with the motion. It calls clearly on the Minister and the Government to see sense on this matter. It recommends that the Department review JobPath once the referrals cease. I will not read out all the recommendations but the last one asks that the Minister responds to the report. Perhaps the Minister of State, Deputy Brophy, can tell us whether a formal response has gone back to the committee, which was unanimous in its recommendations. I do not see any minority report or any member diverging from the opinion set out. It is very unusual to have that happen with a cross-party committee. Even in the case of Sláintecare, there was some divergence, even though it was called an all-party committee report. In this instance, nobody diverged from the opinion and the nine recommendations. It places the democratic process in a very difficult position when a cross-party committee is pleading with the Minister not to take a particular action.

The Minister, in her speech, acknowledged the wonderful work that is being done in this area but then undertook to do the opposite of what was recommended by the joint committee. She is either trapped by the Department, trapped by an ideology or she fully endorses that ideology. I know her as a very hard-working Minister and I have often praised her on the floor of the Dáil. She must see sense in this matter. Everything needs to be paused. If an all-party committee is unanimous in saying "pause", among nine recommendations in its report, then we have to listen.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important matter. The Minister, unfortunately, has had to leave, but she was in attendance, as Deputies would acknowledge, for the vast majority of the debate. She spoke comprehensively on the Government's approach to the expansion of employment service provision and the extensive engagement with the sector. I commend the quality of the employment services the Department of Social Protection currently contracts. All these services are important in assisting people from all walks of life to progress towards employment. They offer the necessary support and direction to persons requiring assistance to gain and sustain employment. Each success, where a person gains employment, is not only important to that person, through enhanced self-esteem and financial independence, but it also benefits his or her family and the wider community. For some, the journey to employment is longer than it is for others. It is important that we have the right services in place at the right time, irrespective of the county in which people live.

It has been heartening in recent weeks and months to see the continued fall in PUP recipient and jobseeker numbers as more people returned to work. We recognise the important role local employment schemes and job club services play in our communities. I want to make the next point clear for certain Deputies who, in effect, were close to misrepresenting our position. The Government is not opposing this motion, only the spirit in which it was brought forward. The fact remains, of course, that we cannot ignore the legal advice from the Attorney General. Indeed, a number of Deputies who know very well what the legal situation is in respect of the Attorney General's advice chose to muddy that fact in their contributions. They know the restrictions on the Minister in terms of what she can say on the Attorney General's advice. As she outlined, the Government has no option on this matter. The clear, unambiguous legal advice is that these contracts must be subject to a competitive procurement process. The simple truth of the matter is that the State cannot bury its head in the sand and ignore its legal obligations. It must, therefore, procure these employment services in an open and competitive manner. However, we are doing so in a sensitive way that reflects the inherent strengths of the current providers.

Several speakers talked about the need for engagement on this issue. In fact, there has been very extensive engagement, including with SIPTU on up to six occasions since 2019. In total, there have been 140-plus engagements. The Government is working with people and engaging on the issue. In that context, I welcome that the new regional employment service has as its heart the delivery of social value through the harnessing of community linkages. The two-phase procurement process currently under way will deliver an expanded employment provision across the State that better supports the customer journey, sets real and achievable performance targets and ensures all contracts are placed on a sound legal basis.

The motion cited the substance of the recommendations from the Indecon reports. It is important to note that those reports also recommended the open and competitive procurement of services. Surprisingly, or perhaps not surprisingly at all, that aspect was ignored by Sinn Féin in its motion. Indeed, it was sad to hear one Deputy having a personal go at the Minister, slagging her off and comparing her to political figures in other countries. As a credit union manager before she entered politics, she knows a lot about dealing with people and has a very good ethos to the way in which she does her job and helps people in need. Some of the contributions were very disappointing in that regard.

Local employment services and job club services have always, from a legal perspective, been contracted services. As such, they are subject to public procurement rules. I have read what the motion says concerning the new procurement directive and - I suspect, again, that it is wilful - there is a misunderstanding, as in some of the contributions, of what the directive requires. On the basis of the legal advice received, there is no escaping the obligation to contract out the delivery of services in the context of services that have already been contracted out.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Then the Minister of State must reject the motion.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Nor is there an exemption that would remove the State's obligation. The Minister spoke earlier about the extensive engagement with the sector, as I mentioned, including visits to every provider and engagement with representatives from the sector. Those engagements have been critical in the approach taken to expand an integrated, high-quality employment service model, while meeting the need to procure services in line with procurement law.

Several

The design of the regional employment service, which arose from stakeholder engagement, in particular with the ILDN, has been extensive and detailed and has been under way since 2018. Its views, concerns and suggestions have been incorporated into the design of the regional employment service model.

The strong focus on quality of service provision, the social value element and the minimum pricing component all arise from engaging with the sector. We must not forget it was ILDN delegates who repeatedly identified that they alone were uniquely placed to help those most distant from the labour market.

Any reasonable person taking the time to consider what the Minister and Department have done in terms of the design of the regional employment service model and phase 1 procurement can see that it has been designed to enable community providers to compete fairly and ensure that the service is not focused on cost but rather on quality of provision. The key features of the model include a banded pricing structure with a high minimum price, reflecting the actual cost of providing a high-quality service, while preventing uncompetitive predatory pricing. The lot sizes are comparatively small, and I have already mentioned a very heavily weighted focus on social value and community linkages. These are the facts. I reflect what the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, is striving to deliver and how accommodating she has been to existing providers. We know from phase 1 that the community and voluntary sector was successful in two of three lots where it submitted tenders. This proves beyond doubt that it can compete successfully under this procurement model. Indeed, where it submits high-quality bids it can and will win. The Department is committed to taking on board the learnings from the first procurement and will seek to amend the phase 2 procurement process.

We have heard many contributions regarding staff in local employment services and job clubs, with which I fully agree. The motion refers to the number of staff in those services, with selective out-takes from the Indecon report. We have also heard the condemnation of the JobPath service as poorly performing, with no mention of the over 480 staff employed in the JobPath service and their dedication to the people they are assisting, despite the Comptroller and Auditor General finding no issue with the JobPath service. In an econometric review, the OECD found it compared to other services. It supported more people into better paid employment, which lasted for longer.

Staying with the staff of existing services, I recognise that there is concern among staff about their employment. However, from phase 1 we know that the community and voluntary sector competed successfully and I have no doubt this will be replicated in phase 2. In the lots where the preferred bidder was from another sector, they have offered employment to the existing job club staff on the same terms and conditions, thereby removing the spectre of unemployment for those individuals. This is a welcome development and ensures that staff can continue to work to provide employment assistance and advice to their communities.

We all agree that employment services are delivered with professionalism by hard-working and committed staff across all of the different services that provide public employment services. The Government is, through the two-phase procurement process, expanding the employment service provision across the State in a manner that seeks to retain its community ethos and procures these services in line with good governance requirements and on a sound legal basis.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Kerrane for bringing forward the motion and for all of the hard work she has done. I also want to put on the record the commitment and hard work of local job clubs and employment services. In my constituency, they are located in Lucan, Clondalkin, Rowlagh and Bawnogue . I have seen at first hand the dedicated work and valuable service they provide to my community.

I spoke to stakeholders this week and I share some of their concerns. They are concerned about the new for-profit employment service that is planned and the move away from a not for profit model. This has Fine Gael fingerprints all over it, again resorting to the private market to provide public services. This has failed miserably in respect of housing, water charges and bin collections, and will fail miserably with job activation models. The Minister of State mentioned JobPath. Some 400,000 people engaged with JobPath between 2015 and 2021, and only 26,000 found employment lasting over a year, at a cost of €275 million to the Exchequer.

The new model will also exclude people with low-paid jobs in activation training that allows them to upskill and a better life for themselves, something which has not been mentioned. We value the importance of not-for-profit community-based job activation programmes but because of the changes proposed, 40 job clubs could close their doors at the end of this month and 81 people could lose their jobs. That is not job activation.

My constituency office is based in an unemployment and training service on the Neilstown Road. I see the daily benefits of people accessing not for profit training and job activation supports. This is not a personal attack on anybody; rather, it is more of an ideological point. Fine Gael is deploying Margaret Thatcher's Tory politics of attacking our communities. Successive Government have deliberately eroded community development and attacked community resilience. This is yet another attempt to disempower our community.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all of the LESs and staff in Mayo for their hard work, dedication, experience and knowledge of communities, which is invaluable. The Minister of State is making a mistake. He is making the same mistake that was made when the home help services were destroyed through a similar type of model to that now being proposed. Hours were cut. The same happened to community development projects. There are long-term consequences. The Government swiped them away and we can now see the consequences in many inner city and rural areas.

The Government is hiding behind legal advice. I do not believe that the Department of Social Protection is under an obligation to offer services out to tender. Services have been performed since before the European directive ever came into practice. That is a fact. Contracts of indefinite period entered into prior to the enactment of the procurement directive can fall outside of it. The Minister of State is making a choice. I would have more respect if the Minister of State, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil stood up and said this is our decision, we are making it and this is why we are doing it. They should stop hiding behind legal argument because it has been established in case law that there is precedence in terms of contracts that fall outside of the directive. The Minister of State is doing this knowing how it will destroy communities. He needs to own this decision.

Paul Donnelly (Dublin West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Anybody who has experience of this issue does not believe that this is not a process to privatise the service. I have listened to the workers, spokespersons for the ILDN and LES managers. I sat in a committee on many a morning and listened to them clearly outline why this will be a disaster for communities, in particular those most at risk and those who are vulnerable. There is no doubt about it. People on the ground have said they will be left behind.

I call on the Minister of State to protect the not-for-profit and community-based ethos of community employment services and to suspend all of the plans to issue tenders for employment services. It is important to hear the words of people who have been working in the area and have run these services for 20 years or more.

New models of employment services are being rolled out without any forum having been established that researches and scopes out the best model of employment services for those outside of the labour market. This removes any element of choice from citizens of the service. Everyone, regardless of whether they are on the live register, will be required to access public employment services only through the Department of Social Protection in the first instance.

The model proposed by the Department is unsuitable and for-profit and has not been proven to work anywhere in the world for those who are distant from the labour market. It is not evidence based. It has not been tested or piloted. It has not received the endorsement of any academic researchers, the Labour Market Advisory Council, the Labour Employer Economic Forum, LEEF, or the Oireachtas committee that I sit on.

Those who have commented have rejected the approach. The proposed model transfers risks from the fund to the contract holder, thus jeopardising not-for-profit community organisations, not just at the bid stage but in its implementation. It transfers the potential future risk of substantial redundancy costs if future contracts are not secured after the initial term. I urge the Minister of State, at this late stage, to listen not just to us but to those who have decades of experience in this area.

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not know what is more ridiculous, the fact that both Government speakers have commended the local employment services and the job clubs or that they are dismantling them. The Government is getting rid of the current services that exist in the local employment services and the job clubs. The Minister said my reference to the Indecon report was selective. Yes, the Indecon report put forward open procurement, but where did it refer to the change in model? That is the problem. If the legal advice and the EU procurement laws are correct and the Minister is right, that does not suggest a change in the model. The problem is that the Minister is moving from a not-for-profit to a for-profit model and taking these employment services out of the community. That is a fact. It is ridiculous to come here and commend them while taking the services away, with people set to lose their jobs.

The Minister also pushed forward the legal advice. She spoke about it for ages in her contribution. Again, so what if that is the legal advice. I do not take or accept that, but if it was, it does not say that the model should be changed. Why is the Minister changing the model? We have we not been told why the model is being changed. Surely that would be the first thing she would say. It is a joke that the Government will support this motion, which calls for suspending the tendering, when it knows it is not going to do that. Why support it? I must add that it is a disgrace there is no Fianna Fáil Deputy here this evening. The Fianna Fáil Deputies have gone to these people in their communities and given them their support, then they come up to Dublin and do not even have the manners, or the respect for those services and staff, to show up here in the first place. It is incredible.

Local employment services and job clubs are not against procurement. We know that. We see it in the social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP, and the tendering process there. The Minister referred to JobPath. Two or three years ago, a motion was passed in the previous Dáil to end JobPath. It was not just Sinn Féin talking about it. After almost six years, the programme has a 7% success rate. How is 7% a success, with €275 million of taxpayers' money? The Minister said phase 1 was not based on cost. If one did not have an annual turnover of between €1.2 million and €1.9 million, one was failed. It was a pass or fail, and that was game over. Can the Minister of State tell me how it was not based on cost? He cannot do so.

As regards social value and community linkages, what social value and community linkages did Seetec and Turas Nua put forward? They have none. How did they pass that part of the procurement process? Again, the Minister of State has not been able to answer those questions. Not one stakeholder supports what is being proposed. The Minister can talk repeatedly about all the consultations and engagements she has had. She should have been involved directly in many more of them rather than her departmental officials.

I will conclude by saying that the cross-party committee, including Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Green Party members of the committee, put forward the report, with no objection, stating that the job clubs and local employment services should remain as they are. They could have been expanded. If there were issues with job clubs not reaching targets, they could have been identified, highlighted and resolved. The model as is could have been procured with no problem under the current model. That was not the decision the Minister chose. She talked rubbish both about legal advice and in commending and complimenting the staff. That is no good to the more than 388 staff. The Minister talked about disservice to JobPath staff, but the staff in job clubs and local employment services have been treated disgracefully. It is a huge disappointment. I am disappointed that the Minister is supporting the motion, but is willing to do nothing. That is even worse.