asked the Minister for Labour the number of persons employed under the employment premium programme since the summer of 1975; and if he has any intention of extending the scheme to embrace other industries.

Since the introduction of the premium employment programme up to 1st October, 1976, 5,901 employees have been returned to full-time employment with the aid of the programme.

Measures to increase employment possibilities in all industries are under review.

Will the Minister indicate to the House the number of people who have been re-employed under this scheme since its extension in June of this year, or would I be correct in estimating that the figure is less than 100?

If the Deputy would care to put down a separate question on that, he will get an answer. I do not seem to have it in the material.

It is too embarrassing to answer.

I assure the Deputy that I am prepared to give him answers from all the material in my possession but I cannot give him material which I have not got.

When this scheme was introduced originally about 16 months ago a target was set by the Minister for the re-employment of 10,000 people in the first year of its operation. Now from the reply we have got in this House, the real figure from the inception of the scheme to date is less than 5,500 people.

No, 5,901.

Sorry, less than 6,000. In view of that and the lack of progress in the scheme, would he now consider as a matter of urgency that the industries excluded from the programme should be included in the intersts of getting more people back to work?

Consideration has been given to the question of the inclusion of the construction industry but it has been decided that the programme could not be appropriately extended to that industry for the reason that it would not be possible to provide satisfactory and adequate safeguards against possible frauds. The question of the inclusion of the service sector has also been examined. It would not have been possible to extend the scope of the programme to all sectors of the economy and, accordingly, the programme was confined to those industries hardest hit by recession. In addition the service sector has a somewhat seasonal employment element and payment of premiums might, it was considered, involve subsidisation of normal seasonal increases which it was wished to avoid.

In view of the fact that the increase in the number of unemployed workers in the building and construction industry over the past two years is 99.7 per cent, would the Minister not think that now is the correct time to include them in this scheme?

I have answered the factual question as best I can. I do not think that, in the absence of the responsible Minister, I would be justified in attempting to answer policy questions not falling within the factual brief before me.

Will the Minister agree that his original reply will not be much of a consolation to the building workers?

My function here is to give factual answers to Deputies' questions. They can judge themselves the merits of the replies. Deputies are dissatisfied with the figure of 6,000 employees returned to full-time employment with the aid of the programme. We could wish it was more, but there is reason for a certain degree of satisfaction even with that figure. It shows that the concept introduced by the Government was a well-founded one.

If the Minister for Labour were in the House I would ask your permission, Sir, to raise this matter on the adjournment. I realise the futility of that in the Minister's absence. With your permission I should like to raise it next week possibly. Finally, does the Minister regard the achievement of 60 per cent of the target in an extended period as being an adequate exercise by the Government on behalf of the unemployed?

We regard it as a useful exercise and there are 6,000 people at least who would agree with that view.

That is not enough.

I did not say it was.

Deputy Fitzgerald has indicated that he wishes to raise this matter on the adjournment. He can seek to raise the matter at the appropriate time and I will then communicate with him.

Thank you.