asked the Minister for Social Welfare if his attention has been drawn to a report (details supplied) regarding offers of employment being refused by persons in receipt of unemployment assistance; and, if so, the steps he proposes to take to remedy this highly undesirable situation.

: The report in question, which has been brought to my attention, is erroneous and misleading. In view of the wide publicity which it has received I propose to give the full facts of the matter.

The Athlone Urban District Council proposed to employ about 15 people on amenity development work under the Environmental Improvements Schemes Programme 1978 and requested the National Manpower Service in Athlone to submit the names of suitable people for interview. Of those to be employed at least three out of every four were to be schoolleavers under 25 years of age who had not had previous employment experience. The basic weekly pay offered was £55 and the employment was expected to last for six months.

The National Manpower Service arranged an interview session and invited 147 young people, male and female, who were on their schoolleavers register to call to their office to discuss the proposed employment with them and with a representative of the urban district council. Of these only 12 turned up for interview. A further interview session was arranged by the National Manpower Service for which ten others turned up.

After the first interview session the National Manpower Service requested the employment exchange in Athlone to submit the names and addresses of suitable persons who were registered as unemployed. The exchange forwarded a list of 42 names who were called for interview. Of the 42 persons, 12 failed to turn up for interview. Of the remaining 30, offers of employment were made to 11 of whom six took up work and remained in the employment.

The claims for unemployment benefit and assistance of the 42 persons concerned were then reviewed by the employment exchange in accordance with normal practice. As a result of this action payment is no longer being made to 23 of them. These are the 11 persons to whom offers of employment were made and 12 persons who failed to turn up for interview. The remaining 19 attended for interview but were not offered employment and their entitlements are not affected.

In conclusion I wish to emphasise that the situation was dealt with in accordance with the normal well-established procedures. These require that where placement officers have been notified of vacancies which they are unable to fill they should apply to the local Social Welfare office for the names of suitable persons. The local office supplies those persons with introduction cards and the placement officer reports back to the Social Welfare officer whether the persons have attended for interview and whether they have been given offers of employment.

: Since the Minister has said that the statement concerned was misleading and having regard to the front-page prominence given to the matter in one of our national newspapers, would he not consider it necessary at least to advise the newspaper to print a correction?

: Yes.

: The Minister seems to have good contacts with the Press.

: I am glad that Deputy Belton tabled the question because I was very annoyed when I read the report. It seemed to indicate that there were many lay-abouts in the area concerned, people who would not work, whereas the reverse is the case. However, I trust that the reply I have given today will be given publicity equal to the publicity that was given to the other story.

: Is the Minister aware, too, that the report indicated that 40 or 50 girls took up the employment that had been offered to the other people?

: The facts are as I have given them.

23.