We use Google Analytics to see which pages are read and how the site is used, so we know what to improve. This only runs if you accept. See our privacy notice for details.

Dáil
‹ Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Unemployment Assistance for Married Women.

Unemployment assistance for 16-year-olds

Summary

The Minister said extending unemployment assistance to 16-year-olds would carry significant costs and could not be considered without diverting funds from other schemes. The proposal had been referred to the Commission for Social Welfare, whose findings were expected soon.

Ned O'Keeffe Mr. E. O'Keeffe Fianna Fáil

asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will introduce amending legislation to allow for the payment of unemployment assistance to 16 year olds.

Comment on this

Extension of the scheme of unemployment assistance on the lines suggested would have very significant cost implications and in present circumstances it would not be possible to contemplate a substantial extension of any of the existing social welfare schemes except on the basis of diverting funds from other schemes to pay for it.

While the minimum age for receipt of unemployment assistance is 18 years, younger persons have many State schemes available to them including unemployment benefit if they have been in insurable employment, the work experience programme and a number of schemes under the aegis of AnCO and the Youth Employment Agency.

Comment on this
Ned O'Keeffe Mr. E. O'Keeffe Fianna Fáil

I disagree that they have unemployment benefit available to them because I do not see how they could be in insurable employment bearing in mind the position of our economy. Will the Minister agree that such a change will have the effect of stopping many young people from going to England and other countries to seek employment? I am sure the Minister is aware of the problems our young people encounter when they arrive in London, and other English cities, becuse they do not have any money.

Comment on this

I do not agree with what the Deputy has said but there would be serious cost implications involved in such a change. Incidentally, the matter has been referred by the Government to the Commission for Social Welfare who will be issuing their findings fairly soon. It is one of those matters which they have been asked to consider.

Comment on this