asked the Minister for Labour if he will give a report to the House on the effects of the cutbacks in the AnCO training schemes for 1986.

17.

asked the Minister for Labour if he will give details of the cutbacks affecting manpower services for 1986.

20.

asked the Minister for Labour the full extent of the major cutbacks in the training programmes conducted by AnCO and the other agencies; if he will confirm that the Teamwork scheme has been cut by 41 per cent; and if he will state Government policy in relation to training-work programmes in 1986.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 17 and 20 together.

AnCO, CERT and the Youth Employment Agency are planning outputs of 15,000, 2,414 and 4,634 man years of activity respectively in 1986 which is broadly in line with that achieved in 1985. The original allocation for Teamwork in 1985 was £6 million. During the year a further £2.5 million was provided giving a total of £8.5 million for the scheme in 1985. The allocation for Teamwork in 1986 is £5 million. The allocation was decided upon in the light of the budgetary situation.

I expect to achieve in 1986 an overall activity level of 45,250 man years on training, employment and work experience programmes as against a figure of 38,484 man years in 1985. The broad picture is, therefore, one of an increase of 18 per cent in training, work experience and employment schemes.

The word coming back from all the training centres is that there are massive cutbacks. There are many courses which are not taking place. There are others which have been severely reduced and others where the numbers are way down. It is easy to put up the overall numbers by having classes double the size on minor and limited courses. Would the Minister of State not agree that the more sophisticated courses and in particular the Teamwork courses have been drastically reduced this year?

In some cases this is related to the fact that European social funding might not be available for the particular schemes. For instance, it is interesting to note that under the social employment scheme there was an increase of 604 per cent in participation from 1985 to 1986.

I do not object to the grouping of the three questions, but the social employment scheme has nothing whatsoever to do with AnCO.

I am giving the overall activity level of training, employment and work experience programmes. These have gone up from 38,484 to 45,250.

I do not object to the Minister of State grouping the three questions, even though they are broadly based. Could the Minister of State give the figures the question asked for in relation to AnCO — the number of people who will be trained by AnCO, and no other organisation, during 1986?

In 1985, 13,250 under 25 years and in 1986, 13,400.

Would the Minister of State agree that, with the large number of young people who are out of work and the continuing increase in school leavers who are unable to obtain employment, there is no increase in the numbers involved in AnCO training schemes in 1986? Would he further agree that the range of courses has also been severely reduced, that the numbers attending courses have risen dramatically and that the whole quality of AnCO training has been severely affected for 1986?

The quality of AnCO schemes and the determination of the number of schemes in operation are separate questions. This refers to the effects of the cutbacks on the AnCO training schemes. If the Deputy wishes to put down a specific question with regard to the workings of any scheme, or the range of schemes, I would be happy to give him full details.

The number of people attending courses has risen dramatically and this lowers the quality of training because instructors are not able to give the individual tuition which they previously gave. Surely that is related directly to the effects.

Does the Minister accept that AnCO, for the first time in a number of years, have not received adequate funding and what is the reason? The training programmes have been severely affected. The number of instructors has been reduced and the numbers attending the courses have risen dramatically. There are not as many courses in operation now as there were in 1968. Does the Minister accept that?

I accept that everybody is concerned with youth unemployment. These questions refer to AnCO training schemes, manpower services and training programmes. I have given the Deputy the overall picture with regard to those three matters.

May I ask the Minister what action the Government will take to give the necessary funding to AnCO which has been taken away by the lack of resources from the European Social Fund?

The overall position, as I have said, is that the figure was increased from £38,000 to £45,000 for 1985-86.

Would the Minister give the reduction in the amount of money given to AnCO because the European Social Fund has not been funding AnCO courses? The Government failed to supplement that difference in 1986.

The Deputy is aware that we received 13 per cent of the European Social Fund last year. That is down to about 9 per cent this year.

How much in money terms?

I do not have the figure but I will communicate with the Deputy in the matter.