asked the Minister for Labour if he will arrange for the payment of a special Christmas bonus to AnCO and CERT trainees, who would qualify for a Christmas social welfare bonus if they were not in training and still on social welfare benefit; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

26.

asked the Minister for Labour if social welfare recipients placed by Jobsearch on AnCO training courses are still entitled to their full social welfare benefits, in particular the free fuel scheme and the bonus week at Christmas; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

50.

asked the Minister for Labour if he will agree to the payment of (i) national fuel scheme assistance and (ii) EC social assistance butter vouchers to AnCO trainees, who are at present ineligible due solely to the fact that they are on training course; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

51.

asked the Minister for Labour his views on whether the long term unemployed will be worse off financially by undertaking training as they will not receive (a) EC social assistance butter vouchers (b) national fuel scheme assistance (c) double social welfare payment at Christmas; if he will adjust their allowances to compensate for such a loss; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

52.

asked the Minister for Labour the reason Jobsearch trainees do not qualify for the Christmas bonus; if they were assured on taking up the Jobsearch programme that they would be no worse off than if they remained on unemployment benefit or assistance; and if failure to pay them a Christmas bonus is a breach of faith with these trainees.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1, 26, and 50 to 52, inclusive, together.

It is my policy that AnCO trainees will not be worse off than they would have been had they remained on social welfare assistance. As I announced yesterday, for AnCO and CERT trainees who are long term unemployed at the start of their training and who would have qualified for fuel allowance and the Christmas bonus payment, I have asked AnCO and CERT to make the necessary increases in their allowance to maintain their level as equivalent to their social welfare entitlement. As regards butter vouchers, these are given under an EC scheme to recipients of social welfare assistance only. I am not able to change the conditions of the scheme. However, I would remind Deputies that trainees receive a meal allowance which should more than compensate for loss of the vouchers.

Finally, I should refer to the enhanced job prospects for trainees as a result of their training courses.

Everyone in the House will welcome the road along which the Minister is travelling but can he tell us exactly what trainees will benefit, and how may trainees are involved? Can the Minister tell the House also the estimated cost of the measure, from what Vote in his Department will the cost be met, and what alternative savings will have to be made by the Department to pay for it?

With regard to the question of numbers, we have to identify those people who would qualify for a Christmas bonus under social welfare because some people on training courses would not necessarily have been in receipt of unemployment benefit. It is estimated that the approximate gross cost of the Christmas bonus for trainees would be £150,000; the net cost to the Exchequer would be £68,000. The cost of a fuel allowance in this respect would be £125,000 gross and £55,000 net. We have been examining the costings over the past few weeks and find that we can achieve the savings from the AnCO Vote.

We are talking about people who are not necessarily on training schemes by choice. As a result they will be losing their entitlement under the free fuel scheme, free footwear scheme and clothing allowance scheme and also possible assistance with their ESB bills. I am asking the Minister specifically to make provision to ensure these people will get their double week payment at Christmas and their free fuel allowance. Because they are on a scheme, and have the same income as they would have on social welfare, will they also be considered for the clothing allowance and for assistance with their ESB bills?

I share the Deputy's concern for the people involved. As far back as last August I said we would try to ensure that they would get whatever allowance they would have got had they remained on unemployment assistance. The Christmas bonus and the fuel allowance come directly within my ambit and I confirm that they will receive both of these. The other matters are for the Department of Social Welfare. I cannot do anything about them.

Can those who are within the area of the Minister's responsibility apply to their own health board, to be considered for a clothing allowance and assistance with their ESB bill, which they would have been entitled to on the basis of income if they had not come under the Minister's area of responsibility? Otherwise they will be worse off, and I hope the Minister will agree, than they would have been if they had not come under the scheme.

The Deputy has already raised that aspect.

I am asking the Minister for a more specific answer.

I have been quite clear on the questions I have asked on both the fuel allowance and the Christmas bonus. The other questions are primarily a matter for the Department of Social Welfare and I suggest that the Deputy takes them up with that Department. With regard to the fuel allowance, those people who would have been entitled to the £5 fuel allowance because they were recipients of long term unemployment assistance but who are now on AnCO or CERT courses, will receive that benefit. The Christmas bonus of 65 per cent of the normal weekly entitlement will be paid by the Department of Social Welfare to those who would have been entitled to that payment while in receipt of social welfare payments but who are now attending AnCO and CERT courses.

I welcome the Minister's announcement of the extension of both bonuses to these categories. I am sure it was pure coincidence that it was announced yesterday, and not today. Could I ask the Minister if he would consider extending the bonuses to those on the social employment and teamwork schemes, who are in exactly the same position and who are losing out as a result of participating in these schemes.

In reply to the first part of the Deputy's question, I announced in August that we would try to extend the bonus when we linked the training allowances rate to the unemployment assistance rate, which was a change from the normal benefit. The reason I delayed the official announcement was that I was waiting to see what would happen in the Department of Social Welfare and, relating to Deputy Birmingham's question, to see where I would get the resources to pay for them. Finally the schemes are not the same. The social employment and Teamwork scheme are not linked to the unemployment assistance rate. They are paid on a separate rate, so I am afraid I cannot do anything for those people.

Can the Minister outline the mechanics for payment? Is it a question of each trainee having to make a claim to be entitled to payment? How will it be processed?

The Department of Social Welfare in conjunction with AnCO and CERT can produce a list of people who would be entitled to unemployment assistance. AnCO and CERT will then pay those entitled. It will not be difficult to administer.

I applaud the Minister for succeeding in making provision for the bonuses in these cases. I would ask the Minister to have due regard to the fact there is a very close margin between the level of allowances paid under the various training schemes and the total entitlement that people on social welfare assistance can obtain, not just in cash terms but in the terms Deputy Stagg referred to. In order to maintain the success of the various schemes could the Minister ensure, perhaps in the forthcoming budget, that there is a net financial gain for somebody to participate in a scheme? Otherwise he will be awarding bonuses to declining numbers of participants?

I will do what I can.