asked the Minister for Labour if he has any plans to restructure the apprenticeship scheme in view of the fact that many young people have extreme difficulty in being sponsored.

As I indicated in my reply to Question No. 28, FÁS are carrying out a review of apprenticeship and a discussion document on the matter will be published shortly. I also indicated that this will lead to a general debate on the whole area of apprenticeship, including sponsorship. Following the debate, decisions on the future structure of apprenticeship will be made.

In regard to the question the Deputy asked before I read this reply, the committee who have worked on this have come up with a number of proposals, in some areas controversial, because they will affect the training institutes, the technical colleges involved in the apprenticeship system. The committee worked on the proposal so I hope at an early date, perhaps by Christmas, to publish the report and for a matter of a few months to allow debate on it by the interested groups, and then to get a submission. The real conflict is that to get up the number of people in apprenticeships they would propose to shorten the apprenticeship programme from about four years to somewhere in excess of two years. This is controversial, to say the least.

That was a reply to Question No. 29 in the name of Deputy Deenihan.

I am sure the Minister is aware of the concern voiced by the CII at the severe shortage of skilled people at the moment. What steps is he proposing to take to redress this shortage of labour, especially of skilled craftsmen?

I will have tongue in cheek if I say I accept there is a skill shortage. Every Deputy in this House writes to me regularly about very well qualified tradesmen seeking jobs. I often feel like sending them all to the CII. I do not think we are in that position yet, but perhaps in the future we could run into skilled shortages and we have to ensure that we continue to qualify.

Will the Minister accept that if there are not skill shortages now some can be anticipated in the very near future, as happened in the seventies when recovery set in?

Yes.

Will the Minister also accept that it would be much better for us to train many more apprentices than we are doing, even if it means they are going to emigrate? At least emigrating with skills gives them a better chance abroad.

It is for that reason — not to make them emigrate — that we wish to have more skilled people within our labour force for the future, particularly in the construction industry which is rising at 10 per cent this year. However, to do that you have to restructure the scheme. I hope to circulate a working paper on this prior to Christmas and I will ask everybody to look at it and to give views on it. It is an attempt to put more people through the present system.

It is very urgent.

Will this committee who are advising the Minister deal with the difficulty of apprentices, or wouldbe apprentices, getting sponsors? This seems to be a bottleneck for young people at the moment. In the construction industry in rural parts in particular where very little is going on, it is very difficult to meet that requirement of finding a sponsor without having to travel long distances. Even if they travel there is no great guarantee for them.

That is one of the difficulties with the present system — not to say there is any abuse, but if you are in the know it is an advantage in the present system.

If you are living in——

The aim of the review group is to try to find a way which would give, if not exactly to the same standards, more young apprentices an opportunity to go through the system. It requires changes in the system which is old and well established. I think it will require some public debate. The documents have been with this committee for two years. I hope to publish it, without recommendations, to get the other bodies who have an interest to express their view.

That disposes of questions for today.