Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-79)
NORTHERN IRELAND
DEPARTMENT FOR
EMPLOYMENT AND
LEARNING
2 MARCH 2005
Q60 Chairman: You said several times,
indeed the whole purport of your response was, that you are dealing
with very difficult youngsters who have never had any opportunity
before but, as Mr Steinberg says, look at the Report. I am astonished
in asking these questions that you do not accept that the sort
of training you are giving is not appropriate. Look at page 53,
paragraph 3.38, of this Report which you have agreed to: "Responses
to NIAO's survey [for people leaving] included reasons such as
the allowance was not enough; trainees didn't like the occupational
area being studied; the pace of the course was inappropriate;
and work-placement was of poor quality". In other words the
fault does not lie with these youngsters; it lies with your scheme.
Mr Haire: We certainly have to
listen to the concerns of 16-year olds. The 16-year olds will
have views about schemes which they will voice. One will have
to judge the quality of some of those.
Q61 Chairman: So they are talking rubbish,
are they?
Mr Haire: We have to listen to
them. This is one of the key areas where they have had difficulties
because these young people have not taken exams in other areas
or had classroom experience. We have been piloting a scheme which
helps them achieve the NVQs they need in a different way by processing
the exams in more appropriate ways to achieve that using different
techniques and that seems to be showing early signs that it will
be of value, so we are trying to listen to their needs in this
area. We clearly are using the inspectorate and the other processes
I have put in place to try constantly to push up the quality of
the work experience they are getting, but these are tough areas
to achieve in a small business economy. Clearly that is the challenge
which my department must fulfil.
Q62 Mr Jenkins: When you read the Report,
Mr Haire, were you very disappointed with it or very pleased with
it or indifferent?
Mr Haire: Certainly not indifferent.
When I joined the Department a year and a half ago, and I received
this fairly early on, it did seem to me to demonstrate that there
were good aspects to the scheme. It is a very important scheme,
the outreach is important to this group, and also it is important
for Northern Ireland to gain skills, but it did demonstrate to
me the range of challenges we had to make sure that we get uniform
quality.
Q63 Mr Jenkins: Let us take the scheme
itself, shall we? When you have got a training scheme are you
constantly breaking this scheme down, because you have mentioned
that these are very difficult youngsters, and I accept that totally,
and you have mentioned that you have been training them in two
areas. There is a job training or an employee standard, if you
like. We have done this in England and we had to buy alarm clocks
and provide bikes to get the youngsters up in the morning, because
they had come from very disruptive families, and get them into
work. Just to clock on at eight o'clock in the morning and stop
there for a day was in itself a success. I accept that programme
in its entirety. It is a good, worthwhile programme that should
be developing the basic skills of youngsters. Within the report,
however, I cannot find the elements of the training organisations
that take this on as a crucial basic task and the success rate
they have with it. All I see in this Report is a combination of
various training organisations which do not seem to have the ability
to do this. We have gone through that in England many years ago
and we have moved on. Have you learned from the English experience?
Mr Haire: In paragraph 1.7 the
Report sets out the three levels of this scheme and what you have
described is perhaps appropriate for this 15%, the ones with the
least skills, the ones we are trying to get to level one, the
Access scheme. A lot of the work in that scheme was done by working
closely with all authorities in the British Isles. We have regular
contacts and we learned a lot from the entry into employment schemes
etc, and we have modelled a lot of this on that area.
Q64 Mr Jenkins: The first thing you do
with a youngster when they walk through the door is a programme
of assessment to assess where they are, to assess their learning
capability, and then attach them to the right programme. Are all
your young people assessed on entry or prior to entry into your
schemes?
Mr Haire: Yes. The careers officers
assess all young people before they come in and indicate which
areas they should go to in the process.
Q65 Mr Jenkins: So we know what they
are doing in the job area.
Mr Haire: And also the skill level
which will be most appropriate.
Q66 Mr Jenkins: I have not got to the
skill level yet. I am just looking at the basic entry requirements
for these people. Do they undertake a contract with you to complete
the process they need to get them up to a basic level?
Mr Haire: There is an individual
training plan that is agreed with them.
Q67 Mr Jenkins: Why is the fall-out rate
so high? Why did you say in response to some people, in fact in
response to the Chairman, "We are listening to these 16-year
olds and we will construct a programme maybe around their needs".
Do you not feel that is a basic requirement which should be in
place now?
Mr Haire: I described earlier
a pilot scheme which we are trying very much on that basis to
give young people, especially the ones coming in here, a broader
training dealing with the social and other issues they have to
get them to a level where wider training is appropriate, and that
has been a very successful scheme. As I said, 65% of the young
people seem to be benefiting from that scheme. We evaluate it
this year and I hope then that we can roll it out more widely
across that particular 15%.
Q68 Mr Jenkins: On page 65 in part 4,
paragraph 4.2, it says, "The Department told us that . .
. it had no clear system for analysing and forecasting skill needs".
Mr Haire: At the time that this
Report was written—
Q69 Mr Jenkins: I can only work on this
Report. Do not take me down that path please.
Mr Haire: Okay; I understand.
Q70 Mr Jenkins: So you had no system
in place for analysing the skill needs, and in fact you did not
even think it was your job, did you?
Mr Haire: Paragraph 4.6 on the
next page indicates that a Skills Task Force would be set up to
deal with those very issues which gave us the ability to choose
the priority areas and at the same time to give clarity in outreach.
Q71 Mr Jenkins: But paragraph 4.1, which
I go back to, says, "The attainment of jobs was not a formally-stated
objective; nor was there an objective to match training provision
with the skills needs of the Northern Ireland economy".
Mr Haire: At the stage that was
written that was right. We then brought a job-focused approach
into this area and I think the report notes that with approval,
that we have taken that on board.
Q72 Mr Jenkins: I will not go through
the figures because I do not think there is much point in throwing
figures around about how many mismatched training schemes you
have got, but obviously within that category, and it was quite
a high category, you must have had trainers providing the mismatched
skills, the skills that were not needed. When Mr Steinberg said,
"How many trainers have you got now?", you said, quite
carefully and guardedly, "Twelve no longer provide the training".
Mr Steinberg's question was, "How many trainers did you have
to finish the contract with?". How many in fact did you sack
rather than that they just went out of the business?
Mr Haire: As I say, there is one
organisation which we indirectly sacked[9]
but we took from other ones part of their contract. We emphasised
output related funding. They only got funding if they achieved
performance and they left the scheme.
Q73 Mr Jenkins: By "they achieved
performance" do you mean that they achieved a throughput
of so many NVQ Level 2's?
Mr Haire: Yes. If they did not
achieve that clearly they would not get funding.
Q74 Mr Jenkins: What about the ones that
failed to get NVQ Level 2 or failed to go through the course?
Did the organisation still get paid for those people?
Mr Haire: Part of their payment
related to that result. Clearly, if they did not get that result
they did not get that payment.
Q75 Mr Jenkins: So how do you know when
the person leaves the particular training course?
Mr Haire: Clearly we have monitoring
returns which have to be returned very quickly to us. We have
got a large range of systems which have to be filled in. Monthly
reports come from the organisations to us and clearly, if they
achieve qualifications, we have to sight up those qualifications
and we have to check with the employers. We have strong systems
there to check these points.
Q76 Mr Jenkins: You have strong systems
to check that they have achieved the qualifications?
Mr Haire: We have.
Q77 Mr Jenkins: There is no case where
a person could be enrolled on a course and then granted NVQ Level
1 and then you get paid for that even though the person may never
have attended the training organisation?
Mr Haire: Our systems we believe
are robust in that area because people have to produce the evidence
that they have achieved these qualifications.
Q78 Mr Jenkins: I am searching here for
the reference I made earlier on, on pages 30 and 32, where it
makes fairly grim reading. You actually paid training organisations
on their work and when asked about it they certainly were not
up to scratch. The Report gives a figure. Is that £166,000?
Does that figure come to mind?
Mr Haire: Sorry; I cannot identify
that figure. If you give me the reference there.
Q79 Mr Jenkins: I would have to go back
to the Report. In the report I think it says, Chairman, "We
were in the process"—that was the word I was looking
at; not, "We have achieved £166,000 of clawback from
these people", but, "£166,000 has been identified
to be clawed back from these people". How much has been clawed
back from these training organisations?
Mr Haire: We identify areas where
we can claw back. We certainly do pursue any areas in this process.
9 Note by Witness: Through renewal of vocational areas
for training schedules resulting in non-viability of the organisation. Back
| 
