COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 5 Feb 2009

Pobal Annual Report 2007.

Mr. Gerry Kearney (Secretary General, Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs) called and examined.

Mr. Denis Leamy (Chief Executive Officer, Pobal) called and examined.

Chairman

Witnesses should be aware that they do not enjoy absolute privilege. As and from 2 August 1998, section 10 of the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Act 1997 grants certain rights to persons who are identified in the course of the committee's proceedings. These rights include: the right to give evidence; the right to produce or send documents to the committee; the right to appear before the committee either in person or through a representative; the right to make written and oral submissions; the right to request the committee to direct the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents; and the right to cross-examine witnesses. For the most part, these rights may only be exercised with the consent of the committee. Persons invited before the committee are made aware of these rights and any persons identified in the course of proceedings who are not present may have to be made aware of these rights and provided with a transcript of the relevant part of the committee's proceedings if the committee considers it appropriate in the interests of justice.

Notwithstanding this provision in the legislation, I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official, by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members are also reminded of the provisions within Standing Order 158 that the committee shall also refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or of a Minister, or the merits of the objectives of such policies.

I welcome Mr. Gerry Kearney, Secretary General of the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. Perhaps Mr. Kearney would introduce his officials.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I am accompanied by Ms Kathleen Stack, assistant secretary, Mr. Seosamh Ó hÁghmaill, assistant secretary, and Mr. Colm Treanor, head of finance.

Chairman

I welcome Mr. Denis Leamy, chief executive of Pobal. I thought you were the rugby player when I saw your name but I am sure you are told that all the time. Perhaps you will introduce your officials.

Mr. Denis Leamy

I am accompanied by Ms Bernie Lynch, director of audit, Mr. Jerry Murphy, programme manager, and Ms Debbie Kivlehan, financial controller.

Chairman

You are all welcome. The meeting is also attended by Department of Finance officials.

Mr. Fred Foster

My name is Fred Foster, secretary of policy division, and I am accompanied by my colleague, Mr. Dermot Keane, who is in the administrative budget division.

Chairman

You are welcome. I invite Mr. John Buckley to introduce the annual report, Vote 34, Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs.

Mr. John Buckley

The Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs spent just over €0.1 billion in 2007. The money went on five main programmes: community and local development; tackling drug misuse; rural development; developing the Gaeltacht and the islands; and promoting the Irish language. In conjunction with its counterparts in Northern Ireland it supervises two North-South bodies, An Foras Teanga and Waterways Ireland. The Department has set out its spend, output targets and achievements in a report which is already tabled for the committee.

Pobal is a special purpose vehicle established under the Companies Acts. One of its functions is to administer certain programmes on behalf of the Department. In 2007, it made payments on behalf of the Department amounting to €169 million across ten departmental schemes. It also carries out functions for other State agencies. In all, it administered €359 million worth of payments in the year. Apart from the Department, its biggest client is the Office of the Minister for Children, for which it managed payments of €167 million on an equal opportunities childcare programme and a national childcare investment programme.

The accounts of both the Department and Pobal received clear audit opinions and there were no chapters in the annual report on this Department. However, I am currently finalising a value for money report on drug treatment. It will be signed later this month. The Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs co-ordinates the implementation of the overall State policy on combating drug misuse. In that respect, it is likely to be before the committee again later this year together with other public bodies with responsibility in the area.

Chairman

Thank you. Perhaps Mr. Kearney would make his opening statement.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

A Chathaoirligh agus a Chomhaltaí den Choiste, ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil libh as an deis a tabhairt dom ráiteas gairid a dhéanamh anseo inniu, nuair atá Cuntas Leithghabhála na bliana 2007 do Vóta Uimhir 27 — An Roinn Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta, á scrúdú ag an gCoiste. Gabhaim buíochas freisin le hOifig an Ard-Reachtaire Cúntas agus Ciste as an mbealach proifisiúnta a rinne a gcuid oifigeach an obair a bhí riachtanach i ndáil leis an gCuntas sin.

Members will be aware that the work of the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs is focused on promoting and supporting the development of communities and advancing the use of the Irish language. As set out in our Strategy Statement 2008-2010, the Department's work is grouped into six main sectors: developing communities — to encourage and facilitate communities to pursue social and economic progress in their areas; tackling drug misuse — to facilitate a more integrated and co-ordinated response to tackle problem drug use with the aim of significantly reducing the harm caused to individuals and society; rural development — to promote living and working populations in rural areas by helping to foster sustainable and culturally vibrant communities; Gaeltacht and islands development — to help Gaeltacht and island communities to grow through infrastructure development, economic supports and the provision of essential services; promotion and maintenance of the Irish language — to increase the use of the Irish language countrywide and to assist its growth as an everyday community language in the Gaeltacht; and North-South co-operation — to maintain, develop and foster North-South co-operation.

The committee has, at its request, been provided with a note in regard to the specific targets set for each of these sectors in 2007 as well as the progress achieved and I will be happy to answer any questions members may have in this regard. I would like to take the opportunity to refer to a number of significant issues and to provide a brief update to the committee.

At the outset, I should mention that 2007 saw the further consolidation of our presence and transfer of numbers of staff to Tubbercurry, County Sligo, under the decentralisation programme. As a result, we now have 100 staff located there in addition to 51 staff at Na Forbacha and 30 staff at other regional offices.

In the communities sector, the Department has worked at a number of levels to support communities across a range of measures. For example, in the context of the work of the task force on active citizenship, the Department supported the expansion of the network of volunteer centres and significantly increased funding to local groups seeking once-off grants for specific projects. Just under €82 million was provided under the local and community development programmes which deliver supports to counter disadvantage and to improve access to employment, training and education. Additional funding was also provided under RAPID.

Funding of €44.5 million was provided towards the community services programme which assists local communities to provide employment opportunities for those marginalised while delivering valued services to communities. Under the flagship project, €51 million was generated across philanthropic and dormant accounts funds towards key social and community initiatives.

Work also continued during 2007 on the improved alignment of local, community and rural development organisations to secure simplified and enhanced delivery of community and rural development programmes. Following from this, there are now 54 cohesed companies in place instead of the 94 organisations previously.

In regard to drugs misuse, local drugs task forces advanced their action plans across key areas such as supply reduction, prevention, awareness and treatment. As at end 2007, the Department was providing support to over 380 projects at an annual cost of €20 million. Regional drugs task forces also pursued their action plans during 2007 with funding totalling over €7 million and supporting 150 projects across the regions.

In regard to the young people's facilities and services fund, over €150 million has supported a range of activities to provide young people at risk with positive alternatives to drugs use. Currently, close to 360 facility and services projects with over 220 workers and 50 sports development officers are being supported.

A steering group exists to review the existing national drugs strategy and to develop proposals for a new strategy for 2009-16. This group is made up of representatives of relevant public bodies as well as people from the community and voluntary sectors. The new strategy is expected to be finalised and launched in the first half of this year.

The rural development programme for 2007-13 was agreed by the European Commission in July 2007. Axes 3 and 4 provide for the delivery of Leader-type activities which, at €425.4 million over the period of the programme, is almost treble the previous round. This will be channelled through the new integrated companies to support and facilitate the continued development of rural communities throughout Ireland. The allocations for the groups were announced late last year and projects on the ground are expected to commence in the near future.

In 2007, agreement was secured by Comhairle na Tuaithe, the Countryside Forum, on a walks scheme to apply to a number of agreed walking trails. This was launched in March of last year and over 600 participating farmers were engaged by the end of last year with an expectation that a further 900 may join the scheme this year in terms of opening up walkways across the countryside.

The CLÁR programme, which provides co-investment in infrastructure in rural areas, continued in 2007 with expenditure of €21.3 million. During 2007, there were over 2,600 participants on the rural social scheme. This measure provides support for low income farmers and fisherpersons by enabling them to earn supplementary income while providing services of benefit to rural communities.

The decision by the European Council to recognise Irish as an official and working language of the EU was implemented in 2007. While this has posed challenges in terms of ensuring sufficient qualified translators, interpreters and lawyer linguists, the Department, in co-operation with the Department of Foreign Affairs, has worked closely with the EU institutions in tackling these issues.

In 2007, the report arising from the major socio-linguistic study of the use of Irish in the Gaeltacht was presented to Government. This was followed by the establishment of a Cabinet committee on Irish and the Gaeltacht, which is focused, inter alia, on the drawing up of an integrated plan to secure the future of Irish as the community language in the Gaeltacht.

On foot of a policy statement by Government on the Irish language in late 2006, work has been advancing on drafting a 20-year strategy for Irish. This has followed significant consultation and input from language planning experts from other countries. A draft strategy has now been presented to the Minister and it is anticipated that the matter will be considered by Government in the coming period.

The development of islands infrastructure continued in 2007 with total expenditure of over €18 million. This included construction work on the €13 million harbour development on Inis Meáin and preparation for the commencement of the €40 million Cill Rónáin harbour development. The Department also continues to support 17 island ferry and air services. Planning for the introduction of new cargo services for Inishbofin, Clare Island-Inishturk and Toraigh was also significantly advanced.

As mentioned by the Comptroller and Auditor General, the Department co-funds two of the North-South implementation bodies, namely, Waterways Ireland and An Foras Teanga. Developments in regard to the operation of the Northern Executive last year opened the way for meetings of the North-South Ministerial Council in both language and waterways sectoral formats. These meetings took place last month.

Internal audit plays a key role in the systematic review of the adequacy, application and effectiveness of internal controls and corporate governance not only in the Department but in bodies that come within its ambit. The internal audit function operates in accordance with an audit plan and strategy agreed annually by the management committee and the Department's audit committee which has an independent chair.

Over the last two years, the main focus of the function has been on the closure of the EU rural development programme and the preparations for roll-out of the new programme. In addition, 14 audits-reviews were undertaken during this period across the community, rural, Gaeltacht and corporate areas as well as certain bodies within our ambit. I can confirm that the implementation of recommendations arising from these reviews is monitored and followed up by the management committee and the audit committee on a regular basis.

I will say a few words on the Department's arrangements with Pobal. As mentioned, a wide range of programmes are delivered for the Department by Pobal. Such delivery is governed under a framework agreement developed by the Department which sets out high level and general arrangements between the two organisations. Below that, there are specific contracts for services for each programme and within these, there are agreed terms and conditions for the operation of such programmes. On an ongoing basis, particular arrangements apply between the line divisions for the ongoing management of individual programmes. If the committee so wishes, I would be happy to go into further detail on the status of Pobal as a body, which is quite unusual, to help it in its deliberations.

Sin an méid atá le rá agam ar an bpointe seo. I would be very happy to expand on any of these areas if the committee so wishes. Is mian liom mo bhuíochas a chur in iúl arís as an deis a fháil chun an ráiteas tosaigh seo a chur in bhur láthair. Go raibh maith agat.

Chairman

Can we publish your report, Mr. Kearney?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Certainly.

Chairman

I ask Mr. Leamy to make his opening statement.

Mr. Denis Leamy

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for the opportunity to meet them to present and be examined on the work of Pobal. Pobal, formerly known as Area Development Management, was established in 1992 by the Government in agreement with the European Commission to manage an EU grant for local development. The organisation was constituted as a company limited by guarantee and registered charity.

Following a review of ADM in 2004, the Government agreed on a number of changes relating to the company. These included the appointment of the board and chairperson by the Government, the company name and its main object. The latter was specified as "the delivery and management of programmes which promote social inclusion, reconciliation and equality through integrated social and economic development within communities". Following the Government decision, the board, whose members give their time and work on a voluntary basis, amended the memorandum and articles of the company and implemented the decision fully.

In 2007, Pobal managed 17 programmes for seven Government Departments and boards, namely, the Departments of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Health and Children, Transport, Education and Science, Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the special EU programmes body and dormant accounts board. The full list of programmes is detailed in the supporting information supplied to members. In managing these programmes Pobal: distributed €360 million directly to beneficiaries; had contracts with 4,000 groups; had a total administration spend of €17.4 million, which was 4.8% of programme costs; had offices in Dublin, Monaghan, Cork, Sligo and Clifden; employed an average 241 staff and has a framework agreement with the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and memorandums of understanding and service level agreements with all relevant Government Departments. In 2008, Pobal transferred €344 million to beneficiaries.

Through its work in managing programmes, Pobal supports partnership approaches to decision-making and promotes co-ordination between communities, State agencies and other stakeholders. We encourage the piloting of new initiatives and are committed to supporting Departments in responding to policy through the lessons learned from the programmes we manage. This is achieved through undertaking and supporting the analysis and exchange of experience, leading to the identification and dissemination of good practice.

The policy context for our work is provided under the National Development Plan 2007-2016, Towards 2016, the programme for Government and national social partnership agreements. The management and monitoring of beneficiaries includes contracts, payments in instalments, monitoring of progress, verification-audit and decommittal of funds and recovery. Pobal reports to Departments through regular meetings and programme reports with financial and monitoring data. We also provide Departments with good practice case studies, evaluations and baseline data.

The audit-verification section of Pobal is an independent unit which operates with the direct authority of the board and under the general supervision and guidance of the finance sub-committee. The primary function of the unit is to provide audit assurance across the programmes that moneys have been spent for the purpose intended and in compliance with public accountability requirements. The staff are empowered to audit all systems and activities of beneficiaries. The director of audit reports directly to the finance sub-committee and provides a detailed written commentary to it at each meeting.

It is also the policy of the Pobal board to maintain and support an appropriately resourced quality internal audit function. The internal auditors are charged with responsibility for auditing the efficiency and effectiveness of the internal administration of programmes and corporate services. The function is outsourced, by tender, to a firm of suitably qualified accountants in order to preserve the objectivity of the role. Crowleys DFK was awarded the contract for a three-year period from 2005. The internal auditor reports directly to the Pobal audit sub-committee and the board, as requested. As at the end of December 2008, the audit committee had considered and acted upon some 12 reports. These include reports on audit, payroll and human resources, travel and subsistence, banking and finance, purchasing and creditors, financial management, corporate governance and a number of programmes.

There are many challenges in the months and years ahead for the board and staff of Pobal. Our priority for 2009 is to proceed with our business process review which began in 2008 and which aims to streamline our procedures for beneficiaries and build on synergies among programmes.

In light of the announcements made in Budget 2009 in October and subsequent discussions with various Departments that will require fewer services from Pobal into the future, we have estimated that the combined effects of cuts will reduce Pobal's administration budget for 2009 by 30%. We have reduced our non-salary costs by 13%. In addition, we have estimated a need to reduce our staffing numbers by up to one third, or 90 staff, by the beginning of 2010. In response to this, and following a process of consultation with staff representatives, we have sought volunteers from among staff to elect for redundancy. A total of 52 staff have applied for redundancy under this process. We are currently engaged in talks with staff representatives, chaired by the Labour Relations Commission, with a view to effecting the balance of staff cost savings we require as a matter of urgency. The professionalism and dedication of our staff will continue to provide a valuable service to communities across the country. Notwithstanding the challenges we currently face and the substantial difficulties ahead, the Pobal board and staff will continue to build on this.

I thank the Chairman and members for the opportunity to address the committee. I would be happy to provide answers to any questions they may wish to pose.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Leamy. May we publish his statement?

Mr. Denis Leamy

Yes.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

I thank our guests for their presentations. I will begin by posing questions to the officials from the Department. The decentralisation programme of the Department is well under way. Will Mr. Kearney outline the position with regard to the costs and efficiencies relating to this programme? Have costs increased or decreased and has there been an impact, for better or worse, on the Department's efficiency?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

While one of my colleagues is obtaining figures regarding net additional costs, I will make a number of general comments. The first point I would make is that it is certainly a different way of doing business. The Department has not completed its decentralisation process. There are still in excess of 90 people working in Dublin and under the decision taken by the Government, the entire staff complement is due to be transferred.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Does that include the officials present at this meeting?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes. On foot of the decision taken in 2003 the Department and a further seven Departments are to decentralise in their entirety.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

What will be the position of the Minister's office in such circumstances?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

There will be a Minister's office in Dublin and another at the decentralised location. Similarly, there will be facilities available for staff to be in Dublin when the Dáil is in session, etc. In terms of the practicalities, decentralisation has changed management and presents challenges. It affords unique opportunities for people to live in decentralised locations. This brings economic benefits to those locations and people tend to be positive in the choices they make for those purposes.

The main challenge that arises is one of culture. It is very easy to transmit culture and good practice when people are in a single space and meeting casually on an ongoing basis. It is a far different challenge when one is taking people in from across various Government bodies into a decentralised location in the absence of that acculturation process. That is one of the challenges with which we are grappling at present.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

I do not wish to press Mr. Kearney to an undue degree in respect of this matter. However, I am interested in and concerned with regard to costs, value for money, efficiency and so on. In that context, is it fair to state that the jury is still out in respect of the issues we are discussing?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I would not concur with the Deputy on that matter. Decentralisation has certainly given us an opportunity to reconsider our processes and practices. It is a medium-term project. Some research has been carried out — but not yet published — on the impact of decentralisation on a number of smaller towns. A proportion of this research indicates that decentralisation has been extraordinarily positive for those towns.

The annual additional cost of the rental for the Department's properties in Tubbercurry is €174,000 per annum. The total extra non-property costs incurred by us since 2004 amount to approximately €1.2 million.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

When the programme has been completed in full, perhaps we might return to consider the position.

Some €44.5 million in funding was made available in respect of the community services programme. How many jobs were created through the use of this money and what level of support was provided per job?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I will provide some background to the community services programme, which was previously operated by FÁS as the social economy programme. My recollection is that it was transferred to the Department with approximately 1,700 to 1,800 jobs. It has been increased and expanded on foot of Towards 2016 and additional resources are being invested in it. When the programme was transferred to the Department, there were approximately 260 projects, employing some 2,000 people, attaching to it. There are now 2,130 people employed as part of the programme. Our aim is to increase participation to approximately 2,600 by the end of the year.

The programme supports a number of projects and activities. These include: community child care services; services for the elderly; services for people with disabilities; rural transport; managing community halls and facilities; rural tourism; and community radio.

The Deputy asked a good question and I will seek to follow up on this with him. When this started out, the intention was that there would be a degree of complementarity between the income earned commercially as a form of social enterprise and the funding provided by the State. We are currently processing a new call for proposals but, under our current round, in my recollection we are offering approximately €50,000 per project. I can confirm that for the Deputy.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

If the figure is not readily available, Mr. Kearney can write to the committee.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I can follow up on this for the Deputy.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Reference is made to "54 cohesed companies", an expression I have never come across in my legal or political life. Are these a combination of local community organisations and Leader groups?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes, one of the reasons the Department was established in 2002 was to pull together this array of fragmented groups that had been created. This is a combination of the partnership companies, Leader companies and community partnerships. There were 94 in all and this has been reduced to 54 integrated companies.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Are the new arrangements working well?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The new arrangements only came into being formally last month. We are now in a process——

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Were they working together informally before that?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

They were. There were eight or nine integrated companies previously and they worked very well. It is one thing creating the company, it is another to realign the substructures and maximise human resources.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

But in the main, is it proceeding according to plan?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It is proceeding. It was quite an achievement to finally get the companies reduced to that number.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

The walking scheme, which I support, is making progress. Does it cost much?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

No. This is one of the positive outcomes of Comhairle na Tuaithe, which was set up in 2004 and which has representatives of walking, hill walking and various farming interests. It has met with a number of successes but one particular area of success has been the establishment of this walks scheme. Where there is agreement between local groups comprising farming and walking interests and the National Trails Office, the scheme offers farmers and those participating in the maintenance and upkeep of those walks modest annual payments. It works out, on average, at €1,000 per recipient but it varies clearly on the basis of the length of the walk and the amount of work involved in maintenance. It is proving remarkably popular. As I indicated, 600 farmers joined over a few months last year and we anticipate a further 900 joining the scheme this year.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Given the need to encourage rural tourism, it is a good vehicle.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Absolutely.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

The Department has made a number of investments in the islands. How many islands are inhabited?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

With a degree of prescience, somebody was busy in the relevant division and prepared briefing material for me. Clare Island has a population of 125; Inis Earcáin, 105; Bere Island, 187; Inis Uí Drisceoil, 24; Tory Island, 142; Árainn Mhór, 522; Inishbofin, 200; Inishturk, 72; Clare Island, 136; the Aran Islands, 1,225; and Inis Bigil, 24.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

How many are on Whiddy Island?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

In 2006, the population was 22.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Does the Department count Dursey Island or Long Island anymore?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

They are not on our list. There may be people on those islands but they are not subject to contracted services from the Department.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Pobal distributed €360 million to beneficiaries. How many were in receipt of that money?

Mr. Denis Leamy

We are in contract with 4,000 groups and, therefore, the number of beneficiaries would be a multiple of that.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

What was the largest amount given to a beneficiary?

Mr. Denis Leamy

The largest amounts are given to capital projects. It could be up €1 million over a few years.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Occasionally, the issue raised with us is the time it takes to process applications and the inevitable red tape involved in dealing with so many people and organisations and so much money. That must be done properly but have efforts been made to reduce the red tape?

Mr. Denis Leamy

Yes, we are making as many efforts as possible to reduce the requirements we place on beneficiaries. I will outline the processes. We look at a number of areas with groups. One is the legal requirements and we try to keep them to an absolute minimum but we must engage with some legal requirements with beneficiaries and groups. There are also financial requirements, such as establishing a group's capacity to manage that level of funding. We also have programme requirements, depending on the programmes we are managing on behalf of various Departments.

The board initiated a review of all our procedures in 2007 and a number of changes were implemented as a result. The application forms and guidelines were very much slimmed down. We also examined smaller grants and tried to limit the number of requirements we made of groups getting grants amounting to, say, less than €10,000 and simplified the process to a letter of agreement as opposed to a contract. When we reviewed the length of time it took for the appraisal process, for groups to get to contract and for payments, we have found a significant reduction between 2006 and 2008 in the time it takes by implementing a number of changes to the appraisal and financial draw down procedures. We are involved in a business process review currently in which we are reviewing the processes in which we are engaged. We are trying to build our IT infrastructure in order that we can engage with groups on an on-line basis, which would also lead to a reduction in the time it takes for financial draw down and appraisals.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Reference was made to the outsourcing of auditing. Crowleys DFK was awarded a contract for a three-year period from 2005. I presume that has expired. Has Pobal retained a new firm or has it put out a new tender?

Mr. Denis Leamy

We put out a new tender and Mazars was awarded the contract for the next three-year period.

Chairman

I refer to funding of groups for local development and so on. Pobal funds groups that also receive funding from the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism through co-funding. Why do organisations have to comply with two sets of procedures to draw down funding? When club A applies to the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism, it must go through the necessary procedures. The Department must vet the application. When the club applies to Pobal, does it go through a vetting process? Is there significant duplication? What is the relationship between both bodies regarding joint applications?

Mr. Denis Leamy

There is potential for duplication in the requirements we make of a group. The same requirements are often sought by the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. This is a difficulty groups have highlighted to us in the past. From the perspective of accountability, Pobal receives funds from various Departments and must be accountable to them. Where a group has been funded by the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism, we engage with that Department to check the amount granted and the validity of the grant. Therefore, we have a level of communication with the group. We must be responsible for our piece, and, therefore, must be able to provide assurance for that back to the relevant Department.

Chairman

Why is there not an obligation on the sporting or community organisation to apply to only one agency for the grant required for its needs, rather than having to apply to two separate agencies, which involves lengthy and complex procedures for the groups, most of which are run by volunteers? Pobal and the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism are two large administrative machines that must vet these applications. Why can the process not be co-ordinated so only one need be involved?

Mr. Denis Leamy

The Departments set the guidelines for the funds that are distributed and it is the job of Pobal to administer those funds according to the guidelines. I understand the point being made as many groups have made the same point. The challenge for an organisation like Pobal is to ensure that there is some level of integration or synergy built between the different programmes we manage. That is our responsibility. However, there is a broader challenge with regard to all Government funding in terms of integration.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

On costing and administration, I note Pobal is making a solid effort to reduce its administration and non-salary costs and that it has proposed a redundancy programme. What sort of terms are being offered on that redundancy programme?

Mr. Denis Leamy

We are offering two weeks statutory pay plus three weeks, per year of service for voluntary redundancy.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Will the services of Pobal be adversely impacted by a reduction of one third of its staff? Is something else, such as new technology, being put in place to compensate?

Mr. Denis Leamy

Losing up to one third of its staff is a significant challenge for Pobal. However, in that context, fewer services will be required from Pobal from the various Departments.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Will Pobal be providing fewer services?

Mr. Denis Leamy

We will be providing fewer services. We are in ongoing discussions with Departments in terms of the services that will be required.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Will some of the services be returning as functions of the Departments?

Mr. Denis Leamy

It might be more appropriate for the Secretary General to comment on that.

Pobal is also investing heavily in IT infrastructure, to improve its processes. This will save the need for some procedures in which it is currently involved and will also have a staff saving. Currently, we are in dialogue with Departments, so it will take some months to work out how this will feature in terms of the cutbacks.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

I will come back to the Secretary General on that issue and the issue of value for money shortly. I am also interested in hearing more about the issue of lease agreements and the taking over of offices. Has Pobal many offices around the country?

Mr. Denis Leamy

We have two offices in Dublin and an office in Cork, Sligo, Clifden and Monaghan.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Is there any vigilance on the cost of these offices, rents and the possibility of reducing rent in this new economic environment?

Mr. Denis Leamy

Yes. This is something we have been looking at in the past few months, particularly as a result of the reduction in staff required over the next couple of years. This is a critical concern for us in terms of reducing our obligations to long-term leases. In some instances, we are tied into fairly long-term leases, but other leases are short-term ones. We are currently examining which leases we can exit from in a short time and are seeking renegotiation of rents to landlords, given the current economic context.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

In the context of the tightening up Pobal has been carrying out on its administration, I notice a new office was opened in Clifden recently. I suppose it is a coincidence that is in the Minister's constituency. Was the property there purchased or leased?

Mr. Denis Leamy

The property was leased.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

What type of property is it?

Mr. Denis Leamy

It is an office building that can accommodate up to 25 people. The intention is that 45 people will decentralise to Clifden eventually.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

What is the cost of that lease?

Mr. Denis Leamy

It is €85,000 per year.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Can Mr. Leamy describe the office?

Mr. Denis Leamy

It is quite normal, with 25 desks and a small reception area. It is a fairly standard office.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

There was some understanding that Pobal operated out of a hotel there or there was some association with a hotel. Is that the case?

Mr. Denis Leamy

The owner of the hotel is also the owner of the office space.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Is it part of the hotel?

Mr. Denis Leamy

It is not attached to the hotel.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Was the hotel being used as well, even on a temporary arrangement?

Mr. Denis Leamy

No. However, there are apartments above the office space that are sometimes used by the hotel during the summer season.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

There is an association with the hotel, but the office is a separate self-contained unit for which Pobal pays €85,000 per year. Is that correct?

Mr. Denis Leamy

Yes.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Was there a particular reason for moving to Clifden recently?

Mr. Denis Leamy

The Secretary General may want to come in on this, but Clifden is part of the decentralisation process. We decentralised 25 staff to Clifden in 2006.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

The last issue I want to cover is the one of value for money. This is an issue we must focus on and I am glad to see the efforts being made by Pobal to contain staff costs. Have any value for money audits been conducted by the Department or Pobal recently and, if so, did they produce any results?

Chairman

I apologise for interrupting, but in one of the responses to the Deputy's questions on leases Mr. Leamy said some were long leases and some were short leases. Could he give us some more detail on the leases in the five different areas?

Mr. Denis Leamy

The lease on our main offices in Dublin are of a 25-year nature, taken out in 2000. However, we have leased one floor of office space in Dublin on a short-term basis and would be in a position to withdraw from that lease quite quickly. The lease in Clifden is up to 2012, but the leases in Cork and Sligo are of longer duration, between ten and 20 years.

Chairman

Why are the leases of such long duration?

Mr. Denis Leamy

The advice we got when we entered into the leases was that we would either have to take a short, five-year lease or a 25-year lease. At the time, two years ago, it was difficult to get suitable office premises and the view then was that it was better from the point of view of security to enter into a longer lease.

Chairman

Did Pobal talk to the OPW on the matter?

Mr. Denis Leamy

We talked to the OPW and one of the floors we have in our main headquarters in Holbrook House is leased from the OPW. The OPW was also involved in the situation in Clifden.

Chairman

Perhaps the chief executive officer could set out in writing the costs, the duration and the contacts with the Office of Public Works.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

That would be helpful as it will fit in with our examination of the value for money situation upon which the committee will need to focus to a much greater degree.

I note the Department's Estimate includes a value for money figure and policy reviews. Who carries out the value for money audit? I note a sum of €140,000 outturn. How is that money spent? Is it an internal audit?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I will make two points in that regard.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Does it cover Pobal or is that a separate issue?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I will deal with that question also.

By way of clarification I refer to the Deputy's previous question about the inhabitants of islands. The information I provided was for those islands in respect of which the Department provides ferry services as there are other inhabited islands which do not enjoy the benefits of such direct services.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Those ones might consider themselves neglected by the Department and with some justification. A few of them are in my own area.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

There are two aspects to the value for money issue. As set out by the Comptroller and Auditor General, this Department is spending about €0.5 billion a year, the bulk of which is social-type expenditure, community interventions. It is broadly agreed that Ireland is behind the gain-line in terms of a scientific approach to evaluating how well money of that nature is spent. In other jurisdictions there exists an administrative science on service design, monitoring, evaluation and an assessment of the impact of resources on outcomesin those settings. The Chairman touched on the issue when he mentioned the difference between the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism and Pobal and a quite fragmented approach between public bodies. Atlantic Philanthropies is able to access that international expertise on this much more outcome-based approach and to assess how well things are performing. As a medium-term measure, the Department is working with Atlantic Philanthropies——

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Perhaps the Secretary General will explain who is this company and outline its role.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It is a philanthropic international organisation with a special interest in early childhood development and it has offered the Government €5 million to co-fund an initiative on childhood development and the Government responded to that offer. It is a close assessment of the outcomes of social expenditure used for social interventions. Rather than just paying the money and looking at the outputs it looks longitudinally at the impact. The Department is participating in that venture with the office of the Minister of State with responsibility for children and youth affairs and Atlantic Philanthropies in order to find out how well our two big expenditure programmes — the local development and social inclusion programme and the community development project — are operating and bringing international expertise to bear on the design and the evaluation of those programmes. I wish to acknowledge the significance and importance of this co-operation.

To return to the Deputy's point, there is a well-established arrangement involving the Department of Finance for the conduct of value for money reviews. These are generally conducted by outside consultants and some of them are listed in the information provided to the committee. A number of value for money reviews have been carried out in the recent past for the Department. These include reviews of the local drugs task force drugs initiative projects; the scéim feabhsúcháin sa Ghaeltacht was similarly reviewed, as was the capital programme for the islands. The local development and social inclusion programme was subject to a value for money review and that report was laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. We are proposing to look at CLÁR and RAPID in the coming year. Value for money reviews are an embedded part of our practice and they are generally undertaken by external experts. Speaking as an Accounting Officer the difficulty I have with this scheme is that we operate within a fairly small pool of expertise, given the size of the country. To effect fundamental programme change across all the programmes, we need a broader discipline and a wider international perspective and this is what the Department is seeking as well as doing the value for money reviews.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Have we the personnel in the country who are trained to do this work effectively?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

My colleague was involved in securing external expertise to look at the local drugs task force projects. We advertised internationally and the organisation which undertook that work for us is based in the UK. It studied and evaluated the 300 projects which receive funding and made recommendations either to end them or else have them mainstreamed. It is the case that one must go beyond one's patch.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Has Pobal a separate value for money audit or is it carried out by the Department?

Mr. Denis Leamy

The Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs is our lead Department so it would from time to time institute some value for money review of Pobal. A value for money review was carried out in 2003, the Indecon report. The various programmes managed by Pobal are also examined as is their management by Pobal and this would be included in the individual evaluations.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

I refer to the administration of the dormant accounts scheme. The outturn was €1,832,000 which was €168 million less than the Estimate provision. How did it happen there was not full payment?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

On the administration?

Deputy Edward O’ Keeffe

Yes.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I will make a few general comments to put it in context. The administration of dormant accounts includes three sources. The first is the expenses incurred by the Dormant Accounts Board, the second is expenses incurred by Pobal when disbursing dormant accounts funds and the third is expenses incurred by external consultants to evaluate the effectiveness of dormant accounts projects. There has been an underspend under the category of the administration of the dormant accounts.

The actual programme expenditure was somewhat below target for 2007. The principal cause was the long lead-in time from the time Government approves projects and programmes to when the spend occurs. From 2004 up to 2007, despite the previous board and the Government making annual disbursement decisions of around €30 million a year, that spend was not being manifest. However, last year that situation was turned around and the expenditure in 2008 was around €75 million in disbursements. We expect a similarly high level of disbursements in the current year. We are in a catch-up situation. If the figures quoted by the Deputy relate to the administration it is simply that the costs for administering the schemes were just a little lower. The Deputy's point is relevant in terms of the scale of the decisions on disbursements not being matched evenly by the disbursements on the ground over that period.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

What kind of funding is still available in the dormant accounts or is it an ongoing account?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The Deputy's point is very useful and with the Chairman's permission I will explain it to the Deputy. As things stand, the gross value of the fund at present is €151 million, which is a very substantial amount. However, the bulk has been substantively approved or disbursed at this stage allowing for about €46 million for reserve — because a reserve is needed on dormant accounts in case people come back for reclaims. When the disbursements and amounts already approved to groups are taken out, the net amount on the fund at the end of 2008 was just €21.6 million. We are now substantively at the end of the road in terms of the large-scale disbursements. Up to last year, the Government made decisions on around €30 million per annum on the scheme and an extra €16 million going towards the rural social scheme. This will not be sustainable from hereon. I will give the committee a flavour of income and outgoings for 2008. A total of €33 million was transferred in from dormant accounts in 2008 with reclaims of just €20 million. Members can see it is tightening. It is only going to be €10 million or €12 million if that continues into other years. The amount of money we will be able to disburse from dormant accounts in the future will be far less. It might be between €8 million and €12 million per annum.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

What does Mr. Kearney mean by reclaims?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Following the money being transferred from the various financial institutions to the NTMA those financial institutions would have notified the individuals that the funds were being transferred. Individuals would respond and those claims would come into the banks and they would reclaim that amount in transfers from the NTMA.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

How do we get the projects that are to be classified or to which funding is to be made available? What is the minimum and maximum amount of money in the fund for projects? What kinds of projects are involved?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It is set out very tightly in legislation that the fund can only be used for three types of projects. It is to support people who are socially or economically disadvantaged, those with a disability or those experiencing educational disadvantage. Following the changes decided by Government in 2005, a very formal procedure was set out in law for the disbursements from the dormant accounts. That requires proposals, which are put through three different interdepartmental committees matching those three headings, and provides for the Minister to put proposals to Government for types of programmes and projects that would be subvented. Those types of programmes and projects must have regard to the plan of the independent dormant accounts board. So the Government approves the broad types.

They are taken back and the relevant areas then are publicly notified. There is quite an emphasis on RAPID areas which are 46 areas of extreme disadvantage. Quite a lot of the initiatives would then be notified or those areas would be invited to make applications under those projects. It would happen similarly with projects identified under disability groups generally and under educational disadvantage. Those would come back then. Pobal would process them and they would come back to Cabinet for approval.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

I asked about the minimums and maximums. What are the highs and the lows of payments to groups? How successful are the programmes in the 46 RAPID areas? Are they all working efficiently and effectively? Have there been any difficulties in any of the areas?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I do not have to hand details of the largest and smallest amounts. It is actually on our website. I will make it available to the committee directly afterwards. In so far as the RAPID areas are concerned, it is a reasonable question and a very difficult one. Before I came down I had asked for a briefing to give a snapshot of what sorts of funds were being made available by public bodies towards targeting in RAPID areas. Certainly the aggregate funding made available to those areas since the establishment of the RAPID programme in the earlier part of this decade ran to well in excess of €400 million of investment.

The Deputy may be aware that the Minister has introduced a number of leveraged measure schemes. These were particular small schemes that people in those communities saw as of particular local value to them, where one wanted to be able to make small-scale resources available. These would cover housing estate enhancement, playgrounds, traffic easing, CCTV, sports capital top-ups and help measures. Those are very well received.

I suppose if the Deputy were to go out and ask people in the RAPID areas and particularly in the area implementation teams how they feel about it, I believe he would probably find that he would get a positive reaction, particularly because the national monitoring committee is chaired at ministerial level. For people who are not very high in the social pecking order, it gives a voice at a very senior level in Government to people in those areas. I believe there is now a kind of uniformity in targeting RAPID areas for funding. How coherently that funding is targeted on the ground is another issue.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

Is the RAPID programme funded from the dormant accounts?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

That is one of its sources of funding, but it also gets substantial Exchequer funding.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

Given that its funding will become more limited, what alternative does the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs have should a crisis arise and the dormant account funding run dry as everything else is running dry?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

That is a very good question and without straying towards public policy, the logic might suggest if one is disbursing dormant accounts in very many directions that with reduced resources one needs a particularly targeted approach.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

Fine. On subhead L1, community and local development programmes, which are partly funded by the national lottery, the actual spend was €81.9 million which exceeded the Estimate provision by €401,000. Expenditure on this category increased by 15% on amounts expended in 2006. I ask Mr. Kearney to elaborate on that and explain it.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

There are two elements to this. One is the local development social inclusion programme and the other is the community development programme. One, as the Deputy can imagine, is one of the larger elements. There was €55.3 million spent on the local development social inclusion programme in 2007. These are the partnership companies. At this stage they are virtually all county-based. They are large structures that represent local employers, trade unions, community and voluntary representatives and public bodies that take a countywide view in targeting areas of disadvantage. They operate under three sets of measures: services for the unemployed; youth measures; and community development measures. That is that piece of the equation totalling €55.3 million.

The second element of the spend is about community development projects. This is a smaller programme of €22.5 million and is based around very small pockets of severe disadvantage where there would be a project of no more than two people which would be a focal point for that community to access schemes, services and information, and to be able to get on to FÁS to get assistance or on to any other scheme funded by the State. If one likes they are complementary but separate programmes.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

I have a few questions for Pobal. The Pobal annual report for 2007 mentions that its ITC system capacity was significantly upgraded. I ask for elaboration. How much did the upgrade cost?

Mr. Denis Leamy

I will wait to get clarification on the costs. In terms of what was involved, we were concerned that we had no ICT back-up systems. Before 2007 we were relying on the one system. We held a lot of data in terms of groups and the types of activities in which we were involved. A significant part of that cost came from creating a back-up system on one of our other premises so that if the main one went down, we could always have access to it. In some of my earlier comments I referred to the fact that we feel we need to invest more substantially in ICT to bring us to a stage where we have the capacity to engage with community groups on an on-line basis. That has required a significant amount of the expenditure. The total IT figure for 2007 was €310,000.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

How did Pobal upgrade the system? Did it do so in-house or did it employ external people?

Mr. Denis Leamy

Some of it was in-house but some of it had to go out to external people, so we tendered for that work.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

What was the cost of the tender?

Mr. Denis Leamy

I ask one of my colleagues for the figures.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

How many people were used?

Mr. Denis Leamy

I just need to check this. The vast majority was done in-house and a very small element of approximately €15,000 was carried out externally.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

How many companies were asked to tender?

Mr. Denis Leamy

The normal number would be three.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

Did Pobal pick the company with the highest price or the lowest?

Mr. Denis Leamy

I will need to check that and get the figures to the Deputy.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

I have a question on drugs for Mr. Kearney. Drugs represent a major issue in the country. It was a Dublin issue a decade ago, but today it affects rural areas. How many people in the Department are assigned to the drugs area?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

There are approximately 15 people in the Department working directly on drugs. There are additional numbers working with the national drugs strategy team, which is funded directly by the Department. There are another four or five, and there is also the National Advisory Committee on Drugs, which does high quality research and has a core staff of two or three.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

Is there a co-ordinated approach between agencies involved in drugs? Mr. Kearney referred to his group and to other agencies.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The national drug strategy team is cross-departmentaland includes community and voluntary representatives in order to secure a co-ordinated approach at local and regional level in tackling drugs.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

Is the agency available in rural areas or is it confined to the Dublin scene?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

A decision was taken some four years ago on the establishment of regional drugs task forces to enable the response of the Government to be matched in the regions, similar to what had been adopted on the local drugs task force area. I invite Ms Stack to comment.

Ms Kathleen Stack

Originally there were 14 local drugs task forces, mainly in Dublin, with one in Bray and one in Cork. Some four or five years ago a decision was made to establish ten regional drugs task forces. These operate around the country, loosely based on the old health board areas. We fund both local and regional drugs task forces.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

Is the Department happy with the performance of the task forces and the co-operation received from other agencies?

Ms Kathleen Stack

As the Secretary General just said, the Department has a co-ordinating role across a number of agencies. We try to co-ordinate the efforts of a range of agencies, from the Garda Síochána to the HSE, and we take a cross-departmental approach. At a local level, the local drugs task forces try to have representatives of those agencies on the task forces so that we are pulling together at local and national level. The regional drugs task forces are less developed and they are still working to the full implementation of their plans. Local drugs task forces have been in place for much longer and are more bedded down. The regional drugs task forces are starting to work and will do well in future years.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

What is the budget assigned to these programmes?

Ms Kathleen Stack

The figure for the local and regional drugs task forces will be €35 million this year.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

What type of payback is there? Are task forces getting on top of the job? It is an expanding business. What is a view of the delegation on drugs?

Ms Kathleen Stack

It is a hard one to call. Looking across the heroin problem, we estimate there are 14,500 people using heroin in Ireland. Of that, some 10,000 people are undergoing methadone treatment at the moment. By international standards that is quite high and so we are doing quite well. The problem is not static and the numbers do not remain static. Sometimes maintaining the status quo is an achievement. There is no doubt that this is a global problem and the problem in Ireland must be seen in this context.

Surveys in recent years show that we have a growing cocaine problem and this poses a different challenge in respect of treatment because there is no substitute treatment as there is for heroin. It is more a case of counselling and behavioural therapy. This provides different challenges in terms of the treatment response. This is the major matter we must address in the coming year.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

How effective is the rural transport scheme and what does it cost?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

To clarify, the main rural transport scheme is run by the Department of Transport. The Minister introduced a pilot scheme across a limited number of areas two years ago. The response was extremely positive and an in-house review has been completed, which will be available to the Minister within the next few weeks. The response from the groups has been positive.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

What is the payback on that scheme?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

That is a very good question. One payback is the level of usage and another is the level of income generated relative to the subsidies provided by the Department. To reflect what is behind the Deputy's question, having examined the preliminary figures there is a wide variation between different groups operating the pilot scheme in different parts of the country. One of the questions about the pilot scheme when the review comes back to us is how one can manage and justify that variation and help to strike a reasonable subvention if the scheme is to continue.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

Is the Secretary General satisfied that it does not interfere with other transport systems in rural areas, such as taxis and public transport?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

One of the criteria for the introduction of the scheme was that it should not duplicate services already available. That is one of the fundamental requirements. If it emerged that this was not being adhered to, that would be a significant issue to consider.

Deputy Edward O’Keeffe

I thank Mr. Kearney.

Chairman

The order of contributions will be Deputies Collins, who has just left, Broughan, O'Brien and Shortall.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

I warmly welcome Mr. Kearney and his team and Pobal to the Committee of Public Accounts. To declare an interest, I am a community director of three or four companies funded by the Department and Pobal. I do not know if it is three or four because the Minister barred Deputies from being directors of partnership companies. My northside partnership company is in a grey area at the moment. Mr. Kearney recently gave a stimulating address to the northside partnership, its member companies and its support. He makes a good point in respect of the evaluation of programmes. Thousands of programmes in the documentation provided by the Comptroller and Auditor General and the chairperson raise issues of evaluation. Mr. Kearney seems to suggest that every programme should be subject to an ongoing evaluation of its effectiveness and delivery. My colleagues have focused on this. Is this a fundamental precept of the Department?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I thank the Deputy for his positive comments. One of the problems we have, which may crop up frequently before this committee, is one of inheritance and legacy. With the highest motives, programmes were designed in another time to address issues of that time and continue in Departments. We now find that, for example with the local development and social inclusion programme, there are models of good practice and projects we wish to support enthusiastically. There are other projects that are much weaker and we do not have inbuilt evaluation capacity to generate that data and supply it to us. The design of the programme is fundamentally weak in not producing this and we do not have the expertise, between the Department, Pobal and the providers. The worst thing we could do would be for us, as providers, to write the script from where we stand. It must come from the communities we are targeting. Redesigning a range of programmes is a long haul but the first steps are with the two large programmes, the local development social inclusion programme and the community development project programme.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

My colleague, Deputy O'Keeffe, raised the point about evaluation in Pobal. Reference was made to the centre for effective services, CES, to design a successor programme for a local development and social inclusion programme. Was there a tendering process for the CES, which I understand were set up and funded by Atlantic Philanthropies? Why was the tender granted to Atlantic Philanthropies? Was a tender issued? While I am aware of the track record of the founder of Atlantic Philanthropies and the organisation itself, would it not have been preferable to tender the contract in Europe and generally to obtain best international practice?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

To clarify, this was not a tendering process per se. It was an organisation, a not-for-profit structure, that was being set up by Government and Atlantic Philanthropies. It is not as if they are sitting out there in space. It is a structure that was being set up by Government to advance the childhood development initiative.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

Is it not the case that both the State and Atlantic Philanthropies will commit resources to the project? I am well aware of the project from first-hand experience in my area. It evaluates children from before birth and through the years in longitudinal studies to assess how inputs into the community give better value. Why was a tendering process not used? Why were Pobal staff not used to carry out this work?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Quite simply, the difficulty the Department shares with Pobal is that we are not accessing international expertise and the international practice now available on service design, monitoring and evaluation. Atlantic Philanthropies has this expertise and practice and was already on the pitch in a structure with Government and providing €5 million to Government to do a specific project. We were invited to come in on that project. If one put this in a tendering frame, one would have to ask where Government would find organisations offering access to this international expertise and €5 million to advance the project. Rather than being a contract for services, we see it as a grant to support the development of services, not only for ourselves or the children's office but also to raise the game in Ireland on how we design, measure and deliver our social programmes.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

Could we have a note on the cost side and how we entered into it? I do not know whether the project will expand but it is under way in three areas in the Dublin region. One of my colleagues also has experience of it. Clearly, we need to closely examine the costs and benefits of the project.

In general terms, on Pobal and its predecessor, ADM, with which I am familiar, Pobal's decision to slash its workforce by one third is an amazing response to current circumstances. Like my colleagues, I will speak in the Dáil later in the debate on the economy. The Joint Committee on Transport held a discussion with the transport companies yesterday. Pobal's decision appears to eviscerate the organisation. Reading through the documents it is clear the Department and Pobal support some initiative or other in nearly every parish. How can this support be delivered if Pobal's workforce is eviscerated and so many staff removed? I wonder about effective delivery if the workforce is being cut by one third.

Chairman

We are straying into policy.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I will answer the question on a number of levels. To take the Deputy back a little, in 2002 when Pobal came to us, its staff numbered approximately 227 and it had an administration budget of around €7 million. Due to the visitation of a large number of programmes and schemes on us, these figures increased substantially. I am also aware that other Departments made demands. Pobal now has close to 260 or 270 staff and an administration budget of nearly €20 million.

We do not have the cash. Our budgets for next year, as indicated in the Budget Statement for 2009, saw a reduction of the order of 4% to 5% generally. The Government took a decision, which has been vigorously pursued by the Minister, that the administrative and intermediary costs were to be reduced. This is not just about Pobal. We have also set aside the regional support agencies which were in place and were consuming up to 20% of a programme budget at one stage. There are also administrative costs to be visited on the Department itself.

Within the programmes provided for us by Pobal, the local development social programme is now a mature programme. The view of the Department in a period of narrowing resources is that we are not in a position to pay for the scale of the liaison functions which were being provided until now by Pobal. It is our understanding that a number of projects no longer need the same degree of liaison with Pobal that was needed when they were less mature.

In relation to dormant accounts and one-off grants, these are not services which will expand in the coming period. We will not have the same level of cash to support them. In relation to the community services programme, a theme the committee has probably touched on, the Department has been getting it in the neck for not taking a greater interest in the management of the community services programme and because the processes around this programme are over-elaborate and sometimes oppressive. What we are doing in that space, with Pobal, is streamlining them to make them more accessible and more sympathetic to groups. It is a combination of economic imperative, the evolution of more mature schemes and the need to have a lighter touch on a number of schemes. It all comes together.

I am not in any way diminishing the point the Deputy raises concerning the challenges faced by Pobal and its successes to date in meeting those challenges.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

I will leave that issue because policy issues arise. On the issue of dormant accounts, we also passed legislation on dormant insurance funding. Did this provide the Department with much additional funding?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes, it did. I will give the Deputy a brief outline. The aggregate from insurance products was substantial and amounted to €22 million in 2004. It then dipped to €7.8 million in 2005, €7.1 million in 2006, €6.7 million in 2007, and €7.1 million in 2008. The insurance products brought in €51.8 million on aggregate under that heading over the period.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

It is a useful initiative.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It is a very useful initiative.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

On funding for some of the programmes, as my colleague, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, used to say, the most misnamed programme or project in the history of Irish government is the RAPID programme because it is anything but rapid. On the ground, in areas of the northside, we heard endless promises about actions and so forth and endless consultations took place. However, we did not see results on the ground. I note the figures in the input and output table. What is the current position?

The CCTV programme was closely related to the work of the drugs task forces, regional anti-drugs task forces and so on. Delivery in these areas has been tortuously slow. As I stated, RAPID is the most inappropriately named programme in history because it is still not rapid.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I will step back a little for the benefit of other members of the committee, although the Deputy is terribly familiar with this issue. The RAPID programme is about requiring all public bodies to prioritise investment in areas designated as of severe disadvantage. Rather than being the preserve of one Department, Departments are supposed to come together to prioritise what the Government has identified as areas of severe disadvantage. The figures before me show that approximately €400 million was spent in RAPID areas in the period from 2001 to 2006. When one includes the additional funds which became available from dormant accounts and continued mainstream funding, it is understood the figure would rise to around €600 million. For completeness and to be straight with the Deputy, whatever complaints he may have had in the past about RAPID, the level of investment is tapering off rather than increasing. There was substantial investment in the earlier years that was not tagged and because it was not tagged it was not seen thus.

A second problem that arose was around expectations. Deputy Broughan will remember that in the first tranche of strand 1 no parameters were set for people in those communities as to what they might accept, whereas strand 2, which was for provincial towns, was much more realistic and people felt they got a better outcome from it.

We are talking about an aggregate investment of the order of €600 million over the period. As the Deputy said — I cannot dispute it — there has been a degree of disappointment and a mismatch of expectations. There remains an issue of the extent to how well public bodies co-ordinate and prioritise their interventions. I must reflect that to the committee. Unfortunately, that is not just particular to the RAPID programme, it is a problem inherent in public bodies within the State.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

Again, it seemed CCTV was urgently needed in many urban areas because of its importance in tackling anti-social, criminal behaviour and drug dealing yet the delivery was incredibly lethargic between the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I am looking at the figures in front of me relating to the grants for CCTV and similar measures. The figure for 2007 was €537,000. I will see whether I have an update on that for 2008. It is not to hand but I can provide that for the Deputy. I do not disagree with what Deputy Broughan said about disappointment in communities, but on a more positive note, the fact that those measures can come on-stage and require to be funded, and the fact that they reflect the views of those communities, as reflected through the AITs, and the fact that those AITs can call public bodies to account in a formal setting is progress.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

To return to my first point, the key point about CCTV was not the capital investment or even the training of the people, it was the cost of monitoring that the Departments were not prepared to meet and the difficulties local communities had in providing for that cost.

On the evaluation of outputs, it seems extraordinary, even with the Atlantic Philanthropies initiative that, for example, one did not have a matrix of outputs such as how many children from certain communities went to third level, which to me is always striking, or even how many children in some communities finished second level, which is an immediate measurement of our ability to deliver real change in communities.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

First, far better quality data are available now following the 2006 census and subsequent research by Trutz Haase with Pobal, which have been fed into all of the partnerships in terms of the targeting of disadvantage. The Deputy is absolutely right in terms of our articulation of outputs. It needs to be far better expressed, based on that data, rather than a mechanistic description of projects we are delivering. I completely concur with the Deputy.

Chairman

What did the data from the 2006 census show the Department?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It provided better quality information on the location of disadvantage and parallel studies also provided significant improvement in many areas in access to third level education relative to previous experience. There is a problem in the sense of to what one attributes the change, whether it is due to the interventions under this programme or if there are wider economic considerations.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

I wish to follow on from the issues raised by Deputy Broughan and Deputy Jim O'Keeffe. From looking through the detail and from comments I received on research about the monitoring of the outcomes of the various programmes, I wish to focus specifically to the drugs Vote in particular, which was in total approximately €51.5 million. It was indicated that €35 million of that is funnelled through local and regional drugs task forces. Mr. Kearney outlined that regional task forces are a work in progress. Can he indicate first, how he feels that money is being spent in the task forces and, second, what positive outcomes are emerging from that spend?

Ms Kathleen Stack

The regional drugs task forces have not been established for as long as the local drugs task forces. There are ten regional drugs task forces based around the old health board areas. Given the nature of the drug problem, looking at outcomes is a difficult prospect and one must acknowledge that. In some ways it is easy to look at outputs in that one can count the number of people who attend training courses or who are in treatment, but trying to get a handle on the broader sum of those efforts can be more difficult. That is something with which we struggle in the same way as many other countries. If Deputy O'Brien is asking me to say that the drugs problem——

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

No, let me explain it in a better way. I accept it is difficult to quantify whether the investment has reduced the misuse of drugs. What I am asking is whether each local drugs task force sets out annual plans in the areas of training, public seminars and education and if that is monitored by the Department.

Ms Kathleen Stack

Each of the task forces is rolling out an action plan in a local or regional context. That is done through a series of projects which are being implemented and that we support. That could cover anything from prevention programmes to supply reduction programmes and awareness. It covers the whole gamut across the different pillars on which the drugs strategy operates. There are five pillars: supply reduction, prevention, treatment, research and rehabilitation. Each of the local drugs task forces has an annual plan. Following a review of the task forces carried out a number of years ago, all of the outputs from each of their activities each year are pulled together.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Are the outputs monitored by the Department?

Ms Kathleen Stack

Yes, it is monitored through the national drugs strategy team and then by the Department.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Therefore, it is not monitored directly by the Department. We have ten regional drugs task forces and 14 local drugs task forces. That is 24 altogether. It is an important initiative and I am not knocking it in any way but anecdotal information suggests that some task forces are more successful or proactive than others. Do we monitor the outputs of the task forces at local and regional level? Is funding for the next year predicated on what they have achieved in the previous year or are the same groups funded continuously?

Ms Kathleen Stack

Each task force is implementing a series of projects that are set out in its action plan that reflect national priorities across the strategy. Each task force is responding to local needs in that area. The needs of the south-west regional drugs task force are different from that in Ballymun, Finglas or Ballyfermot. It must be borne in mind that task forces have to reflect the nature of the problems in their areas. We do monitor the output.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Is it the case that successes are monitored or is funding allocated on the basis of achievement in the previous year?

Ms Kathleen Stack

Not directly. That would not be true to say. What they get is funding for an action plan to be rolled out. That action plan would be based on funding for a number of years.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

I do not want to drag this point out but it is important. Without in any way detracting from the great work done under many action plans, let us consider their effectiveness. Is it being suggested we should continue to fund a five-year action plan regardless of its level of success?

Ms Kathleen Stack

There is monitoring but not to the extent the Deputy is suggesting — that is probably the best way to put it. However, I take his point which is valid and one we need to consider.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

That is one development that may arise from this meeting. It is an area I have considered. Does Mr. Kearney want to elaborate?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The point is well made and reflects the one I made about distinguishing between what is good practice in some areas and learning therefrom and transferring the knowledge to others.

A lot of the expenditure on local drugs task forces is devoted to projects. The concern of the Department has been the projects that have been breathed into life will march on towards eternity while we continue to fund them. What we did to address that issue was commission a review of the 300 projects under the auspices of the local drugs task forces to identify which should be discontinued and which were of sufficient value such that they should be taken over directly by the public bodies to which they related. Thus, if they pertained to education, health or justice, they would be taken over by the relevant Departments. That process has recently concluded with the result that we have an evaluation of the 300 projects. About 40 were identified as non-runners, while the others were identified for mainstreaming. That is coming at it from the project level rather than from the business perspective.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

I am glad to hear the review has taken place. The manner in which money is spent and resources are allocated is important. When is it expected that the regional task forces will be fully effective?

Ms Kathleen Stack

They are at different stages of development. Across the ten task forces, there are approximately 100 projects up and running. Some are more advanced than others. Realistically, it will take another year or two before they will be at full throttle.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

It is a very difficult issue and I do not mean to be cribbing, but it seems the Department does not have a handle on the matter overall, particularly in respect of the effectiveness of the regional task forces. The criteria for determining when we want the regional task forces to be fully effective, be it in one, two or three years, seem to be very loose.

Ms Kathleen Stack

It is a question of their capacity to start projects and identify the needs of an area, and also their capacity to respond to these needs.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

I want to ask another question on drugs. The Department of Health and Children obviously has a major impact on the witnesses' work and the amount they can do. I am referring, in particular, to the example of BZP. There was an EU directive stipulating that it should be banned in Ireland but it has not been transposed into law. That is not a policy decision but an EU decision. I understand from the Department that we need to transpose the directive. We were asked to do so last March and it is now February, almost 12 months later. Is it correct that we only have 12 months in which to transpose the directive?

Ms Kathleen Stack

This matter pertains to the Misuse of Drugs Act which is the responsibility of the Department of Health and Children. I will not comment on the matter directly but do know there are plans in place to have BZP scheduled under the Act. That is in hand and will happen.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

I understand it is a health issue. What input does the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs have into the activity of the Department of Health and Children on these matters?

Ms Kathleen Stack

Given the nature of the drugs problem, there are a number of cross-departmental committees and oversight groups in operation, on all of which the Department of Health and Children is represented. We are in very close contact with that Department. Its representatives are on the new steering groups and developing the new strategy also. We have regular and ongoing contact with the Department and are aware of the issue of BZP and what is being planned in having it scheduled.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

I am just using BZP as an example. Is Ms Stack satisfied with the level of interaction and co-ordination between the Departments?

Ms Kathleen Stack

Yes.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Good. I thank Ms Stack.

Let me move on to the Leader programme. How many Leader companies or boards are there? It is sometimes difficult to find out what sort of entities they are.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I am open to correction in stating there are 54 integrated companies — it might be of that order. We will revert to the committee on the matter.

Let me return to a fundamental point the Deputy raised with my colleague. He referred to the valuation and setting of targets. It would be very useful if this were reflected in the design of the new national drugs strategy which is being advanced and if the views of the committee were reflected in the deliberations. We would be very happy to do so.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

That is important.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

A competitive process was gone through late last year in which contracts were awarded for the new rural development programme which extends from now until 2013 and will disperse in the order of €424 million among rural communities in that period. I have to hand the full list of those which came through which we will make available to the committee.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Are there approximately 50 companies?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I can get an official to make a quick calculation.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Mr. Kearney can pass on the exact figure to the committee. Are there approximately 50?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes, there are approximately 50.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Mr. Kearney has stated approximately €424 million will be dispersed to them in the next five years.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

A sum of €400 million will be allocated to them; the other €24 million will be allocated to a few central groups and networks.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

To be realistic, how will the Department be able to control the outputs and effectiveness of the Leader companies? How will it control the spend across the 50-plus Leader companies?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Not only were the groups selected, the indicative allocations for each group for the entire period were also set out. Within the allocations, groups will be required to set out their targets annually and report thereon. This is an EU programme and the obligations pertaining to reporting are onerous. There will also be a mid-term review. Targets were set for achievement under the programme at the point of its design and negotiation in Brussels. The procedure is based on the plans the companies have submitted which qualified them for funding on the quantification of the cash on an annual basis. That procedure is well bedded down.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

How will the Department monitor the system from here on? The companies must report annually. A lot of money is involved, almost €500 million in the next five years. If the money is to be allocated to 50 companies nationally, in real terms will the Department just seek one report per company?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

No. EU requirements are such that we are not allowed to release cash on that basis. There is a rigorous control mechanism such that, when the groups make applications for funding on a monthly basis to the Department, a risk assessment is carried out on the project that might be most at risk and questionable. The projects will be subject to individual inspection on a random basis.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Is the Secretary General talking about specific projects?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

I am talking about the Leader companies. How will they be monitored?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

They are the groups which forward what amounts to a collective of claims for projects to the Department on a monthly basis. We have a Leader inspectorate with a staff of ten that will be involved actively in the activities of the Leader groups which, as I mentioned, are now integrated companies. The companies will be within the reach of the inspectorate and also within the internal audit function of the Department.

Chairman

The Secretary General has said there are 50 Leader boards.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I am told by my officials there are fewer. Actually there are 36.

Chairman

There are 67 partnership and 35 enterprise boards.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

No, the partnerships are part of the Leader configuration. When all the partnerships and Leader groups are put together into integrated companies, it comes to 54.

Chairman

Is that a combination of Leader companies and partnerships?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes.

Chairman

What about enterprise boards?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

No, enterprise boards do not come within the Department's remit.

Chairman

There is much confusion among people setting up ventures as to whether they should go to a Leader company, a partnership group or an enterprise board. In the case of a rural development venture, one could have to deal with the county enterprise board, Enterprise Ireland, Údarás na Gaeltachta, the Western Development Commission, Shannon Development and FÁS. Is there any way of establishing a one-stop-shop to avoid this confusion for people wishing to set up ventures? Has there been any examination into why so many agencies are involved in the process? Is there duplication of services? Has there been any approach to rationalising the process with a view to providing help to members of the public when they need it?

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

Is the number of agencies under an bord snip nua's microscope?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

We anticipate that it should and shall be examined. There has been an extraordinary proliferation of bodies created under separate Departments. Since 2003, we have reduced the number of those bodies from 94 to 54 through cohesive restructures. That is combining the Leader and partnership structures together.

Chairman

Do the ones I mentioned still exist?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes. On having a co-ordinated approach between county enterprise boards, Leader groups and partnership bodies on the ground and for them to be accessible, the county enterprise boards are represented on the Leader partnerships. We are also working on agreeing protocols between the agencies at local and national level because it is a substantive point.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

One would need a flowchart to see how one could work through the process.

In 2008, no application forms were issued through the Dublin Leader programme. While I appreciate the financial support given to new agencies and ventures in all communities by the programmes, problems were caused by the delay. In Dublin, there were ventures with people ready to go but they were precluded from accessing the grants. That is difficult for small ventures and people trying to create employment.

I am glad the number of departmental bodies has been reduced from 94 to 54, but is it still too many bodies for it to monitor? Some companies are better than others. How does the Department assess the effectiveness and efficiency of each of the Leader companies? We need to have a handle on spending €400 million through these companies over the next five years.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

In fairness to the Dublin Leader programme, the new rural development programme was suspended last year because of threatened legal action and a complaint to the European Commission. Leader groups were not in a position to accept applications.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

That is fine but people should have been told about this. It happened elsewhere, not just in the Dublin area.

Will the spend be monitored on a project-by-project basis?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Every month there will be a review with risk-rated interventions and assessments of a percentage of projects. The groups themselves will be subject to ongoing inspections by the inspectorate. At-risk groups would be subject to inspection by our internal audit function.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

How are the staff, offices and property portfolios of all Leader companies managed? Is there an inventory of them?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Regarding staffing, as these are private companies, the Department's approach is to provide a limited amount of resources for administration. As for the capital and asset resources of the companies, the Department has the matter under consideration, in the context of cohesion. The Department is examining and taking legal advice on its position in cases where a Leader and a partnership company merges and State funds may have been accessed to acquire assets over the years.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

If the State funded several groups which used the money to purchase property, who owns the property?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It is owned by the group but, presumably, with a lien by the State for a specified period. That is the normal arrangement that applies in such cases.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Are we sure that is the case? I am glad there is a review of the position but I am concerned about it. While I accept these companies need offices, the State has provided funds for private companies to purchase properties which are then owned by them.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

As this does not apply just to the Leader groups but to the partnership groups, the best would be for me to supply a note to the committee on the current state of play. There are also legal issues arising too and it would be wiser for the Department to provide the committee with a note on it.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

I appreciate that and thank Mr. Kearney.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I welcome Mr. Kearney's frank comments on the Department being behind the game when it comes to evaluation. While he has been upfront on this, why has it been allowed to continue over a considerable period?

There is an impression that the Department for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs is actually the Department for grants. More worryingly, there is a perception that a number of those grants are in the Minister's gift. The Department's budget in 2007 came to €500 million. Since the Department was established, considerable amounts of money have been dispersed to local communities but it is not clear that the taxpayer is getting value for money.

Does Mr. Kearney recognise the issues regarding evaluation and measuring outcomes not being in place? I ask that question with several different budget headings in mind. Under the Irish language and the Gaeltacht heading, in 2007 approximately €100 million was spent in that area. Is there any system in place to measure whether the taxpayer is getting value for money for that spend?

It is easy for people outside the Gaeltacht areas to get the impression that "Gaeltacht" is synonymous with grant aid. That is not a sustainable approach towards Gaeltacht areas in the long term. Neither is it a sustainable approach to promoting the Irish language and given the spend in that regard, what assurances, if any, can Mr. Kearney give to the taxpayer that he or she is getting value for money.

A draft strategy for the Irish language has been produced. Has that been published and is it available? Can Mr. Kearney say what role his Department has in terms of the teaching of the Irish language? It seems that a considerable number of students leave school, particularly if they have done honours Irish, with a predominantly negative attitude to the language. That has been the case for some time and it does not augur well for promoting the Irish language for the future. Can Mr. Kearney tell us about the Department's performance as regards the Gaeltacht and the Irish language?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

With regard to the first issue of the evaluation, I would point out to the Deputy in the first instance that in regard to all the major schemes the Department is running, in terms of social expenditures and within the rules governed by the Department of Finance, we have conducted a wide range of value for money audits. These have led to various reports suggesting changes and improvements in schemes for improved measuring of outcomes. However, across the Departments that engage in social expenditure, for example the office of the Minister of State with responsibility for children and other public bodies as well as ourselves, we have not developed to the extent that others have, a scientific based approach on the design of programmes and the measurement of outcomes. This is still evolving elsewhere and we need to catch up. Part of the today's discussion is about a process to engage in that.

In terms of the impact we are making, we have followed the scripts as required by public bodies on conducting the VFMs and articulating outputs. However, that in its totality does not give the best result for Ireland Inc. That is a view I hold in the Department and that is why we are engaged in the current initiative to try to improve our capability.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

What does Mr. Kearney mean by current initiative?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The initiative with the centre for effective services.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

We may come to that later. How long is the Department in existence?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The Department came into existence in 2002.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

That is long enough to have learned some lessons.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It is, but since 2002 we have conducted VFM reviews to ascertain the performance and outputs of the various programmes and adjusted them accordingly.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

The Secretary General may be aware of those but I am not. From the viewpoint of that spend on the Gaeltacht and the Irish language, what evidence can he provide that we are getting value for money?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

A number of schemes have been subjected to VFM reviews to decide whether they should be continued and the recommendations of the reports have been acted upon. Separately, the Department invested extensively in a linguistic study which produced a comprehensive blueprint indicating how it should fundamentally change its approach to the supports for the Gaeltacht areas so as to sustain and protect the language. Considerable investment has gone into that as a result of which a Cabinet committee has been established to look at implementing its recommendations.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Can we move on to the area of drugs?

Chairman

The Department of Finance officials have listened to what has been going on here and the questions from the members and responses. As the Department responsible for achieving value for money across all Departments, what are its views on what it has heard in relation to some of the projects being run by the present Department? Has the Department of Finance carried out any evaluations in its own right?

Mr. Fred Foster

I found the discussion of great interest. Many of the concerns expressed would be shared by us. It is difficult in the social area because, as has been pointed out, there are so many extraneous factors affecting these type of schemes that it is difficult to unravel just how much difference State interventions have made in individual instances. At the same time, it will cause us some difficulty in the context of the special group now looking at expenditure programmes. It will be difficult to defend a number of these areas as having been able to deliver real change and real improvement. One of the tragedies of the timing of the economic downturn is that so much had been about to happen, but we have run out of time and money.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

On the drugs front, I must declare I am a member of the Ballymun drugs task force and a past member of the Finglas drugs task force, so I am fairly familiar with the work they do. It is true to say that Ballymun is one of the better and more effective drugs task forces. However, I am concerned about the fact that a great deal of money has been spent in this area in recent years. While there are many people working in the drugs area at community level and a good deal of activity, I am not aware of any evidence that the outcomes are changing. Are they making a difference or not and is there any way of establishing this?

Ms Kathleen Stack

The main way to judge in terms of the entire activity is through initiatives such as prevalence surveys of drug misuse. That would be the main way to get a handle on activity in terms of the outputs. As I told Deputy O'Brien, it is quite difficult, as the Deputy can appreciate, to get a sense of what all the projects on the ground are trying to do. That is one of the things we shall look at in the context of the new drugs strategy, in terms of putting a better performance system in place that can capture the combined effort of projects on the ground for measuring the activities in which they are engaged.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Is it not the case that performance indicators need to be developed with regard to all of the Department's expenditure? It is all very well to disburse money to communities and this is very welcome but ultimately, the Department must have a system in place to establish that this is making a difference and changing things for the better. Whether it is on the drugs front, in terms of reducing prevalence or with regard to Irish in terms of ensuring that greater numbers are living in Gaeltacht areas and speaking the language, there must be performance indicators.

Ms Kathleen Stack

As the Deputy will be aware, each of the local drugs task forces will be sponsoring and supporting a number of projects. Each will have targets in its area and, as indicated by the Department of Finance official, sometimes it is difficult to extrapolate the difference the drugs project alone is making from other initiatives taking place in an area, such as the RAPID or the local development social inclusion programmes. Sometimes it is a question almost of getting a community performance indicator across a wide range of programmes, in terms of the type of difference that is being made.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Is that not what is needed? Given the Department's involvement on so many fronts with regard to disadvantaged communities, it needs to develop performance indicators across a range of areas in terms of health and education status, housing, etc., and have a system in place so that it can measure whether the money it is putting into those communities is making any difference. There is a problem because there are no performance indicators, so we do not know whether all the money is making any difference.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I shall respond on a general level in the first instance. I do not accept that we have not put performance indicators in place. If one looks at the output statement with regard to the secondary strategy——-

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I ask the Secretary General to please tell us about them. That is what I am hoping he will do.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

They are reflected in our statement of strategy and in the output statement, which was provided to the committee. They vary considerably, depending on whether we are dealing with something like the provision of infrastructure and services on the islands, or the local development and social inclusion programme, where we try to place people in a system where they can get back into employment with State support. There is a difference between that and taking a long societal impact measure. Even in the drugs area, there were clear-cut outputs specified for the local drugs task forces, as well as a system to examine the operation of those projects and what they are achieving.

I disagree that there is no performance framework in place and no specification of outputs. However, the more difficult issue of long-term societal impacts is harder to crack. We have been engaged with the IPA for a number of years in trying to nail down the impact aspect of this, but the outputs to be delivered are generally set out for each programme.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I am not saying that the money spent is not making any difference. I am saying that I am not sure whether the Department has any system in place to measure whether it is making a difference. In order to get value for money, there must be clear performance indicators in each area. I understand Mr. Kearney acknowledged that, but we need to move forward and put those in place.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I mentioned the value for money reviews that were carried out. All of them would have articulated particular requirements on improvements to be addressed, but I cannot dispute the Deputy's point about the need for such indicators. It is a progressive process. It is not a matter of descending on it, but a matter of developing them and seeing how well they withstand the test of time.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Those systems are very well developed in many countries. Rather than having a scattergun approach to tackling disadvantage, this needs to be done in a coherent way that is constantly measured.

Deputy Broughan spoke about the Centre for Effective Services. This is particularly relevant to the committee. I am familiar with the work of Atlantic Philanthropies, and I know about its emphasis on intervention in childhood for disadvantaged communities. It does excellent work. I am not clear why it is taking over the responsibility for some of the functions within Pobal. Its remit relates to interventions in childhood, whereas Pobal has a much wider remit. It seems that there is a considerable element of duplication between what this centre is supposed to do and the work that is already going on in Pobal. That would be a matter for concern. I am also concerned that there was not any public procurement process followed in giving this work to the centre. There is no system in place to make sure we are getting value for money. There are not the same accountability tests applied to that centre as would be applied to Pobal. I would like Mr. Kearney to address those points.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The first point is fundamental. There is no question of the centre for effective services taking on the work of Pobal. Pobal has particular responsibility across ten programmes for the Department, which relates to the delivery of those programmes. Pobal continues to work with us in doing that. We are engaging with the centre for effective services to access a fundamental redesign of our big programmes, so that the service design monitoring evaluation, assessment and impact can draw on administrative science that has been developed in other countries. It is not about existing work, but about taking on a design and a review that has not previously been carried out by us or that neither we nor other organisations here are capable of carrying out.

The Centre for Effective Services does not exist on its own. It is a creation of the Government and Atlantic Philanthropies to deliver particular services related to the early childhood intervention initiative. It is not as if we are going to the marketplace to give a group a few hundred thousand euro per annum. Atlantic Philanthropies offered €5 million to the State to advance this agenda, and the State responded by considering it a worthwhile initiative which was worth co-funding. We are participating in the initiative and making a grant available, as we do to other groups when we see a public good arising.

I am very happy to make available to this committee a rigorous output statement of deliverable services and time lines that have been agreed between the centre and the Department, where we require very specific things to be provided for us early on to support the redesign of two of our major programmes. As the official from the finance Department pointed out, we are running out of time to justify the allocation of resources, and we need an improved evaluation and measurement capacity and design to support the protection of those resources.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

This is an area that needs to be examined by the Comptroller and Auditor General. Normal procedures were not followed. I am not aware that the Centre for Effective Services has a remit under community development. I understood that it joined forces with the Office of the Minister for Children in carrying out evaluations on interventions in early childhood. Whose initiative was it to involve the centre in community development? Does Mr. Kearney foresee any displacement of staff within Pobal as a result of the work of the centre?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The initiative was a joint endeavour between my own Department and the Office of the Minister for Children to engage in this process. I reiterate that this relates to the redesign of a programme and not its delivery. What will follow the redesign, that is, the delivery, is a separate process. We do not see it as impacting on the work of Pobal. To put this in context, the reduction of Pobal's budget for 2009 is in the order of some €2.2 million. The allocation to the Centre for Effective Services is of the order of €500,000. Therefore, there is no correlation whatever in terms of the resources involved.

Staffing levels in Pobal are an entirely separate process. Pobal staff have at no stage been involved in the redesign and development of the local development social inclusion programme. They have been involved in its delivery since the establishment of this Department.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Will the Department eventually buy services from the centre for effective services which Pobal would previously have provided for itself?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

No. At no stage since the establishment of the Department has Pobal provided for us the redesign of a major funded programme. Nor would we see Pobal, no more than the Department itself, as having access to the international expertise to support such a redesign.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Is the Department buying in services?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

No, we are availing of services that are there under a co-funded initiative between the Government and Atlantic Philanthropies.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

It is an unusual arrangement to say the least and something that should be monitored.

I have been involved for several years in two area partnerships in my constituency. Unemployment is now affecting every community and not just disadvantaged communities. There was a proposal some time ago to expand the remit of the area partnerships beyond their immediate area and to cover the entire country. I have been tracking this and, certainly up to recently, that expansion had not taken place in practice, while it may have done so in theory. This meant that people who found themselves unemployed outside an area partnership catchment area could not avail of the supports, grants and so on available for people living in the partnership area. Will Mr. Kearney tell us where this proposal stands, if the areas have actually been expanded and if commensurate funding has been provided to allow the expansion to take place?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

My understanding is that the expansion of those areas has been concluded. Additional funding has not been provided but, in support of the expanded areas, Pobal provided partnerships with a detailed analysis of the census data so as to enable the partnerships, based on their new boundaries, to target their interventions within those areas and basically to prioritise how to use the limited resources available to them.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I do not follow what Mr. Kearney is saying. A decision was taken for the area partnerships to expand their catchment areas so that the whole country is covered. They are expected to do this at the time when a significantly increased number of people are unemployed and need their services, yet no funding has been provided for this.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Some €55 million is being provided in the current year to support the delivery of the LDSIP.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Is that additional?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

No, that is the——

Deputy Róisín Shortall

No additional funding has been provided to the area partnerships. I do not know how they can do their job. While that is a political matter, it is extraordinary.

Reference was made to the RAPID programme. People in disadvantaged communities have come to the conclusion that this has been a con job. The €7 million that was provided in 2007 is a very far cry from what was initially promised. Of the €7 million, what proportion was spent on administration?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I have two sets of figures. To clarify, there are two elements to the RAPID programme. First, we fund the area co-ordinators and, separately, we fund a range of the capital projects that were previously mentioned. On the capital side, approximately €5.3 million was disbursed and €1.5 million on the current side. I would have to check for the Deputy to find to what extent any of that directly related to administration.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I want to ask Pobal about the CDPs. How many CDPs are there? I sometimes find it hard to understand what they are about. Some of them are good but I have no idea what others do. Is anything being done to give them a clear remit and to ensure there is accountability?

Mr. Denis Leamy

We do not have any relationship with the CDPs, which is more in the remit of the Department.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I am sorry. Perhaps Mr. Kearney can reply.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

They are approximately 182 CDPs. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I will go back to my previous mantra. While we can set outcomes for the programme and set specific deliverables that we want reported on, we lack a qualitative differentiation mechanism for differences in performance between CDPs currently. This is one of our demands in the redesign of the programme.

The are currently 182 CDPs and their performance is monitored through direct engagement by the staff of the section with the individual providers of the programme. However, the distribution of the CDPs, the specialisation of some and the clustering of others are issues on which an initial review is currently being completed within the Department because of doubts as to how well the current configuration best serves those communities.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Those kinds of questions were asked many years ago and it seems nothing has been done to rationalise the whole area. To have 182 bodies scattered around the country and all doing their own thing seems questionable. How much does this cost?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The programme costs approximately €22 million per year.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Again, we do not know what many of them are doing and they do not have any clear remit.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I beg to differ. The objects of the programme are clearly set out. On an annual basis, a work plan is agreed with the Department and it is monitored on a quarterly basis. They are subject to fairly close engagement with the Department. The more fundamental question the Deputy raises, which is valid, is whether the original construct of 182 of these structures across the country best serves what is now required, particularly in a context where we have full county coverage by the partnerships. The relationships between these structures and the partnerships is a policy issue, as well as the clustering of these structures.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

The Secretary General has already spoken about the proliferation of these bodies. It is very confusing for members of the public to try to access services because there are so many of them. At a political level, we are also confused because there are so many bodies, there is overlap everywhere and nobody is sure what people are doing. The issue is that if we had proper local government, there would not be a need for all of these agencies.

Deputy Seán Fleming

I want to cover a few different issues. First, Mr. Kearney's opening statement referred to tackling drug misuse. He stated that the local drugs task forces advanced their actions plans, the regional drugs task forces also pursued their action plans for 2007, and, in the final paragraph, he stated that the steering committee is reviewing the existing national drug strategy. We have plans at local, regional and national level but who is doing the work? Everybody is drawing up plans but it seems there are a lot of chiefs and no indians.

I attended a meeting in Portlaoise in 2007 which was concerned with drawing up action plans for a regional drugs task force. There was a need to meet the local community but when I went to the hotel that evening, 20 of the 22 people in the meeting room were on the public payroll — from the Courts Service, the Garda, the probation service, the Department, departmental facilitators, the HSE, the local authority and so on — and just two were ordinary people. It is a case of the system talking to itself, drawing action plans, area plans, regional plans and national plans. By the time the national strategy is put together, we will then review that national strategy.

What about implementation? All the brains are working on one level but, from what I saw on the ground, the process did not involve the families who need to be reached out to. Was the experience similar at meetings in most other areas of the country? I suspect it was.

Ms Kathleen Stack

In the first half of last year, we spent a couple of months undertaking a fairly extensive consultation process around the new national drug strategy. The current strategy expired at the end of 2008 and the new one will I hope kick off from the middle of this year. I am not sure what meeting the Deputy referred to. We had a series of ten to 12 public consultation meetings throughout the country in the context of the new drug strategy we are drawing up——

Deputy Seán Fleming

I am talking about 2007.

Ms Kathleen Stack

That was the regional plan.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Yes. The consultation is just between staff and public officials. It is not consultation with the general public. I went into a meeting room in my area expecting to see representatives of 50 families, among others. However, there were only two people in attendance who were directly affected by the issues and they left after a time because they apparently felt it was not for them and that little would be achieved. Does Ms Stack understand the point I am making?

Ms Kathleen Stack

I do.

Deputy Seán Fleming

The Department is collating all this information but it is not reaching ordinary people in this process. I am certain the review of the consultation process was done by the types of people who participate in all such systems. Those people deserve credit for attending evening meetings without being paid to do so. I have no problem with any of the staff, they are dedicated people. However, what was notable about the process was the absence of the ordinary people who should have been there to recount their difficulties, whether as drug abusers, relatives of drug abusers and so on.

Ms Kathleen Stack

I take the Deputy's point. The Department is anxious that once the regional drugs task forces have developed their plans and are rolling out projects, that it is the community-based projects that engage with the families to which Deputy Fleming referred. It is more important that the message gets out at that level. I accept the point that public consultation meetings are sometimes not public in the true sense. We had a mixed response during our consultations in 2008 on the new strategy.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Who is responsible for the drugs strategy? Has the Department merely a co-ordinating role? Is it the case that it is so dispersed that everybody is responsible and nobody is responsible?

Ms Kathleen Stack

It is a cross-departmental and cross-policy issue. Our Department is responsible for co-ordinating implementation of the strategy. That is done through a series of actions, numbering more than 100, as set out in the strategy document. Responsibility for each of the actions is assigned to Departments and agencies. On the supply side, for example, responsibilities are assigned to the Garda Síochána and Customs and Excise, while the Department of Health and Children and the Health Service Executive are responsible for treatment matters. Depending on the nature and target of the action, an assigned agency is responsible for its implementation.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Does the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs co-ordinate the information gathered by all these agencies?

Ms Kathleen Stack

Yes.

Deputy Seán Fleming

What is the typical waiting time for a teenaged heroin addict seeking access to a treatment centre either on a residential or outpatient basis? I regularly read local court reports in which the presiding judge complains that defendants cannot access such treatment facilities. What is the typical waiting time in various parts of the State?

Ms Kathleen Stack

I understand there are currently no waiting lists for those aged under 18 years seeking methadone treatment. For those aged over 18 years, it depends on one's location.

Deputy Seán Fleming

To clarify, there are no waiting lists for those aged under 18 years?

Ms Kathleen Stack

That is my understanding.

Deputy Seán Fleming

I will check that out at local level. I hope Ms Stack is correct but it seems a bizarre assertion. It does not tally with what judges are saying in court.

Ms Kathleen Stack

There are no waiting lists for children aged under 18 years seeking methadone maintenance. I can get more information for the Deputy on the statistics for those aged over 18 years. It varies from area to area and from task force to task force. One of the objectives of the new drugs strategy is that there should be a far more equitable distribution of treatment places throughout the State. We acknowledge that some areas are not yet up to speed and that applicants are on waiting lists.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Are the regional task forces loosely based on the old health board areas?

Ms Kathleen Stack

Yes.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Do these regional structures remain relevant? Given that the problems are largely the same everywhere, is there need for 11 structures for 11 regional task forces? I assume this involves 11 sets of facilitators being paid to draw up the plan for each board. Surely all these plans will be largely the same, dealing with more or less the same issues, save for the name on the cover.

Chairman

Perhaps the delegates will provide a detailed note on the questions asked by Deputy Fleming.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Yes. I was eager to raise that issue.

The local development social inclusion programme is now in operation on a nationwide basis, with the new companies working in co-operation with the rural development programme. Will the delegates clarify that there will be no equivalent increase in funds for the local development social inclusion programme to cover small areas of a county given that funding will now be provided on a countywide basis?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

There is no increase in funds. However, better quality data are now available to partnerships regarding the location of particular pockets of severe disadvantage within their jurisdiction in order to support them in targeting available resources under the programme.

Deputy Seán Fleming

In other words, they will have to prioritise. Does this mean that some of the areas that were covered by previous social inclusion funding programmes will lose out if other areas are identified as being more deprived?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It is for the local partnerships to make those types of calls.

Deputy Seán Fleming

The Pobal report indicates that some 4,000 third level students received assistance under the millennium partnership fund in the year under review at a cost of approximately €2 million, which equates to some €500 per participant. This provision seems effectively to function as a top-up third level grant. Will the administration of this fund now be based across all the local development social inclusion programme areas or will the old area-based and community partnership companies continue to administer it?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

There are two aspects to this issue. First, the millennium partnership fund contained a finite amount of cash which should now be expended.

Deputy Seán Fleming

To clarify, is this programme finished?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes. The second point, which is extremely important, is the role of partnerships in intervening to fill the gaps in mainstream educational provision by reaching out to and supporting disadvantaged persons through additional supports relevant to their participation in education, such as travel, books and so on. These supports are available from partnership companies and we do not expect that to change. However, some area companies attach greater importance than others to this aspect of their role and provide more resources for it.

Deputy Seán Fleming

I did not notice an indication in the annual report that the millennium partnership fund is no longer in operation. Perhaps I missed it.

Mr. Denis Leamy

To clarify, discussions are currently taking place with the Higher Education Authority with a view to providing a new round of this funding. We expect there may be a new round in the future.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Will it be given a different name?

Mr. Denis Leamy

Yes.

Deputy Seán Fleming

We have heard today about the multitude of local bodies with different functions and funds. All the third level institutions have some type of hardship fund to which students may apply for assistance if they experience financial difficulties, such as one of their parents losing his or her income. It would make sense to have some level of co-ordination between the Department and the third level institutions in this regard. There may be students drawing from both funds and others aware of one but not the other. The Department should engage with the third level institutions to co-ordinate efforts in this regard.

Substantial grants were approved in recent years for capital investment under the equal opportunities child care programme, including to community-based projects. Some of these projects are effectively white elephants, with grant approval having been received some years ago but no progress as yet in terms of building work. What is the status of all these grant allocations? Are they preventing the commencement of other projects which could be operational immediately if funding were available? What is the level of allocations that have not been drawn down through that fund?

Mr. Denis Leamy

I will begin by explaining the process. Community-based groups may apply for a grant for the capital and operational costs of a child care facility. These projects can sometimes take a considerable length of time to come into operation because of difficulties in regard to buildings, planning permission and so on.

Deputy Seán Fleming

That is extraordinary. An application to the national lottery for funding for a sports facility, for example, will be deemed invalid unless it includes title deeds, solicitor's letters, planning permission, three quotations, a consultant's report and so on. In the case of the equal opportunities child care programme, however, it seems the Department issued approval, probably in principle, without properties being acquired or planning permission even being sought. There may be cases where, for instance, €1 million is locked in but, three years later, it is discovered that the title deeds are not in order. There appears to be great inconsistency in the approach to handing out Government grants between the two Departments.

Chairman

This issue was dealt with.

Deputy Seán Fleming

I apologise as I may have missed that conversation.

Chairman

It was a good question.

Mr. Denis Leamy

To clarify, these grants are from the Office of the Minister for Children. They go through a process at local level through the county child care committees, at which there is a level of prioritisation regarding the need for child care facilities. They go through a local appraisal after which they are sent to Pobal for further appraisal. We try to limit to a degree the amount of information we expect from groups in the application phase. Thereafter, when they are approved, we enter a support phase with them to secure proper facilities for those groups.

It also is important to state that we do much work pertaining to decommitals. If the funding is not spent within a certain timeframe, especially under the equal opportunities childcare programme, which was co-financed by the EU, the so-called "N+2" rule requires us to enter a decommital procedure with the group concerned. In the first instance, we try to give it all the support possible to put in place the facility but if that is not working out, we go through a decommital procedure in which the moneys revert to the Exchequer, thus facilitating its allocation elsewhere.

Deputy Seán Fleming

That is interesting because members had a similar conversation on decommitals of previously committed grants with representatives from the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. What was the value of the previously committed grants that underwent a decommital process?

While Mr. Leamy locates that information, the witnesses should outline the role of the child care committees. Are the county child care committees included among the aforementioned 182 organisations involved in the community development programme or do they constitute another 36 bodies?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

That is not within my Department's remit. As child care is the responsibility of the Office of the Minister for Children, it is quite a separate programme.

Deputy Seán Fleming

In addition to the 182 bodies to which Mr. Kearney referred, there probably are approximately 30 county child care committees. The witnesses should provide members with a listing of the numbers of the bodies under discussion because I suspect there are many more of them. Does Pobal have information on the funding of county child care committees? How many staff has each such committee? Presumably, not many applications are coming through such organisations at present.

Mr. Denis Leamy

While there was quite a number historically, there probably will not be many in the present economic context. Pobal can provide a note to the committee on the county child care committees and the staffing thereof. They are funded directly by the Office of the Minister for Children.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Such information would be useful.

Chairman

The committee will write to the Office of the Minister for Children. For the Deputy's information, already this morning, the committee thus far has come across 271 bodies that are in receipt of funding and are being paid for out of the public purse.

Deputy Seán Fleming

My question to Mr. Kearney is whether all the aforementioned bodies have charitable status or whether they are eligible for such status.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

They certainly would be eligible for charitable status.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Have many of them applied for it? Would the Department not wish to know whether an organisation to which it intended to provide a grant had charitable status or was a registered charity?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

As the Deputy probably is aware, passage of a Bill is about to be concluded through the Oireachtas that will establish for the first time a register of charities. However, we do not have a definitive register at present. We currently have the Revenue register.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Does Mr. Kearney know how many of the aforementioned 182 bodies are registered charities with Revenue?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I can revert directly to the Deputy in that regard.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Mr. Leamy should comment on the decommitals.

Mr. Denis Leamy

In 2008, the total amount decommitted was €22 million.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Can Mr. Leamy supply the committee with details of these decommittals?

Mr. Denis Leamy

Yes, I can.

Deputy Seán Fleming

If the value of decommitals in 2008 was €22 million, what was the value of committals granted that year?

Mr. Denis Leamy

It was in the order of €140 million.

Deputy Seán Fleming

The equivalent of 10% or 15% of the total was withdrawn because projects did not proceed or whatever.

Mr. Denis Leamy

It is important to note that while that decommitals figure is fairly large, it pertains to the old equal opportunities childcare programme, which was coming to an end. Consequently, that figure was particularly high and probably is not——

Deputy Seán Fleming

It would be helpful to get the breakdown in respect of decommitals because some communities may have learned a year or two ago that grant approval of €500,000 or €1 million had been given and may be wondering what became of it. If such money has been decommitted, they at least would know where they stood.

Mr. Denis Leamy

We can compile a list.

Deputy Seán Fleming

There would be some public interest in so knowing.

Mr. Denis Leamy

We will provide that list to the committee.

Deputy Seán Fleming

My final question is on a different topic, namely, the evening rural transport scheme. I understand its purpose is to take people to bingo and home from the pubs. I am intrigued that a Department has set up a scheme on a pilot basis called the evening rural transport scheme. The Department's report states that it has approved seven projects at a cost of €152,077. This money was paid out via the rural transport initiative projects, which carry out rural transport in the first instance on behalf of the Department and a number of which would have made submissions to the Department. For a scheme that disbursed €152,077, could someone have assessed the total cost of its establishment? I refer to the costs of setting up a section in the Department, advising all the groups, publicising the possibility and assessing the applications, leaving aside the costs incurred by rural transport initiative groups when making applications or their subsequent cut for administration from the sum of €152,077. I cannot discern how a Government scheme could be set up for that sum, simply in respect of administration. Can anyone provide a guesstimate on how much was spent on setting up, monitoring, running and operating the scheme, in comparison with the amount of money that was handed out on the ground?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

As I mentioned, a review of this scheme is under way.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Given there were seven projects, the review could be done in ten minutes. For a scheme involving seven projects at a cost of €152,000, such a review should be done within half an hour. While the Department might be waiting for a report, I would review something like that within half an hour. I am sure that were Mr. Kearney to have details on his desk regarding the seven projects, he could have such a review done by lunchtime. I do not understand the reason a firm of consultants is analysing or staff members are compiling internally a report on seven projects. I almost rest my case.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

No additional resources were committed by the Department to this scheme. It was done on the basis of an existing section that deals with rural development issues. A figure of €250,000 was made available to support the rural transport night scheme in 2008. While a modest amount of that sum might have been taken by Pobal, we opted to travel on the existing scheme. Essentially, we worked within the structure of the main scheme that is being run by the Department of Transport. The figures suggest that close to 10,000 people were carried under the scheme in 2007. Contrary to what the Deputy might expect, many of the users did not use it for social or recreational purposes. It was used for matters that are highly important in local communities, such as people going to church or——

Deputy Seán Fleming

Saturday evening Mass.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes, as well as people going to bingo or to local events for senior citizens and so on. The point at which I beg to differ with the Deputy is that significant variations have emerged across the seven groups in respect of charges, income and usage. When we initiated this review three or four weeks ago, we had some hopes that what came out of it might be used to extend the scheme nationwide. While the Deputy is correct to observe it is a small scheme, if we are to use the pilot projects to inform wider practice, the implications are significant.

Deputy Seán Fleming

Such variations indicate something about the rural transport initiative companies, rather than the scheme itself. That is the implication, regardless of whether the scheme is operated by Pobal, the Department of Transport or the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. While this scheme might not have been the problem, it may have highlighted differing practices among rural transport initiative companies.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I wish to confirm the incisive point made by the Deputy. As the study developed, I asked for the comparable figures for the rural transport scheme to determine whether there was a correlation, particularly in terms of income. It was a close match. The Deputy's points are well founded.

Chairman

Before I call Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, I will refer to something that I read in the report, namely, payments made to universities around the world. The Department paid €205,000 to Concordia University in Montreal, but why was €30,000 given to the Welsh Language Board? How did it benefit taxpayers? Some €30,000 was given to the University of Wales. The list comes to approximately——

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

It may relate to an institute linked to the Ireland Funds.

Chairman

Yes. What is the purpose of funding to the universities on this list, particularly to the Welsh Language Board and the Montreal university?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I will outline the general thinking informing the fund and, with some assistance from my colleagues, go into the specifics. There is a demand for the teaching of Irish in universities abroad. Under the Fulbright and a number of other initiatives, the Minister was approached to support the demand. By making a limited amount of funds available, a remarkable result in the teaching of language has been produced across universities.

Wales has successfully promoted, developed and supported its language in spaces where we have not. We have an opportunity to learn. The resurgence of the language in north Wales in particular is strong. This is the context of our engagement with the Welsh university mentioned. I will provide further information on the exact query.

Chairman

It was not so much a question on the university as it was on the Welsh Language Board, which I presume is a state-financed body.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Yes.

Chairman

Why should we contribute to a Welsh state body?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

We will follow up on the matter for the Chairman. We drew on the board's experience considerably in terms of initiatives that it has undertaken, but this does not explain the Chairman's query. We will revert to him.

Chairman

Let us be conscious of time, as we may need to go to a vote. We should try to conclude our business beforehand.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

An issue that has not been touched on is that of bonuses and meritorious payments. At the end of December 2007, more than €65,000 was paid to three assistant secretary generals, totalling €38,400, and other individuals and teams. Has there been new thinking in this respect? Were such moneys paid in December 2008 and, if so, what is their breakdown?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

The Deputy's information reflects a scheme operating across the Civil Service. Those awards were made in 2007 and, as the Deputy mentioned, amounted to approximately €24,000 to groups and individuals. Due to the economic difficulties that emerged in late 2008, no bonus awards have been paid to senior staff. The amount available to staff last year was reduced by 50%.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe

The main bonus awards were those payable to the assistant secretary general grade.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Some €38,000 was awarded to the assistant secretary generals and approximately €25,500 to other staff. No payments were made to assistant secretary generals in 2008 and only half of the general staff award was made through the social partnership process.

Chairman

Did everybody at the assistant secretary general level receive a bonus?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It depends, as a central scheme is operated under the auspices of the Department of Finance where outputs are formally set for individuals. Depending on the extent to which they achieve an output, awards may be made.

Chairman

Does everyone get a bonus?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It depends. All three assistant secretary generals in this Department would get a bonus, but its size would vary from individual to individual. It was not paid in 2008.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Returning to the issue of the establishment of the Centre for Effective Services, it is my understanding that it only had two staff members when the Department considered becoming involved. Their expertise was in the fields of intervention and early childhood services, not community development. For a number of years, the OECD has recognised that community development expertise resides in Pobal. On this basis, understanding the rationale for contracting out those services is difficult, given that they could be more easily and effectively delivered by Pobal. Will Mr. Kearney respond to this point?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I am not sure I agree with the Deputy. It is my recollection that the centre had no staff and that it was only being formed when we and the Department of Health and Children held discussions and made a proposal to the Minister. All of that occurred long before staff were recruited into the structure. I do not concur.

If one can make the leap from questioning why the centre — a joint Government and Atlantic Philanthropies initiative — should be challenged on accessing these funds, one can also ask why something should go to Pobal, which had the expertise, without a process. We must be consistent in our approach.

My fundamental point is that Pobal has been engaged with the Department in providing services, for the Government since 1992 and us since 2002, on the delivery of programmes. This relationship continues. We regard the programme's fundamental redesign and accessing the international expertise of Atlantic Philanthropies as a unique and valuable opportunity.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Does accessing the international expertise not mean that the centre would recruit someone? It is not as if the expertise is already contained in the body and the Department wants to tap into it. The expertise is within Pobal. Why is the Department not using it? In the context of members expressing concerns about the proliferation of agencies, it does not make sense to go outside existing structures to buy services. The issues involved relate to public procurement, who initiated the move, that the Department did not go to the market and that the centre will not be subject to normal value for money audits.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I will respond with a few points. The Department does not take the view that the particular expertise sought in the programme's design and redesign resides in Pobal. There is a concern, one that has been expressed by some of the Deputies present, that those involved in the provision of programmes, particularly the providers themselves, should not be the architects of new programmes and that fresh thinking is required.

The centre is a joint venture between the Government and Atlantic Philanthropies. We are availing of the opportunity to broaden our knowledge base, which will be to the public good.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Who initiated this move? As I understand it, Atlantic Philanthropies was in partnership with the Office of the Minister for Children and had set up the centre. Who decided that the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs would be involved?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

Our Department's involvement stemmed from discussions between ourselves and the Office of the Minister for Children. It was then recommended and accepted at ministerial level.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

By whom was it initiated?

Mr. Gerry Kearney

It was initiated by our two offices. We are in regular contact on the provision of schemes and it was across the two Departments. It came through dialogue on what each Department was doing to address performance and how we look at outcomes.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I am concerned that this amounts to duplication of services and displacement of staff within Pobal. I am also concerned that there are no accountability measures in place to ensure we are getting value for the public money that is spent. This is something we should examine in the coming year.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

With regard to the final point, as I said — I want to emphasise this — the arrangements with the Centre for Effective Services are set out under extraordinarily formal, outcome-based, time-lined documents which we are happy to make available to the committee. In terms of its being subject to scrutiny, under legislation anybody that receives substantial funding from the State can be subject to review by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

The longitudinal study under the initiative that was taken, which was raised by my colleague, clearly has an impact on the public. Strong ethical controls were put in place under the invigilation of the Department with regard to the running of programmes, which is very welcome. There is an issue with regard to how we independently evaluate the success of programmes. Given that the expertise of Pobal and ADM has been there consistently going back to the 1990s — nearly 20 years — it is obviously something we should keep under review as a committee.

With regard to the evolution of community programmes, we did have a social economy model. As the witnesses are aware, we have spent a long time invigilating FÁS at this committee over recent months, but on the positive side, FÁS was instrumental in trying to develop this model. From the point of view of public expenditure, does the Department have any views on the extent to which local initiatives can be self-sustaining and self-supporting? Over recent years we have tended to move towards passive organisations that run the local community hall or whatever, although there is scope for support of more active organisations — those that would have the resources to employ people, particularly those who are vulnerable for one reason or another, and get them back into the mainstream economy. Is it a concern of Pobal that initiatives could be more self-sustaining and therefore cheaper for the State? In other words, the State could expect the local communities not to be so passive. This is a political argument I have had with the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, many times on the stairs outside Dáil Éireann. We should be more encouraging towards get-up-and-go groups, whether they are in Cork North Central, Dublin North or anywhere on this island. This is something we should consider.

Mr. Gerry Kearney

I congratulate the Deputy on his persuasive arguments with the Minister, because he has come back to us, in terms of the advancement of the programme, to focus more on encouraging groups to generate income. In so doing, they are releasing funds to be available more generally throughout the programme.

Sometimes we lose important elements in arguments, so I would like to come back to one thing. ADM has extensive experience in the delivery of the local development social inclusion programme, and it will be involved with us in dialogue with the Centre for Effective Services. I should have said also that the Department took in an expert from New Zealand who worked with us in Pobal for six months, visiting all the projects and engaging in discussion about design and what was working well. She is coming back to work with the centre for a while to support that evolution. The involvement of Pobal and ADM in the discussions has a place also. I would not like that to be lost.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

Are we clear on what information needs to be sent? We will deal with that.

Chairman

We will write in the next 24 or 48 hours outlining the information we require. We will be very specific in what we are looking for. If members wish to have an input into the letter they can communicate with the secretariat.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

It will be based on the transcript.

Chairman

Yes.

Mr. John Buckley

There has been considerable discussion about the national drugs strategy and its effectiveness. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, a report on this issue will come out this month which will range over many of the areas mentioned, including monitoring and evaluation, and will provide an opportunity to discuss the issue in depth in the coming months.

I will pinpoint two areas that came up in the discussion in which there is work for us to do in the future. One is the area of effectiveness evaluation. There was concern about the design of programmes, which can be weak. This can militate against the capacity to evaluate. That is from the point of view of ongoing evaluation. From the point of view of longitudinal studies, we have had a discussion about the scientific approach to assessing the long-term outcome of social interventions. One of the primary accountabilities of each Government organisation is to put systems, procedures and practices in place to evaluate the effectiveness of operations. This is something the Accounting Officer has mentioned as being underdeveloped and something we are also concerned about. It is probably worth looking at this to see how the joint venture is working out and what we can learn from it.

The other area that is important for the future is change management, which arises with regard to decentralisation of the Department and the winding down arrangements in which Pobal is engaged. The challenge here is to maintain controls while bringing in a lighter touch and reduced liaison in the administration of programmes. Effective evaluation and change management are shared interests for us all, including the committee, the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General, the Department and Pobal.

Chairman

I suspect there is a lot of information to come back to us about a wide range of issues. I am very concerned, as is the committee, about effectiveness evaluation. As I said, I have so far counted 271 bodies under the jurisdiction of the Department. We need to examine in more detail what is happening in these bodies. There is a lot of money in circulation. Many bodies seem to be duplicating work and we do not know exactly what is coming out the other end. Are members happy to defer noting this Vote until we obtain further information, or will we note it pending the receipt of further information? My feeling is that we should defer noting it.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien

I agree with the Chairman. When we see the information we can assess it.

Chairman

There is nothing sinister in this. We need further information. Members are concerned about the issue of effectiveness evaluation. All these bodies are there but we do not really know what are their specific roles. Until we get further clarity we should defer noting the Vote and the accounts of Pobal also. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I thank everybody involved in the process today, which has been very enlightening at times. The officials who came to the committee have fulfilled their obligations to us in an honest and open manner. However, there is more information required for us to do our job adequately and effectively.

We will agree the agenda for next Thursday, which is Vote 31 — Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and chapter 9.1 on the consolidation of single payment entitlements. We will also consider special report No. 10 of the Comptroller and Auditor General, General Matters arising on Audits of Non-commercial State Sponsored Bodies and chapter 8 — Marine Institute.

The witnesses withdrew.

The committee adjourned at 1.20 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Thursday, 12 February 2009.