I sought to raise this matter on the Adjournment because of the seriousness with which I view the cut which has been inflicted on the money available to the National Committee on Pilot Schemes to Combat Poverty. I do not think there is any single act that gives a better insight into the philosophy, both political and otherwise, of the Taoiseach and his Government than the decision to make a cut of approximately £122,000 in the allocation for the Committee and their work. When I spoke on the appointment of the Taoiseach on 11 December last, as reported in volume 317, column 1342 of the Official Report, I made the following observation:
His lack of understanding of the position of recipients of social welfare and of the major problem of poverty in our society is perhaps best illustrated by his attitude—on taking up office and persisted in over the last two-and-a-half years—towards the National Committee to Combat Poverty. He has obstructed the work of that Committee in every way possible, short of taking any action that would have political repercussions against himself. That, also, would run contrary to his persistent aim of maintaining his personal ambition to be where he is today—Leader of Fianna Fáil and is yet to be voted Taoiseach in this House.
On 11 December last I predicted what has happened in the budget with regard to the National Committee to Combat Poverty, on the basis of my knowledge of the attitude of the Taoiseach when he was Minister for Social Welfare in relation to the work of that Committee.
Everything that Committee sought to do, their expertise and detached assessment of what was required to be done in order to achieve the elimination of poverty in our society, was anathema to everything the Taoiseach and his Government stand for. I am not talking about a group of left wing radicals, even by the Taoiseach's definition of such. I am talking about a group of people who in their field had acquired a well justified reputation for their expertise and concern in the field of poverty. They came from all walks of life, members of the clergy, religious orders down to trade union officials and social workers, irrespective of what their political affiliations may have been. On appointing them it was my belief, although I was not sure because it was not a matter of consideration, that some of them actually subscribed to Fianna Fáil. They were appointed purely on the basis of their expertise and their concern in the field of poverty. They were not and would not be subject to any political interference e or dictation.
In a preface to one of their draft reports they mentioned something along the lines—I am subject to correction as to the exact phraseology not to the train of thought—that it was essential to recognise that if poverty was to be eliminated in our society there must be a redistribution not only of existing wealth in our society but in the power structures within our society and that we could not continue to alienate between 20 and 25 per cent of our people who live in poverty. That was deleted because the Taoiseach found it objectionable to his political thinking and his philosophy of life.
The Taoiseach has now carried that particular antagonism towards the work and objectives of the Committee by taking the first decisive steps to putting this Committee out of business. The cuts this year could not be justified economically. We are talking about a budget of approximately £3,000 million and the cut in the allocation is £122,000 of what they sought. The Minister at Question Time today said that the Committee's allocation had not been cut and, in fact, they had retained the same rate. In 1979 they spent £549,800 and this year, allowing for a 16 per cent inflation rate, they sought £622,000 and they were allocated £500,000. In money terms that was a cut of nearly £50,000 and in real terms sufficient to put this Committee out of business. It is more serious when we realise that it coincides with the year when the operations of the poverty Committee are up for review at EEC level.
I recall in 1974, when as a junior Minister in the last Administration, I was under the direction of the then Tánaiste, Deputy Brendan Corish, I put forward at EEC level proposals that the poverty projects would be taken up by the nine member states. This committee had been established here and financed nationally before the EEC initiative was taken. The creation of the EEC projects at EEC level was closely identified with Ireland. There was a very warm response from people concerned in the poverty area throughout the other eight member states towards our initiative. It was seen that there was a positive input by Ireland instead of, as we were traditionally seen, looking for something out of the EEC. Although it was a positive input into the thinking of the EEC and the operations of the social policy of the EEC we also gained financially.
To prove further that this money could not be taken away on economic grounds but purely on political antagonism towards the work of the committee, their objectives and their professional assessment of what was necessary we have to look at the EEC. In 1975, the first year the committee came into operation, they got £30,435 from the EEC, in 1976 they got £108,630, in 1977, £130,445, in 1978, £165,500, 1979 £234,550 and in 1980, £238,000. When we are now undermining the work of the committee at national level the operations of the committee are under review at EEC level. It will be clearly seen by our fellow EEC members that the country which sponsored and promoted this committee in 1974 are now abandoning them nationally and hence at EEC level. I have no doubt that the decision by the Government will finish the work of this committee nationally because the Taoiseach and his Government are opposed to it. They have always been antagonistic towards that committee, and because of their action in cutting back the allocation the committee will finish at EEC level. This will not only affect the 20 to 25 per cent of our own people but tens of thousands of people living in poverty throughout the EEC.
I can give two further examples of the economic necessity for a cut-back of £100,000 in a budget of £3,000 million. There is the fact that in the budget—I mentioned this before and I do so again because it also clearly illustrates what the priorities of the Government are—the Minister for Finance announced that he was granting £100,000 —almost exactly the same figure—to a national organisation, the GAA, to compensate them for having to pay VAT on hurling sticks. I do not want to be misinterpreted as attacking the GAA, a great national organisation, but I would like to know what their priorities are, hurling sticks or the 25 per cent of our people living in prverty. If they were asked, where would that £100,000 go? I have no doubt that the vast majority of the members of the GAA would agree with me that in any Christian society the priority would be to combat poverty.
Another example of the priorities of this Government is the Navan Chamber of Commerce getting a grant of £100,000 to build an exhibition hall. There are not many votes in poverty and because of the development of our society it is very difficult to get across to people what is really happening within the 20 to 25 per cent. Back in the thirties and forties nearly everyone was living in poverty; they had that in common and had an insight into and understanding of what poverty meant to them and to their children. Now that has all changed. There has been economic growth and development. Progress has been made on a number of fronts and approximately 75 to 80 per cent of our people live in relative affluence. It is very difficult to get across to them and to marshal their support in getting something done for the other 20 per cent.
I believe the Taoiseach has made that assessment in political and vote terms. He realises there are more votes in hurling sticks than in hungry children, that there are more votes in hurling sticks than in people living in appalling housing conditions where opportunities, where they exist, are marginal; children go to first-level education in crowded classrooms with no jobs at the end of it or jobs that will only last two or three years where they will be exploited. Is there a full realisation even here in this House that within half a mile of where I am standing children will go to bed hungry tonight and it is nothing unusual; most nights they go to bed hungry. Within that 20 to 25 per cent it has been estimated that there are 215,000 children and the future in Christian Ireland is not very bright for them.
But the Taoiseach believes —and I believe somewhere he indicated publicly that if a person is poor he is poor through his own fault. No thinking person could objectively give that assessment. Those people are poor because the machinery and structures of this State were constructed in such a way as to make them poor and they have been revised over the years to ensure that they stay poor. Unless there are fundamental changes in our whole economic structure, in our whole social structure, in our power structure these people will stay poor. The Taoiseach is a very smart man indeed, highly intelligent. He realises that and he realises that if that assessment comes out from a committee of the calibre and reputation of the poverty committee that it will be listened to by the media and conveyed by the media to the general public.
It is difficult to speak in a detached way about this subject if one has an insight into what it really means in human terms. We have a number of burning political issues at the moment, tax on farmers, tax on PAYE workers, job creation and national understandings. All of them have power groups behind them, people who are well organised, usually well financed, very articulate and with considerable political muscle. There is very little political muscle behind the people who live and are condemned to live in poverty. If we allow this committee to go out of existence, if we allow its work to be brushed aside and stopped our whole position as a Christian society or a Christian people is called seriously into question. There are organisations here who should be extremely vocal, not just about this cut of £100,000 which is only symbolical, but about the attitude of the Government towards this problem and their determination and the determination of the present Taoiseach in particular to put an end to the activities of what he apparently regards as being a group of dangerously left wing radicals who are trying to deal with this situation. Anyone who thinks that they are dangerously left wing should go down and look at those people who are on the committee, look at their background, look at their positions, look at their record. By no stretch of the imagination do they come into that definition. But if there is not an outcry, if there is not a protest by the trade union movement, by the churches, by organisations like the St. Vincent de Paul Society, I believe they are seriously neglecting their responsibility to those people because we can have all the charitable lip service, we can have all the do gooders but if we, as an organised society, do not recognise this cancer within our society and the human suffering that is in it and take positive steps to eradicate it we will have forfeited the right to describe ourselves as a Christian people.
The Minister, even at this late stage should ensure that the working of this committee is not only continued but is financed so that it can expand. At the moment there are 16 projects which have been undertaken by the committee. They fall into the categories of action and research. They have, in most cases, shown positive results and in fact their impact upon the communities in which they work has been very positive indeed and extremely encouraging. I think it is because they have been encouraging, because they have been making progress, because they have been able to convey to these people that they have rights as citizens and that they have power as citizens that this action has been taken.
