I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
I am very pleased as Minister for Social Welfare to introduce in this House the Bill to establish the Combat Poverty Agency. As the House is aware, the Bill was introduced in Seanad Éireann by my predecessor and passed all Stages in that House after a detailed and thorough debate.
I am aware that there has been a lengthy debate going back over a number of years on the question of combating poverty in Ireland. I do not pretend to be fully au fait, as yet, with the background to that debate and therefore I will be listening with great interest to the contributions of Deputies during the discussion of this Bill. All of us have, from our experience as public representatives, our own views on the question of poverty and its extent and there are a number of Deputies who have had very direct involvement in previous initiatives in the area of poverty.
I might mention in particular in this context Deputy Frank Cluskey who, in his period as Parliamentary Secretary in the Department of Social Welfare from 1973 onwards, was instrumental in the setting up of the Combat Poverty Committee in Ireland and in the campaign leading up to the adoption of the first European poverty programme. A considerable amount of preparatory work in connection with the setting up of a permanent Combat Poverty Agency was also done by Deputy Mary Flaherty during her period in the Department of Social Welfare in 1981-82. In effect, we are now building on the work which was done during those years and re-establishing on a more formal basis the structures which previously existed and which were responsible for a very wide range of initiatives in the poverty field. Essentially it is experience gained in the operation of the first poverty programme and the recommendations made by the national committee in their final report that form the basis for the Government's decision to restore the combat poverty programme to its central place in Government policy.
As a prelude to setting up a new Combat Poverty Agency, the Interim Board of the Combat Poverty Organisation were established in March 1984 to submit recommendations with regard to the structure, membership, staffing etc. of such an agency and its detailed terms of reference, bearing in mind, inter alia, what role the agency should have with regard to drawing up in accordance with the Government's programme an anti-poverty plan within the context of national economic and social planning. The interim board submitted a report to the then Minister containing detailed recommendations for the new agency and the proposals now before the House are based essentially on the board's proposals.
One of the board's primary concerns was the need for anti-poverty policy to be an intergral part of national economic and social planning and they recommended that the new agency should have a direct involvement in the planning process so as to help in determining priorities for effective action in the fight against poverty.
This function of policy advice is one of the four main functions proposed for the new agency as outlined in section 4 (1) of the Bill now before the House, namely
advising and making recommendations to the Minister on all aspects of economic and social planning in the State.
It is sometimes said that in Government concerns and interests of social policy come second to economic policy. It is impossible, however, to draw a clear distinction between what is economic policy and what is social policy. For example, the biggest problem facing this country at present is the level of unemployment which is a major social and an economic problem. If we are to devise adequate policies to tackle poverty on an overall basis we must address all aspects of Government activity to see where Government policies and programmes impact on poor people and how these policies and programmes might be revised the more effectively to address the problem of poverty.
One of the main advantages in setting up the Combat Poverty Agency is that they will provide a forum for the examination of Government policies and the policies of other agencies and organisations and make available a co-ordinated input into the policy-making process. I believe that the legislation before the House will enable the new agency to carry out adequately their functions in this area and I, as the responsible Minister, will do whatever I can to see that the agency have an effective voice in the policy-making process.
Closely related to the task of policy advice which is given to the new agency is that of research into poverty. This could be said to be a necessary prerequisite to policy advice and accordingly another of the main functions of the agency is:
the examination of the nature, causes and extent of poverty in the State and for that purpose the promotion, commission and interpretation of research
This is in itself a difficult area and one in which it is often not possible to reach agreement on even the most basic concepts. For example, surveys have shown that a sizeable number of people believe that there is no real poverty in Ireland anymore. If poverty is defined in purely financial terms, there is no doubt that people on social welfare payments, for example, are receiving more money in real terms now than they were years ago. It is very difficult to say, however, what is a reasonable or acceptable level of income to aim at in our social welfare system.
I look forward to the views of the Commission on Social Welfare who have had to address this fundamental question in the context of their deliberations. There is no doubt, however, that while rates of payments have increased appreciably in real terms over the years, nevertheless many people find it difficult to cope with their commitments and there is an increasing amount of what might be called customer dissatisfaction with the system. I would be concerned about such dissatisfaction and that there should be adequate mechanisms for independent assessment of the effectiveness of the system, particularly as it affects people in the greatest need. I see the Combat Poverty Agency as having a central role here.
Poverty, of course, is not related to lack of income alone but also to low levels of education, poor health conditions, poor nutritional standards, insufficient housing, job insecurity, poor environment, social isolation and so on. Despite the advances that have been made in many areas of State policy we all know that there are many people in our society who are deprived in one way or another. We are all aware of this and of the concerns voiced by persons who are involved in this area — people representing voluntary organisations, the Churches, statutory bodies, academic institutions and so on. There is a need, however, for detailed research into the different aspects of poverty before any final conclusions can be drawn as to its causes.
I know that some people would say that there has been too much research into poverty and that what is needed now is action and not further research. When one looks at it, however, there is still a lack of basic information, of statistical data and of knowledge in general of many aspects of poverty. One of the primary functions of the new agency will be to increase public understanding of why people are poor and the consequences for individuals and for society as a whole. Without public understanding and support change will be difficult to achieve. The more the characteristics of the poor are identified, the more light can be thrown on the process by which people end up in poverty. This is not an easy task but in order to decide what we need to do to combat poverty we must first of all have adequate information on the causes, characteristics and extent of poverty and we must attempt to convince society in general of the need for the policies which we intend to pursue and that they will be effective. Therefore, we need a body of information which is clear, understandable and publicly acceptable.
The third main function of the new agency as set out in section 4 (1) of the Bill is what might be called the action role of the agency, namely:
the initiation of measures aimed at overcoming poverty in the State and the evaluation of such measures.
This was, perhaps, the main role carried out by the first poverty committee 1974-1980. What strikes one immediately looking back at that period is the very large number of projects and schemes which were undertaken by the national Committee on Pilot Schemes to Combat Poverty, as known. Some of these projects were very successful, some were not so successful and many ran into problems and difficulties. The final report of the national committee gives a very interesting resumé of the various activities which were undertaken and information can also be gleaned from other sources. The committee organised and operated a number of projects directly while others were contracted out to different organisations and that fact together with the large number of projects which were involved makes it difficult to draw overall conclusions from the projects as a whole. As far as the new agency are concerned, the interim board's view on this occasion was that they should, as far as possible, avoid becoming involved in directly running projects but should assist in the establishment of action projects by other appropriate groups. Any projects which the agency run should be in the nature of demonstration projects which would be experimental and which would be so structured as to enable the agency to withdraw from direct involvement after a certain period.
I agree with this general approach. Obviously the agency will have to draw up their priorities in terms of the amount of their overall resources which they can devote to initiating or assisting action projects. It is very important, however, that the agency should not become just another source of funds for local projects. The difficulty in many respects for local projects is the variety of possible funding sources which already exist and the addition of another one to the list would not serve any useful purpose in the long run. The agency are being viewed in this way in many quarters. The agency will have to be selective in regard to direct funding of action projects and not lose sight of their other functions in response to the pressure which will undoubtedly be put on them by groups and projects to provide immediate funding for their particular area of activity.
The interim board stressed that whatever actions are engaged in by the agency, and I take this to include activities of other groups which are funded by the agency as well as the agency's activities, arrangements should be made for the evaluation of these activities on an ongoing basis. I strongly support this, as only in this way will it be possible for the correct conclusions to be drawn from these activities to the benefit of similar activities and of policy in this area.
I see the agency, therefore, as having to be selective in regard to the sorts of projects in which they become involved and ensuring that the resources available for this purpose are channelled in the most effective way. Already there are a number of projects which will become the responsibility of the agency when they are established. These are the eight projects from this country which have been selected for participation in the second European Community Poverty Programme. The first European programme covered more or less the same period as the former national committee in this country — 1974 to 1980 — and indeed the Irish Government were instrumental in having that European programme adopted. It is gratifying to note that the Irish Government on this occasion also were instrumental in having the second programme adopted and that the council decision on the programme was taken during the Irish Presidency of the Council in December 1984.
I would like to say a few words about the European programme. The programme is backed by a Community budget of 25 million ECU, around £17.5 million, over four years, the bulk of which will be devoted to supporting actionresearch projects in favour of deprived groups or deprived areas. A total of 61 projects have been selected across the Community and some 18 million ECU, £12.5 million, has been earmarked for direct subventions to these projects. Community support is at the level of 50 per cent of the cost of projects in most cases, 55 per cent in exceptional cases.
The eight Irish projects included in the programme are being financed to the extent of 55 per cent by the Community, the remaining 45 per cent being met largely by the Government with, in some cases, a contribution by projects themselves. Over the four years of the programme the total amount of Community funding to the Irish projects will be approximately £1.3 million, while the Irish Government will provide approximately £1 million.
The programme is a relatively small one in financial terms but it has the potential to be of major significance in the impact which it will have on Government policies in the member states of Europe. Before being selected for inclusion in the EC programme, projects went through a rigorous selection process both at the national level and the European level. In this connection I would like to pay tribute to the work of the Interim Board of the Combat Poverty Organisation under their chairperson, Noreen Kearney, who performed the initial selection and did so very successfully. The fact that eight Irish projects were finally selected by the Commission is a tribute to the high quality of all the Irish projects and I am satisfied that we have eight excellent projects which will make a major contribution to the overall programme.
The Government are co-financing the projects with the Community and will be taking a very direct interest in the projects. It is very important that the results of the programme at an Irish level should be closely monitored so that whatever lessons can be drawn from the experience of the programme are made available in such a way that they can be absorbed into and become part of anti-poverty policy generally. The Combat Poverty Agency will have a central role in this area and pending the establishment of the agency the interim board will continue to have responsibility. The board have already done a considerable amount of work to ensure the smooth introduction of the programme and I am sure that over the next four years there will be an excellent working relationship between the projects and the agency and a relationship which will have major benefits for both sides.
The Irish projects which have been selected for the European programme all involve local communities and groups trying to address problems which they have identified in their own areas and doing something about these problems. There is a very significant community development component in these projects. Community development in the sense of a planned programme of activities whereby people combine with their fellow citizens to establish community needs and solve them through action is an aspect of anti-poverty policy which is identified in the interim board's report as being of major importance. The need for a significant and well planned community development component is given explicit recognition in the Bill, where it is envisaged that the new agency would be a resource centre for community development in relation to poverty. As such the agency would encourage facilities for training in community development, stimulate evaluation and research and promote initiatives and experiment in community work.
A resource agency of this kind could provide a worthwhile service to voluntary organisations and communities and also to central and local authorities and statutory bodies. The agency in any event will need to develop a close working relationship with local authorities, health boards and other relevant statutory bodies and ensure that the efforts of the agency, the statutory authorities and the local organisations were welded together to provide an integrated response to the needs of the poor.
The fourth main function of the Combat Poverty Agency as outlined in section 4 (a) of the Bill is "the promotion of greater public understanding of the nature, causes and extent of poverty in the State and the measures necessary to overcome such poverty."
I mentioned already the need for research into the causes and extent of poverty in Ireland and the need for the results of such research to be made available in an understandable way. The notion of poverty itself is, I feel, a somewhat vague one to many people and it will be important for the new agency to "operationalise" the concept and make it meaningful in concrete terms. It is important also that the facts in relation to poverty emerging from research etc. are got across in an effective way. There will be a need to make use of all the techniques which are now available in the communications field to ensure that the results of the anti-poverty programme are made available to the public.
These are the main thoughts which I want to express in introducing this debate. There will be an opportunity on Committee Stage to discuss in more detail the individual provisions of the Bill. The proposals in the Bill endeavour to take account of all that has happened in this area over the past decade. There have been different approaches reflected in different policies adopted by successive Governments. The approach now put forward seeks to draw on the most positive features of all of these different views and approaches. To be effective the new agency will have to have a wide degree of support in the community and I hope that it will be possible to achieve a wide measure of agreement in relation to the proposals now put forward. I look forward to the contributions to the debate from all sides and I have pleasure in recommending the Bill to the House.
