Vol. 487 No. 7
5 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs has met since the budget; if so, the Government decisions, if any, and if these were implemented; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1594/98]
6 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern expressed by anti-drugs groups regarding the failure of the Government to allocate funding for the youth services development fund agreed by the previous Government arising from the second report of the ministerial task force on measures to reduce the demand for drugs; the plans, if any, he has to discuss the matter with the chairpersons of the 13 local drugs task forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1727/98]
7 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the number of occasions on which the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs has met in 1998; the number of times which it is proposed to meet over the next six months; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3894/98]
8 Mr. Gregory asked the Taoiseach the functions of the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs; the regularity of meetings; and the Government decisions, if any, taken to date. [4965/98]
9 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the number of occasions the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs has met in 1998; the number of meetings scheduled for 1998; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5071/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 to 9, inclusive, together.
The Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs was established by the Government in July 1997 to tackle the problem of social exclusion in a holistic way and to build on and advance the work of the Cabinet drugs committee established under the previous Administration. The committee oversees the work being done under the Local Development Operational Programme, the national anti-poverty strategy and the national drugs strategy and aims to focus action across all Government Departments, agencies and programmes in addressing disadvantage in the broadest sense.
The conduct of meetings of the Cabinet and its committees is an internal matter for Government. In the circumstances, I am precluded from divulging details of matters discussed by the committee or its recommendations or proposals to Government. However, the committee has met twice in 1998 and will continue to meet as frequently as required to co-ordinate the various initiatives which are being taken in the area of social inclusion.
During the latter part of 1997, the committee reviewed the findings of relevant Ministers on the extent of the needs of young people in the most disadvantaged areas, particularly those areas where a serious drugs problem exists. As a result of proposals subsequently submitted to Government, a programme for young people at risk has been established, the centrepiece of which is a young people's facilities and services fund to which £30 million will be provided over the next three years. This fund will be used to support a variety of capital and non-capital projects in severely disadvantaged areas.
At least £20 million from the fund will be targeted at those areas particularly affected by the heroin problem. The initial 1998 provision of £1.25 million allocated in the budget is now being increased to £7.5 million. The fund is additional to the £10 million already approved by Government towards the implementation of the action plans of the 13 local drugs task forces.
As a further measure to ensure the co-ordination of measures to support young people "at risk", the Government has appointed my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Frank Fahey, to be Minister of State at the Departments of Education and Science and Justice, Equality and Law Reform, in addition to Health and Children.
In my capacity as Minister of State with special responsibility for the national drugs strategy team, I intend to meet the chairpersons of the local drugs task forces in the near future to outline the Government's plans in relation to the operation of the young people's facilities and services fund.
Given that the Cabinet subcommittee met only once in 1997, it is a tribute to the effectiveness of Question Time in December that it has already met twice in 1998. What are the guidelines for accessing the £30 million fund?
I am considering the drawing up of guidelines for which I have been assigned responsibility. I am working in consultation with my officials and I will bring forward detailed guidelines in March regarding access to the fund.
Can I take it that no moneys have been paid out from the fund to date? Given that the Minister of State is in charge of the national drugs strategy team will he make the allocations from the youth services development fund?
I have to complete the drawing up of the guidelines which I will bring from my Department to the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs. That committee will make its recommendations which will ultimately be decided by Government.
From what Vote will the moneys be drawn? Will the Minister of State accept if he is given responsibility — I have paid tribute to his commitment in the past — for politically driving the continued fight against the drugs menace, it is important that he, in conjunction with the national drugs strategy team, makes the decision? Is it the case that the Minister of State does not have control of the fund and that the Vote is in a different Department?
The initial provision of £1.25 million seed capital to establish the fund which allowed it to be placed on a firm footing was in the Department of Education and Science. At least £20 million from the fund of £30 million will be targeted exclusively at those areas which cater for the 13 local drugs task forces. Following completion of the guidelines the local drugs task forces will have a central role in accessing and planning the disbursement of those funds. The question of administration of the funds will have to be worked out and will be covered by the guidelines which I hope to bring to Government in March.
On behalf of the anti-drugs movement, in particular ICON, Inner City Organisations Network, and COCAD, Coalition of Communities Against Drugs, I welcome the fact that the Government has belatedly agreed to honour its commitment to establish a £20 million fund, specifically for heroin hit areas. Although the Minister of State is dealing with the local drugs task forces in the disadvantaged areas affected, particularly in Dublin, he will not be in charge of or administer the fund. Will this not cause difficulties and a great deal of confusion? Despite the fact that he has been sidelined, will the Minister of State indicate when groups and organisations in the areas in question will be able to apply for funds?
I have been most successful in keeping faith with the original intent behind the establishment of the fund to which the previous Administration promised to allocate £20 million, although it has fallen on the Government to provide the money. In its report the ministerial task force recommended that the £20 million should be directed exclusively at the areas covered by the local drugs task forces. That is what will happen and there will be an additional £10 million for use in other areas. I am drawing up guidelines on the administration of the fund with the assistance of the national drugs strategy team which is centrally involved and which has produced a paper for my consideration and further discussion within the Department before I present proposals to the Cabinet committee on social inclusion and drugs and a decision is made by the Government. We will also work closely with other appropriate organisations such as the health boards, the local authorities, FÁS, the vocational education committees, etc.
I welcome the fact that the Government has belatedly decided to provide the money and the commitment of the Minister of State that it will be spent in the areas of greatest need as identified by the previous task force under the chairmanship of Deputy Rabbitte. Although the Minister of State is drawing up guidelines on the administration of the fund, it appears that it will not be under his control. Will this not cause difficulties? If the money is allocated to a different Vote, it will legally be the responsibility of another Minister and secretary general. Is it not a matter of concern that the committee which is drawing up the guidelines will not have ultimate control over the disbursement of the money? Will the Minister of State seek a formal Cabinet decision to ensure he has direct control and arrange for its immediate disbursement?
The guidelines, when finalised, will meet the points raised by the Deputy and others. On the disbursement of the fund, the objective set will be achieved. The allocations will be based on the recommendations of the Cabinet committee on social inclusion and drugs in accordance with Government procedure with which the Deputy is familiar. The national drugs strategy team, the local drugs task forces and other organisations will be centrally involved based on the guidelines which are being drawn up on the proper disbursement of the funds.
From which Vote?
The fund was established in the Department of Education and Science for procedural purposes. I expect to make considerable progress on the guidelines during March and intend to ensure there is no undue delay. We will channel the funds through agencies such as the Eastern Health Board, FÁS and the vocational education committees.
Will the Minister of State seek Government approval to augment the funds available by the proceeds seized by the Criminal Assets Bureau to ensure those who have suffered most at the hands of the drug barons benefit?
I am advised that there may be legal difficulties in the direct transfer of proceeds seized by the Criminal Assets Bureau but I am working on the proposition that an equal sum will be channelled to the fund.
Does the Minister of State accept the goodwill of Members on this side of the House in respect of the lines of authority in the disbursement of the fund? Will he agree it is the experience of this House that the Minister who controls the purse strings controls the decisions? Is he aware that in the first report of the ministerial task force on drugs the greater number of innovative proposals related to matters under the aegis of the Department of Education and Science? Is he also aware that the Department of Education and Science has done least to date to implement the proposals contained in that report and which has been most neglectful in implementing the terms of reference to which it agreed reluctantly? Will he agree that it would not be in keeping with the concept of removing control from a line Department and giving it to a broader based strategy committee if he and his committee do not have a say in terms of where and how the moneys are spent?
I accept that the Deputy has the right to speak authoritatively on these matters. He made a significant contribution when chairperson of the ministerial task force. The allocations will be based on the recommendations of the Cabinet committee on social inclusion and drugs. The funds have been allocated to the Vote of the Department of Education and Science for procedural reasons but this is not written in stone. The matter will be looked at again when the guidelines have been finalised. While I take the Deputy's point on access to and control of the fund, the £20 million will be channelled to the areas covered by the local drugs task forces. That will centrally involve the local drugs task forces working through the national drugs strategy team and drawing on the skill and expertise of other agencies working in the areas covered by the 13 local drugs task forces.
I share Deputy Rabbitte's apprehension that the fund might be controlled through the Department of Education and Science. I hope, as the Minister of State indicated, that will change. I understood originally it was intended the £20 million or £30 million in the fund would be the State's contribution and it was hoped a similar contribution would be made by the private sector. Will the Minister indicate what steps have been taken to ascertain if there is a willingness on the part of the private sector to complement that fund or has any contact been made with it in regard to that original intention?
It became apparent there was an expectation the corporate sector would become involved in making additional allocations to the fund in question and I am encouraged by some initial contacts we have had from the corporate and private sectors on this matter. In relation to their ability to contribute to the fund, we are working on guidelines and on other details that need to be attended to so as to ensure the corporate sector will not only find it possible to contribute to the fund but will be actively encouraged to do so in respect of specific proposals it might have in mind or to meet other proposals that will be brought forward, principally by the national drugs strategy team.
Is the Minister of State aware that leading figures in the corporate sector inspired that idea? Dr. Michael Smurfit made a speech at the time of the preparation of that report to the effect that the corporate sector would not be found wanting in terms of its contribution to such a fund and that is to be welcomed. I invite the Minister to indicate to the House his view on the share of the fund to be assigned to capital as opposed to non-capital projects. I would like to hear his thinking on that critical question.
Regarding the willingness of the corporate sector to contribute and the indications received from it, I am aware of the manner in which that suggestion arose. I am encouraged by some initial contacts made with us on this matter. I can assure the Deputy we intend to vigorously pursue this issue. I have an open mind as to the breakdown of the fund between facilities and services and I will be guided by the national drugs strategy team and the local drugs task forces because the position differs from one area to another. One area might have what it considers sufficient infrastructure for what we are trying to do and might require more emphasis to be placed on services such as equipping clubs, providing staff to assist in the running of clubs or providing outreach personnel to search for those who are misusing drugs, an important aspect of my approach to this issue. Another area covered by a local drugs task force might have a dearth of infrastructural facilities such as community halls, youth centres or other leisure and recreational facilities. I have an open mind on that and I will be largely guided by the views expressed through the local drugs task forces and by the national drugs strategy team before I finalise what I hope will be an integrated approach to each local drugs task force area on how best that area can be served by the fund, whether in terms of infrastructure, services or a combination of both. I note the Deputy's point which was well made.
When the Minister of State took questions approximately two months ago he said he had made initial contacts and had discussions with the corporate sector, but he seems to have got no further since then. Has he got a commitment from people in the corporate sector that they will allocate money to that fund? The fund was announced 12 months ago but it has still not been set up. The problem of young people abusing drugs is multiplying every day that fund is not being disbursed. I urge the Minister to disburse the moneys immediately. That committee has met only three times since last June. We need action now, not talk about initial contacts and discussions.
Arising out of the work of the national drugs strategy team on how best to attract additional corporate contributions, it is my intention to make a proposal on that to the next meeting of the Cabinet subcommittee on social inclusion. That represents progress. Regarding the Deputy's remarks about progress in regard to the fund, a great deal of work has been done over the past number of months and that is not only work that takes place at meetings. I assure the Deputy the national drugs strategy team is a fine operation and comprises very able people who are committed to trying to prevent drug misuse. That team is working diligently and is making considerable progress on a range of issues. There will be no intentional delay in the disbursement of moneys from the fund. I am sure the Deputy will agree that throwing money at problems is not necessarily the answer. The answer is a well thought out, well developed and co-ordinated plan, particularly for the areas seriously affected by heroin abuse. I am continuing along the lines set out in the two ministerial reports on the misuse of drugs. I intend to ensure there will be no untimely delay in making moneys in the fund available through the local task forces to the areas where they are needed, those currently affected by heroin abuse.
