Bernard Allen
Question:43 Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation his views on the development of a second URBAN programme. [19892/99]
Other Questions. - URBAN Programme.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:59 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the position regarding the continued operation of and funding for the URBAN programmes in Dublin and Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19913/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 43 and 59 together.
URBAN is a Community initiative of the European Commission under which assistance is made available for integrated development programmes for a limited number of geographically defined deprived urban areas throughout the EU. The programme has total funding of approximately £21 million of which the EU element is £15 million over the period 1994-99. In Ireland the areas that have benefited from the operational programme for URBAN were north Dublin, including Ballymun, Finglas and Darndale; south Dublin, including west Tallaght and north Clondalkin; and the north side of Cork City.
URBAN funding is disbursed in accordance with plans submitted by individual URBAN steering groups. Under the EU guidelines all funds must be committed i.e. subject to legally binding contracts by 31 December 1999. It is expected that all available funding will be committed by the stipulated deadline, and funding should be taken up by June 2000.
The position, therefore, regarding the continued operation and funding of the URBAN I Community Initiative is that funds will be available into 2000 in respect of projects for which legally binding contracts have been entered into by 31 December 1999. As all URBAN I funds are due to be committed by the end of this year and as all projects submitted by the three urban groups were submitted on the basis that they would be sustainable, the question of continuing funding does not, therefore, arise.
Ireland, supported by Portugal and Italy and the European Parliament, succeeded in convincing the EU to have a new URBAN initiative in the post 1999 period. The new initiative will be known as URBAN II and it is expected that, like URBAN I, it will operate on the basis of a call for applications to be made under EU guidelines. The guidelines relating to URBAN II are expected to be issued by the EU Commission before the end of the year. Until they have been issued, it is not possible to make any firm commitment regarding the URBAN II programme.
It is good to know that URBAN II will follow URBAN I. The final proposals will be published by the end of the year, so it is clear the Government has discussed with its EU partners the parameters under which URBAN II will operate. Will it operate on an area or project focused basis and will it be extended to towns and cities with populations of under 200,000, thus extending the number to be included?
The current URBAN I initiative stipulates that cities and towns must have a population of 100,000 or more to meet the eligibility criteria. I understand the Commission has decided that cities and towns with populations of 50,000 and over will be eligible for inclusion in URBAN II. The reduction in the size of population criterion will either result in an extension of the areas currently benefiting from urban initiatives or an increase in the number of applicants.
The recently announced initiative excludes the deprived areas in the bigger cities. What proposals does the Minister of State have to compensate them, given that they will now be dependent on a more broadly based URBAN II programme? Apart from URBAN II, what are his proposals to deal with the deepening problem of deprivation in urban areas?
The Government is committed to direct intervention into the urban areas of disadvantage. That is a central core of the remit of the Cabinet sub-committee on social exclusion and drugs. On a number of occasions the Taoiseach has indicated to the House the Government's commitment to provide significant resources to enable us to intervene in areas of urban deprivation. I have considerable responsibility in this regard, not just in the misuse of drugs area but also in the projects we have introduced, including the integrated services project. The Government recognises that much ground must be made up to enable people in those areas benefit from the economic and social progress under way.
Will the Minister of State indicate the way in which the areas concerned benefit from the urban programme? How many people have benefited? What changes does he consider appropriate for URBAN II? Many changes will have to be made because on the basis of the figures he has outlined only Limerick would have a sufficient population to apply for the second round. Urban deprivation occurs in many smaller towns with populations of less than 100,000. In view of this, major changes would have to be made in selecting the criteria for URBAN II.
I agree with the Deputy that deprivation is found not only in the larger urban areas, but also in other areas across the country. The national development plan will contain proposals to tackle this. URBAN is a special initiative with which the Deputy and other Members will be familiar. I referred earlier to the three areas which have benefited so far. The programme has made a considerable impact here. Having learned from this experience the extensions outlined in my reply will benefit other areas.
The greatest impact on social exclusion will be made by the Government's commitment to tackle areas, be they large or small, which suffer from disadvantage and social exclusion. The Taoiseach has given a firm commitment that resources will be available to tackle social exclusion in any area where it is found. The Cabinet sub-committee on social exclusion and drugs is working on that.
How many will benefit?
Deputy, we are gone beyond Question Time. I will take two very brief supplementary questions from Deputy Allen and Deputy Gay Mitchell and a final reply from the Minister of State. I would prefer if the Minister of State did not answer questions made by way of interruption.
Has an analysis of the effectiveness of URBAN I been undertaken and, if so, will the Minister of State publish any report in that regard? Will he assure the House that the ongoing projects under URBAN I will not be terminated in a move to new areas and that they will continue into the foreseeable future where they have proven to be effective? Will the programmes deemed as ongoing in deprived areas continue? It is not all about drug prevention in these areas and I regret that when we refer to them we talk about drugs.
I call Deputy Gay Mitchell to ask a brief supplementary question.
Does the Minister of State agree that the need to have a centre is at the heart of any urban renewal initiative in Dublin? In view of this does he agree it is necessary to bring back the villages of Dublin, such as Inchicore, Dol phins Barn, Rialto and Crumlin, which he will visit, if he has not done so already? Does he also agree that this—
A brief question. We are gone well beyond Question Time.
—is central to urban renewal and that it needs to be done in Dublin?
I call the Minister of State for a final reply.
I apologise to Deputy Moynihan-Cronin for not answering her question about the number of people who benefited. Essentially, under the previous programme the criterion was approximately 100,000 per area, and as there were three areas this amounted to approximately 300,000 people. For example, in my area of west Tallaght and north Clondalkin, groups—
Did they all benefit?
Yes. Many projects have come to fruition that have made a direct impact. Deputy Allen requested information on ongoing progress. All the projects can continue to draw down funding for the lifetime of the programme. Some of the projects deal with infrastructure and in respect of most of them construction is under way. Some have been completed while others are beginning. Contracts have been signed and legal commitment must be entered into before the end of the year. When that happens the moneys will be committed to them.
I am concerned about the training and education programmes.
Allow the Minister of State to conclude.
Our experience and learning will roll into URBAN II. Deputy Mitchell's comment refers to two areas, core village areas, which can be found in urban centres, such as Inchicore, Crumlin and many others, as well as villages in County Dublin, such as Saggart, Newcastle, Rathcoole and so on.
I agree with the Deputy that these areas should be strengthened, supported and promoted. In so far as my responsibility in dealing with local development is concerned, I would be keen to support any proposals put forward along the lines suggested by Deputy Mitchell.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.