Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 16 Nov 2000

Vol. 526 No. 2

Written Answers. - OECD Study.

Róisín Shortall

Question:

9 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if his attention has been drawn to the recent OECD study of Irish partnerships which recommended the issue of mainstreaming successful local practice and stated that the transfer of learning from the work at local level was vital; the plans he has to establish mechanisms or ways this mainstreaming and learning can happen; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25973/00]

Róisín Shortall

Question:

29 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if his attention has been drawn to the recent OECD study of Irish partnerships which recommended greater decentralisation of decision making to the local partnerships; if he will act on the recommendation of the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25972/00]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 29 together.

Delivering on Social Inclusion: Lessons from the Local Development Programme, the comparative study on the experiences of the partnership process across seven OECD countries, including Ireland, was recently launched in Dublin. The report put forward a number of recommendations on how weaknesses which have been identified in partnership structures across the seven countries examined might be addressed.

These issues are a need to strengthen commitment to the work of partnership; a need to develop a more collaborative culture so that programmes can be made more effective and relevant to local needs; and the need to develop a more transparent application of public funds and strong accountability on the part of the partnerships.

The section of the report which specifically examines the Irish experience provides a very encouraging account of the achievements here over a number of years and clearly acknowledges that the process has played an important role in strengthening local capacity and promoting community development. Notwithstanding this, there is scope for improvement in the delivery of measures to deprived communities and the need for flexibility to take account of the changing economic climate in which these services are being delivered now and in the future.

The lessons of the report will now be examined, especially in the context of the recently established city-county development boards – CDBs – whose specific functions include facilitating a bottom-up approach to community development. The CDB approach will allow local needs to be identified, to which an integrated response can be developed and local services better targeted and directed at meeting those needs. The process will bring together key interests, including area based partnerships and community groups, and agencies to ensure that public services operating locally will work to a common agenda in a spirit of inter-agency co-operation.
As regards mainstreaming, already initiatives being delivered in the context of the new National Development Plan, 2000-2006, have a local partnership focus, in particular those relating to education and child care. Indeed, a number of initiatives now being supported under the NDP, particularly in the education and child care areas, were successfully piloted by the local area based partnerships under the Operational Programme for Local, Urban and Rural Development 1994-1999.
Meanwhile, the successful pilot programme under the integrated services process has clearly established that a process of co-operation will facilitate State agencies to deliver a more relevant, focused and effective service to meet local needs. While I do not wish to anticipate the upcoming report of the pilot phase of the integrated services process, including recommendations relating to mainstreaming, I have no doubt that the lessons of the integrated services process will provide us with the very best practice in the delivery of State services in areas of disadvantage.
Question No. 10 taken with Question No. 7.
Top
Share