Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 26 Mar 2003

Vol. 563 No. 5

Ceisteanna – Questions (Resumed). Priority Questions. - Departmental Programmes.

Seán Crowe

Question:

94 Mr. Crowe asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the frustration of com munities, their representatives and area implementation teams at the long delay in providing funding for projects identified in the public consultation process; the position, in the interim, on test case projects, some of which were submitted as late as September 2002; the position regarding the larger projects; the schemes which have been front-loaded under RAPID; and the amount the consultation process has cost to date, including salaries and administration costs. [8522/03]

As the Deputy will be aware, the RAPID programme is a focused initiative by the Government to target the most concentrated areas of disadvantage in the country. My Department, supported by Area Development Management Limited, co-ordinates implementation of the programme.

I acknowledge the huge investment of time, local knowledge and commitment by members of local communities and area implementation teams in drawing up the plans in each of the RAPID areas. While it would not be possible for me to quantify the cost of the consultation process, this process was supported by my Department in the amount of €2,280,595 since the establishment of the programme in 2001. This amount includes support to local areas and administration costs associated with the support team in ADM. In addition, a local co-ordinator was appointed to work with each area to prepare and develop the plan. While this cost is carried by the Department of the Environment and Local Government, I understand that the total cost of the 45 co-ordinators is approximately €2.2 million.

While the scale of the proposals contained in the RAPID plans is large, nevertheless, progress in implementing the plans has been slower than anticipated. While the Government remains fully committed to RAPID, the delivery of the programme may require adjustment. What I am currently looking at, therefore, are options to bring about greater progress under the programme and I am in discussions with my Cabinet colleagues as to how best this might be achieved.

The Deputy will appreciate it is a matter for each Department to advance and report on progress in relation to specific proposals in the plans. I understand that ADM has forwarded a report to each RAPID area outlining the updated position of all proposals from the plans, including short-term proposals or test cases, as referred to by the Deputy. These short-term proposals-test cases were pursued as a possible mechanism to speed up implementation of the programme. Approval was sought on a number of actions across all areas that were considered possible to fund and progress in the short-term. However, the outcome to date of this exercise has not led to significant further progress.

As regards my Department, proposals from the RAPID plans fall to be considered under the young people's facilities and services fund, the community development programme and funding for local drugs task forces. In the case of proposals relevant to the young people's facilities and services fund, proposals submitted under the RAPID plans will be considered in the context of decisions to be made under round II and in light of the overall funding position for 2003.

Additional information

A number of proposals in RAPID plans relate to the community development programme. I am pleased to inform the House that my Department announced allocations of funding to six new community development projects in RAPID areas yesterday. Projects in Bluebell, Dolphin House, Inchicore, Merchant's Quay-Usher's Quay, Longford town and Tipperary each received a renewable one year contract for funding of €60,000. A number of proposals from RAPID plans are also being pursued through the local drugs task force plans.

I welcome the fact that the Minister of State took the time to come to my area to discuss this issue with members of the community. He will be aware from that night that people are frustrated with this process. I know from answers he has given to other Deputies on this issue that he has mentioned a review. Approximately 1,000 hours have been spent on the consultation process in my area, but people do not see any material gain emerging from it in the area. The Minister mentioned the amount of money spent on this process, but nothing of substance has emerged from it in these areas to date.

In terms of a review of the programme, I accept that the Minister is trying to get value for money, but every Department tends to say that issues are under review. My office is coming down with reviews and consultation documents, as I am sure is the Minister's. People are concerned that this will be yet another review, an excuse to fob them off. They are looking for answers. We were told before the election that this process would be rapid and that it would result in real achievements and movement in areas of high disadvantage, but we have not seen that.

The Minister referred to the test cases. Will he give a timescale within which they will be reviewed by his Department and people will see real movement in this regard? When will the larger projects come on stream? People in the Minister of State's area were asking about the Lourdes project – they were looking for something as simple as a bus, which will be costly to repair. If those people look for a health centre will the Department of Health and Children fund that?

That situation is mirrored in every other area involved in the RAPID scheme and we are seeing no progress. I do not blame the Minister, who is new to the job, but surely we should not have to go through this process again.

The Deputy will know from the meeting we attended in Tallaght that I am not happy with this process. We are literally getting paralysis by analysis at this stage in terms of consultation. On one hand there seems to be a public demand for consultation but I often find that people know what needs to be done on many issues and believe we should just go ahead and act. In taking responsibility for RAPID I immediately identified weaknesses in the process. However, many people involved in the voluntary and community pillars and social partnership disagree with me. They like the methodology which was created. I took a different view with CLÁR; I decided we should get on with it and to a certain extent that has paid dividends.

Regarding the Deputy's specific question, I am advised that €451,000 is allocated for short-term actions but that is still not adequate. When I mention reviews I am looking for a mechanism which will make this happen: that has always been the weakness in the scheme. When this was mentioned as a way of implementing CLÁR, which was to be implemented according to the RAPID formula, I decided not to go that way. I am looking for methods to ensure better delivery of the existing plans, not recreating the wheel.

I can give definite news on one programme within the ambit of my Department, the selection of CDSPs for progression. Of those CDSPs put forward 80% are either in CLÁR or RAPID areas. A conscious decision was taken to give RAPID and CLÁR priority. They comprised only 60% of the total number of groups which were ready to go but they make up 80% of those getting the go-ahead.

Top
Share