Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 May 2003

Vol. 567 No. 6

Adjournment Debate. - Local Partnerships.

The Minster for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs should be sacked following the slashing of the 2003 budget for Northside Partnership by almost 30% – this is in addition to the severe 7% cut in funding resulting from the 2003 budget. I believe that the Minister has sanctioned a further cut of 20% in the partnership's income. This has dealt a body blow to the organisation and has endangered the many outstanding employment, educational and community programmes successfully run by it since 1991.

The general funding of partnership companies and other development bodies throughout the country has been cut by between 10% and 40%. As one of the 12 original partnerships in the most disadvantaged areas, the Northside Partnership has pioneered many outstanding programmes to assist unemployed and lower income families. At first the partnership concentrated on long-term unemployed and women returning to the workforce. The partnership needs additional funding, rather than these miserable cutbacks, to develop its work in its administrative area of the constituencies of Dublin North-East and Dublin North-Central.

A short time ago the partnership discovered that in addition to the cut of €80,000 at the start of the year, it would not be allowed to carry over funding. Its total loss of funding amounts to €435,775. I understand that when the organisation of partnerships met the Minister he did not seem to be aware that this was the case despite the decrease in funding for ADM from €48 million to €45 million. Under the current partnership development plan, the local employment service, which was invented by the Northside Partnership, is targeting four key groups for training and job placement. These are people with disabilities, people recovering from addiction problems, ex-offenders and Travellers, of whom there is a large community on the northside. As usual, the Northside Partnership has pioneered a wave of initiatives with regard to these four target groups, and should be commended and given further assistance rather than itself being threatened with redundancies. Two mediator positions are under threat among its core staff due to these harsh cutbacks.

It was also the Northside Partnership that pioneered the challenger programme. The Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Noel Dempsey, has been talking in the last few weeks about educational disadvantage. It was we on the northside who pioneered the effort to keep children in primary and second level schools; if they cannot be kept in first level they will certainly not make it to third level. The Minister's cutbacks have savaged this programme and made it impossible for us to carry on this work with many households throughout some of the most disadvantaged parts of the northside. I commend the chief executive of the Northside Partnership, Ms Marian Vickers, and our distinguished chairperson, Mr. Padraic White, the former head of the IDA. They have rightly been praised as the leaders of one of the best partnerships and local development projects in the country.

A whole range of major developments across our region is now threatened by the failure of the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, to sustain and support them. We had this discussion before about iar Chonnacht and Connemara, which I know well. I wonder whether, if this partnership was in the Minister's domain, it would have been savaged in such a manner. Is the Minister prepared to deal in an even-handed way with the disadvantaged areas of Dublin, which I believe is the Minister's native city? I strongly urge him to start taking his responsibilities as Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs seriously and reverse these rotten cutbacks. I am not just talking about my partnership. I acknowledge that I have an interest in the Northside Partnership – I am a director – but equally important are all the other companies around the country, including in the Minister's own area of Galway.

This disgraceful development is part of a Fianna Fáil con trick. Before the last election, the so-called RAPID programme was foisted upon my area. Some 27 actions were supposed to be taken to deter and deal with disadvantage in the most deprived areas of my constituency. Here we are, two and a half years later, with nothing achieved. All we hear about is process – meetings, meetings and more meetings. Nothing has been done. Deputy Ó Cuív is the Minister with responsibility for community affairs and I urge him to take action to restore the Northside Partnership's funding, and the funding of the other partnerships. He should do this, or get out.

I am delighted to have the opportunity of restating the facts and refuting the fairytales put forward by Deputy Broughan. I advise the Deputy always to think before he speaks. It is a good idea to do one's research. If he checks the record, he will see that the cutback in funding for Údarás na Gaeltachta was far greater, in percentage terms, than the cutbacks in the local development and social inclusion programme. That is a fact.

I do not agree with any cutbacks.

Of course not. The difference is that Údarás na Gaeltachta has managed its finances in such a way that it can continue to carry out a full programme. I compliment it on this. I also compliment the work of the Northside Partnership. I had the privilege of visiting it last year and seeing what was being done.

It is amazing that what the Labour Party proposes when it is in Government, it opposes when it is not.

We started it.

It was the Labour Party that was so hung up on consultation and process in Government. It was the Labour Party that wanted all decisions made away from Government by independent bodies, but when those bodies make decisions that the Deputy does not like, he says that the Minister should step in and do what he cannot do, which is to make the decision.

The facts of the matter are quite simple. An amount of €44.6 million has been provided in the Vote of my Department under the local development subhead, representing a 6% decrease compared to the amount provided in the 2002 Estimates. I emphasise to the Deputy that the cut was 6%. Just before Christmas last year, I gave money from savings in the Department to ADM to try to facilitate it. In 2001 and 2002, funding of €45.5 million and €47.6 million was provided to deliver the three sub-measures of the programme. The outturn of expenditure for both years was €43.2 million in 2001 and €53.6 million in 2002, because I made the decision before Christmas to give that money to ADM. This was done using savings under other subheads in my Department.

The Northside Partnership was allocated a total of €3,618,753 from 2001 to 2003, which equates to an annualised amount of €1,206,251 in each of the three years. As a result of the reduced budget in 2003, the revised allocation for this year is €1,121,814 – a 7% reduction.

What about benchmarking, for example?

Let us talk about facts. The Deputy was throwing figures around – 20%, 30%. We gave the money en bloc to ADM. I currently have no function in how that money is spent, although this is under review. ADM made the decision to spread the cuts evenly, according to the size of the group or partnership, right across the country. It delivers the programme on the ground for the 38 partnerships and 33 community groups. It agreed on how to allocate the money and each partnership group was notified. It could have done a number of things with this 6% cut. It could have decided to target the areas of greatest need for increased funding. This was a matter over which the Minister, fully in line with Labour Party thinking, has no control. What it decided to do, totally independently of me and quite likely without reference to me, because that is the way it is structured, was to institute across-the-board cuts of between 4% and 7%, depending on the annual budget of the partnership, with no reference to the activities of the partnership.

I have gone over this time and again in the House, but I do not know where the idea came from among some community and area partnerships that underspends in one year could be carried forward and spent the following year.

We had new programmes, which were approved by ADM.

No, ADM assured me that there was no question of that. I am only going by what ADM told me.

ADM asked us to pilot them.

ADM assured me there was no question of a rollover of the funds from underspending. The Deputy and I both know, as Members of this House, that an underspend in a Department returns to the Exchequer. It cannot be carried forward to the following year. As I have said again and again, we vote the Estimates through on an annual cash basis, not on an accrual basis. There is no way my Department could ever facilitate a cumulative carry-over. The validity of this is borne out by the fact that when the Estimates were announced at the end of November, ADM did not approach me regarding this matter because it understood the situation perfectly. It did not say that it had carry-over commitments. I only found out that somebody had a question about this when my local partnership in Galway rang me one Saturday about a month ago. I said that of course there was no question of a carry-over.

I assure the Deputy that I am continuing to work with ADM. I have had fruitful meetings with the planners who have been more than helpful and have told me directly that they understand perfectly that the system operates as I have outlined. ADM is working closely with the area partnerships to minimise as far as possible the impact of the 6% reduction in funding this year. As regards the future, I assure the Deputy that we will have to live with the system of annual funding operated by the Oireachtas. Within that, I am committed to the areas of greatest deprivation. A concern I have had for many years has been that in widening the scope of the scheme to more areas—

Acting Chairman

The Minister's time has elapsed.

I have one more sentence to read. Other speakers were given latitude earlier. In widening the scheme to more areas we inevitably reduce the amount of money available to each area. I assure the Deputy I am totally committed to the RAPID areas which are, by scientific analysis, the areas of greatest deprivation in this country. I am not satisfied with the structures I inherited and am setting about, following good Labour Party processes of consultation and negotiation, refocusing the schemes on the areas of greatest disadvantage. I assure the Deputy that by the time the next election comes around the people in those areas will be the first to defend my actions.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 29 May 2003.

Top
Share