Vol. 575 No. 5
2 Mr. O'Shea asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the way in which it is intended to apply the moneys provided in the Estimates for 2004 for the RAPID programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28697/03]
In my Department's Vote for 2004 a total of €5.8 million has been provided under a new subhead for the RAPID programme. The breakdown of this amount is €4.5 million for capital expenditure and €1.3 million for current expenditure.
Many of the proposals from RAPID plans have been sent to Departments for consideration when it would be much more efficient for them to be dealt with at local level. To this end, a dedicated fund of €4.5 million has been set aside for capital expenditure for the programme to support such projects. This funding will be used as leverage to facilitate co-funding from State agencies. I hope to make an announcement shortly on the precise way in which the money will be spent but as I have previously stated, area implementation teams will be involved in the process.
The sum of €1.3 million in current expenditure will be provided for ADM to meet administration expenses and provide support for area implementation teams.
Will the Minister agree that there is an inherent contradiction in the provision of RAPID programme moneys having regard to what is being dispersed by the Dormant Accounts Disbursement Board? The RAPID programme process is now being bypassed at local level. Over the last two years the social inclusion measure groups and area implementation teams prioritised the processing of applications. However, a sum of €30 million will now be dispersed per annum, targeted particularly at RAPID, CLÁR and local drug task force area programmes, bypassing the work done by the social inclusion measure groups and area implementation teams.
I sympathise with what the Deputy said and I am genuinely interested in the point he made. Legislation was passed to create an independent Dormant Accounts Disbursement Board. It is important that these types of schemes resonate the demands of the benefiting communities. I will keep what the Deputy said in mind to see how we can avoid giving funds to RAPID programme areas that might not be seen as having top priority through the process. However, I approved the plan and was anxious that as much money as possible would be ringfenced for RAPID programme areas, in particular. However I cannot be sure whether the Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursements Board, which is independent, will dovetail that with the requirements in the AIT plans. The Deputy has raised an issue that warrants ongoing examination. I have noted what he has said and I will keep it in mind as events unfold.
I find the Minister's response encouraging. However, this has been a demoralising decision for the two groups, the SIMs and the AITs, that have worked so diligently over two years. More is required than simply carrying out a review. They must be brought into the mainstream of this process. I understand the capital sports grants are endorsed at a local level. Surely that should happen here.
The RAPID programme has made appallingly bad progress. The Minister has made a virtue – I do not necessarily disagree with him – of saying that the macro decisions should be taken at a Department level and the micro decisions at a local level. This flies in the face of that policy. Substantial funding is available which is targeted at the RAPID areas. This seems like quite a retrograde step that highlights the muddle that is the administration and bureaucracy of RAPID.
What the Deputy says is music to my ears and mirrors my general thinking on these matters. I am somewhat old-fashioned in thinking we need a fairly simple streamlined system of Government. With only 4 million people, every citizen has access to all of us as Members of the House. All these tiers only complicate the issue.
I would like to focus on how we will spend the €4.5 million, over which I will have direct control as it is Department money. I had a very fruitful meeting with the AIT co-ordinators. When I examined all these plans there were many small issues. There were housekeeping issues over maintenance of local authority estates and safety issues over the provision of CCTV cameras or speed ramps to prevent so-called joyriding. There were other issues involving small sports projects and areas of rough ground that young children were using for cider parties, etc. Those issues should be addressed. They are in all the plans. To ask a Department to process those is undermining the AITs.
Somewhat similarly to CLÁR, I intend to use these moneys and ask the AITs to provide a menu of the items that are repeated in the plan as exists in CLÁR. The AITs should decide what to choose from the menu. As with CLÁR there should be matching funding, which would mean that the €4.5 million could leverage €10 million or maybe €15 million worth of action in one year. If this were done over two or three years we would see considerable difference on the ground. The beauty is that it deals with the small ones. It shortens the list of items that have to be handled by the Departments.
The time for this question has expired.
You might give me one more minute, as I believe it is important and I want to give as much useful information as I can.
We could take the 1,200 actions that were meant to be processed through Departments, which the Deputy knows would never happen, and generate a much smaller list of major items, which could be prioritised to get real action on them. I am committed to RAPID and once I have finalised my thoughts on it I am willing to give a detailed briefing on how I intend to make the programme really effective on the ground in line with the AIT plans next year.
