Vol. 636 No. 1
43 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress he has made over the term of this Government in the matter of producing a more co-ordinated engagement by the State with communities throughout the country as they pursue their own development; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15007/07]
The Deputy will be aware that my Department operates, either directly or through bodies under its aegis, a wide range of schemes and projects that support rural and urban communities throughout the country. As indicated in my Department's statement of strategy, the key principle underlying our activities is the provision of support that enables communities to identify and address problems in their areas. The purpose across the range of projects and programmes which my Department has inherited and which I have initiated is to provide support to communities in the most appropriate way as they work to shape their futures, address their common goals and achieve their full potential.
Bringing a strong, coherent focus to this area of Government policy has found particular expression in my Department's work to co-ordinate and streamline service delivery at a local level. Arising from the joint ministerial initiative on the review of local and community development structures, the Government agreed a series of measures in January 2004 designed to improve arrangements under which community and local development initiatives are delivered and to improve cohesion and focus across various measures. In the interim, I have overseen the cohesion process, which is informed by the following guiding principles: improving on-the-ground services, streamlining structures so as to avoid overlaps, duplication and undue administrative overheads; and bringing transparency, co-ordination and improved control to the funding and operation of local and community development measures.
I did not learn a great deal from the Minister's reply. The question I tabled was based on one of the aims set out in the Department's mission statement. One of the phrases used in the latter is "the co-ordinated engagement of the State with local communities". Is the Minister, after five years in office, in a position to indicate that such engagement has substantially improved, that duplication among Departments and agencies has substantially decreased, that taxpayers are getting a better deal and, more importantly, that communities are benefiting? If he is able to do so, what independent evidence does he possess to substantiate his claims?
The independent evidence to which the Deputy refers comes from communities throughout the country which indicate that the system is working. Experts can say one thing, while ordinary people can say another. However, those who are important to me are the ordinary people of this country. The latter really appreciate the progress we have made. That progress has been slow because we have tried to do things on foot of consultation. It might not be great but it would certainly be quick if one could do it by diktat. However, that is not the way we do business.
The bringing of the community services project under the remit of the Department has meant that in many instances where we are providing capital, we will also be able to provide ongoing service provision. The delivery of the RAPID programme, which has grown quite considerably and which is seen by the relevant communities as vital to their future, is dealt with on a much more co-ordinated basis. The bringing together of the Leader and partnership companies so that one company in each area will deliver services will, in time, give rise to enormous benefits. The placing of the rural social scheme under existing structures so that a Leader company with capital might use the labour available under the scheme to develop community projects has been a major benefit.
People are beginning to see the practicalities and common sense in having a Department with many bodies that complement each other under its aegis. They also see the logic in that Department ensuring that a co-ordinated approach is taken in respect of service delivery.
I still do not get the point the Minister is making. He stated that the process has been slow. I fully agree with him in that regard. The process has been far too slow. The evidence he possesses in respect of improved services to community and voluntary bodies came in the form of responses he received from people on the ground. Is the Minister referring to the people he meets when announcing the allocation of grants? Is he discussing matters with the communities or with the service providers? I do not believe that he has made a case in respect of real progress being made in this essential part of the mission of his Department, which was established when the Government was returned to power.
The Deputy has his view and I have mine. I meet community groups, service providers and ordinary citizens. The response to a large number of the initiatives taken by the Department has been extremely positive. Those to whom I refer are of the view that having a range of activities under one Department is beneficial.
If one considers the urban areas, the drug diversion programme, the RAPID programme — these are closely interlinked — the partnerships and the CDPs all come under one Department. We are, therefore, taking a much more co-ordinated approach than was the case heretofore. In the past, matters such as those to which I refer were dealt with by four or five different Departments. This led to great difficulties in the context of co-ordinating policies.
In rural areas, the bodies under my Department will deliver the LDSIP, the Leader programmes and the rural social scheme. This will mean that it will be possible for such bodies to deal with social inclusion issues by using the rural social scheme and Leader funding. Previously, there would have been two different bodies operating in this area and we would have established a third to run the rural social scheme. There has been a great improvement in terms of the co-ordinated approach to development and, regardless of the Deputy's opinion, this has been generally welcomed by people throughout the country.
As regards the Gaeltacht and the islands, which were previously the responsibility of another Department, progress in this area has been widely welcomed because their needs can be considered and then serviced by the various instruments to which I refer. We are no longer obliged to work with extremely limited resources.
44 Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made to date on the aim of significantly reducing the hardship caused to individuals and society by drug misuse; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15008/07]
This will be a continuation of the reply to Priority Question No. 39 which I did not finish. I listed a number of major capital projects completed under the young people's facilities and services fund in Cabra, Ballywaltrim in Bray, St. Catherine's Community Sports Centre on Marrowbone Lane, St. Teresa's Hall on Donore Avenue and Donnycarney. In total, approximately 650 people are employed in drug-related initiatives funded by the Department. The €50 million in the Department's Vote is only part of the overall allocation of approximately €200 million provided by the Government across a number of Departments to tackle the drugs problem.
In response to a supplementary question, I mentioned the report entitled A Community Drugs Study — Developing Community Drugs Indicators, which was produced by the NACD. It examined the experiences and perceptions of three communities which experienced drug problems, namely, Ballymun, Bray and Crumlin, with respect to drug use and associated issues. While problems persist in the communities relating to drugs, drink, anti-social behaviour and crime, the study noted significant improvements in a number of areas, including reductions in some types of crime, the expansion of drug treatment services and improved employment opportunities. The study also clearly demonstrated the merits of the approach underpinned by the national drugs strategy, in particular the level of community involvement through drugs task forces.
The future implementation of the recommendations of the report of the working group on drug rehabilitation, which will be launched in the coming weeks, will represent another step forward. I expect to receive shortly a recommendation from the national drugs strategy team for an increased role for the family support network, which was called for and recommended in the mid-term review. Major efforts are being made to tackle the various problems of drug misuse. I acknowledge more remains to be done but we are tackling the problem and having significant successes in a range of targets.
In the previous part of his reply, the Minister of State indicated the national drugs strategy was conceived in the context of the heroin problem which existed at the time. A major recommendation of the study mentioned by the Minister of State which was carried out in Ballymun, Crumlin and Bray was that indicators be developed to identify emerging drug problems earlier. Has anything happened with regard to this? Has the Minister of State directed any actions to be taken in this regard? The Minister of State will be long gone by the time the new drugs strategy will be in place. Has he come to a firm view with regard to whether alcohol abuse should be part of the next national drugs strategy?
I stated the original strategy and local drugs task forces came out of problems in certain areas in the inner city and suburban communities of Dublin. These will always be a priority. Other people use cannabis and cocaine but they are from a range of various groups in society. The emphasis should always be on those who are most affected by drug misuse.
A different view is taken on alcohol. As called for in the mid-term review of the drugs strategy, a committee was established by the Department of Health and Children to examine the issue and it includes people from a range of agencies and Departments. Various view are taken. Some feel the two strategies should be amalgamated and others feel links should be made on particular pillars.
At preventative level, where one addresses school children and teenagers, links already exist. One speaks about the danger of addiction and does not necessarily focus on drink one day and drugs the next. Major differences also exist and we must wait to see what the committee recommends. Whatever one may state about alcohol, it is a legal substance. Drugs are illegal. Similarities and differences exist and we must wait to see what comes out of the report.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
