Vol. 673 No. 1
6 Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the outcome of his Department’s review of the night-time rural transport scheme; if the scheme will be extended in 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2723/09]
25 Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the position regarding the rural transport programme; if the programme will continue in its current form; if he will make cutbacks in the programme; the amount of funding that will be allocated to the programme in 2009; the amount of funding to each individual programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2580/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 and 25 together.
In many rural areas there are no public transport services at night. While in the more developed rural areas there may be hackney or taxi services, these are at the discretion of the providers and do not always provide a guaranteed service to rural people.
Against this background in May 2007 I introduced a new evening transport service, on a pilot basis, to allow rural people to fully participate in the community, sporting and social activities that take place in their areas. Thirty-four groups deliver the rural transport programme, which is operated by the Department of Transport, and seven of these are delivering the pilot evening transport service. The pilot scheme is widely used in the areas in which it is in operation. Funding of €665,000 was provided to run the pilot scheme to the end of 2008.
A review of the pilot scheme is under way and it is anticipated that it will be completed in the coming weeks. Decisions regarding the future of the scheme will be made following the completion of the review process. In the interim, additional funding of €150,000 has been pledged to run the scheme for the first quarter of 2009. This funding has been allocated to the seven participating groups as follows:
|
RTP Project |
Allocation Jan-Mar 2009 |
|
€ |
|
|
Avondhu |
22,250 |
|
West Cork |
33,000 |
|
County Sligo |
24,500 |
|
Laois |
13,500 |
|
Meath / Kilnaleck |
34,250 |
|
Tumna Shannon |
11,250 |
|
MFG |
11,250 |
|
Total |
150,000 |
I think Meitheal Forbartha na Gaeltachta, MFG is in Tír Chonaill.
The Minister told me during his last session of parliamentary questions that he would have that report early in January. I hope we have it soon. Has the Minister provided funding in each Department to continue that pilot scheme for the year? It is important that it should continue.
Has the Minister had discussions with the Minister for Social and Family Affairs so that a voucher system can be put in place and people in rural Ireland, who can avail of the free schemes but have no access to the public transport, can use the vouchers for taxis and other forms of transport? Some people in rural areas have got the free schemes, but they cannot use them because they have no access to public transport. The people who can avail of the free schemes should be given the option to avail of public transport or to obtain vouchers to use taxis and so on.
People with free travel will travel free on this scheme. Therefore, they are not being charged. We have not got the report, but I understand we will have it shortly and we will make it available. We have made money available for January, February and March this year. From what I hear anecdotally, my argument is the opposite. It would appear from what is happening on the night-time scheme that the vast majority of people are travelling for free because they are eligible for free travel. Before we set up this scheme, we were told there was a major problem with people under the age of 66 who tried to go out and socialise, because of the laws on drinking and driving. I wonder whether some of the services were structured correctly to attract a younger clientele that would have paid, which would have made these services more economic and would have allowed us to provide more services for our money.
Many of these services operated on fixed bus routes, with a fixed time and a fixed place and so on. People might be picked up at their houses, but the bus would go to one destination. We should look at the model whereby a hackney could be on a retainer in a fixed geographic area over a fixed time, such between as 7 p.m. on a Friday night and 2 a.m. on a Saturday morning. For a fixed fee, the hackney would always be available to go anywhere in that area. That would attract much more young people to use the service. It would make it more viable and when those who can afford to pay do so it facilitates us in providing more services.
When we get the report, we will make it available. We could then have a debate on it.
Who is carrying out the review of the night time rural transport scheme? What are the terms of reference given to the review group? Why is it that only seven of the 34 groups provided service? Has the Minister any statistical breakdown on usage? I am referring to the percentage of the population, the number of people using the service, the cost per head and so on.
I presume that the information being sought by the Deputy will be in the report. I will watch very carefully for that. I am only going on the anecdotal evidence that I have, but it seems to be mainly older people using the service. That may not be borne out in the report, but I will have to wait and see. All these statistics are being ascertained. I have not got the name of the person or the group carrying out the review, but I will arrange for the person who is carrying out the review to inform the Deputy. I understand that the review is more or less completed, but I do not have the name here.
What are the new terms of reference?
I approved the terms of reference and I will arrange for them to be sent to the Deputy. I made one amendment to the terms of reference, so I remember them quite clearly. I believe they were adequate for the purpose.
If that scheme was to be extended to the end of this year, will the funding be there for it? This issue is about money. If the Department does not have the money, then an extension of the pilot scheme will not happen.
It could be tempting fate for any Minister to say before Tuesday that he has the funding for anything. We should do the evaluation here. I believe the concept is right. When one compares what is spent by the State on urban transport with rural transport, one finds that the money spent per capita on rural transport is minuscule. Despite the impression that is often given, it costs much less to provide transport to rural Ireland. One could also say that the services are inferior as well.
One of my findings from the committee report is that Dublin Bus, Luas and so on are costing much more. The schemes in rural Ireland cost only small amounts of money when compared to what is happening in the cities.
The Deputy is supposed to be asking questions.
I want to give the Minister some useful information.
I am sure he appreciates it.
A publican in a rural area outside a town in my constituency bought a mini-bus to bring people to and from his premises. When he applied for tax relief against his business, he was refused as he needed a taxi licence. We should provide incentives for people who will provide transport in situations like that. This issue should be kept in mind when the Minister analyses the review.
That is a very good idea. We will publish the report, and with the blessing of the committee chairperson and the Deputy, I will come in to the House and debate it. We must try to see if we can extend the services. I would give it a priority if I could prove that I could go further with similar money and serve more people. I am willing to debate creative ideas like that proposed by Deputy O'Shea. I have been told on the ground that the scheme was successful, but if I was doing it again, I would look for more money.
7 Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the amount of funding he will allocate to the RAPID areas for 2009; if there will be a reduction in funding for these areas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2574/09]
The RAPID programme aims to ensure that priority attention is given to tackling the spatial concentration of poverty and social exclusion within 46 designated RAPID areas across the country. It is a matter for individual Departments to report on the provision of funding and progress on delivery with respect to projects under their responsibility in the RAPID areas. Pobal collects data from each RAPID area in respect of funding allocations received by projects from Departments and local State agencies. The latest data in respect of the programme is available on Pobal's website under the RAPID section, which is http://www.pobal.ie/live/RAPID and the Deputy may find it useful to access this information.
I initiated the RAPID leverage schemes in 2004 in order to support small-scale projects identified locally by the area implementation teams in each of the RAPID areas. These schemes are co-funded by the relevant agencies and fund projects that focus on estate enhancement, graffiti removal, traffic calming, community closed-circuit television, health and sports facilities and the provision of playgrounds and multi-use games areas. In 2007, I agreed to co-fund the provision of facilities in schools located in, or mainly servicing children from, RAPID areas.
A total of €6.5 million has been allocated in the budget for the RAPID leverage schemes in 2009. While this is a reduction on the amount allocated in 2008, my primary concern will continue to be to make every effort to ensure the front-line services provided by my Department are protected, especially those focused on the needs of the most socially deprived communities. I am satisfied that this year's allocation will be sufficient to enable further good progress to be made with small-scale co-funded projects in RAPID areas in 2009.
Since the RAPID programme began, it has been very difficult to identify the projects that were completed as a consequence. Perhaps they would have been completed in any case. How many were completed earlier than anticipated because of the programme? Did the programme really concentrate resources in the 46 RAPID areas? Has anyone determined what exactly the programme has achieved? Claims have been made on the Government side that many projects were completed as a result of the RAPID programme. One would be sceptical about this and ask whether they might have been completed in any case. Is there any way of telling what the programme really delivered?
To give the Deputy a very straight answer, I am not sure. It is a valid question and I have often asked it myself. It is very hard to determine. Consider, for example, the case of a community council that keeps asking a local council to fix the pavement. When it gets fixed, it is impossible to prove whether it would have happened anyway or whether the community council was an agent in making it happen. Therefore, it would be unreasonable for me to claim all the projects in RAPID areas and all the projects associated with work programmes were carried out solely because of the RAPID programme. I do not believe this is true.
We had a RAPID conference today. If I were asked to state the real nub of RAPID, I would say it is that, through the area implementation teams, the people living in the areas concerned for the first time sit at the table as equals. When facilities are needed in an area, the team is present to represent that area and have an input. Deputy O'Shea's theory is probably correct that some projects would be carried out in any case. Let us consider the case of a health centre in this category. The difference RAPID could make is that, when such a centre is being built, the area implementation team, because it would sit as an equal at the table with the HSE, or because there would be some RAPID leverage money available, would be able to determine the type of centre to be constructed and the services provided. This, in itself, could make a considerable qualitative, rather than a quantitative, difference.
I stated publicly today that the defining difference between living in a local authority housing estate and elsewhere, be it in an urban or rural area, is that in the former case most decisions have been made for one by others. I refer to the size of the house, the shape of the rooms and the community facilities. Local authority housing residents have had very little input into any decision affecting their area. On the other extreme, the main characteristic of small rural communities is the considerable input they have into what happens, for better or for worse. Under the RAPID programme, I wanted to give that kind of input to the public through the area implementation teams. It is a question of having the community representative sit at the table with the Department's leverage money saying, "If we do not agree, there is no deal". For the first time, the representatives have cash when talking to officials.
I thank the Minister for his frankness. To some extent, he shares my scepticism and concerns. Consider the allocation for this year in terms of the initiation of projects. The Minister stated what would be provided would not be affected by the cutback. How much is the shortfall? Can the Minister stand over a statement to the effect that a cutback in resources will not diminish service?
I believe the figure was €7.8 million and is now €6.5 million, indicating a shortfall of €1.3 million. That fund was not very big in the beginning. I still believe we can have a very good programme this year. The leverage fund only covers the small projects as the big projects are covered by the Departments from their own funding. It is not within the scope of the RAPID leverage fund to provide schools and major health facilities, etc.
I have said that, in everything I have done in the Department, I have tried to keep the front line money in place, particularly on the current side. I have cut all the administration funds, thus affecting bodies such as Pobal and Údarás na Gaeltachta. They are all complaining but I have still done it. In fairness, some of the agencies have been very helpful and understanding in respect of why it had to be done. The leverage fund, small as it is, involves the communities having a veto over money that the local authority, for example, would have to match. Normally, if the local authority grants money, it totally determines what happens, but now the communities have a say.
We allocate some money from the dormant accounts fund for discretionary spending. It amounts to approximately €100,000 for RAPID areas. This still remains a top priority for me, although the dormant accounts fund is beginning to become depleted after five years.
Today we invited a good selection of the sports organisations to the conference at Croke Park, including the FAI, IRFU, the camogie representatives, the GAA, and Swim Ireland. Many of these bodies have considerable resources and we were telling them to match the resources the area implementation teams receive through the dormant accounts fund and to increase activity in sport in the RAPID areas. For every euro we give, I hope we would get €2 or €3 from the sports organisations.
8 Deputy Tom Hayes asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views on the fact that the range of public services available in rural areas is in decline; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2739/09]
The Government is committed to providing essential public services in rural areas to secure a proper environment for economic development, promote social inclusion and support dispersed, viable rural communities. To this end, the programme for Government contains a series of commitments to strengthen and underpin public service provision in rural areas across a range of Departments and agencies.
One of the challenges faced by rural communities relates to accessing services from Departments and agencies. In line with a commitment given in the programme for Government, new integrated local development companies have been established in rural areas that will enable local communities to more readily access services in regard to a wide range of schemes and programmes operated by my Department. These schemes and programmes aim to strengthen the provision of services in rural areas, regenerate rural communities and support the diversification of the rural economy. Relevant schemes include the CLÁR schemes, the community services programme, the rural development programme, the rural social scheme and the pilot rural transport night scheme.
The CLÁR programme, which aims to tackle deficits in physical, economic and social infrastructure in peripheral rural areas affected by population decline, has a pivotal role in strengthening public service provision in rural areas. CLÁR schemes cover a wide variety of developments such as housing and schools enhancement, electricity conversion, roads, water supply, sewerage schemes, and health, coastal, sports and community projects.
The community services programme is of particular relevance. This programme supports voluntary and community groups to provide essential services, which otherwise would not normally be available within local communities, such as social care, services for older persons, youth support and recycling.
The Leader element of the rural development programme 2007–13 aims to improve the quality of life in rural areas and promote the diversification of the rural economy. The new programme is being rolled out this year and a sum of €27 million has been allocated for 2009. Údarás na Gaeltachta and the Western Development Commission, which come within the ambit of my Department, also promote economic and social development in rural areas.
In addition to the above measures, the rural transport programme, which is under the aegis of the Department of Transport, seeks to address social exclusion in rural areas arising from unmet public transport needs. This scheme is complemented by the pilot rural transport night scheme, which is operated directly by my Department.
The Government has a policy of decentralisation, yet Eircom announced last week it is to remove half of its public telephone boxes. At one stage it had 8,500 and now the number has decreased to 4,500. With the next cull, there may be fewer than 2,000. Likewise, post offices are closing in rural areas throughout the State. There are currently some 1,200 in total and they are unevenly spread across the country. The Minister referred to rural transport. If it were not for the Minister and the communities themselves, there would be no transport in rural areas.
We now have a situation where one of the largest retail groups in the country, Superquinn, has had to pull out of Dundalk. In rural areas, small shops are closing because they can no longer compete with larger operators and because rural populations are declining. The Minister must seek to bring as many Government agency services as possible into rural areas. It is important that he have discussions with companies such as Eircom in this regard. It was taxpayers' money that put Eircom's infrastructure in place and it is obliged under law, as overseen by the Commission for Communications Regulation, to provide a certain element of public service. It is public service that is missing in this country. What does the Minister intend to do in this regard? Semi-State companies have a public service obligation.
The Minister has eliminated the hub towns from the Leader programme with the result that they cannot draw down any funding. This is causing a significant problem in many rural towns.
I have agreed with much of what Deputy Ring has said today. However, sometimes we make a song and dance in defending services which are not used by anybody. Some years ago, for example, Eircom announced that it was removing a public telephone box in my constituency. In response to a telephone call from a local resident, I made a representation for its retention. The Eircom representatives I dealt with were very helpful and the telephone box was kept in place. However, I must admit that I was informed at the time that the average number of calls being made from this telephone box was three per week.
The telephone was probably broken and had not been fixed.
No, it was working perfectly.
I am aware of a case in Mayo where it took Eircom a week to fix a telephone.
The reality is that few people in rural areas use public telephones because most of them have a mobile telephone. From speaking to people in these areas, I am aware that this is not the service with which they are most concerned. What people are shouting about is the provision of broadband. With the announcement of the rural broadband scheme, I have no doubt that companies such as Eircom will now provide broadband at a rate of knots where they would not have done so before. The difference now is that we have engendered competition in the market. I am confident that nine out of ten people in rural areas would gladly swap a public telephone box for the availability of broadband. In the modern world, the latter is 100 times more important. People will fight for that rather than for the retention of telephone boxes which are no longer used.
Likewise, I am of the view that there is no viable future for post offices in which all the processing is still done manually and where there is a turnover of only €5,000, €10,000 or €15,000 per year. There is no livelihood to be had from such an enterprise. To oppose any consolidation in this age of the car, mobile telephone and other modern technology is to destroy the viability of the remaining post offices. There must be a balanced approach in this. We cannot defend services whose day has gone. I would much rather seek out those services whose future is coming. I have always been greatly supportive of the credit unions, for example, because they can provide a five-day or seven-day per week service.
There is no doubt that small retail businesses in rural areas are in trouble. However, there is another side to it, as the Deputy will know from his own constituency. I am sure very little passes him by in his constituency. It is significant that the first Tesco store in Ballinrobe opened recently, while another huge supermarket is being built on the other side of town by a person who previously had a smaller supermarket in the town.
However, all the smaller shops are closing. That is Government policy.
My attitude when I see Aldi and Lidl stores opening in Clifden, and a Tesco store opening in Ballinrobe, is that, in their absence, the people who shop there would instead travel to supermarkets in Galway and other large towns. One can view it either as the multiples coming to the people or the people going to the multiples. The reality is that most people tend to go to the multiples when they have a large quantity of purchases to make. It is a positive development that the large chains are willing to set up in rural areas and create employment. I have an opposite view to that of Deputy Ring in this regard.
In regard to public services in rural areas, there is a problem in the Gaeltacht area in my own constituency, where it seems we are set to lose the áisitheoir poiblí. I understand this is also happening in two other areas, Ráth Chairn and Uíbh Ráthach, and it is a damaging development. Will the Minister intervene to ensure this important public service, which comes within the remit of his Department, is retained?
I have expressed publicly my surprise at learning that these three áisitheoir poiblí positions are being removed. Meitheal Forbartha na Gaeltachta must explain why, out of its 60 staff, this particular position is being targeted. There are no other staff in these small Gaeltachtaí but they are the first positions to go. I do not understand it.
However, we must recognise that the entire basis of partnership under the Leader programme is bottom-up development. Therefore, it is not in my position to dictate how——
Is the difficulty that Meitheal Forbartha na Gaeltachta's funding has been reduced? Is there another element from within the Minister's Department, such as Coiste na Gaeilge, from which these posts could be financed?
We cannot continue to provide additional finance to administrators simply because they inevitably make decisions to cut the post that is based in the most remote place. I understand Meitheal Forbartha na Gaeltachta has funding for some 60 jobs. It is a matter for that body to ensure it configures that staff complement so as to provide effective services to these outlying areas. If I were to do what the Deputy is proposing, I would have to take money from front line services merely to maintain the status quo. I said the day after the budget that I had a policy in my Department, under the local development social inclusion programme, Pobal and Údarás na Gaeltachta, to reduce administrative costs in order to protect front line services. I will not be deflected from that. Those who must make decisions devolved from me——
We have gone way over time on this question but I will allow Deputy Ring to put a final supplementary question.
I hope to have time to respond to Deputy Ring's question on the hub towns.
I disagree with the Minister's views in regard to post offices and telephone boxes. The Government's policy is to decentralise State services, yet State agencies are withdrawing services from rural areas. The Minister referred to broadband provision. The Government gave a commitment last week to roll out broadband throughout the State, with a particular emphasis on rural areas. There was uproar in my constituency because many of the rural areas there are exempt from it. I challenge the Minister to accompany me to several areas in my constituency where he will find it is impossible to get a mobile telephone signal. Eircom and O2 will not be able to deliver broadband if they cannot even deliver mobile telephone coverage. They must improve the level of their service.
There is no doubt that broadband provision is essential. The Minister is aware of a business in Blacksod where employees have to go into a corner to get a signal. I would sacrifice much for broadband. Without it, we will not attract jobs to rural areas. The Minister must work with his colleagues, the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Ryan, and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, to ensure it is rolled out. The Green Party wants birds in rural Ireland but I want people there.
I am so much in agreement with Deputy Ring today that I am beginning to be worried. The Deputy is aware of my passion for keeping people in rural areas, I have devoted a lifetime to it. He and I see eye to eye on this issue. All I want is modern services. My point, however, is that it is not conducive to the best interests of rural areas to seek always to protect services which are no longer used by anybody.
I note the Deputy's points regarding broadband. The national broadband scheme is being rolled out. I understand that in one area of the Deputy's constituency, the maps do not cover one area where there is adequate broadband cover. I have no doubt that my colleague, the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Ryan, will look into that issue.
Deputy Ring asked me about hub towns. I had two choices in this respect, to proceed the way I did or to proceed another way based on OECD statistics on population density. The option I chose has by far the less negative impact of the two. If I had taken the other option, it would have resulted in a worse position. I had to take this option because of consideration of what is covered by the definition of rural.
If I worked in a Leader company or lived in a rural community, I do not know if I would be happy if a large proportion of the allocation for rural development was being invested in hub towns such as Castlebar, Ballina, Drogheda and so on. If the allocation is for rural development, let us ensure it is invested in real rural development, which will benefit quite sizeable towns. I am not sure whether the major county towns should be the big beneficiaries of rural development moneys.
9 Deputy Seán Barrett asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the position regarding the development of the national drugs strategy 2009 to 2016; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2726/09]
22 Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the position regarding the national drugs strategy; when the final report will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2585/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 22 together.
A steering group, chaired by my Department, is currently developing proposals on a new national drugs strategy covering the period 2009 to 2016. I expect to receive its proposals and recommendations by the end of March and I will then consider them before seeking Government approval for a new strategy.
An extensive consultation process was undertaken last year on the new strategy. This involved meetings with Government Departments and agencies, the community and voluntary sectors, various interested parties and focus groups as well as an extensive schedule of public consultation meetings at 15 locations across the country. The outcomes of these discussions are being used by the steering group as the basis for much of its deliberations. I anticipate I will be in a position to seek Government approval for the new national drugs strategy in April, with publication to follow shortly thereafter.
We are nearing the end of the first month in 2009 and I intended to ask the Minister of State when he expected the strategy to be published, but he answered that in his reply.
I refer to a point raised by Deputy O'Shea concerning widespread access to services under the national drugs strategy among communities in rural areas. I hope such access to services will be highlighted in the new strategy.
Is the Minister of State concerned about the €2 billion cost-saving measures to be agreed by the Government? Does he consider this will result in a cut in funding for the strategy? Will the Government ensure the new national drugs strategy also addresses the issue of alcohol abuse?
I will take a brief supplementary from Deputy O'Shea.
The last point Deputy Byrne raised was the one on which I wanted to focus. Will the national drugs strategy focus on polydrug use and, in particular, alcohol use? There have been varying views in the Department about that, but drug abuse and alcohol use are so interlinked that there is no escaping that they must be dealt with together.
I will first address the alcohol issue as it has provoked a great deal of discussion. The reality is that alcohol and drug use are closely linked. In terms of the services provided by the statutory agencies, the HSE, clinics and so forth and education programmes, many of them already focus on drug and alcohol use. The exact relationship between the two and how it will be defined in the new strategy has not been clearly identified because the process is not complete. Regardless of that process and the end strategy, there will be a recognition of the role both substances play and there will be syngeries between how we deal with them as that process will have to reflect the treatments currently being provided.
Regarding the budgetary position, there was a reduction in the allocation in this respect under this year's budget. Our Department prioritised the drugs budget. We transferred funds from other subheadings because we recognise the importance of the drugs budget. The allocation of funding to the community initiatives through the task forces in 2009 will be the same as that allocated to them in 2008. That will present difficulties for task forces. I have met many of the chairpersons and co-ordinators and each task force should strategically identify the most important front line services and preserve them in each local area. The funding allocation for 2009 has been notified to them and it will the same as the allocation for 2008.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
