JOINT COMMITTEE ON ARTS, SPORT, TOURISM, COMMUNITY, RURAL AND GAELTACHT AFFAIRS debate -
Wednesday, 31 Jan 2007

Rural Development Strategy: Discussion with Irish Rural Link.

Chairman

I welcome our guests from Irish Rural Link, Mr. Seamus Boland, chief executive officer; Mr. Martin Smyth, chairperson; and Mr. Darragh Hunt, policy and communications officer. They are here to make a presentation on Ireland's Rural Development Strategy 2007-13. As I must always note, while committee members have privilege, the visitors who come before us do not enjoy the same privilege. I cannot imagine this will cause a major problem for the delegates.

We will hear the submission and then move to questions. We are all interested in rural development as, aside from the issue being directly relevant to the committee's work programme, most of us live in rural areas and have first-hand experience owing to people coming to us about access to transport, housing, jobs, infrastructure and health services. We are always looking for solutions rather than a further indication of the problems encountered. I am sure Irish Rural Link will enlighten us, given it is linked to many other groups in the countryside.

Mr. Martin Smyth

I thank the Chairman and members for inviting us to appear before the committee. We are delighted to outline our point of view on the proposed policies. Our organisation was established 15 years ago and our aim is to promote rural development. I will hand over to our chief executive officer who will present the submission.

Mr. Seamus Boland

I thank the Chairman and members for having us before the committee. I will try not to talk about drink-link buses which I know gained much publicity in recent weeks. We have provided our submission for the committee and members will have a copy.

We argue that we have complemented the work of those who wrote the rural strategy. We know from the consultation process that a great deal of work went into it. We note there are obligations to adhere to the European Union guidelines, as well as the Lisbon strategy. In particular, we welcome the increased budget for rural development contained in Axis 3 and Axis 4. It is a €7 billion package. However, the table in our submission demonstrates that, effectively, rural development measures are allotted just €425 million, or approximately 5% to 6% of the total package. Therefore, despite being titled the rural development strategy, we draw attention to the reality that it is more an agriculture and farm support strategy. Nonetheless, we accept and welcome this reality because, without such a subsidy and support, farming, the main industry, would die and rural areas would be seriously affected. We do not suggest this funding should not be made available.

We acknowledge the prioritising of rural development in recent years, given the White Paper on rural development, the establishment of the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and initiatives such as CLÁR and the rural transport initiative, among others. We welcomed the publication of the national spatial strategy and the significant emphasis put on rural development in the recently published Towards 2016 agreement and the new national development plan. Clearly, the case for supporting agriculture is well established, given the many CAP reforms initiated since the beginning of the 1990s.

We also draw attention to the observations in the ex ante evaluation report which accompanied the strategy. It was a lengthy document in which certain recommendations or criticisms were made. We have not listed all of them in the submission, although they are contained in our analysis document which was also sent to the committee. Even if one discounted all criticisms and simply accepted the independent evaluation in the ex ante report, it would be a major step forward.

The issues highlighted by Irish Rural Link in its new strategic plan which will be launched in Buswells Hotel on 14 February, St. Valentine's Day, are as follows: the narrow economic base in many rural areas; the ongoing restructuring of agriculture; the development of the potential of rural areas as a source of energy; the development of the potential of rural areas as leisure destinations; the role and effect of planning for and within rural areas; regional inequalities and geographical peripherality; and rural disadvantage in the Border region. There was very wide consultation with our members which was carried out in the past year. These were the strong findings that emerged.

In meeting these challenges any rural development strategy, particularly one that highlights vision and strategic issues, must look to the longer term and address some of the fundamental weaknesses in the rural economy. It is our analysis that this paper is at least a beginning. However, as it stands, it is unlikely to achieve a sustainable future for families in rural Ireland. The independent ex ante report states:

There is an underlying assumption governing the whole plan that interventions are mainly implemented via farmers who are seen as central to the rural economy notwithstanding the decline in farm numbers. This is especially true in respect of Axes 1 and 2 and is consistent with the Regulation. In respect of Axis 3 the interventions are more applicable to the wider rural community.

We fundamentally believe rural development is not treated fairly in the document. While it will assist the rural economy through agriculture, it will not assist the wider development and diversity of other economies within the rural areas. Members should examine the figures we put before them if they wish to suggest otherwise. It is clear they relate to maintaining the status quo.

It is stated in the strategy that 59% of our overall population live in areas covered by the plan. Clearly, if they are to benefit from this plan, they can only do so if there is a strong, vibrant rural economy in place and if it is complemented by full accessibility to basic social services, including health care and housing. It is also clear that while the dominant industry in rural areas is farming, it is in decline, as has been shown by the AgriVision and Foresight reports. In the BMW region alone, employment in agriculture decreased by 17% in the 1999 to 2005 period. At the same time employment in the services and industrial sectors has increased by up to 55%. These figures, taken from the national development plan, point clearly to a trend that is not addressed in the rural strategy document.

In the audit of innovation report published by the BMW regional assembly there is evidence that higher income jobs are based in the greater Dublin area. A migration pattern is developing as the trend towards part-time farming continues. It is our view that were it not for the current building boom, we would be facing a degree of emigration.

The rural strategy clearly focuses on the application of measures geared at resolving many of the problems faced by farmers throughout Europe. In Ireland these problems are well documented in a range of reports published in recent years and in the plan submitted by the Government. Rural areas are still dominated by usage of the land. The preponderance of small holdings remains extremely high. In the global economy we now inhabit, however, these small holdings are no longer viable in economic terms.

The plan adopts a policy to continue as before, that is, to support by subsidy, in one form or another, the continuation of farming. However, farming cannot survive without subsidisation to the tune of 90% of the income derived from it. That is the figure produced by the Department of Agriculture and Food. It could be argued that staying with a failed and ultimately unsustainable model, without looking at effective and long-term solutions, is a weakness of the plan. There is little doubt that such large-scale assistance is required, now and in the medium term. Failure to examine viable alternatives, however, must be seen as a significant weakness.

The other weakness is the less than satisfactory resources available to the wider rural community. There are compelling arguments as to why this issue should have been addressed. The increased rationalisation of farm holdings, as supported by the strategy, means more and more people will be disconnected from farming but will want to remain within their own community, or at least have that choice. The benefits of a younger population remaining within their own community are huge in terms of economic and social sustainability.

Some 40% of the overall population live in dispersed settlements and, therefore, require a much higher level of service. The viability of such services depends on our ability to link a range of national strategies in such a way as to ensure their success in terms of community access. The strategy is likely to contribute to the rationalisation of farm units and, by extension, the number of families who can live and work in their own areas. For the first time there is evidence of linkage between the various strategies in the latest national development plan and the partnership agreement, Towards 2016. We welcome this as a major development.

The rural strategy could present the Government with a golden opportunity to redesign an entire range of education and training initiatives based on the establishment of a comprehensive education and training programme which would be available to all ages. While support for small enterprise is likely to increase under the strategy, obstacles such as planning, poor basic infrastructure and lack of cohesion in the availability of health and social services are not addressed.

Support for farming is essential. However, resources could have been made available under the strategy to examine more sustainable uses of land. There is some assistance available to those who wish to go down the alternative energy route but nowhere near what is possible, particularly in the establishment of a biofuel processing industry, for example.

The strategy does not fully address the difficulties faced by isolated rural communities, particularly those in the Border region. The Border brings a number of added adverse dimensions into the lives of those communities which are often dependent on the vagaries of the economies of both jurisdictions.

Our submission includes a list of recommendations which we also submitted to the Department. I will not go through them in detail but members can see that they are organised under the headings of bioenergy, education and skills, community supports, other strategy linkages, social inclusion and monitoring indicators. Irish Rural Link always tries to bring forward solutions, as we did in the negotiations on the social partnership agreement. We were pleased with the result of those negotiations. Our recommendations form only part of what we consider essential developments. Given the narrowness of the document that had to be submitted, these were the issues we considered most relevant. In the wider rural agenda there is far more to be done and Irish Rural Link is never hesitant in making the case for change.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Boland for his presentation. It is interesting to hear about his perspective on the rural development allocation of €7 billion, which is that there is little additionality if one subtracts the value of the farming packages. The Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food will be more than delighted with the €7 billion allocation. As the committee whose brief includes rural development, we are less so. Improvements in the European Union's provision for rural development were well trumpeted. The Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mariann Fischer Boel, told us in the Dáil Chamber that we should watch this space. Is Mr. Boland saying this space was not worth watching?

Mr. Boland

The game is not entirely over. The Government was under pressure to submit the document, but I understand another review will be undertaken in 2008. Our contention is that rural development and sustainability must go hand in hand. Questions must be asked about an industry which depends on subsidies of 90% of income. At the Leader conference in Galway a French Commissioner made an interesting point when he asked about the position of a hairdresser in rural Ireland. Such a person receives no assistance with her or her business, whereas a farmer with 100 acres enjoys subsidies of 90%. Those subsidies are to be welcomed. There is a danger when one makes this point that one will be seen as anti-farmer, but that is not the case. We merely draw the comparison to underline the importance of ensuring a sustainable rural economy which comprises 40% of the population.

We must deal with the economic realities and apply pressure at the next review. We are thankful for the committee's invitation to attend this meeting because it allows us to outline some directions as to the approach we should take.

Chairman

Mr. Boland makes the point that the industries which were the traditional strongholds of the rural economy, including fishing and farming, are in decline. He argues that we should protect existing activity in those areas while realising that there are limitations to their future viability and that there is great optimism for the future for rural development if we focus on the correct strategies and deal with the basic infrastructure. What does he consider the best mechanism for delivering a new strategy that will meet those aims? Should it be done through the Leader programme? Should the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs have a stronger arm into every Department? This is a cross-departmental issue. For example, broadband is the responsibility of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, while the construction and upgrade of roads is a matter for the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Most would agree that the lack of co-ordination between Departments can give rise to major frustrations. In matters of cross-Border co-operation, I experience particular frustrations living in north Donegal.

Alternatively, does Mr. Boland see the delivery of rural development initiatives as primarily a matter for local authorities? Does he consider the new co-financing arrangements with which local authorities are obliged to comply to be a problem? If the funding available for rural development were doubled, how could it be allocated most effectively? If we retain the current strategy, will we remain on a never-ending spiral of money being dispensed without great effect and not where it is most needed? I will park these questions and allow other members to contribute.

Deputy Deenihan

I join the Chairman in welcoming the delegation. As a Deputy who represents a rural constituency, I am sure the Chairman realises that many rural areas are in terminal decline at present. This is a serious issue that is not being addressed and its existence has not been realised fully. While there is a multiplicity of agencies, much duplication occurs at times and there does not appear to be any focus on delivery for rural areas.

A major east-west divide is happening across the spectrum at present. For example, in tourism, Dublin and the east coast now attract the great majority of tourists who come to Ireland and the greatest expenditure takes place there. The level of spending in rural areas is not as great as it had been previously and not enough is happening to redress this imbalance. While efforts are being made, they are not having a tangible impact.

The farming population constituted the engine of rural communities and country sounds from tractors, dogs, cattle or whatever always emanated from farms. However, those sounds are now gone from the countryside. Unfortunately, the music that was to be heard traditionally in the countryside as it emanated from various activities is no longer present. As we speak, the entire culture of rural areas is changing.

A worrying aspect of the agricultural community is that at present, only one in ten farmers is under 35 whereas in 2000, the equivalent figure was one in five. The profile of people in agriculture is ageing and greying, which is worrying because young people are simply not remaining on the land. Why is this? At present, the average farm income is two thirds of the average industrial wage. I understand the former is approximately €21,600 while the latter is approximately €30,000. Moreover, the average farm income is half that of the average wage of a civil servant, which is more than €40,000. Young people have no incentive to remain on the land.

As Mr. Boland noted, the building industry is doing well at present and has created opportunities. Members can see for themselves that a number of rural dwellers, including farmers' sons and so on, are engaged in building. However, Irish Rural Link's submission discusses a possible slowing down in building. What will such people do if this occurs? Unfortunately, they may be obliged to leave again for London or, if they can go there, New York or other parts of the world such as Australia. There is real concern in this regard.

As the witnesses noted, total farm income came to approximately €2.4 billion last year, of which €1.8 billion derived from Brussels or the national Exchequer. How sustainable will this be in future? Without such subvention, there would be very few farmers. I can remember one statistic from 1995 because at the time I held office as Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry in charge of rural development. While there were 45,000 dairy farmers then, there are now approximately 27,000 and this number is in rapid decline. In marts, one continually hears of the sales of pedigree herds or whatever being advertised. In County Kerry, as many as ten dairy farmers leave the land every week. While there were more than 10,000 dairy farmers in Kerry in 1973, the present number is approximately 2,500. This is the overall scenario. In respect of the wider problem, an interagency approach should be taken and, as the Chairman noted, the responsibilities of Departments differ.

At present, the major interurban connectors, between Dublin and Cork and Dublin and Limerick are being emphasised. While I do not disagree with this, funds should also be invested in the national secondary routes, which have a greater impact and influence on rural areas than do the national primary routes. Not all parts of Ireland possess the advantage of having a national primary route running through them. Consequently, given the increased investment in national primary roads, areas served by national secondary routes are becoming more marginalised and disadvantaged and will not benefit from foreign direct investment. Investment in national secondary routes has been for maintenance purposes rather than to carry out major improvements to them. This is a significant issue that the witnesses should take up as much as possible.

The treatment of sewage is another issue. I am amazed the Government is doing nothing to provide sewage treatment plants in villages nationwide as so doing would take pressure off rural areas for housing. Rather than building in rural areas, people would build in properly planned villages in which land was available. However, the policy appears to be to allow communities to pay to provide such plants themselves or to allow builders to do so. While this might happen in villages or communities containing enterprising builders, not all villages have such people connected to them. Consequently, some communities are dormant, static and without development whereas other villages with enterprising people, such as farmers who are prepared to install treatment processes, are faring well.

Development takes place wherever there is proper sewage treatment and those towns that have been granted proper sewage treatment facilities are growing. In County Kerry, although applications for 38 schemes have been lodged with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government for nearly seven years, not one has been approved. While preliminary reports are awaited, it is not happening. Several small villages in north and south Kerry are not developing because one cannot get planning permission in them, and without proper planning there is no in-depth or back-land development. People are not prepared to sell their frontage unless they can also get permission for back-land development to maximise the potential. The witnesses should emphasise this point.

All members are familiar with the issue of broadband access. I live in a village without such access. While politicians receive documents from all quarters, some more important than others, one is certainly at a significant disadvantage without broadband access. Yesterday, a document which should have come through failed to so do because I lack broadband access. This brought home to me the importance of such access. In the new millennium, one must be connected and if, in common with most of Ireland, one lacks it, one is at a serious disadvantage.

The issue of village enhancement and the retention of traditional village architecture no longer appears to matter. At present, those villages that are undergoing development are gaining new-style housing that has no connection with their traditional architecture. The planners do not appear to care about the proper planning of villages and we are losing the traditional face and streetscapes of our small villages. Such streetscapes created a great deal of character and were one reason people came to visit Ireland. Although traditional village architecture is part of our culture, we are losing it as new buildings are in no way integrated with it. If one goes to France, one sees how they have retained the streetscapes and traditional architecture of their towns and villages. We could learn from them.

With regard to social centres where people can meet each other, I know one can build community centres, but not every community in the country can afford to build one or have the leaders to do so. There are primary schools strategically located throughout rural Ireland and because so many of them are strategically spread geographically at a certain distance from each other, they should be seen as community resource centres in the evenings. Facilities should be provided in the school where there is a sports hall which could be used by the school by day and the community at night. It is very simple and works in certain places. I have seen it working and do not see why it could not work throughout the country.

As a rural Deputy, I worry about rural areas. The emphasis has been taken off rural areas and the enthusiasm and dynamic that existed in the 1990s and the early days of the Leader programme do not seem to exist now. I say this looking at it in a sense as an outsider who observes what is taking place in rural areas. A number of small artisan food industries, such as those developed under the Leader programme at the time, and other small enterprises no longer exist. It would be useful if an audit of small enterprises that were funded through the Leader programme or by other means were carried out to see how many that existed ten years ago still exist. I would say very few do.

Towns that had traditional farm markets should be encouraged to revive these markets. It creates a market for rural communities and allows a different type of farmer to get back into farming. This could involve growing vegetables or producing cheeses. There is an opportunity to bring back some excitement and activity to a town or village, which should possibly be emphasised by Irish Rural Link.

Deputy O’Shea

I welcome the delegation from Irish Rural Link. I found its presentation to be forthright, based on real issues and problems and, very importantly, positive. Listening to the debate, it struck me that if I were at the stage at which many young people are, namely, filling out their CAO forms, and were living in rural Ireland, what would entice me to decide to remain there? What would keep me there? It is not an easy question to answer.

On the one hand, we can be very pessimistic, but there are trends evident. I represent a constituency with a large urban centre in Waterford and a large county town in Dungarvan. There is quite a small village in west Waterford where I understand a planning application for approximately 70 houses is being submitted. People who are near to urban centres where there is employment will, where they can, set down roots in rural communities.

Another issue that impacts on rural areas is people coming from the new EU states, a number of whom have backgrounds in agriculture. We talk about an ageing population. While this may have quite a positive effect in terms of the age profile of our population, it brings other issues to bear as well, for instance, the language issue and providing for that. We all face issues in areas where we have older populations who can become quite isolated. It is almost a cliché to talk about the closure of post offices, Garda stations, schools and, more ominously, shops. The competition between shops and larger stores in larger areas is a problem. It is all right if one has a car and can drive to the nearby town to do one's shopping. It is not quite so easy if one does not have a population. The rural transport initiative has been helpful in this regard and the expansion of this initiative will be useful.

I attended a meeting yesterday which dealt with quite a different subject, namely, the cost for older people of heating their poorly insulated homes in rural areas. I believe the guidelines are that if the cost of fuel is above 10% of one's income, one is paying too much for it. People in rural areas can have access to timber and wood. On the other hand, if one is old, one is not as useful or active in terms of cutting up wood into suitable lengths.

I listened to the former director of Teagasc, Dr. Liam Downey, at the opening of a biodiversity laboratory in Waterford recently. He quoted a figure relating to the number of full-time farmers in the foreseeable future, which was quite frightening when one considered the number of them before. This side of living in rural areas is in decline.

Deputy Deenihan spoke about broadband which, in theory, has lot of potential because it allows entry into new-style technological industries where the actual location does not matter once one has the broadband connection. The country's record on the roll-out of broadband in general is quite appalling, not least in rural areas. For a long period I had a great deal of faith in what could be generated by way of employment in this respect but I am certainly nowhere near as optimistic now.

I was Minister of State with responsibility for food for a period and one of the areas I looked to was alternative industries. These were the niche food industries to which Deputy Deenihan referred. A problem is presented by the high entry costs into this type of industry which are much higher than normal. One has hygiene and other standards to maintain. I saw it in the case of an operation in the west where a good product was being produced but the operation could not expand because of the lack of access to three-phase electricity. Getting this connection required moving three miles away from where the person lived. Part of the issue was that this man's wife did the packing of the product at times that suited her. She had young children so when they did not require her attention at any given time, she applied herself. This economy would be lost if the operation went elsewhere.

This is a small illustration of the problems in this respect. Good quality products can be produced, but the issue lies is having the infrastructure whereby people can produce the product and get it to the market because distribution is also a difficult issue. Some of the large food co-operatives are positive about helping people in this regard and, with discussion, they can make their distribution systems available.

How effective has the input of the Leader programme been in general? In what ways could the programme be expanded to be more effective in capacity building in rural areas?

Regarding planning and developing settlements in rural areas, houses can be built not too far from centres of employment. The people who go to live there do not earn their living there, but they put life and skills back into the community. Community and other organisations allow a sense of community to develop which can be of benefit to older people.

No one would disagree with the list of seven problems outlined by our guests. Given the Leader programme and the involvement of the Departments of Agriculture and Food and Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, is there a loss of focus and momentum, as other speakers have hinted? Is there a more effective way to harness resources?

I take Mr. Boland's point that while 59% of the population live in the area covered by the report, only 6% of EU funding goes towards rural development specifically. As we will never have enough resources, we must make the best use of what we have. Given that more are required, how can we centralise the rolling out of the current or an enhanced level of resources in the most effective and efficient way to bring the greatest benefit to rural Ireland?

Craft industries prosper to an extent in some parts of the country and turn out products of the highest calibre. How can this sector be expanded? I do not know how much scope is left in that regard, but tourism has more scope for expansion. A vexed issue which I hope will reach a conclusion shortly is that of hillwalking. I remember carrying out research into what would entice French people to visit Ireland. It was surprising to learn how many would be attracted by being able to walk in the quiet of the mountains. There are two sides to the issue that must be addressed, but there is potential for developing tourism.

The last figure given to the committee on bed and breakfast accommodation which used to be a means of providing good quality accommodation in areas outside the main urban centres indicates that the current generation which will inherit the tourism industry is not inclined to take up something so time-consuming. Cheap flights attract many tourists to Dublin where they stay. The last figure indicates a 20% decline in the bed and breakfast sector.

While there are problems, I would like to emphasise the positives. The structural issue is of most concern. Do we have the structures in place to get the best from what we have?

Senator Ó Murchú

I welcome the representatives from Irish Rural Link and compliment it on its work. That it is affiliated with approximately 300 groups is impressive, as that lobby which is powerful in its own right is as important today as it was in the difficult times of 50 years ago.

There is a perception abroad that the urban lobby, as a result of being more vocal and closer to the decision makers, is more effective, which became clear in the light of the announcement this week that Knock Airport had succeeded in establishing a transatlantic air service. When I saw Monsignor Horan in a flashback celebrating the opening of the airport, I remembered what he had gone through on the "Late Late Show" many years ago. He was criticised for even daring to contemplate requiring finance from central government to establish an airport in what was called a soggy, boggy part of Ireland. He stated he was a simple parish priest as mentioned on television recently, but we all know that he did not fit the definition of "simple". The clear point he made was that the cost of building an airport at Knock would be less than providing a DART carriage in Dublin and maintaining its infrastructure. There is no question that he was right, but the central point of the debate was whether rural Ireland should have expected such services whereas urban Ireland, particularly Dublin, expected them as a right. For this reason, lobby groups such as Irish Rural Link are needed.

The challenges facing rural Ireland are no less daunting, but they are different from those we faced 50 years ago. When one travelled through the west, one could see homesteads with falling roofs and padlocked doors. There was a good possibility that one would meet some of the former owners in the Bronx, New York, London or Manchester. That was the prevailing economic climate.

I am a co-founder of the Irish Rural Dwellers Association. An argument we have always made is that at the very time when people want to live in rural Ireland or, having returned from abroad and made their money, settle in the areas from whence they left, they meet planning difficulties. I compliment the Government on the latest guidelines, but they are not being interpreted in keeping with their spirit. Family members cannot build on their farms, which is unacceptable. No one questions some of the planning codes that apply in the cities which are way out, but there is an opinion that rural Ireland should be maintained as a big picnic venue for the urban travellers who visit on a Sunday and say what a great experience it is. The fact that it is the habitat of more than one third of the population is forgotten.

These fundamental issues must be addressed. There are also human rights issues involved, as it is not just a matter of the interpretation of legislation. The people of rural Ireland were the custodians of the land at a time when it was not profitable to be so. While we all speak about the environment now, they were its custodians, kept it clean and maintained that legacy intact for future generations.

There will always be a need for a body such as Irish Rural Link to act not just as a watchdog but as a motivator. The latter is more important than the former. Our guests were right to focus on the national strategy because it will be taken for granted and, before we know it, implemented. Someone should keep an eye on the plan.

I wish to touch on a number of issues. Rural Ireland has certain assets that urban Ireland does not always have, particularly in respect of our heritage. Many of our great national interests and assets are to be found in rural Ireland, including tourist attractions. One of the difficulties is that catering and accommodation is not available. I agree with Deputy O'Shea that the situation regarding bed and breakfast accommodation is worrying. These were a classic example of what people could do for themselves, providing a service different from that of five star hotels. They were successful and offered the opportunity for people to live with a family and experience warmth and hospitality. Hotels have reduced prices and now compete with bed and breakfast accommodation. My recommendation is to examine the tax situation because these establishments are so important to tourism and rural Ireland. The owners may work for 14 hours per day yet they are still paying tax as if it is a normal job. The amount invested is forgotten.

A licence should be made available to allow bed and breakfast accommodation to sell alcohol. People who like a drink at night may opt for the hotel if the prices are similar because of the facility to drink. Just because this idea is different does not make it radical. It would assist the bed and breakfast accommodation industry.

The challenges that face rural Ireland are different from those of the past but assistance can be provided if sufficient people can make use of it. Knock airport is a shining example of this, as is the Tipperary institute, which had no blueprint from which to work. It was a new concept that is now providing courses relevant to a rural area. The challenge of the past was emigration. Today, people are living in rural Ireland and travelling by car or train to another town or city. This has a bearing on the fabric of the community. One does not hear the voices of children in rural Ireland because most are in crèches and parents are at work. I have a small house in a rural area and have remarked that one no longer hears the music of children's voices during the day. Our style of living has changed and we must examine the responses to that change.

The number of fingers in the pie ensures that we do not get a cohesive answer to our problems. There are means to help the situation. A number of measures have been suggested under education and there is no reason every educational facility should be in urban areas. We should examine small education initiatives in rural areas on the basis of keeping the community intact.

Cottage industries have come under a certain amount of attack. On the other hand, many of the 900 exhibits at a recent trade fair in the RDS could be categorised as cottage industries. These included sculptors and those who make brooches and badges. These industries are important to tourism because they are high quality and tourists visit to see them. We must make it clear that assistance, finance and agencies are available but a missing link remains. We must take two steps back from the bigger policies to examine other options.

We often see people flying a kite to the effect that FÁS is under pressure and may disappear. I remember exaggerating the case by stating that if FÁS disappears rural Ireland will close down. It is one of the pragmatic agencies that could adapt to each community. No agency has achieved more than FÁS and any discussion that it should be diluted is counterproductive to today's discussion. Its functions of training and maintaining community amenities should be upgraded.

Irish Rural Link enjoys good relations with Government agencies. Is there a monitoring process between Irish Rural Link and Government agencies on issues affecting rural Ireland? Can Irish Rural Link influence, advise and ensure the right decision is made?

Chairman

I was interested in the remark about the French Commissioner who asked what subsidies were available to a rural hairdresser. It reminded me of my time as convenor of the Joint Committee on Health and Children. The Irish Nurses Organisation used to complain that nurses would not remain in Dublin because they did not receive enough money to compensate for living in the expensive Dublin region. Any profession in rural Ireland can argue that it needs the special support that farmers receive. If one pays people to remain in rural areas while others seek compensation for living in Dublin, one ends up compensating everyone by degree. That comment revealed that farmers are receiving subsidies but committee members have heard the other side to the argument, namely, that the urban centres of Dublin or Cork are more expensive. The delegation may respond to the points made and come to some conclusions.

Mr. Boland

I thank the Chairman and members for their comments. I have always been impressed by committee members' commitment to the rural cause, which is appreciated. The mothers of Ireland are deciding rural policy because key decisions are being made now. One woman spoke of two children, one of whom wishes to be a farmer and the other a bricklayer. She advised them to choose whatever they are good at but cautioned that the farmer could depend on State payments for 90% of income whereas a bricklayer is on his own. Families in rural Ireland are making decisions and express these opinions at meetings with Irish Rural Link. They want their children to have as good an education as possible but sometimes the education is too good and they need to leave the rural area. The dearth of an economy in the rural area is what must be addressed. I am optimistic that there are opportunities. One person who employs six people not only grows produce and sells it, he also imports it. However, he will not receive one penny under the strategy under the Leader programme or from anywhere else. Our point is that the strategy misses imaginative thinking. If one examines the figures, one sees the same characters, including Teagasc, receive funding. I do not begrudge them this. However, funding is provided to continue what was done before but which no longer works. That is the trouble. People involved in rural businesses or using land will not receive encouragement from the document.

We are all aware of the new cohesion process, whereby each county or region will receive the same funding to run Leader and partnership processes. The role played by the Leader programme must be applauded. Economic assistance for groups or individuals has been provided under it. Owing to the regulations governing funding, in some cases as little as 15% has gone towards capacity building and community development.

I take Senator Ó Murchú's point on FÁS. I have also stated it. In the mid-1990s, if a village did not have a FÁS sign, it was probably dead. Through its training not only of young people but also community groups FÁS did an enormous amount to promote activity. I also take the point made about our membership. Most of our members began through a FÁS scheme. Jobs provided through groups in Mullaghmeen or Mountmellick began with a FÁS training programme. We argue this is missing from the strategy and must be reconstituted. Rural village communities will develop their own strategies and employment initiatives. However, if the fundamental support given by FÁS does not continue it will not happen. They will look to Dublin for industry rather than create their own.

Irish Rural Link argues people must live in rural Ireland. It is not sustainable if they do not. That is the reality. We proposed the establishment of a rural housing commission which would not alone examine planning issues, which are extremely controversial and important, but also the overall provision of housing and services. It would put in place rural planners. Most planners in rural Ireland are urban trained and work in that way. We argue this is a major deficit in the planning system. Our request for the establishment of a rural housing commission is still on the table. In a short-term sitting it should examine how we take on board settlement requirements in rural Ireland without damaging the environment and ensure people live there.

Repeatedly we ask questions on sewerage. It would take very little to deal with the septic tanks which cause problems. This can be solved. No rural dweller wants to pollute.

Senator Ó Murchú

I must excuse myself as a vote has been called in the Seanad.

Mr. Boland

I hope I have not delayed anyone.

Chairman

A vote was called on the Order of Business in the Seanad. We can either suspend or continue. It is best to continue.

Mr. Boland

We raised the issue of tourism and hillwalking on many occasions. It is hoped Comhairle na Tuaithe, the walkways group established by the Minister, will develop it. We were at the forefront on this issue.

The Chairman asked about the Department. We strongly welcomed its creation. It is new and must live in the shadow of agriculture, which is the reality with this document. Perhaps the Minister cannot state this but we can. We have respect for the Minister who has an open door policy. We proposed rural proofing. He argues he is a rural proofer at Cabinet level, which we accept.

It is for the Government to decide how to allocate moneys and carry out its business. A strong Department leading with passion, strength and support at Cabinet level will always be in the best position to drive policy forward. The local authority system has many advantages. However, by their nature, local authorities lack certain powers. Often, they must rely on central government. It can be difficult to co-ordinate funding activities.

Our fundamental position is that if we are to develop a sustainable rural Ireland, farming must begin to sustain itself rather than be dependent on the taxpayer. Those in the wider economy who do not want to farm must want to live in their own areas and have employment opportunities there. Transport, apart from that provided within the area, would become less of a problem. We must examine the rural economy and accept what all reports state, namely, that agriculture in its present form will not do the business. We must develop it and other types of economic activity. With €7 billion to spend, this is a missed opportunity.

Mr. Smyth

Rural Ireland has one extremely strong asset in the people living there, particularly those born into it. During the years people have moved off after unsuccessful planning applications on their own land or for other reasons such as education or obtaining a better job in Dublin or abroad. It is important to create a rural planning initiative to allow people from rural areas remain there and work from home.

Training such as vocational training in rural areas is significant. It is important to know what are the needs of an area, compile the information and provide training. The Leader programmes are good. However, it would be better if there was more intermingling with people in rural areas rather than merely placing ads in newspapers to state what is being done.

Chairman

The consolidation of rural partnership which has started will have a major impact. The Minister has rural development at his heart, never mind his portfolio. Developments such as three-phase electricity projects in the CLÁR programme are being driven. I live in a rural area but have a Black Berry, so I can read my e-mails regardless of whether I am in Dublin or at home. Technology is progressing and, as I am aware from my own region, people are returning to rural areas. Admittedly, they expect the same standards as they have experienced in urban centres and there is some way to go in that respect.

I enjoyed the comments made on sewerage schemes because controversy has arisen at home on that issue, not because the Department does not have the money but due to NIMBY attitudes. I have battled for an increase in the group sewerage scheme grant to the level of the group water scheme grants in order to reduce the numbers of septic tanks installed.

As Deputy O'Shea would agree, if Mr. Boland had not made clear at the start of his presentation that he was not here to discuss the rural drink link, this meeting would have attracted a full attendance. In some respects, it is sad that rural issues are most sexy when they are associated with issues pertaining to vintners. However, given that we are linked to every monitor in the Dáil and Seanad offices, we might not be as alone as it appears. We need to recognise that rural people deserve strong representation in the Oireachtas and that rural development is not just about bringing people to and from the pub. People also want to get their pensions, go shopping and meet friends.

I am delighted that the representatives of Irish Rural Link took the time to present their case to this committee. It would be valuable to send a report of the meeting to the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. When we meet the Minister to debate the Estimates, we may set aside time to address this issue because it would allow us an opportunity to offer him support at the Cabinet table. This committee is united with regard to pushing this cause and we are fully aware that farming is not as strong as it was in the past. I used to say there were three Fs in my area, fishing, farming and Fruit of the Loom. I will not put the other part of that phrase on record, except to say they are all gone.

We want to live in rural Ireland, so we agree with the ideas raised today and respect the fact that the bigger picture was discussed rather than the trendier option of mass appeal. I guarantee that we will be pursuing these issues on behalf of Irish Rural Link by helping the Minister to push the door. The Chair is not supposed to be partisan but I believe the current Minister is committed to the sectors he represents.

The joint committee adjourned at 4.25 p.m. sine die.