Skip to main content
Normal View

Combat Poverty Agency.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 11 November 2008

Tuesday, 11 November 2008

Questions (16, 17)

Richard Bruton

Question:

96 Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way the inclusion of the Combat Poverty Agency with the Office for Social Inclusion will proceed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39381/08]

View answer

Eamon Gilmore

Question:

121 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way she will safeguard the future independence of the Combat Poverty Agency. [39504/08]

View answer

Oral answers (43 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 96 and 121 together.

As Deputies will be aware, the Government's decision to integrate the Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion within my Department was informed by the findings of a review of the Combat Poverty Agency, which was undertaken on foot of a Government decision of 6 June 2007. As the Combat Poverty Agency is established under statute, legislative changes will be required to alter its status. I intend to bring proposals in this regard to the Government in advance of Committee Stage of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008. I do not intend to absorb the Combat Poverty Agency into the Office for Social Inclusion in its existing form. A new strengthened division, which will make the best use of the considerable experience and expertise of the staff of both existing bodies, will be created. The new organisation, which will seek to address the weaknesses in both bodies which were identified in the review, will provide a stronger voice for those affected by poverty and social inclusion issues. An implementation plan has been formulated to provide for the smooth integration of the Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion over the coming months. The detail of the plan will be developed with the expert input of the staff of the agency and the office. It will take account of the findings of the review, particularly relating to the potential of the integrated division to strengthen the performance of both bodies in the areas of research and data.

I am conscious of the concerns about the need for independent scrutiny of public policy that have been expressed by some interest groups. I agree that independent critique is important. This measure is not intended to reduce the scope for such work. As the review report notes, the function of independent reporting on poverty does not depend on the Combat Poverty Agency as much as it did in previous years. This is due to the emergence of other independent data sources such as the statistics on poverty reported by the Central Statistics Office and the independent analysis provided by bodies like the Economic and Social Research Institute, the National Economic and Social Council in Ireland, the European Union and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development overseas. Ireland is well served by the social partners and a wide range of non-governmental organisations and other groups which have a strong voice in the public debate on poverty and related issues. I intend to ask the new division to prioritise the development of procedures to ensure the views of these and other stakeholders, including people experiencing poverty, continue to be available to the Government as it develops and monitors social inclusion strategies.

The role of the Combat Poverty Agency is to draw together the results of its own research and the research conducted by the other bodies mentioned by the Minister. It gives that research an independent voice. It is able to point out the good and bad aspects of Government policy. The failure of the Combat Poverty Agency lies at the door of the Government and its actions over the last 11 years. In an earlier response, the Minister said that the agency's input was not good.

That is what the review said.

Its input was not good because the Government, including the Minister and her predecessors, did not listen to what the agency had to say. Its input would have been good if the Government had actually done something about what it said. Does the Minister realise that the word "poverty" was not mentioned in the terms of reference which were drawn up for the review she is so fond of quoting? How does the Minister intend to ensure the Combat Poverty Agency will be independent when it comes under the Department of Social and Family Affairs? Having listened to how the Minister has answered questions on this matter in the House today, I am more aware than ever of the importance of the agency. The Minister does not appreciate what it is like for people in poverty.

A wide range of groups can make an input into all Government policies. Over many years, successive social welfare Ministers have participated in the pre-budget forum, in which 32 groups express their views. That is a direct input into Government policy.

The Government ignored all of the forum's recommendations, with the exception of a recommendation relating to disability.

The community and voluntary pillar makes a direct input into Government policy. The established mechanisms which are in place work very well.

That is from the Minister's perspective.

I would like to mention the various elements of the Office for Social Inclusion, particularly the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion, which is chaired by the Taoiseach.

It has not met since February.

That committee has examined a wide variety of issues, such as the best way of combatting poverty.

It has not met since February.

It has not met for almost ten months. Does it still exist?

The senior officials group works on a cross-departmental basis. A number of Departments have sections dealing with social inclusion.

The Combat Poverty Agency was able to draw that all together.

When I worked in the Department of Education and Science, the Department's social inclusion unit drove the Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools initiative, which successfully combatted disadvantage.

That initiative has been cut back in the budget as well.

Mechanisms and procedures are in place to provide information. The Combat Poverty Agency will enjoy the best possible future if it is integrated with the Office for Social Inclusion.

Can the Minister tell us how much she expects to save by gagging the Combat Poverty Agency in this manner?

Nobody is gagging anybody.

How much does the Minister expect to save as a result of this move?

I answered that question earlier when I mentioned the figure of €4.6 million, which is how much has been spent on the Combat Poverty Agency.

That is not what I asked.

It is obvious that the staff will be transferred.

I asked the Minister to say how much she expects to save.

It is obvious that negotiations will take place with the staff. We intend to enhance the amount of research we do. That is important. I intend to ensure we have a strategy, mechanism or forum in place to ensure the voices of those who are experiencing poverty are listened to and heard on a regular basis.

Can the Minister stop talking for a second?

I envisage——

Can she answer my question?

I ask Deputy Shortall to allow the Chair to determine who is called to speak.

How much does the Minister expect to save as a result of this move?

I envisage that we will spend more money in some areas, such as research, and far less money in other areas, such as advertising and consultancy.

I ask the Minister to answer the question I asked. How much does she expect to save by shutting down the Combat Poverty Agency, as it is currently constituted?

She does not know.

I have indicated to the Deputy that as soon as we have made the final plans and arrangements——

It is clear the Minister does not know.

I expect to spend a lot more money on some of the more relevant things, such as research.

The decision to close the Combat Poverty Agency was a political one.

We will not pay for more advertising and more consulting.

It was clearly a political decision.

The aim of the review, which has been ongoing for a year and a half, is to ascertain the best mechanism for ensuring the voice of poverty can be heard. This was the recommendation.

The word "poverty" was not even mentioned in the terms of reference of the review.

Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.

Top
Share