The quality of the work will depend very much on the board and the way it approaches its work and I have great confidence in that matter. The amount of money being provided is very important because for the first time we will have a board with significant backing in financial terms to undertake its tasks.
I was a little surprised at the reaction of the Opposition to the Bill. I had presumed that a measure which is aimed at improving the lot of the poor and the disadvantaged would have received unambiguous support in this House. I want to make it clear that everything of substance contained in the previous proposal has been carried forward into this Bill. However, that is a matter that can be taken further on Committee Stage.
The Bill has been criticised on the ground that it has relegated poverty to a minor position and that it has promoted the position of community. Of course that is not true. The elimination of poverty and inequality remains the primary objective of the Bill. A number of Deputies raised the question of the absence of the word "inequality" in the functions of the agency and they tried to suggest that the Government do not accept that inequality exists in our society. I want to reject that suggestion. The Government are well aware of the great differences that exist between the haves and havenots in our society. It was in recognition of that fact and of the need for a co-ordinated national programme to tackle inequality that led us to propose the establishment of this agency. It is only fair to point out that our party have always accepted the reality of poverty and inequality and have worked consistently to bring about their elimination.
Most of the major social welfare advances of our time were made by Fianna Fáil. We gave everyone the opportunity to avail of free second level education. We abolished the out-dated dispensary system and introduced the choice of doctor scheme. We developed the pay-related social insurance scheme and brought about substantial improvements in all social welfare benefits. It is against this background that the proposals to establish this agency were developed. The ultimate objective of the agency then is quite clearly to eliminate poverty and social deprivation and to ensure equal opportunity for all in so far as this is possible.
It is clear from what I have said that inequality is at the very root of poverty and social deprivation. I would like to assure Deputies that the omission of the word "inequality" from the Bill is not an oversight, nor is it due to any sense of complacency or lack of commitment to the elimination of inequality. The term has not been used because I am advised that it is too vague and ambiguous to be enshrined in the legislation. I am sure it is for this reason that the word "inequality" did not appear in the draft scheme of the combat poverty agency Bill which was being prepared by the former Coalition Government. Presumably they were also advised of the unsuitability of the word in the drafting of the Bill.
I want to repeat that nowhere in the functions proposed for the Coalition's agency did the word "inequality" appear and I am sure that Deputies Flaherty and Desmond can confirm this. The changes in phraseology between the Coalition Government's proposals and the Bill before the House today are due to two main reasons. The Coalition's proposals were still at drafting stage and had not been subjected to the normal tidying up process which is required by the parliamentary draftsman. Our Bill has been through this process and the way in which the functions are expressed has had to be altered to obviate any misunderstanding or looseness in drafting. The second reason is that we have adopted a different approach to the conduct of the agency's work. The Coalition were content to allow their agency to operate in a vacuum. We are determined that our agency will have the full support of the community and that it will work with and through communities and that it will help to develop communities and community activity where this does not exist already. This is an area in which there was considerable difference of opinion about the intentions of the Bill. It is certainly our intention to use, as far as possible, local community based effort and to encourage and foster that effort and to promote it because we believe that this will be one of the most substantial and important factors in overcoming poverty within our society. Indeed it reminds me that a number of Deputies raised the question of poverty being mentioned in a limited sense and not wanting to involve it with community development. But one of the mottoes used by those who work in Third World countries has been that if one gives a man a fish he will live for a day but if he is taught how to fish he will be able to supply himself for the rest of his life. Obviously the question in community development is to encourage and support people in helping themselves — this is where self-help comes in — and to assist them in overcoming their difficulties. As Deputy Higgins made quite clear, I also pointed out in my initial speech that this was not to suggest that one would solely rely on that method and that in many instances it may be necessary to use other direct approaches.
Deputies have suggested that the agency will spread their energies instead of concentrating them on the most deprived areas. This, of course, is not the intention. I intend that the agency should concentrate their efforts in the most deprived areas as a matter of priority. But I would not agree with limiting their functions so that they cannot extend beyond that because the communities involved may be communities of elderly people. Here again Deputy Higgins recognised this point and welcomed it in the Bill. The communities being talked about may not necessarily be localised communities but may be communities of the elderly spread throughout society generally or communities of the disabled or other kinds of communities. It is certainly our intention that priority will be given to the most deprived groups and the most deprived areas. Indeed, section 4 (1) (c) gives the agency the task of identifying these areas and groups which have a high level of poverty and social deprivation. That is actually one of the tasks which was set into the functions to identify and specify these areas so that the resources can be channelled in that direction. It clearly follows that the agency's activities will be directed at the most deprived areas. This is what the Government's intention is and that is what I, as Minister, will ensure in the operation of the agency.
A number of Deputies drew attention to the fact that there was no direct reference to combating poverty. Deputies Desmond and Flaherty were concerned at the omission of reference to the functions of the agency, to the National Committee on Pilot Schemes to Combat Poverty. I would like to point out that as their very first function the agency are required to advise the Minister on policies and programmes in relation to poverty and in so doing they would be completely free to make whatever studies they consider necessary so that they may advise the Minister and the Government on the programmes which are necessary to combat poverty. In that respect the agency will be free to draw on the work of the combat poverty agency and on any other experiences or research when formulating their advice. I do not, therefore, feel that it is necessary specifically to mention combating poverty in the Bill.
I would also like to make clear the fact that as Minister previously, before the change of Government, I had already set about a process of changing the nature of the National Social Services Board. Shortly before we went out of office we had introduced the National Social Services Board and had reduced the size of the board and strengthened it and it was our intention to go on in that direction and, ultimately, to give it a statutory function. Now this agency will give the full satutory powers to the body and it is a further step in the process which was already taking place before we left Government.
The pilot schemes to combat poverty grew out of the EEC movement to eliminate poverty at both Community and local level. The Deputies here will be aware that the EEC programme came to an end in 1980, having been extended two years previously to November 1980 and it again got a further extension to December 1980 when it came to an end finally. It was I who suggested, at the meeting of Social Affairs Ministers in the EEC, that a review should be carried out of the work which had been undertaken by the combat poverty groups in the different member states and that on the basis of this review the Community should decide what its future policy would be in this area. That suggestion was accepted and that review has been got under way. The Council very recently discussed a report from the Commission and decided that a full examination should be made both at national and community level of the various assessments and guidelines which had been contained in the work previously done. The Council then directed that a report of the examination be undertaken at Community level and should be back to the Social Affairs Ministers as soon as possible. That is the position as of just a couple of weeks ago and the situation is still progressing. I would certainly hope that the European Community, through its social affairs committee and the Council of Ministers on Social Affairs, will proceed with further assistance and aid in this area and that the new agency will be able to avail of this assistance in carrying on the kinds of work involved in combating poverty in the different member states.
The commission's report provides a sound basis for the development of the next phase in the battle against poverty. A further anti-poverty plan will emerge which will benefit from the lessons learned from the first five years of the anti-poverty programme. This cannot fail to be more effective than the first programme, having learned from the experiences and shortcomings of that programme.
There is still a lot of work to be done, but the war against poverty and all forms of basic social inequality and deprivation can be won provided there is sufficient political and administrative determination. It is not just a matter of legislative proposals; it is also a question of the political commitment, the administrative ability and the ingenuity of the administration. I hope the new agency will be innovative in their approach, that they will not be afraid to undertake new methods and approaches and that they will be administratively effective in the way they approach these problems. It is the administrative effectiveness which ultimately will have the biggest effect on the usefulness of the agency as a whole. That is something we cannot legislate for. It depends on the board of the new agency, the management, board membership and staff.
In this society it is not merely a question of a conflict over values or philosophies. All parties are agreed that we should urgently take steps to combat poverty and undertake programmes which will improve the lot of those in poor circumstances, but we must decide how to go about this in the most effective way. Therefore, it is more a matter of administrative organisation and the manipulative skills of those who challenge the system and seek change. I would like to applaud the EEC's further initiatives. This country will be playing a leading part in structuring and implementing the new programme the EEC are working on at present.
It has been asked why this agency should be under the aegis of the Department of Health. There are many good reasons why this was done. I was surprised that Deputy Mitchell did not seem to realise that a good deal of welfare work is carried out through the health boards under the aegis of the Department of Health. The Deputies who were critical of our approach may not realise that in my first term as Minister for Health I established within the Department a new welfare division, headed by an assistant secretary, which has responsibility for developing policies for the whole range of disadvantaged groups within our society — the poor, the deprived, the elderly, children, the disabled, travellers, victims of family violence, single parent families, unmarried mothers and other groups who through no fault of their own find themselves in difficult circumstances. I find it strange that a number of Deputies should suggest that this agency should be attached to another Department. Policies and programmes in relation to poverty span the whole range of Government activities. In my view, and for the reasons I have just outlined, the Department of Health are the best organised and the best equipped to co-ordinate activities in this area.
A number of Deputies raised the question of confidentiality and queried the need for section 17, which deals with confidentiality. This is a standard provision in Acts establishing bodies of this nature. The saver clause of section 17(3) clearly provides that the agency's day to day work will not be affected or restricted in any way. The purpose of the provision is not to hinder but to facilitate the agency. Much of the work of the agency, especially in the area of research, will be concerned with the development of Government policy and the analysis of existing State services. If the staff of the agency are to be given access to sensitive information, it is necessary that they should be subject to the normal requirements of confidentiality. If this section were to be removed there is the danger that some agencies would be reluctant to provide the new agency with the information they require. As I see it, this section will help rather than hinder the agency in the performance of their functions.
Two points have been raised concerning the National Social Services Board — first the question of the consultation with members and staff and, secondly the desirability of transferring the functions and staff of the board to the new agency. As regards prior consultation, I informed the chairman of the National Social Services Board what was proposed before the circulation of the Bill. At the same time officials of my Department briefed the director of the board. However, I felt obliged to request the chairman and the director not to disclose the proposals until the Bill had been presented to the House. In the same way I feel it is my duty as a legislator to come before the House and discuss the proposals before I enter into consultations with the staff. I have indicated already to the chairman and director of the board that I will be very happy to enter into consultations in relation to the staff once the Bill has passed through the Houses. I made it clear in my opening speech that the existing terms and conditions of the staff will be protected and that the new arrangement will provide them with a greater degree of security than they have enjoyed up to this time.
The proposal to assimilate the board into the agency is designed to obviate any duplication of effort and any ambiguity between the functions of the board and those of the agency. The two principal functions of the board at present are, first, to support community information centres and, second, to act as a resource centre for the development of voluntary social services. Both of these functions are clearly appropriate to the agency if it is to help people to understand and avail of the services and supports which are available to them, to assist groups to develop their areas and to improve the position of the underprivileged. The present functions of the board are natural functions of the new agency and have been incorporated within the functions of the new agency. In this respect the chairman and director of the board are fully familiar with the situation and are happy that their present functions will be included in the new agency. Therefore, I consider the most practical approach is to dissolve the board and to transfer their functions and responsibilities to the new agency.
A number of Deputies raised the question of the definition of "self-help" and were concerned at its inclusion. All the functions included in the original draft Bill are included in this Bill, and other functions have been added. The words "self-help" raise some concern among Deputies. I accept the views of the Deputies that some of the terms such as "self help" and "community development", used in the Bill may be interpreted in a broad sense. In relation to "self-help" I accept Deputy Desmond's point that many disadvantaged persons would not have the ability to help themselves, but it is important to recognise that these people do not wish to accept what they would regard as interference by wellmeaning outsiders. In effect, they want to help themselves but they want to be given the assistance, resources backing and support they need.
Material handouts and attempts by outsiders at imposing structures are not particularly desired by them. They need and want self-reliance, self-esteem and the dignity due to ordinary human beings. With the right approach from trained community workers, there is motivation to help oneself, one's community, family, neighbours or whatever the group may be to get a job, organise a project, start a small industry or try to achieve the particular aim. There are objectives which can be instilled through the operation of self-help, with the backing and support of members of the community.
Community workers are, therefore, prime motivators when assisting communities to engage in self-help exercises. One fact which emerges from the reports of the combat poverty programmes is the input necessary in certain areas to enable people to help themselves. In effect, it meant longer, greater and more specialised support. However, having been given that support, people became able to handle their own environment and their own particular difficulties. The degree of support could subsequently be lessened and those people, in turn, were able to help others at that stage.
Community workers are primarily concerned with assisting communities to identify their needs and objectives and to take appropriate action to ensure that needs are defined and objectives met. In other words, they also engage in self-help. This is the normal procedure of community workers. Where people are deprived, poor and powerless, it is vital that strategies are developed to encourage their fuller participation in decisions which affect their lives. This came through again and again from the pilot studies on combating poverty, where people became involved in determining their own needs and could work towards the alleviation of their problems. This enhanced their participation as members of society on a wider basis.
In situations where people are deprived or alienated from the wider community, it is important that initiatives be taken by local leaders to employ personnel to stimulate participation. It is also important that such leaders look to their own delivery of service and organisation to ensure that no alienation from the group to be helped occurs. A high level of openness and opportunity for participation in decision-making by the client community must be facilitated. This agency, far from taking over, so to speak, in the community, will play such a facilitating and supporting role.
Another area about which Deputies were quite concerned was the area of community development. As Deputy Higgins pointed out yesterday, the word `community' is open to many interpretations. As far as its inclusion in the Bill is concerned in the sense of community development, the strength of the term lies in that very openness to wide interpretation. My concern is to ensure that this agency will not be hampered in carrying out its function by difficulties which narrow definitions would bring. The term `community development' is used in the Bill primarily to describe work at neighbourhood level. It is seen as a process by which local communities are helped to assess their needs and plan collective action to meet them.
The emphasis is on self-help and the maximum involvement of people themselves in the planning and provision of services and amenities. An essential part of the process is the structuring of a representative organisational framework like the community association which enables people to act collectively on their own behalf. This neighbourhood organisation is often linked to a more broadly based structure catering for a wider geographical area. At both levels of organisation, representations from statutory agencies are particularly valuable. There is some difference of opinion as to the terms of the definition. It is suggested by Deputies that we have defined these areas somewhat more broadly and I agree with that interpretation. We have purposely made the definition broader so as not to limit the agency in any way.
I could point to the work of the combat poverty group and take one of the studies which they did. The combat poverty group commissioned a study on the elderly, published under the title of "Old and Alone". The greatest problem they found throughout the country for the elderly was that of loneliness. It is quite obvious that overcoming the problem of loneliness requires community involvement. How we describe the community may be different for each of us. However, if we go into particular communities and see them in action, this is the kind of care and involvement which we wish to encourage. We would not like to describe the functions of the agency in the Bill in such a way as to exclude this community care, action and involvement.
Deputy Flaherty mentioned giving the agency teeth, apart from the financial aspect. She recognised that in section 4 (4) we have again given an additional provision of particular importance. This provision gives the agency teeth which the previous draft body did not have. Section 4 (4) states:
A statutory body may and, where the Minister having statutory responsibility for it so directs, shall co-operate with the Agency in the performance of its functions.
If that is not giving the agency real teeth, I do not know how one is supposed to do so. That is a direct way in which the statutory agencies can be brought under the support of the programmes of the National Community Development Agency. It is specifically laid down statutorily and is one of the elements which give real teeth to this agency. I am particularly happy to be associated with the establishment of this new agency because for a long time we have needed a body like this, with the resources and statutory powers.
Deputy Mitchell suggested that this agency would be coming virtually within the health boards and would be lost in the whole morass of the health services. In effect, this is an independent statutory agency, which will relate directly to the Minister and to the Department and not directly to the health boards. It is an agency with a considerable strength which has never been seen before, even in the previous draft Bill. It also has the flexibility to undertake any measures which Members of the House would see it undertaking. We are all agreed on the work which it should pursue. We are certainly concerned that this will be pursued with the priorities being allocated to the most deprived groups and areas, but also to the other bodies operating in the area. That is a matter for priority selection by the agency itself, once established.
In conclusion, I thank the numerous Deputies who contributed to the Second Stage discussion on this Bill. If they reflect on the functions and measures included in the Bill, they will recognise that all previous measures have been included, and there has been some broadening and the allowance of some additional flexibility in the Bill, which can only leave the agency with the power to undertake work in some of the other areas which we feel quite certain they will need to undertake, if not immediately, certainly in the near future.
Some Deputies raised the question of research and the fact that the body is empowered to evaluate and collate and to provide resources and funds for research. I accept, as was said by a number of Deputies, that a considerable amount of research has been done, perhaps not always directed specifically towards the key objectives which the agency or the Combat Poverty Group might have had in mind. In that sense I can see research will be necessary, directed very specifically towards deprived groups or deprived areas, and not of an academic nature.
For this reason the agency is given the power to be involved in this way. At the same time it is not seen as a research body. It is not seen as establishing a sort of super-structure as some people feared. It is seen as a small, centralised resource group which will facilitate, encourage and grant-aid, both by way of current and capital grant, the various bodies operating in this field. It will also foster, initiate and undertake trials in areas where this becomes necessary. We hope it will co-ordinate many of the efforts which are not well co-ordinated.
This aspect is spelled out fairly clearly in the functions. It will be in a position to bring the activities of the various statutory agencies in areas to bear on problems which are regarded as high priority by the agencies. All in all, within the functions there is plenty of flexibility. There is plenty of meat. There are teeth which never existed before. I am privileged to be able to bring this Bill before the House. I look forward to the early establishment of the agency so that it can set about tackling urgently some of the most immediate priorities which we all know exist. I would welcome a fairly speedy passage through both Houses of the Oireachtas so that we can establish the agency and put it to work in the way Deputies would like to see it working.
