asked the Minister for Social Welfare the position regarding the further funding of the Coolock community law centre.
2.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Coolock (Dublin) Community Law Centre.
1.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he has accepted the recommendation made by the interim combat poverty committee that Coolock community law centre should receive interim funding until the full agency is established; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
3.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the arrangements being made to provide funding to ensure that Coolock law centre remains open.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1, 2 and 3 together. Funding was provided by my Department to the Coolock Community Law Centre to the extent of £41,000 in 1983 and £45,000 in 1984.
Pending the establishment of the Combat Poverty Agency a payment of £15,000 has been made to the centre this year and the question of a further payment is under consideration.
Is the Minister aware that the number of cases coming to the Coolock law centre is constantly increasing? The centre provides an essential service in the absence of State-funded services. Is he aware that the centre has been suffering from inadequate funding for a considerable time? Would he or his Department consider direct financing since it is very obvious that coming within the ambit of the combat poverty scheme will not be adequate to meet the needs of the centre?
These matters will be considered as soon as the Combat Poverty Agency is established. The question of ongoing financing of the centre is meanwhile under consideration.
Does the Minister consider it proper that this law centre has on a number of occasions been on the verge of closure because of the failure to provide permanent financing? Does he not consider it essential that some firm financial basis should be provided for the centre?
It is hoped that with the establishment of the Combat Poverty Agency the question will be put on a firm basis.
Has the Minister of State or the Minister for Social Welfare met the committee of the centre during the past 12 months to discuss their requirements? Does he not consider that the centre is playing an important and useful role in that area where there is an obvious lack of State-funded services of a similar nature?
Would the Minister seriously reconsider the decision — if it is a decision — to place that centre under the Combat Poverty Agency? Many of us would not see that as an appropriate way of dealing with the centre. It is a counselling, guidance and legal advice centre and anybody who knows the centre would not consider it appropriate that it should be brought under the umbrella of a Combat Poverty Agency. It is sui generis that it should be dealt with and funded as a separate type of organisation.
It will be up to the permanent agency to decide whether and to what extent the centre should be funded by the agency. It should not be assumed that the new agency will see it as their function to fund the centre indefinitely.
That reply indicates a very uncertain future for the centre. Would the Minister not accept that, as Deputy Haughey suggests, there should be direct funding for the centre from the Department but perhaps involving also the Department of Justice? Would the Minister not agree that this is an agency which should not come within the realm of the Combat Poverty Agency?
This whole matter raises a number of questions and these questions are ones for the Combat Poverty Agency to sort out.
Is the Minister aware that people would go to this centre genuinely seeking advice of a legal or quasi-legal nature, that they are people who could not be regarded as poverty victims and that therefore to put the matter into a combat poverty context is to misunderstand the whole function and nature of the centre?
The Minister's reply is a cause for concern in that he is indicating that there is no secure future for the Coolock Law Centre. Can he say whether the Government wish this centre to remain in existence and, if so, whether they propose providing funding for it?
Funding for the Coolock Law Centre has continued on an ad hoc basis from 1976 to date. As I have stated already, the question of future payments is under consideration and no final decision on the future of the centre will be made until the Combat Poverty Agency have been set up. The House will be aware that a Bill in that regard is at present before the Seanad so we shall not have too long to wait.
That is a very unsatisfactory reply. In fact, it is not a reply at all.