Vol. 370 No. 14
asked the Minister for Social Welfare how much of the £1 million allocated in the last budget for anti-poverty programmes has been spent so far; if the remaining money will be allocated to combat poverty groups without further delay; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
19.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the current position in relation to expenditure on anti-poverty programmes, including a breakdown on the expenditure on the EC Poverty Programme; the total amount of moneys allocated by the Combat Poverty Agency to various organisations in 1986; and if she will give a breakdown of the number of applicants for funds under this scheme; and the number of applicants sanctioned for moneys under the scheme.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 19 together.
Approximately £270,000 is being spent this year in meeting the Government's share of the costs of projects included in the EC Poverty Programme. I will make available separately a breakdown of the expenditure involved in this case.
It took somewhat longer than expected to set up the Combat Poverty Agency with the result that it has only been in operation since September last. The agency immediately set about identifying projects working in the area of poverty and community development which merit support and encouragement and proposals about these were submitted to me. I was glad to be able to respond positively and speedily and I recently announced that I have approved grants totalling £515,000 to 55 organisations engaged in work relating to poverty on foot of the proposals. I will also make available separately a list of the organisations and the amounts of the grants involved.
There are clearly many more projects and initiatives around the country which the agency will be progressively identifying but in the short period available in the present financial year it has not been possible to go any further. I am satisfied, however, that a good and worthwhile start has been made. For the future I look forward to working out with the agency a programme of ongoing support for projects of this kind.
I understand that £1 million had been allocated in the budget this year to the Combat Poverty Agency once it was established but according to my arithmetic, the Minister has dispensed £785,000. What does the Minister propose to do with the balance of £215,000? Will the Minister indicate why she has given money to 55 organisations or groups that applied and the number of projects submitted to her by the agency? Will the Minister tell the House why the Coolock Law Centre did not get any money although they applied for £5,000?
I cannot answer a question about a specific group and it would have been helpful had the Deputy referred to an individual group in his question. There was a lengthy and useful debate on the legislation establishing that agency and the Deputy, like most Members, was active in that debate. The fact that Members were anxious to tease out all details of the legislation meant that the agency did not hold their first meeting until September. Since then the agency received applications for an enormous number of schemes and they worked very hard to carry out investigations. On 17 November the agency recommended a number of projects to us. As a considerable amount of money was involved my Department had to go through them in detail and then obtain the sanction of the Department of Finance before paying the grants. I understand that almost all the projects submitted by the agency were sanctioned by the Department. I was very pleased they were able to deal with the applications so quickly and that we were able to respond fully to the agency's request. The fact that there was some money left over does not have anything to do with whether the Government want to spend it. We responded quickly to the applications. The money had to be spent this year and I was anxious that those worthwhile projects would be funded as soon as possible. More than £500,000 was paid out to those projects last year and that represents a great achievement by the agency and my Department.
Will the £215,000 left over in the allocation be spent this year or will it be returned to the Exchequer?
The Deputy must be aware that the projects submitted by the agency were responded to and that £515,000 has been paid out in respect of them. I am sure the Deputy is not suggesting that we should expend more public money without evaluating the projects? What is he suggesting we should do with the £215,000?
Is it true that the agency recommended 65 projects for funding? What is the position in regard to the other ten recommended for funding?
I do not have the full total with me. It may be that a few projects were not funded but I should like to assure the Deputy that the amount involved would be a small fraction of the £215,000.
The Minister suggested to Deputy De Rossa that had she been asked for specific information on the number of applications for funds it would have been given. In my question, No. 19. I asked the Minister to give a breakdown of the number of applicants for funds under the scheme and the number of applicants sanctioned for moneys under the scheme. The Minister has told us that 55 groups had projects sanctioned but the Minister has not told us how many groups applied for assistance.
I overlooked that and I will get the information for the Deputy from my notes. I will be making the full list available later. The agency submitted proposals to the Department for grants totalling £515,000 to 55 organisations throughout the country. Those proposals were submitted towards the end of November and I am sure Deputies will agree that, bearing in mind that each project has to be sanctioned by my Department and the Department of Finance, they were dealt with expeditiously. It is understandable that the applications were received late in the day because the agency did not commence work until September. The first batch arrived between 17 and 24 November and the grants were issued on 12 December. Those grants were for once-off projects. The requirement was that the grants should be spent before the end of the year. I understand that the agency, in addition to the 55 applications that were approved, received further applications from 20 other organisations. However, they arrived too late to be evaluated before the end of the year. I am happy that the agency were able to have so many projects approved in a short space of time and I look forward to the work of the agency expanding in future years.
Did the applicants receive the amount recommended by the agency or was it reduced or increased in any way after the agency's recommendation was considered? Why was it necessary for the agency, which was established by the Oireachtas and in which we presumably have confidence, to go to the Department at all to seek permission to spend the money? We understood from the budget that £1 million was being allocated for this purpose.
I do not make any apology for the fact that the Department responsible for collecting taxation and spending it should examine all projects on which public moneys are to be spent. The problem referred to by the Deputy probably arises from the fact that we were very anxious, in the first year of their operation, without a specific budget having been agreed in advance and the agency having been set up so late in the year, to get money out before the end of the year to as many projects as the agency were able to recommend to us. We were still not proceeding as we will be in the future, which will be on a definite budget planned by the agency, all agreed in advance. I expect that there will not be so much checking in the future. This year we were spending a lot of money in a short time, anxious to help people as quickly as possible, and we had to ensure that the money would be spent in the way it was intended. Because there was such a short time, the Department decided to assist the agency and the agency did not have any objection whatever to this co-operation and help.
In view of the consensus that one million people are living in poverty or on the verge thereof, is it not easy to reckon that the £1 million allocated to the agency meant only £1 per head of those living in poverty? Therefore, why did this poverty agency fail to provide the low sum that was allocated, and is it not appalling that the Department have not arranged to allocate even the small amount provided in the budget? It is important that even the £1 million allocated to the poor was not distributed, that £215,000 was left.
That is a comment, not a question.
The Minister has not attempted to answer. There are one million living in poverty and only £800,000 was spent. We on this side facilitated the Government to get the agency Bill through as rapidly as possible. We have been told that 22 late applications went in and should it not have been quite possible for the agency to have exercised their right and allocated the balance to some of those applicants who would have been eligible?
I reject any criticism whatsoever of the agency. I regret very much that the work they have done so speedily and so well in co-operation with the Department since September should have been criticised like this in the House. The Bill setting up the agency was not finalised until the period during the summer recess. We then set about appointing the agency, they met in September and did extremely good work on examining applications quickly and working with us. They did a magnificent job getting out £750,000 for the EC programmes and the combat poverty programmes and a further £750,000 to voluntary organisations. This has meant that this year there has been more help given to people working in the on-the-ground voluntary organisations in combating poverty than in any other year in the history of the State.
That was because so many were unemployed.
The Minister did not respond to my supplementary. Did the Department reduce the money recommended by the agency to any organisation?
I have not got the answer to that. When the Department were satisfied that the full amounts for once-off projects could be expended in the time available they did not interfere in any way with the allocations. The Department would have reduced expenditure not targeted for this year but cases of that were very few.
