I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time". With the permission of the House I should like to share my time with Deputy Therese Ahearn.
Private Members' Business. - Youth Services Bill, 1990: Second Stage.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I am delighted to bring this Bill before the Dáil. It is significant in that it is the first Youth Services Bill to be debated in this House since the foundation of the State. I should like to take this opportunity to thank the National Youth Council of Ireland, the National Youth Federation, Foróige, and all the other organisations which helped and advised me with this Bill. I hope that their interest and time will be rewarded by a generous and positive response from the Minister.
This Bill is introduced to the Dáil as a response to the plight of young people today. When I say "plight" I mean the problems being experienced by our youth population in terms of poor economic performance, mass unemployment and worsening social conditions. Our youth population bears the brunt of all our socio-economic ills. A few hard facts will bring this home to Deputies. Despite the current propaganda that our youth population is very much on the decline and that the problems of youth unemployment will soon die a natural death, the latest census figures show that our youth population remains at 43 per cent, the highest in Europe. Our youth unemployment rate now runs at 27 per cent, a figure which has been on the increase since early 1990, despite the assurances given by economists and Governments that things were improving.
The point to note is that the youth unemployment rate is a massive seven percentage points higher than the ordinary unemployment rate which currently runs at about 20 per cent.
Since 1982, 280,000 people have emigrated. The vast majority of those emigrating are young people between the ages of 18 and 30 years. The waste in terms of loss of human resources is staggering and does not bear thinking about, considering the amount of time, money, effort and dedication put into the training and education of young people. Leaving aside the social implications of emigration, it is a shame that we are at the loss of such a vibrant, educated and useful resource. It could be said that many of our young people have left a bright future behind them. Why have our young people become marginalised in society? Why is the problem of our young people walking the streets without jobs accepted as nothing more than par for the course? These questions must be answered. I hope I can provide a framework in this Bill by which we can all work together to solve these problems.
This Bill is entitled the Youth Services Bill and contains phrases such as "youth work" and "youth services". How can this Bill benefit young people in Ireland today? What is youth work? It is the work carried out by many varied and diverse groups and organisations, including youth and community groups and national and international organisations which involve adults, teenagers and children in developmental programmes designed to better the lot of young people. All youth work has as the cornerstone of its programme and events the emotional, physical, spiritual and intellectual development of the young person. Youth work is not just about arranging youth discos or running jumble sales or sponsored walks. The majority of youth work is carried out with the specific aim of imparting life skills to young people in a coherent and comprehensive manner. Basically youth work is out of school life skills, education for the young person. It is based on an ethos of empowerment for young persons, equipping them for the transition from home and school to adult and working life. It is participatory and is highly developed and sophisticated with its own curriculum, teaching and instruction methods as well as very specific aims and aspirations.
What is the youth service? The youth service in Ireland has developed rapidly since the sixties. There are approximately 52 organisations in this country, ranging from the scouts and guides to the Catholic Youth Council, Foróige, the National Youth Federation and Irish language and environmental groups, including exchange organisations, travellers' groups and the National Youth Council of Ireland, the co-ordinating body for voluntary youth organisations. The youth service, which includes all these voluntary youth organisations and the statutory based organisations, Comhairle le Leas Óige, set up under the auspices of Dublin City Vocational Education Committee, employ approximately 400 full-time youth workers and depend on the involvement of over 40,000 volunteers to help run clubs, drop-in centres and events throughout the country on an ongoing basis. Over 500,000 young people benefit from youth work provided by these youth organisations on a daily basis. Funding for the youth service is provided through fund raising activities undertaken by the organisations and the State. State funding is through the national lottery and amounts to £9.806 million in 1991. This money is distributed by the youth affairs section of the Department of Education to youth organisations.
I will now deal with the Bill. What can a Youth Services Bill do for the lot of youth organisations and young people? This Bill is a first, despite numerous policy statements from both sides of the House, including the O'Sullivan report which was brought forward by Deputy Jim Tunney and the Costello report which was introduced by George Birmingham and Deputy Garrett FitzGerald. The first youth policy document, "In Partnership with Youth", was published in 1985 by George Birmingham. None of these documents has been implemented. Despite numerous statements and election guarantees, nothing has been done to provide a permanent and stable base from which the youth service can operate. Nothing has been done to provide a platform to ensure that the best possible use of resources is obtained. This Bill is designed to do just that. It is designed to copperfasten policy and aspirations into straightforward and meaningful proposals.
Since 1987 the Government have seen fit to ignore the present dilemma of youth organisations. Since then their response to the youth service has been to have no youth policy; the only policy is to do nothing and hope the problem will go away. Youth service funding is allocated on a year to year basis with no guarantees of maintenance of funds on a long term basis. Youth organisations have to fight year in year out for every penny they get from the State. Youth service funding depends on a lottery hand-out, despite the obvious educational content of programmes undertaken by youth organisations. While the Minister has to be congratulated for the £10 million made available in 1988 he has done little in this regard since. This Bill would promote the structure whereby the Department of Finance could measure the valuable work being done in this area.
Perhaps the final degradation visited on youth organisation in 1991 was the broken promise in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress that youth services will continue to be provided. In 1991, 35 youth workers have been made redundant and many organisations, including the National Youth Council of Ireland, have sustained funding cutbacks in the region of 30 to 50 per cent. Such instability is counter-productive and inhibits development. The best possible service cannot be provided because the opportunities of such provision has been blocked by Government at every turn.
The Bill is very much about co-operation — co-operation between youth organisations, social services and most particularly Government Departments. This is a vital component. The Costello report of 1984 referred to this type of co-operation. Indeed, I have often heard the Minister refer to that report as his bible. There is a distinct lack of co-operation between statutory and voluntary organisations. Much of the time, the relationship is one of the funder dictating to the funded, and it remains little more than this. For example, the Department of Justice, through the Garda, have subcontracted Foróige and the Catholic Youth Council to employ youth workers in Tallaght and Neilstown, County Dublin, yet the Department of Education were completely unaware of this initiative — a glaring example of lack of co-operation.
The Department of Labour certify one set of courses involving Youthreach while the Department of Education certify another. This is yet another glaring example of lack of co-operation between Government Departments. Perhaps the most reprehensible lack of co-operation is the position of the interdepartmental committee on disadvantaged young people which was set up by the Minister with responsibility for youth and sport but which has not met for over two years. The co-operation envisaged in this Bill is not mere aspiration. The Bill contains a specific detailed number of measures which can take effect immediately with substantial savings.
This Bill is a mechanism which provides for co-operation. In the interests of our young people, this House should act upon the provisions in the Bill. I would point out that the O'Sullivan report of 1980, the Costello report of 1984 and "In Partnership with Youth" published in 1985 recommend the establishment of the youth service on a permanent legislative footing.
I will now deal with the Bill in greater detail, drawing attention to certain areas and outlining its aims and aspirations. Section 1 deals with the interpretation of various phrases, including "voluntary", "youth worker" and "youth service". It is important that Deputies pay close attention to the definitions in the introductory section which contains many of the key elements of youth work in this country.
First, the word "voluntary" is of tremendous importance since voluntary organisations are the bedrock of the provision of out-of-school education and leisure opportunities for young people. Under this I want the primacy of volunteerism to remain and thus I have sought to emphasise the voluntary nature of much of the youth service. The principle of subsidiarity must be preserved at all costs. In the definition "youth work" I include the moral, spiritual, cultural and general development of the young person which includes the development of social and vocational skills in young people. Again I wish to emphasise that the definition is based on a perception of youth work as education rather than recreation, although the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. "Youth services" includes areas such as education, employment, housing, health, welfare and justice, which clearly shows that interdepartmental co-operation is vital if youth services are to be maximised and if we are to cater to the greatest possible extent for young people.
Section 2 provides for the establishment of the advisory committee on youth work, which will advise the Minister on youth issues and which will have a number of research and advisory roles. The importance of this section is that it lays down a framework for co-operation, which is at the very heart of this Bill. The committee will consist of 16 members, of whom five will be persons engaged in youth work and selected in consultation with the National Youth Council of Ireland, and Foróige, the National Youth Federation; two will be persons engaged in youth services provided by the State; three will be nominated by the Minister for Education and five will be representatives of the Departments of Justice, Education, Labour, Social Welfare and Health. I wish to emphasise that this is, perhaps, the most important section of the Bill, since it is an attempt to draw together for the first time in this country all of those who provide for our young people in order to produce a cohesive policy and an action programme under the auspices of the Department of Education.
I firmly believe that the current situation whereby different Government Departments are unaware of the work being undertaken by other Departments will be eradicated by this Bill, as it ensures co-operation. Furthermore, that co-operation is not limited to co-operation between youth organisations or Government Departments, but extends right across the board so that voluntary, statutory and Government Departments are all involved in both the planning and provision of services for young people. The Costello report, published in 1984, recommends the establishment of a national youth advisory committee, as does the O'Sullivan report, published in 1980, and I would like to remind the Minister that this report was brought forward by Deputy Jim Tunney, a member of his own party.
In Britain the Thompson report, published in August 1982, also called for similar co-ordination. It suggested that one Government Department should have overall responsibility and pinpointed the Department of Education for such responsibility. The Bill before us tonight makes this possible. In Northern Ireland, a report entitled Policy for the Youth Service in Northern Ireland, published in 1987, called for the establishment of a similar national committee. It is clear that I am not alone in thinking that such a committee has to be the cornerstone of the youth service in this country. It is significant that in the submissions to the Costello committee, various groups recommended this type of advisory committee. I am amazed that it has not been acted upon since then.
Section 4 is a practical section and has been included for a very specific reason. The Department of Finance seem to be unwilling to fund voluntary youth organisations on a more permanent basis because there is a perception that youth organisations are fly-by-night bodies. Indeed, young people may say the same about some political parties and indeed some politicians. I hope there is none of them on this side of the House.
The Deputy does not sound too confident.
We will see how confident the Minister sounds in a minute.
It is true that organisations grow, shrink and indeed disintegrate. But it must be remembered that the youth service and youth organisations have developed substantially over the past 20 years. Most now hold property and premises and have substantial business commitments, being involved in the ordinary business sector and are indeed run along the lines of an ordinary commercial enterprise, except, of course, that they are non-profitmaking.
Many organisations are limited by guarantee with charitable status and despite the primary of volunteerism they act substantially and most correctly within the current small business framework. In my view, the worries of the Department of Finance in this regard are needless. However, in order to ensure that all voluntary youth organisations are regarded as absolutely properly and correctly established, I have proposed this register of voluntary youth organisation, which is similar to that currently in force in Britain.
I believe that this simple measure should assuage the fears of the Department of Finance and pave the way for a firm commitment to long term secured funding which will allow for long term planning and execution of programmes to the ultimate benefit of the young person, and in particular, to the ultimate benefit of the disadvantaged young person who always needs that much more time and effort in order to develop the most necessary life and social skills.
Section 5 was designed with a very specific purpose in mind, that is to allow for the certification of the 40,000-odd volunteers who are needed to operate the youth organisations on a regular basis. While some youth organisations have certification of the volunteers built into their training programmes, it is clear that the aims, aspirations and ethos of the vast majority of youth organisations are similar, so that a common form of certification can be achieved quite easily.
Section 6 deals with the establishment of local advisory committees. I recognise that the Minister of State with responsibility for youth and sport, was instrumental in setting up local voluntary youth councils and I do not in any way seek to detract from that initiative; indeed I compliment him on that initiative, and seek to put the current voluntary youth councils on a permanent footing and to establish them throughout the country instead of confining them to the 11 pilot areas, as is currently the case. I propose that they be set up on a proper statutory basis throughout the country. I propose also to widen their powers so that they become local advisory committees.
I am sure the Minister will agree with me when I say that the establishment of such committees on a permanent basis, dealing as they do with local representation, community empowerment, coupled with statutory and departmental involvement, is only to be welcomed. This would mean a partnership between statutory and voluntary bodies on the ground. I also believe that when the structure is put in place it will be able to respond in a very constructive manner to the Green Paper on Education currently being prepared by the Minister's Department. May I emphasise once again that the establishment of these committees was recommended in both the O'Sullivan and the Costello reports and in the document, In Partnership With Youth, all of which I have already referred to and I wish to remind Deputy Quill, of the Progressive Democrats, Fianna Fáil's partner in Government, also supported their establishment I quote from paragraph 4.5 of the Progressive Democrats document on youth policy, entitled A Better Tomorrow, which states:
Youth work ought to be treated as a developmental area and given funding appropriate to that status. The funding of youth work should be formally recognised and should form part of the estimates for the Department of Education even though supplementary monies may come from sources such as The National Lottery.
Mention has been made of the co-ordination of youth services. Paragraph 5 (1) states: "The Progressive Democrats support the setting up of Local Youth Service Councils on a phased basis, as part of the ongoing development of Youth Policy." Indeed, within the present Government I have strong support for this concept.
Did you not expect it?
I am sure if Deputy Quill pushes the concept she will be rewarded, because her party seem to have been successful in most of the things they have asked of this Government. Tonight I appeal to Deputy Quill to urge acceptance of this concept.
I should like to mention section 7, which is again a simple, practical measure that has not been undertaken. I take this opportunity to try to rectify what I consider to be a gap in legislation, the amendment of which would be of substantial benefit to youth organisations. Section 7 proposes that those who donate money to voluntary youth organisations may obtain tax relief to the amount of that donation. That measure would apply to income tax and corporation tax. The present legislation on tax relief for donations for various groups does not apply to youth organisations, for some strange reason, and section 7 would rectify that curious anomaly.
I proposed that amendment to the Finance Bill, 1991. However, I was very disappointed, not so much with the reaction of the former Minister, Deputy Reynolds, but with that of some of his backbenchers who asked why youth organisations should have the right to such a concession. Similar organisations throughout the country enjoy the concession and why should youth organisations not be entitled also? The measure would provide a major source of finance for them. It would be a productive measure in that people would be encouraged through tax incentives to invest in local youth clubs and their facilities. I urge the Government to take that concept on board in the next Finance Bill. A net gain would be investment in youth organisations throughout the country which is so badly required at the moment. I remember asking midway through my speech what the Youth Services Bill could do for youth organisations and young people. I have answered the first part of that question adequately and I should now like to turn to the second part of the question.
It may seem I have been concentrating on the lot of youth organisations and the youth service rather than on young people. However, I emphasise that every measure and proposal put forward by me today has a direct bearing on young people, whether or not they be involved in youth organisations. Increased co-operation between the Departments of Education and Labour will mean that fewer young people will fall through the formal education and FÁS nets. It also means that the division between education and training will be eradicated. Increased co-operation between the Departments of Education, Justice, Health and the Environment and youth organisations means fewer young people will become involved in crime, will become marginalised and will start to live rough. Indeed, in today's society there are several instances in which that is ocurring. It is rather ironic that the district justices are calling for a measure such as this.
One of my colleagues will later deal with the plight of young offenders. District justices point out that in the case of young offenders there is substantial passing of the buck between the Department of Education and the Department of Justice. That attitude must be eradicated and I feel I am offering a solution to it tonight. The measures proposed in the Bill link up to ensure: first, that young people's issues and problems are recognised; second, that there is a mechanism whereby such problems can be discussed and, third and most important, that there is a stable and permanent framework of co-operation from which the appropriate response can be planned and executed with all possible efficiency.
Youth organisations very often provide the only link between young people and society. All too frequently the young person has left the education system, has no job and has little training or education behind him or her. In such a marginalised situation, with the dole queue or emigration as the option, many young people have only their youth organisation or their drop-in centre to fall back on. Therefore, it is vital in order to guarantee our own future and a future for our young people, that we prepare the young for the myriad of social and economic problems they will face in the transition from adolescence to adult life. Youth organisations provide such preparation and it is vital that we offer our wholehearted support to those who attempt to help our young people outside the formal education system.
It is perhaps ironic that while only 15 per cent of a young person's time is spent in school, £1,290 million is spent on the formal education system, as compared to a mere £9.806 million spent on the informal education system. As I said, that £9.8 million comes from lottery funding, not from the Estimates. I leave the House with that simple statistic and ask Members to make up their own minds about the value of youth work to the young person and the community. In my mind there can be only one answer, that the youth service and youth organisations make an invaluable contribution to our country that is not being recognised. I urge the House to support the most valuable work undertaken by voluntary youth organisations.
The Bill is not just for young people involved in youth services, it is about co-ordinating all the services for young people from all Departments. If we accept the Bill we will send a signal to young people that we do care, that we are interested, and that we are legislators. The Bill stands on its merits and it should not be rejected because it comes from the Opposition benches.
I thank my colleague for allowing me to share his time. I congratulate Deputy Deenihan on introducing the Youth Services Bill. We must all admit it is disappointing that so little time is devoted in the House to discussing the matters that affect the lives of our young people. Tonight Deputy Deenihan and the Fine Gael Party have placed youth as top priority on our political agenda.
For far too long youth came near the bottom of the list of society's preoccupations. Youth was considered a kind of limbo. In fact, life really began only when one emerged from youth. Thankfully, times have changed and today youth is to the forefront in their concern for the problems of the world. On the great questions of peace, justice and progress youth has its decisive word to say. that is a welcome change.
We must realise that in every field of human endeavour, be it political, social, educational or scientific, we must look to the future, not the past, to provide the necessary action, and that future is the territory of youth, this is, indeed, the age of youth, but Irish society does not as yet fully recognise the position of youth. Expression must now be given to the voice of young Ireland. The Bill before the House this evening aims to ensure that services are available to provide young people with the means to take their rightful place in our society.
It is an undeniable fact that the future of the nation will depend largely on the way in which our young people are catered for, physically, socially and educationally. Our present generation of young boys and girls start off with the advantage of good educational opportunities that were not, perhaps, foreseen some decades ago. Whatever its merits, formal education as we know it today, sadly, does not prepare youth for the world outside the classroom, but it is the environment outside the classroom that will have the greatest influence on the lives and the attitudes of young people. That is why they must be given the opportunity to be involved in out-of-school activities that will benefit themselves and their communities. The well organised youth club plays a vital function in this regard and the dedicated people who run such clubs are doing this nation a great service. We must acknowledge the great responsibility they accept and recognise the major influence they can exert on a large segment of our youth.
There is a conscious need now to educate people generally for leisure as well as for employment. As developments in modern technology have added considerably to people's leisure time the ability to lead a full life will depend, to an ever increasing extent, on good and valuable use of free time.
From time to time unfair questions are raised about the leisure activities of youth. The tragedy of our time is that the misdeeds of a few are highlighted as representing the overall pattern. Of course, the plain fact of the matter is that in no age had the involvement of youth in worthy causes been so great as at present.
I wish to deal with the importance of equality in the overall activities of youth today. It should not appear unrealistic to hope that in 1991 young men and women be treated equally, be provided with equal opportunities and not be discriminated against on the basis of gender. Despite growing awareness of these issues and improvements in many areas undoubtedly there remains a huge volume of work to be done to ensure such equality of opportunity and of access to all.
In theory there are more options available to young women today than heretofore whereas, in practice, these opportunities are not availed of because the requisite back-up education and encouragement of young women does not exist. It is not sufficient to open up new opportunities for young women. Indeed, it would be naive to expect young women to avail of such opportunities unless teachers, organisers and employers examined their attitudes and adopted strategies for the recruitment of young women. The concept of equality needs to be promoted at a very early age. This is beginning to happen. For example, books and toys for children are becoming less sexist but the attitudes of adults and educationalists still warrant revision. The choices for boys and girls in education still differ with many girls' schools still not offering courses in honours mathematics or physics to their students. I could give many other examples. Anti-sexist training has never been made available to teachers. Therefore, it is clear that the participation of women in the workforce is governed very much by attitudes and opinions which come to the fore in the formative years in both primary and secondary schools. For example, teaching practices must in no way encourage stereotyping but rather should act positively against such stereotyping. There should be both in-service and pre-service training of teachers to ensure that equality at primary and second level is not alone encouraged but continued. Young women often form the majority of entrants to third level education. On the other hand, young women who leave school at a very early age without any qualification tend not to fare quite as well as young men in that category. Very often young women undertake unpaid work at home, looking after younger brothers and sisters or parents and become part of the hidden unemployed. They also have less access to services in this area than their young male counterparts.
While FÁS, the national training agency, have operated a positive action programme for women in recent years — something I welcome — there remain a number of areas in which young women are under-represented, particularly in relation to apprenticeships. There is a need for a more aggressive marketing approach to be adopted to encourage more women to enter non-traditional areas of work.
The history of Irish youth services in general is one which has had a male focus. In the forties the aim of the then new youth service was primarily geared to keeping young men off the streets and out of trouble. Young women were invisible in that they were not found at street corners and, therefore, not considered to be in need of a youth service. Over the years gradually young women became involved in youth clubs but such clubs' activities did not change to reflect their needs. In many cases young women became passive observers and were often criticised for non-participation. At that stage it was still not recognised that the girls' sub-culture was different from that of boys in what was perceived then as a general youth sub-culture. Over the past ten to 15 years more young women have come into contact with the youth services by way of the programme for disadvantaged and special services. In many youth services work for girls has been developed. However, in most cases this work has been undertaken by women having a personal interest in such work which means that generally such work is dependent on individuals or a small group of women.
I should impress on the House that young people always have been imaginative, creative and original. They have a great deal to offer today's world and, more important, that of the future, a future that after all belongs to them. We must ensure they are given the support outlined in the Bill to enable them express their ideas through positive, constructive action. The enthusiasm and idealism of our youth must be exploited and utilised so that their work will be enhanced with fuller recognition given their rightful claim to a greater say in the life of our country.
The introduction of this Bill proves that the Fine Gael Party value young people and their contribution to our society. The provisions of this Bill say to young people in a loud, clear, unambiguous voice that they matter, that what they say matters and is important; that what they do and what they would like us to do is relevant. Indeed, it puts into action the hitherto meaningless rhetoric such as their description as being our greatest national asset.
In introducing this Bill on behalf of the Fine Gael Party I should emphasise that Deputy Deenihan always has held a sincere, genuine concern for young people and has never let up on his commitment or determination to enhance and expand our youth services. He has never ceased his efforts to focus the attention and concentration of all his colleagues on the needs and aspirations of the young Irish. His Bill is deserving of overall support and, in its introduction, he has done a good job for our young people. Fine Gael want to hear the voice of the youth of Ireland. We believe that they have important things to say and that nobody in this House has a right to exclude them.
First, I compliment Deputy Deenihan on introducing this Bill and for the opportunity he and his party have given the House to discuss matters relating to youth affairs.
I concur with the sentiments expressed by Deputy Therese Ahearn about Deputy Deenihan as spokesman for his party on youth affairs. There is no doubt that he has always acted in the utmost interest of young people in the provision of youth services for them. He has always been constructive in his role as Opposition spokesman, something on which I would like to pay him a very sincere, personal compliment.
I thank the Minister.
The Bill, which came to my notice on Friday evening last only, is one with which I cannot find much satisfaction. I say that without wishing simply to be negative about it. I do not agree with Deputy Deenihan that this Bill — even if enacted next week — would be of any great significance in improving our youth services or the lifestyles of young people.
We do not need another advisory committee to improve our youth services. Neither do we need any further discussion; rather what we need is more money. Deputy Deenihan referred to a number of reports and policy documents that had been published in this area, one an excellent report, the Costello report and, following on that, the Fine Gael document entitled, "In Partnership with Youth". It was for that reason that I said in 1987 when I took over this position — and have repeated many times since — I did not intend to have any more policy documents, reports or committees, that we had sufficient documentation and talk, what we wanted was action. We succeeded in getting a certain amount of action. Nonetheless I am the first to accept that lack of money has been a major problem in our getting more action along the lines we wanted.
I want to refute a number of points. The Deputy referred to statements and election guarantees about advisory councils. No such statements were ever made by me and no such guarantees were given. The last four years have seen policies and aspirations put into action. I was very happy to adopt the Costello report which set out the areas in which action was needed in regard to youth services. A significant development of youth services has taken place on that bedrock.
The voluntary organisations must be appreciated for the work they are doing. Were it not for them and their efforts, we would have no youth services. In fact, we have excellent services, due to the voluntary organisations. The only inhibiting factor in their work is lack of money. We are giving them about £10 million and they have demands for a much greater sum. There is not a need for an extra committee or for new legislation, but there is a need for more money. That is the problem. If extra money could have been provided by bringing in legislation, I would not have failed to take the appropriate action.
What about section 7?
The idea of a national youth advisory committee is mentioned in one paragraph on page 138 of the Costello report, which contains 282 pages in all. It is not accorded a very high priority. When Fine Gael in Government produced their policy document on youth it contained no reference to an advisory committee.
There was such a reference.
I should like to see it. The only legislation proposed was in regard to local youth service boards which were to be set up. The establishment of a committee of Ministers of State in various Departments was also proposed. I wonder why this idea has been brought forward now, since it was not contained in the 1985 policy document.
This matter is all about our providing youth organisations with more money. The last paragraph of the Fine Gael document stated that in 1985 the voluntary youth organisations received £2,029,700. The document went on to state that the Government were making an additional £2 million available in 1986 for the phased development of the national youth service. That was the last line of the policy document published in December 1985. In January 1986 the Department of Finance announced that the £2 million provided the month before was being withdrawn from the youth service. That was the commitment by Fine Gael in terms of extra financial resources for the development of the youth service. They provided £2 million in 1985 and promised in a policy document in December that year an extra £2 million, but they announced in January 1986 that the £2 million was being withdrawn.
We provided the national lottery.
When I came into office there were many documents and policies but only £4 million.
We doubled it in one year.
That £2 million was withdrawn.
That was from Exchequer funding, not the national lottery.
National lottery funding is Exchequer funding, as a result of the Bill introduced by Deputy Deenihan's party which ensured that was the case.
It was not meant to be.
I increased to £10 million the amount available for youth services and I have endeavoured since then to get fruther increases but I have not been successful. I need not go into the reasons for that. The only requirement for the provisions of youth services is money, not committees or legislation. Unless we can convince the Minister for Finance and his officials that we should get a bigger share of the cake, we are going nowhere.
Nobody is trying to convince him. That is why we should have the committee.
Apart from Standing Orders, the Minister of State did not interrupt Deputy Deenihan during his contribution.
I acknowledge that.
When the Deputy's party were in Government he was not very successful in getting money. This debate should be focused on the wonderful work done by youth organisations and the need for politicians, civil servants and the general public to recognise that the best value for Government expenditure comes from the youth services.
Deputy Deenihan has shown a lack of knowledge on what has been happening during the past two years. There has been extremely good co-operation between the voluntary and the State sectors. I have enjoyed a very good relationship with the national organisations, the National Youth Council, Fóiróige and the others. The only issue of major concern to them and to me is lack of money. The interdepartmental committee which I set up two years ago to deal with the provision of money for the most disadvantaged children, sat in order to make recommendations to me for a two-year programme. It has not been necessary for them to sit since because the programme has proceeded very well along the lines they set out.
The next development was the committee set up by the Government, chaired by the Minister of State, Deputy Flood, which deals with homelesness and child care. They are representatives of the Departments of Health, Education and Justice and they are tackling the continuing problem of disadvantaged young people. It is not correct to say there has been no continuation of the work of the committee. It is certainly not correct to say that the Department of Education were not aware that the Department of Justice had appointed youth officers in the Tallaght area. I was aware of that from the outset and I welcomed the development, although I expresed concern because we, in the Department of Education, could have used extra youth officers in Tallaght and other areas if we had the money to fund them.
I have found no demand from the youth organisations for the proposed advisory committee, and I meet them regularly. I have with me the various agendas they have put before me and they have not put forward in any of those agendas a proposal to set up a national advisory committee similar to the one proposed in this Bill. There is no demand for such a committee and I do not for one moment think it would add anything other than another layer of bureaucracy to the provision of youth services. Given that the Deputy proposes that travelling and subsistence expenses should be paid to the members of the committee, this proposal would cost money which I believe could be much better used providing youth services on the ground.
In addition, the advisory committee would bring in people from a wide range of areas. Frankly, it would be an unworkable committee because it would go into areas which are not the responsibility of the Department of Education. This would lead to more red tape, more bureaucracy and more talk which, in turn, would lead to absolutely nothing.
I do not understand the provision in regard to a register of youth organisations because the Department of Education have a detailed list of organisations in receipt of funding. This list is available to anyone who wants it. We keep a significant number of records on all of those organisations. Indeed, there is a continual assessment by the youth affairs section of the Department of new organisations which want to be considered for funding. A register of youth organisations would have no beneficial, practical, effect that I can establish and Deputy Deenihan did not outline any in his speech.
While section 5, which deals with education and training, is a good section there is nothing in it that is not being done already. It outlines the areas where action which should be taken in education and training. However, all this is happening very effectively at present. The only problem youth organisations have in regard to the action is that they would like to have more money to carry out a more effective and broadly based education and training programme.
The local advisory committees would simply duplicate the local voluntary youth boards. Nine of these boards have been set up and two further boards were announced recently. The only reason I cannot set up voluntary youth councils all over the country is that I do not want to set up councils to which I cannot provide some funding, however small, to help them with the task they have to do. The very laudable demand for a local voluntary youth services structure is hampered only by a lack of money. As I have said, section 6, which proposes the establishment of local advisory committees, would simply add a further layer of bureacracy which would be of no great benefit whatsoever in providing youth services at local level.
Section 7 deals with tax relief. While the idea of tax relief may seem good, I disagree vehemently with Deputy Deenihan's suggestion that it would bring very significant amounts of money to youth services. There is ample reason to be categorical about this. For example, one has only to look at the proposals by the Fine Gael Party in Government when they introduced Gaisce, the President's award. Gaisce was to be funded by a series of donations from the private sector which were to carry a tax relief bonus. When the then Minister of State with responsibility for youth affairs put it to his Government colleagues that this devlopment should be approved they refused to approve the provision of a tax relief scheme for donations to Gaisce. As a result no money was donated by the private sector. In fact, the youth affairs section of the Department of Education had to take up the full funding of Gaisce which they have been proud to carry on.
The second reason I believe a tax incentive scheme of this nature would not be of any significance is that one such scheme is in operation — a tax relief scheme on gifts to Cospóir. In the four years that scheme has been in operation we received no money because it is simply not attractive for the private sector to make gifts to sport through that scheme. I am not aware of any scheme other than this one which could be introduced for the provision of money to youth organisations which would be acceptable to the Revenue Commissioners. Fine Gael in Government rejected the same type of scheme when it was proposed as part of the funding for Gaisce. I am absolutely definite that there is no hidden crock of gold in the private sector which could provide money for youth services through any tax relief schemes. Consequently, section 7 would be of no benefit whatsoever in the provision of extra funding.
Having gone through the various sections, I have to say there is nothing in the Bill which would improve the lot of youth service provision. However, I acknowledge that this debate gives us the opportunity to highlight the necessity for increasing the amount of funding and further developing our youth services. As I have said to youth organisations and in this House, the main difficulty which has always existed in relation to youth service provision is that it is not taken seriously by the general public or politicians on all sides of the House. The reality is that youth services provides an excellent service to the State for a very small cost.
I have to get across the message to the Taoiseach, the Minister for Finance and the Government that more money should be put into this area. In the present climate where there is a demand for major cutbacks I can assure the House that this is a very difficult message to put across. I have been making the case for extra funding for youth services in the Estimates and I have met with the kind of response that we read about in the newspapers, that is, there must be cutbacks in public expenditure at all levels. This is the kernel of the issue. I want to put it to Deputy Deenihan that it is also the kernel of the issue for his party. It has been stated categorically by the leader of his party, Deputy John Bruton, over the past number of weeks that a cornerstone of the economic policy of Fine Gael in Government would be to cutback on public expenditure. Therefore, it is not good enough for people to promise extra money in the current climate. We are all agreed that extra money is difficult to get——
This Bill does not promise any extra money.
That is the point; that is why this Bill is totally useless.
It is not. Obviously the Minister has totally misread the Bill.
It is all about extra money.
There is not much to read in the Bill.
The provisions in the Bill in regard to extra committees will not bring in one extra penny but rather will waste time and money.
I want to refer to the importance of all of us, together with the youth organisations, working to try to convince everybody that, despite the major difficulties in regard to the public finances which will continue, the investment of extra money by the State in youth services would give a good return. During the past week newspapers have carried stories and printed pictures of disadvantaged young people in parts of Dublin city. This epitomises the need for youth organisations who would ensure that there would not be wholesale disruption of the lives of young people.
If we provide more money for youth organisations to enable them to continue their work, there would not be the kind of difficulties we have seen in parts of Dublin this week. We would not have the difficulties we have seen in areas such as Ronanstown. At present Opposition parties are calling for extra gardaí to be appointed. If the response of the Government is to provide extra gardaí then, as Minister of State with responsibility for youth affairs, I say that is the wrong approach. We have an uncanny ability here to try to prevent problems after they have happened. If we were to increase the amount of money we are spending on youth services in places such as Ronanstown——
That is what we were suggesting.
——we would not have the difficulties we had in the past week.
The Minister of State is making a good case for our point.
I am trying to be frank and honest because if the Deputy was in my position he would have exactly the same problem with regard to money.
I am not disputing that.
It is important that we accept that and are honest with each other. As a young politician, like the Deputy, I want to face up to the real problems. I hope what I have to say will convince the senior people in my party and in Government that what we are saying is the way forward. We established a voluntary youth special project in Ronanstown.
You will not have that problem for a long time.
It is being run extremely well by the Catholic Youth Council and Dublin Vocational Education Committee. In 1991 we provided £88,710 towards that scheme and the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin also provided a significant amount of money. That money is far short of what is required to provide those young children in Ronanstown, who are severely disadvantaged and underprivileged, with a reasonable level of lifestyle to which they are entitled but are not getting. I have to say, "there but for the grace of God go I". I have no doubt if I were a child in Ronanstown and brought up in the same circumstances as those children, I would have been in the pictures in the newspapers last Sunday. We have got to face up to the fact that unless and until we are prepared to put money into the youth services, who can give those children an improved standard of living, we will have the problems we saw at the weekend. We will spend twice as much money trying to solve those problems by recruiting extra gardaí or providing extra prison cells or whatever. In my four years in my present post — like my predecessor — I have been trying to deal with the problem. The general public do not recognise that money spent on preventive measures for those young people would by and large solve their problems. I have only to look around this city and the country at the work being done by youth organisations and by the youth service to know that given any small chance young people are good and will act responsibly. If we cannot put in the basic resources to assist those young people in having a basic lifestyle they will get up to the kind of difficulties that are becoming all too prevalent. That is the issue this debate should address.
I ask Deputy Deenihan to forget about this Bill and address the issues which need to be addressed and highlighted here and outside. I hope as a result, despite the serious difficulties we have with the public finances, the Government, and the Department of Finance, will see the necessity for providing more money, otherwise it will cost the State considerably more in curing the problems those young people will create as a result of not being given a fair chance.
I ask that this debate this week and next week addresses those issues, the mechanisms by which we can make the youth service more effective. We do not need any more policies, we have all we need. We have excellent youth organisations providing an excellent service throughout the country on a shoestring. We have to make a critical analysis of the work they are doing and bring to the Floor of this House, before the general public and the Minister for Finance, the fact that the work they are doing is proper for young people and that it costs money.
There is provision for that proposal in the Bill.
Unless we are prepared to put that money in support of those youth organisations we cannot expect them to deliver the service. That is what this is all about: it is not about legislation, advisory committees, or tax incentives; it is about money.
I should like to refer to the point made by Deputy T. Ahearn in regard to young women. Since I was made Minister of State I have been anxious to see that youth organisation serving women have an equal, if not greater, opportunity through the provision of money and support services from my Department. We have tried to ensure that the organisations serving women are given an equal, if not a better, chance than the organisations which serve boys only. We have tried to ensure that the disadvantaged programmes would be of assistance to women. A number of our disadvantaged programmes are specially geared towards young mothers and young women in places such as Dublin. Limerick and Wexford.
This Bill does not serve the interests of young people or the interests of the youth service provision but it gives us an opportunity to debate this important issue and for that I thank Deputy Deenihan. I hope that for the remainder of the debate we address the issues and, rather than political point scoring, which I have tried to keep out of, we recognise that for all parties——
The Minister of State did a good job.
——including that of the former Minister of State at the Department of Education——
The Minister of State never mentioned it.
——the one question we have to address is the fact that more money is needed.
The Minister of State will always be remembered in New York for his political point scoring.
Unfortunately, I cannot get money at this time. It is clear if Deputy Deenihan were in my position he would have the same difficulties.
I look forward to replying.
First, the Labour Party welcome the Bill but believe that the Bill as presently drafted contains a number of flaws. We have some reservations about it. We welcome the contribution by Deputy Deenihan on the Bill. I am a little confused in regard to what the Minister said. He stated that what we need is not a Bill but an opportunity to debate youth affairs. That is what we want in the House and that is what 500,000 young people and those in youth organisations are looking for. Will the Minister acknowledge that with the exception of Private Members' Business, the business of this House is in the hands of the Government. The Minister of State, Deputy F. Fahey, is a member of the Government and we have not had a debate on youth affairs since 1984. That is an indictment of the attitude of the Government in relation to youth affairs and the need of young people who are looking for guidance and support.
When we get a statement it is only rubbish.
Despite numerous policy document on youth services culminating in the report of the National Youth Policy Committee in 1984 under the chairmanship of Justice Declan Costello a Bill on youth services in Ireland has never been put before this House.
Debate adjourned.