Vol. 492 No. 3
6 Ms O. Mitchell asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if the proposals for the establishment by the local authorities of community and enterprise groups have now been reactivated; if not, when they will be reactivated; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13766/98]
It is my intention to have in place, by the end of 1999, an integrated approach to local government and local development, with an emphasis on participation and partnership. The Government has established a task force representative of the relevant Government Departments, which I am chairing, to develop an appropriate framework. The community and enterprise group approach is one of the ways of achieving closer alignment which will be examined in this context. However, whatever approach is adopted will have regard to partnership principles which underlie the community and enterprise group approach and which were outlined in the previous Government's Better Local Government White Paper.
I am surprised by the answer that the community and enterprise approach is one of the ways of achieving integration. The Minister must be aware that the current situation is unsatisfactory and cannot be allowed to continue. There is a great deal of duplication.
The Deputy should ask a question.
I am just setting the background. Is the Minister aware that not only is there duplication but suspicion and competition which is wasteful of resources? I understand the Minister is aware that local authorities are ready for change and want integration but there is still a great deal of suspicion on the part of the other agencies involved. If we want to make progress it seems the only way is to appoint the directors of the community and enterprise groups. Will the Minister agree that they are the catalyst necessary to make progress towards the integration of local authorities, community enterprise groups and other agencies? On a related matter, is it not time also to introduce information systems which would be available to both groups to help in the process of integration? Could those measures be put in place fairly quickly?
The Deputy asked whether I was still committed to the community and enterprise group approach. I do not wish to be evasive, but we are in the process of deciding the best way to bring them together. The task force will make that decision. The essential principles are based on partnership and participation. It was unrealistic to expect that this would happen at local level without a wider national framework in place. The task force is attempting to get co-ordination at national level and translate that into effective action at a local level to overcome problems of duplication and lack of co-ordination at local level. There is suspicion, and my predecessor was aware of it also, in local development that local government is trying to take over, and some work needs to be done in that area to allay fears. The task force will have the job of over-coming that suspicion. I have no doubt that local authorities have proved, with their ready adaptation to the SPC system that they are ready for this type of change. I hope local development will also change. Currently we have 38 area partnerships, 36 Leader II groups, 35 county and city enterprise boards, drugs task forces, community groups, supported by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs. County strategy groups were meant to pull all this together, but they do not seem to be working. There is a need for rationalisation and that is what we want to do, not in the spirit of local Government or any other body taking over or dominating but in the spirit of working in partnership so that we can come up with the best possible arrangements at local level to effect what we all want, and include people rather than exclude them.
When does the Minister expect that all this consideration might come to a conclusion? Could he speculate on whether, if the final conclusion of all this consideration is that we do not go ahead with the community and enterprise groups as originally proposed, he will take steps to encourage local authorities to include community and enterprise groups on the strategic planning committees?
The Deputy has made a good point. That is already happening in the case of the strategic policy committees. The concept of the community and enterprise group was that it would not have the same composition as the strategic policy committees. Because community development and enterprise development are involved there will be a balance of public representatives, the community voluntary sector and other players. In answer to the second part of the question, it is hoped that some of these groups will participate in the strategic policy committees. The community and enterprise group was meant to be a separate group, and that may be the case, subject to the talks that will take place.
On when the discussions will conclude, the task force has been given three months to report to the Cabinet. During that time there will be discussions within the task force and, simultaneously — this is necessary under Partnership 2000 — discussions will take place with representatives of the four pillars of Partnership 2000. We hope those discussions and consultations will be finished and the report ready for the first Cabinet meeting in September.
Will the Minister accept that the concept of partnership between local development groups and local authorities envisaged in a programme for change by local government is an important concept to be preserved, that there are local authorities that believe the objective of the exercise is for them to take over the funding and structures of local development groups? Initial discussion of the programme, for which I was responsible, was usually confined to local authorities. Does the Minister accept there is need to include in a structured way, not through the task force but by the Minister directly, local development groups to assure them of their uniqueness and their place in the new structures that will emerge?
I accept the Deputy's point. In the past 12 months the Minister of State, Deputy Flood, has had responsibility for local development, partnerships, ADMs, the drugs task force and so on. He undertook to consult with all these groups and has done so.
The Minister should have that role because he is seen by local groups as predator on behalf of local authorities.
I hope I am not seen in that light. The Minister of State, Deputy Flood, has conducted wide-ranging consultations with every group and I will meet representatives of the various groups. I accept the Deputy's point about misconceptions in terms of takeover and so on. I agree with the Deputy this is about partnership and participation. That is the spirit of the local government document and the spirit in which we are approaching it. I have no doubt we will receive the same generosity from local development groups.
