Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:4 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs will take place; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3398/99]
Ceisteanna–Questions. - Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs.
Tony Gregory
Ceist:5 Mr. Gregory asked the Taoiseach the Government decisions, if any, which arose from the last meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs. [3500/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 and 5 together.
While it is not the norm to divulge details of the deliberations of the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs, the last meeting of the Cabinet committee took place on 28 January 1999 and the next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, 23 February 1999. In general, as the House is aware, the committee meets on a monthly basis.
The topics discussed at our last meeting related to the three themes of the committee, namely the national anti-poverty strategy, drugs issues and local development issues. A work programme for the coming year on each of these themes and related matters was agreed.
Will that work programme be published? Did the committee obtain the views of participants in various local communities who are dealing with the scourge of drugs?
That will be a matter for the Cabinet subcommittee to decide. If it is the Deputy's wish that it be published, I will raise it at the Cabinet subcommittee meeting on 23 February.
As to whether the views of community groups are being taken into account, with particular reference to drugs, the very structure of the National Drugs Strategy and the local drugs teams allows for community and voluntary representation which is very significant. That process allows for information and other issues that relate to the local drug task forces and the drugs issue to be filtered through to the National Drugs Strategy. I have political responsibility for the strategy. Therefore, I represent those views to the Cabinet subcommittee.
The Minister of State is committed to this task which is of far greater significance than the approach of the Millennium, but would he agree that it is essential, particularly in those communities which are suffering from the ravages of drug infestation and all that it brings in its wake, that ordinary citizens know what this committee is doing or intends to do? Will he not therefore agree that it is highly desirable that the decisions of this committee, where appropriate, are properly publicised and communicated? He might turn to the Minister of State beside him and use the resources of Mr. Rowley to publicise the activities of this committee?
That is already happening. Many of the decisions taken by the Cabinet subcommittee are published in the normal course of events. I could refer to a number of them. One is the recent announcement by three of my colleagues on the Cabinet subcommittee on the provision of sports halls attached to second level schools in areas covered by local drugs task forces. This relates to the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, the Minister for Education and Science and the Minister for the Environment and Local Government who came together to provide funding and resources for up to 12 halls attached to schools in those areas. That is one decision that was widely publicised recently. In my direct area of responsibility which relates to local development and to the Young People's Facilities and Services Fund, an announcement was made this time last year on which I intend to be in a position to bring forward proposals from the assessment committee at the next meeting of the Cabinet subcommittee next week. In due course, these decisions will also be publicised. The final matter to which I could refer relates to the Integrated Services Project launched by the Taoiseach and given support at that level immediately prior to Christmas. This is making considerable progress. Decisions have now been taken and further announcements will be made during the course of the next two weeks. As decisions are taken that are particularly relevant and important for local communities, they are publicised and communicated locally. I am always seeking ways in which to get the message of the subcommittee through to local people. I am particularly interested in effecting change for communities on the basis of taking action.
Some of the commitments by the present Government on the work of this Cabinet subcommittee have been forgotten about. In relation to the commitment to eliminate waiting lists for treatment, will the Minister of State comment on the fact that there are now between 600 and 700 people on waiting lists for treatment? This appears to indicate that we are going backwards rather than forwards. Will he comment on the progress being made on the commitment to establish an independent national advisory committee, which again appears to have been abandoned by the present Government.
In relation to the second question, we are making considerable progress in getting to a position where we will be able to announce the establishment of such a committee which I strongly support.
In regard to the waiting lists of 600 to 700, it is to my eternal regret that that is currently the situation. However, the Deputy and some of his urban colleagues will be particularly aware that this is because efforts by local authorities to establish treatment centres across Dublin have run into severe difficulties because of local objections. I have called previously in this House on people in positions of leadership, which I consider all Members of this House to be, to support the provision of such treatment facilities. Only recently An Bord Pleanála made a decision about one such facility in Tallaght Village which I strongly supported not only publicly in the local area but also by appearing before An Bord Pleanála. Recently An Bord Pleanála took a decision, which it is entitled to do, to turn down that facility which would have provided treatment and counselling for up to 80 addicts. We are finding that the Eastern Health Board, although supported by local drugs task forces, is increasingly frustrated in its attempts to provide treatment facilities which are essential, which I strongly support and which I urge all Members of this House to support whenever the issue arises in their own areas.
Like the Minister of State, I accept that methadone treatment seems to be the only way to go. That is what the report compiled by Deputy Gregory for the Joint Committee on European Affairs indicated, and there seems to be no other show in town. Has the Cabinet subcommittee on drugs considered the long-term benefits of the methadone treatment programme? Has it carried out any studies and, if so, will it put those studies in the Dáil Library so that Members can familiarise themselves with them?
Regarding the Young People's Facilities and Services Funds, is the Minister of State aware that some of the independent groups who carried out assessments in their own areas have circulated their findings to groups in their areas? Does the Minister of State consider himself bound by these circulars? What is his position on the recommendations which were sent to him?
The answer to the Deputy's second question is that I do not consider myself bound by any circulars that emanate at local level prior to the work of the assessment committee which is based in my Department assessing each project to ensure that it fits in with the aims and objectives of the Young People's Facilities and Services Fund which is an attempt to encourage at-risk young people in areas of deprivation not to become involved in the type of activities which end up in them having to present themselves for treatment. As far as local circulars are concerned, there is a process in place, an assessment committee based in my Department. The results of that assessment activity will be brought to the Cabinet subcommittee. Decisions will then be made based on the conclusions of the assessment committee and on my anxiety to ensure that the Young People's Facilities and Services Fund is used for the purpose for which it was established.
The issue of whether methadone treatment is a suitable form of treatment is widely debated. My colleague, the Minister for Health and Children has brought out a new protocol with regard to the use of methadone. Considerable progress has been made, particularly through the Eastern Health Board, in making methadone available at selected centres under professional supervision, including pharmacists and doctors. Nevertheless, it is a debate that is very considerable.
Are there any studies?
At the moment the best opportunity available to us is to use the facility of methadone treatment to assist people presenting themselves for treatment. It is an issue that is increasingly debated. I cannot go into details, but we have briefly considered the issue of methadone treatment at the Cabinet subcommittee. There are divergent views not just there but professionally as well. For the moment it is the best support available to stabilise drug users, unless we take the other route, total abstinence, which may work for a few people, but in my experience, not for the many.
The time for questions to the Taoiseach has expired. I will allow four brief supplementary questions from each of the Deputies offering and one final answer from the Minister of State.
Does the Minister of State agree he has a budget of just under £11 million? Does he agree there is much local suspicion about the introduction of local treatment centres? Therefore, does he agree it is essential that the work programme of the committee of which he is a member is published and properly communicated to a wider audience to instil public confidence on this matter?
Does the Minister of State support the recommendation of the independent evaluation of the task forces, which was recently made available, that the Department of Edu cation and Science participate in the task forces, especially given that primary schools in task force areas are losing teachers while the drug problem is getting out of control in those areas, a matter I have raised before with the Minister, Deputy Martin? Does he also agree that the Department of Education and Science seems oblivious to the implications of its own lack of activity in the whole area and that, if it were directly represented on the task forces, it would perhaps create or develop a more correct policy towards primary schools in these areas?
(Dublin West): Does the Minister of State accept that the opposition about which he spoke is not the full story and that there is need for much more funding in terms of personnel and resources to eradicate waiting lists? Does he also accept that, if that were provided and a campaign conducted for small, local treatment centres, they would be accepted? The fear is of large centres, which have proven to be bad. Does the Minister of State also accept that there is a need for targeted and much more greatly resourced after care in terms of retraining for and rehabilitation of those leaving heroin behind? It is easy to give it up, but staying off it is difficult, so there must be many more resources provided for programmes to enable addicts to stay off drugs and live a new life.
I have heard and support what the Minister of State said about the obstruction of treatment centres. Does he acknowledge that it is a lamentable performance that his accounting officer had to report to the Committee of Public Accounts a few weeks ago that, of the £10 million voted in 1997 and the same amount in 1998, only a cumulative total of £6.1 million has been drawn down? Without the Minister of State driving this programme, does he accept that will be the rate of performance and that it is not good enough in a situation where 600 to 700 young people are crying out for treatment? I say this as someone who acknowledges the Minister of State's support for the programme.
I will deal with questions in the order they were asked. I agree with Deputy Quinn on the fear of local treatment and the need to publish more information. We are preparing significant publications, through the National Drugs Strategy Team in particular, which we will circulate in all the areas referred to.
Perhaps the Minister of State should approach Jody Corcoran.
I am concentrating on the issue of drugs and heroin abuse and the need to put the message across to local communities. Communication is extremely important.
Regarding local treatment centres and the fear which has been raised by a number of Deputies, I have no difficulty with and would encourage local debate, discussion and consultation, providing those participating do not assume that, through the process of discussion, they have the right to a veto and can decide whether to have in their area a treatment centre which is intended to meet the needs of local people.
Regarding Deputy Gregory's reference to the Department of Education and Science, it is important it participates in local drugs task forces and I accept its participation to date has been sporadic. However, I thank the VEC structure for the support it has given to both local drugs task forces and the Young People's Facilities and Services Fund. It became very involved and is one of the funding agencies appointed by my predecessor, Deputy Rabbitte, and has been particularly helpful. However, I would like to see a stronger participation by the Department of Education and Science in the local drugs task forces and that is something on which I am working with my colleague, the Minister, Deputy Martin.
Deputy Joe Higgins referred to the need to have smaller treatment facilities. I agree the process can be strengthened if small facilities are provided to meet the needs of local communities because they can then be owned by the local communities and promoted not only by the health board but by the local drugs task force. I regret the one and only primary facility available in Dublin for a long time as far as I can recall, did great damage to the efforts of local communities to provide local treatment facilities. However, the 40 such facilities now established by the health board with the support of the local drugs task forces across Dublin – a further nine are to be established this year – are making considerable progress. Nonetheless, I accept the point made by different Deputies on that issue.
Regarding the final comment made by Deputy Rabbitte on the expenditure of the voted fund, the issue was raised in detail at a meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts and I understand we must respond in due course to the issues raised, which we will do. However, it would be erroneous to assume that, because the money has not been drawn down, it is not committed. I am sure Deputy Rabbitte understands that any project which applied for funding and received notification it would receive it is entitled to have it provided on a draw down basis as required. One of the difficulties which has arisen is that the community structure is heavily involved in the local drugs task force and community structures in some areas were not as strong as they might have been. Some time was required to put in place the support needed to develop local initiatives, many of which Deputy Rabbitte would know. Another issue which hindered drawing down funds relates to the planning process whereby a number of infrastructures to be supported by the fund to which Deputy Rabbitte referred had to acquire planning permission and this sometimes created delays and difficulties. I am happy that, out of 230 projects funded under the original local drugs task force system, almost 200 are now drawing down funds, with the remainder very close to commencing operation.
The suggestion by Deputy Rabbitte that I should drive forward the process is one I take seriously. I will continue to push very hard to have local facilities put in place and, as requested by Members, for support through treatment and after care, which is where a person, having come through the treatment process, needs help and support to reintegrate into society and the workplace. I have on a number of occasions appealed to employers to be more helpful and forthcoming in allowing young people coming through that system to obtain jobs in industry, because it is an important part of the rehabilitation of young people who have been caught up in the misuse of drugs.