Eamon Gilmore
Ceist:67 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the further developments he is considering with regard to poverty proofing of Government decisions. [5746/01]
Written Answers. - Anti-Poverty Strategy.
Following the agreement among the social partners in July 1998 on a pilot poverty proofing system to assess all significant policy proposals for their potential impact on the poor, the Government adopted this process in official Cabinet procedures. All memoranda for Government and key policy initiatives upon which significant policy decisions have to be made, are required to be poverty proofed and this has been the case since late 1998.
The introduction of poverty proofing of significant policy proposals is a major tool in assisting this Government in halting the drift towards a two-tier society by keeping social inclusion to the fore in policy making at all times. It ensures that Departments are kept aware of the possible implications of policy on those most in need and it is a system this Government is committed to as part of its social inclusion strategy.
To assist in the implementation of poverty proofing, the national anti-poverty strategy unit, based in my Department, produced a set of guidelines on poverty proofing and worked examples which were distributed to all Government Departments last year. The unit has also met with the strategy's liaison officers in all Government Departments and discussed poverty proofing with them in order to assist with any difficulties.
As provided for in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness, the poverty proofing arrangements are currently being reviewed by the National Economic and Social Council. The review is examining issues such as how the poverty proofing process might distinguish between large integrated programmes which consist of proposals from various Departments, and other more self-contained proposals. It is also assessing how the ongoing implementation of the poverty proofing process might be integrated with the broader policy proofing requirements, including equality proofing, rural proofing and eco-auditing.
I expect that the outcome of the review, due in spring, will enhance the current process and help address any difficulties that may constrain its effective implementation. Following the review, my Department will consider further measures for improving the process, including possibilities for incorporating appropriate training modules into general service training courses.
The Programme of Prosperity and Fairness also envisages the extension of poverty proofing on a phased basis to a local level through the local authorities and state agencies and this will be progressed following completion of the review.