Vol. 572 No. 6
77 Mr. O'Shea asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if ADM has made any report to his Department regarding the administration of the RAPID programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24197/03]
As the Deputy will be aware, it is the role of my Department, supported by ADM, to co-ordinate the implementation of the RAPID programme. It is, therefore, a matter for each of the other Departments to report on the implementation of the programme regarding proposals that fall within their remit. No major report has been submitted to my Department regarding the administration of the RAPID programme. As part of its co-ordinating role, my Department receives regular updates on the implementation of the RAPID programme.
These updates include informal ad hoc updates, reports prepared for regular Department liaison meetings with ADM and reports prepared by the national co-ordinator for the RAPID national monitoring committee. In addition, the RAPID area implementation teams report regularly to the social inclusion measures groups of the city and county development boards or RAPID county monitoring groups, which report quarterly to the RAPID national monitoring committee via ADM. Information from these reports is analysed by ADM and key issues for action across all Departments are identified.
In response to an earlier question, the Minister spoke of ineffectual structures for administering services. He also stated, in response to another recent question in the House, that he could only comment on RAPID plans within the remit of his own Department. However, he has overall responsibility for the implementation of RAPID. He read his reply to the question very quickly, referring to a national monitoring committee and other monitoring committees.
That allows the Deputy more time for supplementaries.
How can the Minister have overall responsibility if he is not getting frequent reports from ADM as to how the administration of the scheme is proceeding? How does ADM relate to the national monitoring committee? Who is in charge of the RAPID programme? From what the Minister said, he appears to have a fairly tenuous role as the overall implementor of RAPID which, in the final analysis, is not really being implemented at all.
Deputies O'Shea and Crawford appear to be in agreement with me. The system is rather labyrinthine, as I have said time and again. The national monitoring committee of RAPID makes its pitch to various Departments. When I came to the Department and sought a list of all proposed actions, I was informed that, in the original strand, there were approximately 1,000. There are only, perhaps, ten or 12 Departments directly affected, excluding those such as the Department of Defence, which are not so involved. That represents an average of about 100 actions per Department and the Deputy will appreciate the difficulty of handling that amount.
Let us deal with the direction I wish to take, as I believe Deputy O'Shea may wish to do. I have always stated my belief that the RAPID programme, however well meaning it may be, is too labyrinthine in its modalities. With a target date for implementation at the beginning of next year, my intention is to separate all of the small issues which can be dealt with locally. For example, does a problem with a CCTV camera have to be referred to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, rather than being handled at local level? If an area needs to be landscaped to eliminate cider parties, is it really necessary to involve central government through the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government? I do not believe so.
We should separate the big issues from the smaller ones and provide a small leverage fund to deal with the latter on a local basis, somewhat analogous to the system which operates in the CLÁR programme. The remaining smaller number of major issues, which I believe would be of manageable proportions, would then be dealt with as between one Department and another. I have been known to favour an approach on the basis of Department to Department and, ultimately, Minister to Minister to resolve the bigger issues in debate, rather than using outside bodies to interact with Departments, as I believe the results tend to be better.
I am glad the Minister has finally admitted that the whole administration of the RAPID programme is in quite a mess and is not really going anywhere. I admire his aspirations, which have some merit. However, will anything happen? That is the real question. I believe the Minister will admit that RAPID is not really working. We now have a situation in which the Government is raiding the dormant accounts fund to provide some money in that regard. On my understanding of the Government's promise, approximately €2 billion was to be front-loaded. That is just not happening and we are now reduced to robbing a charity fund to push this very ineffective programme forward.
The Deputy is wrong. Amazingly, he congratulated me on my statement in Tallaght very early this year, in which I gave a timetable for the beginning of next year. His party leader castigated me in this House for stating that I did not believe the programme was working and that I intended, through the process to which I have consistently adhered, including monitoring committees, regional assemblies and so on, to bring about this change. The Deputy's leader castigated me for taking precisely the action on which he has complimented me today. However, that is life.
I wish to refer to the dormant accounts issue.
What is the Minister's answer to the question?
I have given the answer. I have set a target date for implementation of a different way of operating RAPID by the beginning of next year. On the dormant accounts issue and RAPID, the position is quite simple. By statute, the dormant accounts fund falls to be directed towards those who are in greatest socio-economic need. If the Government and its Ministers did not prioritise that money towards RAPID and CLÁR areas, we would, in my view, be in contravention of the legislation. It is additional and it is entirely within the spirit of RAPID that money should be front-loaded towards the RAPID areas which are the areas of greatest need.
