JOINT COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AND FAMILY AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 16 Jan 2007

Draft Rural Development Programme 2007-2013: Presentation.

Chairman

We are here to discuss the draft rural development programme 2007-2013 with representatives from the European Anti-Poverty Network, EAPN. I am pleased to welcome the following delegation from the EAPN: Mr. Paul Ginnell, policy support worker; Mr. Robin Hanan, co-ordinator; and Ms Janice Ransom, co-ordinator of the minimum social standards project. Representatives of the EAPN have appeared before the committee previously. I am pleased to again welcome its representatives to discuss the draft rural development programme on which I hope we will have a fruitful discussion.

I remind members of the parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any persons outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members who wish to make a declaration on any matter being discussed may do so now or at the beginning of their contribution. Members are also reminded that if there is a possibility of a conflict of interest, they should make a declaration of interest either now or at the start of their contribution.

I draw attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but this same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. While it is generally accepted that witnesses would have qualified privilege, the committee is not in a position to guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses attending before it. I invite Mr. Ginnell to make his opening presentation, following which I will open the floor to members for questions at which point I expect the other invited delegates may participate.

Mr. Paul Ginnell

On behalf of European Anti-Poverty Network, I thank the committee for the opportunity to make a presentation to which the following is the background. It is based on the European Anti-Poverty Network's comments and submissions to the consultation process on the development of Ireland's rural development strategy and programme. We recognise that the strategy and programme have been developed in line with the European regulations and guidelines, but also in terms of their link to the Lisbon Agenda, the national spatial strategy and other relevant policy areas.

It is important to highlight that the comments are also in the context of the Government's White Paper on rural development of 1999 and other reports such as the National Economic and Social Council report of 1994 and the National Economic and Social Forum report of 1997. All of these reports on rural development state that rural development policy needs to take account of those who are most disadvantaged, including those experiencing poverty, inequality and social exclusion. The rural development strategy briefly acknowledges this in the introduction to the strategy but not throughout. Therefore, it is clear that while the rural development strategy and programme need to address the needs of farmers and agricultural and forestry sectors, they must also address in a strategic and comprehensive manner the broader needs of rural communities, which are changing rapidly and increasingly becoming more diverse. This must include addressing the needs of the most marginalised in rural areas.

The view of EAPN Ireland is that the rural development strategy and programme, at least as presented in draft form in November, fails to do this and if these issues are not addressed in the final form, they will result in the greater exclusion of some people in rural communities. I will outline why we believe this to be the case.

The first key issue we wish to address is the failure in the rural development strategy and programme to produce a strategic and comprehensive approach. The process for drawing up the rural development strategy provided the opportunity to draft a broad and clear strategy for Ireland for the next seven years. There was a broad consultation process and there is a range of reports, documents and studies available. The strategy, as presented in November, failed to take this opportunity and is limited to the narrow EU requirements, mainly addressing economic issues related to farm families and those involved in agriculture with some focus on the environment and forestry and very little on other issues related to the other needs of people living in rural communities.

The rural development strategy states that many of the other social and economic issues related to an integrated response will be addressed in the new national development plan, NDP, which will cover the next seven years and which is due to be published next week. However, there is no draft NDP available currently and the rural development strategy does not provide a strategic approach regarding how these issues are to be addressed. The latter is, in fact, unknown and there is no attempt to provide a clear, strategic or coherent link between the rural development programme, the NDP and other policy areas.

The EAPN recommends that the rural development strategy needs to clearly outline the broad range of issues facing rural communities, particularly those which create or which keep people in situations of poverty and social exclusion. It must then present a more comprehensive, strategic and coherent approach to addressing these issues, whether in the rural development programme, the NDP or other investment programmes. Details of these programmes must be clearly outlined.

Some of the issues which should be addressed and which are continually raised by anti-poverty organisations and community groups include the affordability and accessibility of services and the upgrading of local infrastructure. I refer here, for example, to transport, which is a key issue in rural areas. The rural transport initiative is not national in nature and does not cover all the areas it should. Another issue relates to post offices. There has been a recent trend towards the centralisation of services, including those offered by post offices. Many rural areas are without post offices, which provide particular services.

Other key issues are accessing financial services, housing and accommodation, including Traveller accommodation, and related matters such as fuel poverty, the level of insulation provided in social housing in particular, child care, education, health, etc. In terms of health, there must be a better approach in providing more community-based and public health services, as opposed to focusing on centralised health care within hospitals.

Access to quality employment and training opportunities is a key issue. There are high levels of unemployment in rural areas and many are obliged to travel long distances to access employment. For those on low incomes, this is particularly difficult. As regards training, courses are, in many cases, offered in larger urban areas and are difficult to access for some individuals. One matter highlighted to use in the context of unemployment issues is that FÁS training courses often begin at 8.30 a.m., which makes it impossible for many — lone parents, people with child care responsibilities, etc. — to access such courses.

The final matter I wish to highlight is the need to support and resource community development activity. In that regard, I refer to the provision of centres but also to the need to ensure people experiencing poverty and social exclusion should have the opportunity to participate in decisions that affect their lives. The Government has highlighted the latter as a priority. However, policy in this regard must be spelt out in greater detail and a higher level of resources must be provided at local level.

The National Economic and Social Forum's 1997 report identified specific groups as being at an increased risk of poverty in rural areas. These include unemployed persons, women, people with disabilities, older people, migrants, local authority tenants, Travellers, lone parents, Gaeltacht communities, fishermen and farmers who occupy small holdings. It is essential that a comprehensive rural development strategy should outline an approach to addressing the exclusion experienced by such groups which takes specific account of the structural causes of the inequality experienced by these groups.

The rural development strategy and programme is divided into four axes: improving the competitiveness of the agriculture and forestry sector; improving the environment and the countryside; quality of life in rural areas and the diversification of rural economies; and the Leader programme which aims to increase the capacity of rural communities to engage in their own development. While all these axes have the potential to address issues of poverty and social exclusion, axes 3 and 4 have the greatest potential in this regard.

The total budget allocated for the 2007-13 programme is €7,055 million, of which €2,339 million is EU funding. Only €425 million, or 6%, of this budget is allocated for issues related to quality of life in rural areas and the Leader programme. This is extremely small in terms of the overall budget. Almost all the remaining funding, and some of this 6%, goes to those involved in farming, agriculture and forestry. This is an indication of the low commitment in the strategy and programme to addressing issues for the wider population, including those experiencing poverty and social exclusion. We recommend that a more balanced budget be put in place to address issues of quality of life in rural areas for those not involved in farming and related activities and to meet the social objectives of the Lisbon strategy. Many of these issues are outlined above.

The EU regulation also highlights that the promotion of equality and prevention of discrimination needs to be addressed at all stages, including design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the programme. The EU guidelines for the rural development programme also clearly highlight the importance of addressing the particular needs of women including access to the labour market and specifically names initiatives to develop child care infrastructure in rural areas. The need for Ireland to develop an affordable and accessible child care infrastructure is constantly highlighted by the European Commission in its comments on Ireland's national employment action plan and on its successor, the national reform programme, the latest report on which was published in December.

Another issue highlighted in the Commission's guidelines as needing to be addressed is the particular needs of young people. Rural communities are becoming more diverse with increasing numbers of immigrants working and settling in all parts of the country. Apart from economic integration, the social integration of migrants within communities needs to be addressed. This issue is also highlighted in the Commission's report on our national reform programme. Ireland's draft rural development strategy and programme states in broad terms that the promotion of equality and prevention of discrimination will be addressed throughout the programme but only specifically refers to women, young people and minority groups in regard to a small number of measures related to quality of life.

The issue of child care infrastructure is not mentioned despite it being one of the greatest barriers to women in accessing training and employment and participating in community activities. We believe the rural development programme needs to outline in greater detail how the issues of equality and discrimination will be addressed at all stages within the programme as required by EU regulation. We ask that a detailed equality and poverty impact assessment of the programme be put in place in accordance with Government policy. The Equality Authority and other community organisations addressing issues of equality and non-discrimination should be directly involved in this process.

The limited and unsatisfactory nature of consultation with those experiencing poverty and social exclusion, and groups representing them, is of major concern to EAPN Ireland in regard to the development of a range of policy areas. This includes the national development plan, the national action plan for social inclusion, the national reform programme and the rural development strategy and programme. Even where opportunities arise for people experiencing poverty and those representing them to input at initial submissions or ideas stage, there is generally a lack of transparency at later stages and often strategies do not reflect the earlier contributions.

While the process for developing the rural development strategy and programme appeared to be open, with the opportunity for submissions and input at national consultation workshops, almost all of the funding for the programme was allocated as part of the discussion between the farming organisations and the Government in social partnership talks. This seriously undermines the consultation process for the rural development strategy and programme. We recommend that all Government policy should be developed through a meaningful consultation process which allows the views of those experiencing poverty and social exclusion to be heard and reflected in policy documents.

The final area I wish to highlight concerns partnership and participation by those experiencing poverty and social exclusion in groups representing them. The draft programme outlines the composition of monitoring committees for the rural development strategy. It is important the inclusion of environmental and equality interests is recognised. In terms of structures at national and local level to develop, monitor and implement the programme, EU regulations highlight that bodies should include representatives from civil society or community organisations. This includes organisations representing equality interests and the various locally based socio-economic sectors. We recommend that every effort should be made to ensure that the EU regulations with regard to structures are implemented and that proper funding is put in place to ensure that those representing these voices are adequately supported.

The cohesion process should be carried out in terms of bringing together the Leader and social inclusion programmes at local level and ensuring county and regional coverage. In terms of social inclusion representation on these committees, there is currently a move to select members from the community and voluntary fora in each area. It has been made clear by local groups to the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, that they feel this is inadequate in terms of representing those experiencing poverty and social exclusion. As the fora represent a wide range of groups, there is a chance that people experiencing poverty and social exclusion will not be represented on the new bodies being established under the cohesion process.

Deputy Stanton

I welcome the group and thank it for its presentation. I have been trying to get information on this area for some time. The three documents mentioned on the first page of the presentation date from 1994, 1997 and 1999. Is there any more up-to-date research information available on rural poverty? Rural Ireland has changed enormously and continues to change beyond recognition. Material going back to 1997 and 1999 is out of date in terms of the situation today. There is a problem with regard to the dearth of research on rural poverty, isolation and marginalisation. We have significant material available on cities and built up areas, but not on rural areas.

The Combat Poverty Agency has stated it intends doing some research and I have been pushing for that. I have also asked parliamentary questions on the matter, but the information does not appear to be available. Anecdotal evidence points to some social exclusion in rural communities, but we do not know the extent of it.

What measure does the European Anti-Poverty Network use to measure poverty? I am sure the organisation is aware of the debate we have had with the Minister regarding relative income and consistent poverty. It would be useful for us to know which measure the EAPN uses in its analysis of social exclusion and poverty in the rural community. I understand most of Europe uses relative income poverty as a measure, but the Minister insists that is nonsense and sticks with consistent poverty which he says is reducing. However, when I consider the significant amount of personal debt in the country, I contend that relative income poverty is a greater problem than ever and is increasing. The Minister seems to put his head in the sand and say that is not the case. Will the group give us its opinion?

The delegation's discussion document refers to the needs of rural communities and other related issues. It also refers to transport, post offices, financial services, housing, Traveller accommodation, fuel poverty, child care, education and health, quality employment, training opportunities. Is the existence of those needs backed up by quantitative and qualitative research? I would be very interested in such research if the delegation could point me in its direction because I cannot seem to find up-to-date material.

The delegation has not referred to the importance of the Internet in communications. I contend that the Internet would alleviate many of the issues which are raised and the need for the Internet is a pressing issue in rural communities. Does the delegation agree that the use of the Internet should be encouraged because it would serve to negate loneliness? It is now possible to access many financial services over the Internet and there is no need to go to a bank when one knows how to access services on-line and if the infrastructure is available.

The NESF report is now ten years' old and I contend we do not know what is the current situation because things have changed so much. Is it true to say that rural communities are not so much dying as changing and becoming urbanised? The Chairman is from a rural area. There was a story told of two Deputies who could stand on top of the hill and point at every house in the area and know how everyone voted. This is no longer the case in rural areas. Given that people do not walk or cycle, it is often the case that neighbours do not know each other. It is similar to the situation in housing estates. The only place where people might interact is at the school gate when they meet to pick up the children or when they become involved in parents' councils. Apart from these occasions, people living in rural areas may never have the opportunity to meet each other.

The presentation makes an interesting reference to the building up of community life and the part which the Leader programme plays. Many of our villages now have new housing estates slapped onto their edges and the people living in these estates have little or no connection with the indigenous population. They do not know each other. These residents spin off in their cars. The American phrase for this is "cocoon living". There is a saying that we live in a box, go to work in a box, work in a box, come home to a box and then we look at a box. This is true in many instances.

The delegation has requested more funding for the Leader project but this is a matter for another committee. The concerns of this committee are to do with poverty and social exclusion, how they are measured and their extent and what action should be taken. There is a dearth of information on these subjects as they affect rural areas. The issue of equality would be within the remit of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights rather than this committee but the issue of equality may impinge on the issue of poverty and these may be cross-committee and cross-departmental issues.

Rural life has changed totally and is still changing. I question whether we can talk any more about a rural Ireland because everywhere seems to be urbanised. Most people have Sky television, the Internet and a couple of cars outside the house. However, I agree there is a hidden poverty and it is very difficult to discover its extent. I cannot find the research on this issue. I have asked all the questions but I cannot find the answers. I hope the delegation has the answers.

Mr. Robin Hanan

That is a very thorough set of questions which covers much of what we would like to expand upon. I will answer a few of the points as far as I can and ask my colleagues to reply on others. First was the question of what we mean by poverty, which members of the committee know more than anyone in the country has been very controversial in recent times. We do not agree with the Minister that the concept of relative poverty does not mean anything. We are part of a European-wide network. In the rest of Europe, which the Minister argues is out of step with Ireland, poverty is measured relative to the rest of the community. We would argue that both concepts mean something. Consistent poverty tells us something about our society. It tells us how much more or less we can afford than our parents or grandparents could. Relative poverty tells us more about the way in which people are left behind by economic change and whether a country is changing quickly, like this country, or more slowly like countries in other parts of Europe.

For our members on the ground, the reality of both is very pressing. A person who cannot afford a hot meal or a coat, which are two of the measures of consistent poverty, is affected in one way. A person who is earning much less than the other people whose children are attending the same school, is affected in a different way and it means the person is not a full part of that society. We must also remember that poverty is not just about money. Our submission concentrated on services partly because the rural development plan is very much about investment and we hoped it would give much more investment in services, because services are so important to people on low incomes in rural areas. In addition not having good access to quality health care, housing, transport, etc., will affect a person almost as much as lack of income. This is particularly true of poor people in rural areas, which comes back to the point mentioned that rural communities are changing.

It could be said the average standard of living or the average lifestyle of people in rural areas is changing, but the type of people Mr. Ginnell referred to in his submission — the list from the NESF of people who are still long-term unemployed, people with disabilities, older people, etc. — are in many ways as isolated and cut off as they were before. The gap between poverty in rural areas and poverty in urban areas is still very high. Much of this relates to not having the services and some relates to planning. We were careful not to get too much into all the planning controversies. From the point of view of people living in poverty, the way in which community services are planned and the way in which housing is planned around community services make a big difference to how people live their lives and how much they are isolated in rural areas.

Poverty is about money. It is about both relative poverty, which is how people relate to the rest of society, and also about consistent poverty which is about what people can actually afford to live on. It is also about services and community services. We have always made the point that it is a disgrace that Ireland, as such a rich country, is either in first place or second place, depending on the whose measurements are used, in terms of relative poverty in Europe, and the issue should be somewhere near the top of the public agenda.

The issue of the Internet and communications is clearly important in bringing jobs to rural areas. Many are still not able to avail of the Internet at this stage. For the people we mentioned — those who are members with whom we work or are members of our member groups — it is either not relevant to them or for various reasons relating to education, age and disability it is not accessible. While the Internet is important it is not a substitute for a good rural transport service that can get people to the community centre or to work. It is not a good substitute for a good health service. However, it is a very important area and we will not get the spread of jobs without it.

Ms Janice Ransom

The Deputy mentioned the dearth of research available. We agree there is a dearth of research on issues affecting rural communities. I sat on the committee that produced the NESF report. At the time no research had been carried out on rural issues. Much work was put into that report and the NESC one. The recommendations were not necessarily taken on board.

There is an issue regarding the amount of research available to us. When we have the research the recommendations must be acted upon. I agree that there is a dearth of research available, that rural communities are changing and that there is more urbanisation. One of the key issues to emerge from the NESF report was recognition that even if a house has a satellite dish it does not mean the occupants are not excluded or isolated as the television may be their only form of contact. Poverty and social exclusion can be more hidden in rural than urban areas because in the latter one can clearly see their impact when one walks down a street.

Mr. Ginnell

A number of important issues have been raised. Rural communities are changing a great deal, small towns and villages are growing in size and there is a sense that people are moving ahead. One of the problems the European Anti-Poverty Network faces is a public perception that poverty no longer exists because it has become more hidden. As a result, many of the strategies being developed, including the rural development strategy, do not specifically address poverty or target issues around it. The national development plan due to be published next week is supposed to include a specific section dealing with social inclusion. The EAPN has not seen a draft of the plan and is anxious to learn how it will address social inclusion.

Notwithstanding the view that poverty has been sorted out, a significant number continue to experience poverty. Among those experiencing increasing isolation is a new group in our more diverse community, namely, migrants and migrant workers. The services and supports available to this group need to increase throughout the country, not only in urban areas. Without proper supports and a proper approach to integration, we will have to deal with the issue in the future.

In 2003, the European survey on income and living conditions, which examines the risk of poverty, showed that poverty in rural areas was significantly higher — approximately 20% — than in urban areas. In 2005, an ESRI report examined the spatial distribution of poverty. Prior to the publication of that report, the Combat Poverty Agency published a report showing that certain parts of the country experienced consistently higher levels of poverty than others. It highlighted in particular counties Donegal, Leitrim, Longford and Mayo, although smaller pockets in other areas also experienced higher levels of poverty. The report also noted that some of the problems highlighted in the NESF report persisted. The causes of poverty were found to be unemployment, non-participation in the labour market due to illness, disability or old age, lone parenthood, low levels of education and social class-background. Some of these issues, which were highlighted ten years ago, have still not been addressed. While the numbers living in extreme poverty are lower than previously, a significant number of those living in rural areas still live in poverty.

Deputy Callanan

I welcome the delegation. I agree that rural Ireland is not dying but changing, as becomes obvious when one drives around the countryside. In some areas one will find an extremely valuable house at the end of a narrow road. This is a welcome development.

Two measures introduced by the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, have helped a great deal. As a farmer, I have seen the wonderful benefits of the rural social scheme which has significantly enhanced the income of low income farmers. Farmers or their partners may participate in the scheme. This benefits the community because participants do excellent work, including visiting elderly people in their homes or carrying out village enhancement works.

The rural transport initiative has also worked extremely well in rural areas and is widely used in County Galway. I understand 650,000 people availed of transport under the scheme this year. A significant number of people are being brought from rural communities into villages and towns for shopping or other services they require.

There is a lack of provision of social services for elderly people. While some service is provided in towns, very little is available in rural areas. Day care centres are a wonderful service where elderly people can meet and receive hot meals. The meals on wheels service does wonderful work but there should be more emphasis on this kind of service.

It is difficult to break the cycle of unemployment where it has gone on for two or three generations. It is frequently stated that the way to tackle this problem is through education but this does not always work because in some cases when young people reach an age where they can draw unemployment assistance they are more or less encouraged to do so rather than to continue with their education. It is important to break this cycle in both urban and rural areas. I would like to hear the views of delegates on these matters.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

Members referred to the local post office which is the lifeblood of any village or rural community. Post offices are under severe pressure in terms of making financial returns. Do the delegates believe there is a future for post offices if we can expand their range of services? Some post offices are now computerised and have banking facilities. The rural population has increased in line with the growth in overall population. Will the witnesses outline what steps can be taken to ensure we retain rural post offices given their importance to rural life? Parishes are built around the local post office.

A point was made about axis 3 and axis 4 in terms of quality of life in rural areas and the diversification of rural economies. I accept there may be weaknesses in other areas but Leader programmes have done a great job in my area. Controversy has arisen in certain areas because of the intention to divide up existing Leader groups. How can we improve on Leader to provide better opportunities? Leader has significant financial resources. I would welcome suggestions on how we could get a better spend and more value for communities in need.

My colleague, Deputy Callanan, referred to the quality of life in rural areas and the diversification of rural economies. I wish to raise the issue of drinking and driving in rural areas about which I feel very strongly. The Chairman may rule me out of order. Rural life is being destroyed as people are, in effect, being locked into their homes. I refer in the main to the marginalised in society such as retired people. I am aware of a county council worker and his wife who go to their local pub for a drink and to play cards. These people are being marginalised and living in fear in rural Ireland because they cannot drive to the pub to socialise. While I welcome the suggestion of the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, to address this problem, we should broaden its scope to subsidise pubs to provide transport services. Perhaps two or three pubs could combine to provide a transport service. On the one hand, we want people to live in rural Ireland but, on the other, we want to deprive them of an opportunity for recreation and socialising. This is a significant issue.

I am loath to say it but I believe the Garda probably over-enforce the law in this area. In some cases I have seen approximately 50 cars stopped on a road with 15 or 20 Garda present. That reminds me of the past when there was trouble in Northern Ireland. There was merit in the heavy Garda presence at that time. Only a small number of people break the law in this area. A strategy should be put in place to accommodate people who are in danger of becoming isolated. This point has been missed. When people of my age go out we can either drive or get a driver but in the case of couples living in an isolated area they are, in effect, locked into their home and deprived of a social life. Among other things, rural pubs offer people the chance to play cards or other games but it is becoming no longer possible for people to go to them. We must address this issue. The suggestion of the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, could be broadened. Leader funding is available in addition to other partnership funding options that could be used to provide a small vehicle that would operate between two or three rural pubs at weekends. The service would be especially important on Friday and Saturday nights. The people concerned have served the community well, working in local authorities, for farmers, small businesses and builders. Now in the latter days of their lives they cannot go anywhere.

Chairman

I appreciate the thrust of the argument that the draft rural development programme does not address the needs of the most marginalised in rural communities and that there is a failure to address comprehensively the issues of affordability and accessibility of services and access to full employment and training.

Although they mentioned child care, the delegates did not mention the equal opportunities childcare programme which has been a lifesaver for rural areas. I am involved with the programme in my village. There are 32 children involved, some from lone parent families. The programme gives people an opportunity to participate.

I am surprised that the European Anti-Poverty Network did not mention lone parents who are bedevilled with poverty, not because their income is low but because they have few opportunities to participate. Their income is wiped out when they must pay for child care to enable them to participate in education. The back to education allowance scheme was emasculated for that group, for which it offered the best way out of poverty. They were interested in pursuing the scheme as a way to get a job but were struck down by the limitations placed on participation in it. There is a major deficit in the lone parents proposal issued by the Minister for Social and Family Affairs six months ago which seems to have been in abeyance since. Camille Loftus has pointed out that while it is a good scheme, there are no opportunities because FÁS would have to reorganise its timetable to make opportunities available at 8.30 a.m. Schools and child care supports would also have to be available. She indicated that more poverty traps could open by cutting off the seven or eight year old points. It would be terrible to pursue policies that would aggravate the situation rather than alleviate it. I would like to hear the European Anti-Poverty Network's comments on this.

Carers suffer significant endemic poverty. We did a great deal of work on this issue and issued a report in November 2003 on the position of full-time carers. The Minister has gone some way to meet several of our recommendations. Nevertheless, carers are impoverished when major events happen. For example, a woman might receive the allowance while her husband is alive but when he dies, not alone does she lose his income but also the carer's allowance. We recognised this by giving people in that situation half the carer's allowance, which is a small step. The respite care grant has been increased to €1,500. These are welcome measures but when one cares for someone full time, it makes a big hole in their budget. People do not have a statutory right to a needs and care assessment, as they do in Northern Ireland. There is a major deficit in that regard.

Transport presents one of the biggest problems in rural areas. I agree with Deputy Callanan that the rural transport initiative is excellent but it must be extended nationwide. There are pockets of isolated rural areas and the initiative will not solve every problem, as Deputy Ned O'Keeffe said. On reaching 66 years a person receives a travel pass for public transport only but public transport is scarcely available in parts of rural Ireland. Bus Éireann has announced the withdrawal of several uneconomic services in my area. Part of the problem is that the European Union requires commercial assessments to be carried out, ignoring that the social value of the service is not the same as the balance sheet value. This is of great psychological and physical importance. The social impact is not measured when calculating the accountants' bottom line of net profit. Bus Éireann may have been forced to give up many routes because they were no longer commercial, despite their being essential to those who used them, not only to visit the pub but also the doctor or solicitor. A great problem with elderly people living in rural areas is the impossibility of their making medical appointments which can be very early in the morning.

Has the European Anti-Poverty Network ever considered examining the free travel pass scheme and suggesting to the Minister for Social and Family Affairs how it might be extended through the use of a voucher system? We do not want to open it to abuse, but a voucher worth perhaps €10 or €15 a week would allow people to use hackneys or taxis. We must face the reality that a bus cannot travel down every boreen. I live in a remote area; there is a house approximately two and a half miles from us in a bog area and it would be difficult for a bus to turn. Let us be practical and recognise that we could extend the value of the service with taxis. I am sure colleagues will agree when I say that, in my experience, the free travel pass is often discoloured with smoke, since it sits on the mantlepiece, from where it is never retrieved, since there is no public transport to use.

I am not being political, but the Government has made a very bad job of broadband. Many rural areas have been left out and remain isolated as "the sticks". Companies come to Ireland to compete against Eircom in areas where the service is profitable, the large urban ones, although there are also people in the countryside who need a service. I remember attending a conference in Kiltimagh at a time when Deputy Ned O'Keeffe may have been Minister of State. It was an IRD conference and a local man stood up to speak. Telecottaging providing five or six jobs could well be the way forward for many rural areas. Unfortunately, the big factories for whose owners one must roll out the red carpet do not come to rural Ireland since they too are located in geographical bands where there are educational establishments. I can understand some of this too.

To rebalance matters, we must get our share in rural areas. It is important that such services as broadband be made available. That is not currently the case since the network is patchy. All the players compete in large urban centres where they are able to provide a service and there is a critical mass of population. However, in rural areas, people may be able to provide a few jobs or expand their business and offer opportunities to others, dealing with issues of rural isolation and poverty. According to the maxim, the best route out of poverty is through a job. However, we are once again left sucking our thumbs in rural areas. That might be addressed in this policy document. Considering accessibility to services reinforces the European Anti-Poverty Network's argument in this context.

I agree with Deputy Ned O'Keeffe that the rural post office is the ideal place for a telecottaging, financial and information centre. It should take on the commercial banks. We should put our hands in our pockets and produce something to facilitate such competition. In fairness to the few that have come, they are beginning to provide competition, which is important. Unfortunately, many of the poor people of whom we speak would not be able to turn to any bank. The best bank is the poor person's bank, the credit union, which is owned by the people. Without it, the availability of credit to many ordinary people, for example, to buy a second-hand car, would end, thus worsening their isolation.

I agree with Deputy O'Keeffe that every effort should be made. The European Anti-Poverty Network as an organisation with its finger on the pulse should concentrate on the provision of financial services. The post offices not only provide postal services but social services also. Many postal personnel are extremely helpful to their neighbours. They know everybody intimately. They can produce the paper or a couple of pounds of sugar or whatever and know precisely what the old pensioner needs. That type of response is not available from the average well dressed high-flier who talks the talk. Post offices in rural Ireland have provided an invaluable and inestimable service and the situation is very worrying.

I heard a statistic last night to the effect that every week or fortnight two post offices close. Between Mullingar and Castlepollard, a distance of 14 miles, there is not one post office, where there used to be three. That is just one example. There are all types of other concerns also. In the past postmasters and postmistresses have been poorly paid. If we want a service, we should be willing to pay for it. If we have to put an extra cent or two on the stamps, so be it. We cannot say, on the one hand, that we want this, while, on the other, give out if the price of stamps goes up 2 cent. As a society if we want something we should be bold enough to say we are prepared to pay for it. Otherwise, as in England, everything in this country will be privatised. That is a matter of concern to me.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I want to comment on the wonderful discussion document and wish the European Anti-Poverty Network well with it. Broadband is very much an issue in rural Ireland. The problem is that we do not have fibre optic technology and this is where the problems arise. Broadband may be accessed within a four-mile radius of any local exchange. However, a progressive person with a small industry in a rural area cannot have broadband because the copper wiring will not take it. Why can we not have more fibre optic technology at a time with the country has plenty of money? The European Anti-Poverty Network has made a good case in this regard.

The Chairman brought another area to my attention when he talked about financial matters. Why can there not be a joint venture between credit unions and rural post offices? There is a great spread of credit unions across the country, but they are nearly all in populated areas. Should they not have joint ventures with rural post offices? This might be relevant to the type of area the Chairman speaks about, 14 miles between Mullingar and Castlepollard. I do not know the area, but I assume it is fairly well populated. Credit unions could give a very good service for such areas in joint ventures with post offices, where people could have access to small amounts of money to buy a car, pay for an electric cooker and various other essentials. Quite a number of things could be done in this regard.

Agriculture is a major issue for rural Ireland and we now see animal services closing down and co-ops being turned into construction companies rather than servicing the primary producer, which was their original role. Recently in my area 22 jobs were lost when a little agribusiness closed down which had supplied fertiliser, hardware, etc. to local farmers. The impact was worse than the loss of 1,000 jobs in a town of 12,000. Those affected were all local rural people and the sadness in that community was unbelievable. However, the enterprise could not continue because of changes in agricultural service needs.

Those are just a few comments. This has been a very good discussion document.

Mr. Ginnell

Some of the areas mentioned include the rural social scheme, the rural transport initiative and the equal opportunities childcare programme — in this regard greater focus is being put, more broadly, on carers. These are all welcome initiatives but they are not national as yet, are under-resourced and need to be expanded. In terms of the child care programme, in particular, I highlighted this because the rural development programme never mentions child care, despite its being highlighted at European level as a possible focus for funding. It is extremely important for people, especially women, to be able to access services or employment. The equal opportunities childcare programme is an important initiative but there is an issue in regard to availability. Child care services in general must be expanded. This is particularly important in the context of the lone parent strategy being put in place to ensure such parents can access the labour market. Inadequate child care provision is a major barrier to the ability of lone parents to engage with employers and employment services.

The roll-out of broadband provision is very much behind schedule. This is highlighted in the new regional development programmes and the regional programmes that come under the Structural Funds programme. There is a commitment that broadband services will be rolled out with greater intensity. The European Commission has an ongoing interest in the issue of access to information technologies. As Mr. Hanan said, however, broadband provision is not of benefit to everyone. There are significant numbers who will never own a computer, for example. Improved broadband services will bring improvements for some but not all.

Moreover, an emphasis on improved access to broadband services may cause its own problems in that there is an assumption that everyone will use computers to access on-line banking and other financial services, including those traditionally provided by post offices. A reduction in the availability of such services in communities will impact those who cannot access them through the Internet. The question of the viability of rural post offices is not an issue of profitability but should be based on a recognition of the importance of access to key services. Postal services were removed from some communities because of falling populations and the increasing prevalence of on-line facilities. Many of these communities are now growing, however, and demand for such services has increased. This is an issue that must be addressed.

Action to tackle early school leaving has been highlighted as an important aspect of breaking the unemployment cycle. Significant numbers of students continue to leave school before completing the leaving certificate. Additional resources must be put into those schools and areas where this is a particular problem to allow for a far greater degree of one-to-one engagement with students. A recent report of the National Economic and Social Forum shows that in order to engage with people, particularly those who are at risk of falling into long-term unemployment, and support them in returning to employment, there is a greater need for one-to-one support.

Adequate supports are not in place. Reports at national and EU level generally refer to the numbers who have moved off the live register and into employment. This fails to take account, however, of the significant numbers who will not progress through such an approach and who require a greater level of direct and individualised support.

In terms of transport provision and the quality of life in rural areas, I agree these issues must be considered in the broader context not only of access to pubs but to services in general. As Deputy Stanton said, the rural development strategy represents a missed opportunity to develop a more strategic approach to rural development. Account should have been taken of past reports, current statistics and various submissions received to compile a broad strategy, regardless of whether that strategy is to be addressed through the national development plan, which is being launched next week, or through another area of resourcing. It would have been extremely useful to have at least gone as far as devising a comprehensive strategy for rural development. A shortcut was taken by concentrating solely on the narrow guidelines from the European Union.

Ms Ransom

I wish to make a brief comment in respect of carers and the Chairman's point regarding our submission not going further. The Government did make an important change, in that it widened the timeframe in which travel passes for carers may be used. The point made by the Chairman regarding the introduction of a voucher system for free transport in rural areas is also very important. I would like to see such a system extended to cater both for those who are over 66 years and those who are unemployed. This would provide the latter with access to services, as people who wish to attend FÁS training courses must travel to them and the need to avail of a transport system which is not free constitutes a barrier to participation.

As for the point made on breaking the cycle regarding unemployment, until we move away from a highly academic-centred education system, this will continue to happen. While it is not a matter for this joint committee, it is extremely important. More opportunities for vocational training are needed for those children who are not academically minded.

Mr. Hanan

A final point is that while the European Anti-Poverty Network is a network of small organisations around Ireland, it is also part of a European network. Consequently, we often hear of people's progress in other countries, as well as on the ground in Ireland. People often ask us why a country with so many good ideas regarding community, including rural, development still has such a high level of poverty. Ireland has an extremely good reputation. The meeting has touched on child care and some of the highly interesting ideas regarding rural transport, such as the pilot schemes that take people from door to door. Moreover, we have pilot schemes in respect of employment, child care and so on.

Our major problem has been to convert such programmes into mainstream services. In other countries funds are put into mainstream services. Many of our members in Ireland are involved in pilot schemes, including many highly innovative schemes. We travel around Europe to showcase such schemes, as well as new ideas from Ireland. However, strategies such as this should provide an opportunity to establish how, as a rich and developed country, Ireland will deal with issues such as health and transport services, broadband, access to employment, personalised supports, etc.

From the perspective of our members, the particular programme or funding scheme under which they come does not matter. We would be as happy if next week's national development plan was to contain everything we seek, as if they were promised in next month's national action plan on inclusion. The important point is that as a nation, we must think about where to put our resources. Much of our work as a network involves linking members with the national action plans regarding inclusion. In the past, during Deputy Penrose's chairmanship of this joint committee, we have made a couple of submissions to it. We would be very keen to return to discuss the national action plan when it comes out next month, were the opportunity to arise.

Chairman

We have had a useful exchange between members and delegates. I thank the delegates for their attendance and responding to the points raised. We look forward to their return following the release of the inclusion plan in approximately one month.

I propose the joint committee send copies of the delegation's presentation and this meeting's transcript to the Department of Agriculture and Food. It might be useful to request it to address some of the points raised. Moreover, members will lend their support to the submission on behalf of the delegates. In addition, it would be useful to send copies to the Joint Committee on Arts, Sport, Tourism, Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I thank the delegates and look forward to seeing them in the not too distant future. As agreed, the joint committee's next meeting will be held on 30 January, rather than 23 January.

The joint committee went into private session at 4.15 p.m. and adjourned at 4.16 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 30 January 2007.