Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Community Services Programme

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 2 May 2018

Wednesday, 2 May 2018

Ceisteanna (21, 22)

Éamon Ó Cuív

Ceist:

21. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Rural and Community Development his plans to expand the community services programme over the coming years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19101/18]

Amharc ar fhreagra

John Curran

Ceist:

22. Deputy John Curran asked the Minister for Rural and Community Development his plans to open the community services programme to additional new entrants in 2018; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19011/18]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (17 píosaí cainte)

I am delighted that the Minister has got the community services programme back, although I am very disappointed to hear he did not get the staff. It often seems that Departments run their operations as if they were independent empires rather than part of a collective Government, although that is not the Minister's fault. My question concerns the plans to expand this scheme. There are many community facilities that are not used to their potential and many tourist facilities in community hands that could be drawing many more people into communities who would then stay there, shop there, eat meals there and so on. What plans has the Minister to expand this and has he got the backing of the Department and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform for those plans?

I propose to take Questions Nos. 21 and 22 together.

The community services programme, or CSP, was transferred to my Department on 1 January 2018. The programme supports 400 community organisations to provide local services through a social enterprise model, with funding provided as a contribution to the cost of a manager and an agreed number of full-time equivalent positions. Some €46 million will be provided under the programme in 2018.

My current priority is to maintain the level of service for the organisations funded under the programme and to monitor its progress over the coming months. Thereafter, the Department will undertake a thorough review, commencing in early autumn 2018. The review will consider, among other things, how the programme fits with overall Government priorities, as well as my Department’s other community programmes and its policy objectives. It will also consider potential crossover with my Department’s forthcoming national policy on social enterprise.

I recently approved €815,000 for 12 social enterprises following a call for applications issued in 2017 under strand 3 of the programme. Additional calls for proposals will be considered upon completion of the review and in light of available funding. That said, my Department will continue to accept expressions of interest under the CSP in 2018 and I expect to approve funding for additional social enterprises during the year as funding becomes available as part of the ongoing management of the programme.

From his reply, it would appear that what the Minister is doing is recycling the money. Some schemes get a reduced number of full-time equivalents and he is transferring them. One thing that all of us puzzle about, and we have often talked about it among ourselves, is the fact there are still a large number of people drawing jobseeker's allowance long-term who will never get commercial jobs. Let us be honest about it. They could provide fantastic services in the community through this scheme if there were to be a transfer to the Minister's Department of some of the welfare that is going with these people and if he were given the top-up by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. Are there negotiations under way to ensure that kind of lateral thinking in government rather than the silo effect that goes on all the time and which we are all, as politicians, subject to at times?

While I welcome the fact the scheme has been transferred to the Department, I was slightly disappointed with the Minister's response where he said a review of the scheme would take place later in the year. I would have thought that review should be under way as we speak and I am not sure why there would be a delay in that taking place. I acknowledge there were expressions of interest last year and that the Minister has recently announced a dozen new projects. These were restricted to strand 3 specifically, however, and I understand projects that did not meet strand 3 criteria were declined funding, although they may be assessed in the future. Nonetheless, the demand is real and it is there today, both from individuals, as outlined by Deputy Ó Cuív, and from communities. In regard to strand 1, there are many community facilities that could avail of this programme, especially in areas of disadvantage. My concern is that it is like a drip feed. The scheme is turned on and off and there is no continuity in terms of access to the programme. While I know this is budget related and budget specific, I would like to see a more transparent and consistent scheme being designed.

With regard to the review, we only got this programme at the end of last year and we took it over from 1 January. My first priority was to make sure that the programme continued. As the Deputies said, this is a very important programme and I did not want any delay in regard to it continuing and the programme being put in place, so that was my priority. We need a review of the scheme, and I want to respond to the points made by the two Deputies, many of which I agree with. The scheme supports more than 2,000 jobs. There are 1,600 people employed and 306 managers, and I have provided €815,000 for 12 new social enterprises. I like this scheme. Deputy Ó Cuív referred to the people who are on the scheme.

It is important that we give them an opportunity to be in the workplace and give back to society.

Work is being done in terms of social protection and discussions on these schemes are constantly being held. However, I must be careful in that some of them are social enterprises and meet social needs. I do not want to affect schemes that are performing a good for society that no Department, local authority or agency is addressing. Without such schemes, communities would not have access to certain services. My first priority is to protect them and their funding and prevent something from being introduced that would affect them negatively in any way. I will want the Deputies' support in that regard, as these important schemes are working.

I am sorry, but the Minister will have a final minute in which to reply.

That is fine. I thank the Acting Chairman.

I do not like interrupting, but I am trying to keep to the time limits.

I understand Pobal administers a large part of the programme. Is the Minister personally consulted before any scheme is reduced or closed? Pobal has previously made bad recommendations regarding the kinds of service in question. Will the Minister reassure me that no scheme will be reduced or closed without his personal say so?

As part of the review, will the Minister consider costing a doubling of the scheme's size? More than 2,000 full-time equivalents would be needed to provide all of the community services, some of which have a semi-economic basis, while others are of significant social importance, for example, community halls, while also generating some income. The Minister's costing could take into account the savings that would be made in the social welfare budget. It is all taxpayers' money. If the State saves with one hand and spends with the other, the taxpayer only has to worry about the net cost.

I welcome the Minister's statement that he will pay close attention to ensuring none of the existing schemes will be adversely affected by the review. One of the advantages of having the programme in the then Department of Social Protection was that, if savings were made on jobseekers' payments, there could be a supplementary budget and transferring funding internally was easier.

However, that should not be a blockage in expanding the scheme which offers real and tangible work for people who are otherwise finding it difficult to work and provides projects for communities. Regardless of whether they are projects with tourism features like the ones Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív indicated or community facilities, they play a vital role.

I urge the Minister to accelerate the review. Our frustration is that emerging communities are shut out from the programme. That is the problem. If people move from the live register onto this programme, there is an additional cost to the Minister's Department, but there is a saving elsewhere. Joined-up Government thinking is needed in order that these funds can flow from one Department to the other.

The Minister should try to keep his answer as tight as possible.

I inherited a budget of €45 million for this year, although it was subsequently increased to €46 million. I will negotiate with the rest of the Government for further funding for next year. We must remember that the programme has only been running since 1 January. I would like to see further funding for it, but the problem lies with the existing budget. For new schemes to come on line, others must be dropped. That is the problem.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked about Pobal, which administers the programme's schemes, and I will give him an honest answer. It notifies me of schemes that will be dropped. I have ministerial authority to reject that decision, but the Deputy knows that the minute I do so, I will face more allegations like those made in the Chamber this morning about interfering in the process.

The Minister has to be brave.

I have already seen it happen. I asked Pobal to review a number of its decisions with which I was not happy. It is reviewing them. It receives a great deal of criticism, but it has a professional team and makes good decisions 99.9% of the time. I support it in that regard.

I need to examine the appeals mechanism and will do so. I have spoken to Pobal about this matter and, to be fair, it has accepted the need to do so.

I thank the Minister for his co-operation.

Barr
Roinn