Paul Donnelly (Dublin West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank both groups for their presentations, which were very interesting. Deputy Ó Cathasaigh asked a number of the questions I had wanted to ask. In regard to taking risks, I attended Charities Institute Ireland's presentation last weekend and thought it was very interesting to hear the organisation’s views on risk-taking in funding, whether from the community itself and the public at large or from philanthropic organisations or groups of individuals, and how the balance is spent. We heard about the experiences of a number of organisations, especially in the US, given the presentation was based largely on the American experience. One year, they might raise $500 million or a couple of hundred million dollars and then the following year, because of issues with spending on, say, advertising, administration, CEO costs or whatever it might be, public trust in that body falls through the floor. Sometimes, philanthropic organisations can give charities, community groups and voluntary groups that bit of space to be a risk-taker in some of the steps they want to take, and that can be important.

Deputy Ó Cathasaigh made an important point about the power balance between the funding and the work that is done, as well as who is given the money and for what reason. When we talk about tax incentives or tax breaks for people who are giving substantial sums, we have to be really careful. The Charities Regulator has a very important part to play in ensuring that taxpayers' money, which is what it is and which is, in effect, given back by the philanthropic organisation to the people, or at least spent on them, will be used in the correct way and properly regulated. The witnesses might comment on that.

One organisation I have always found really interesting is Benefacts, which the witnesses referred to in their documents in the context of statistics and data on the community and voluntary sector and how important it is to know the number of people who work in the sector and the level of money that is raised within the sector. All those very important data show the value, not least in the Twenty-six Counties, of community and voluntary organisations. In fact, a lot of both physical and mental health organisations and disability organisations just would not exist without philanthropic funding or the supports from community funding. I have asked this question a number of times of the Department and I am still not exactly clear on it. It relates to the funding that was given to Benefacts. The Department is bringing the expertise in house but I have not seen that level of transparency coming from the Government in regard to data and openness. The witnesses might speak to that.

On bridging loans, I am involved in a community group that is also a charity, and pretty much all our funding comes from either the local authority or the HSE. One of the key developments we have built up over recent years is a separate fund that will allow us, if we have any issues or if the company needs to be wound up, to survive for three months. Is that a separate issue to that of bridging loans? Do they apply to organisations that are perhaps waiting on funding from a State organisation and do not have money to pay the wages, or are the witnesses talking about new projects, community or voluntary groups or charities that are looking to set up something new?