Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)

I thank Deputies Donnelly and Gannon for their contributions. I thank Deputy Mark Ward for tabling the amendment. We all agree it is a good idea to use as much of the proceeds as possible from the seizure of criminal assets for the purpose of putting them back into communities. It is a good idea that is done. The community safety fund is the mechanism through which that is done. I recently had an opportunity to give out money in the community safety funds. I have to consider the applications that come in. There is one thing I am trying to ensure happens - it happened a bit this year but I want to see it happen more next year. As Deputy Gannon said, there are entities that are very proficient in applying for funds. They are very deserving of getting funding. They are good at it and organised in doing it. I am trying to ensure with the community safety fund that smaller communities which are probably not as proficient at filling out forms are identified and we give money to them. For the sports capital grant, it is the case, as Deputy Gannon said, that the club that has the accountant or somebody who works in the Civil Service who can do all the forms proficiently is at a huge advantage over the club that does not have those individuals. There are two functions to it. We need to make the process simpler. The sports capital grant is different because there are huge amounts of money. In the community safety fund, the maximum amount I gave out was €150,000. A lot of the funds are about €50,000. We are targeting deprived areas and areas subjected to a lot of criminal activity.

I agree with the principle and spirit of the amendment. There is a huge advantage in redirecting the proceeds of crime seized into the communities most affected by it. However, I am not in a position to accept the amendment. I know the objective; my concern is the amendment sets down in law a very strict statutory procedure for the purposes of determining how money should be allocated. It is €4.6 million this year. I hope to be able to get that up over the coming years. If this amendment was enacted, it would create a formal mechanism for redirecting the proceeds of crime into community projects and that is already Government policy. This year, I announced an allocation of €4.4 million for the community safety fund, supporting 42 community safety projects nationwide. That is a 33% increase on the previous year's allocation. I have already secured a further increase for 2026 so we will have €4.75 million next year. They are significant sums of money.

The statutory architecture to deliver on these objectives in a structured and community-led manner is already being put in place through the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024. It establishes the new local community partnerships we will see throughout Dublin and the rest of the country in the near future. The national office for community safety has responsibility for administering the community safety fund and is also providing support, training and guidance to local community safety partnerships being rolled out nationwide. They will identify issues relating to community safety in their areas and develop responses through tailored local community safety plans.

My view on the amendment, notwithstanding the fact that it is well intentioned, is that it would create a parallel and potentially conflicting process to what I have outlined. That is why I cannot support it. There is €4.7 million to be allocated but, if this amendment were to be adopted, it would put in place a real statutory procedure to ensure there was a review of the financial supports to disadvantaged communities. That is a process that would be ongoing. I would prefer to be able to identify the projects that need the money. TDs and public representatives have a big role in this. In a lot of local areas, the people doing work are not aware that they can apply for this fund. It is better if we can just get people to apply for it and there is a process whereby that money can be given to them. I cannot accept the amendment because it sets out in legislation a very detailed process when this is something that should be simpler. I think all Ministers will recognise when it comes to allocation of this fund that it has to go to the most deprived areas affected by crime.