Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the witnesses for their attendance. I give a special welcome to the students from UCD in the Public Gallery, who, I understand, are doing a master's degree in rural development and sustainable agriculture. I hope the meeting is of benefit to them and that we have a considerable engagement this morning.

Before we begin, witnesses and members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that could be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if a speaker's statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, that speaker will be asked to directed to discontinue his or her remarks. It is imperative to comply with any such direction of the Chair.

Members attending remotely are reminded of the constitutional requirement that to participate in public meetings, they must be physically present within the confines of the place where Parliament has chosen to sit. In this regard, I ask all members participating via Microsoft Teams and wishing to contribute to confirm they are on the grounds of the Leinster House complex. I ask all members, whether in the room or attending remotely, to ensure their mobile telephones are switched off or in silent mode.

This meeting is to review Our Rural Future: Rural Development Policy 2021-2025 and discuss challenges and opportunities for its successor strategy. The strategy was launched as a blueprint for rural development when it was published in March 2021. Now is the opportune time to review the strategy, in tandem with the ongoing consultation, to forge a successor strategy for the 2026 to 2030 period. We look forward to reflecting on the strategy and identifying both the challenges and opportunities for the future of rural development.

I welcome the following officials from the Department of Rural and Community Development and the Gaeltacht: Mr. Fintan O'Brien, assistant secretary; Mr. Gareth Makim, principal officer; and Ms Michelle McKiernan, assistant principal officer. I thank them for being with us. I invite Mr. O'Brien to make his opening remarks.

Mr. Fintan O'Brien:

I thank the Chair and members of the committee for the invitation to attend today’s meeting. We very much welcome the opportunity to update the committee on the work of the Department in respect of Ireland's rural development policy, Our Rural Future.

Since its launch in 2021, Our Rural Future has set out the Government's ambitions for rural Ireland and provided the framework for rural development activity across Departments. This whole-of-government approach is central to the policy and its implementation. While the policy has been developed and led by the Department of Rural and Community Development and the Gaeltacht, a large part of the actions under its umbrella has been delivered by a range of Departments across the system. Some of the actions delivered across government to date include improvements in digital connectivity, support for regional enterprise and employment, improvements in education, research and skills development in rural areas, and developments in regard to key infrastructural provision.

Within the Department of Rural and Community Development and the Gaeltacht, a range of funding schemes and initiatives continue to be implemented that directly support the aims of Our Rural Future. For example, from our recent engagement with this committee, members will be aware of the positive developments in relation to the investment in, and development of, our outdoor recreation sector and the attendant social, environmental and economic benefits that brings. Similarly, there has been continued investment through a number of schemes that aim to support the regeneration of rural towns and villages across the country. The town centre first policy continues to be implemented in conjunction with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Earlier this month, the Minister, Deputy Calleary, announced a further round of funding under the rural regeneration and development fund, RRDF, with more than €20 million approved for 30 projects across the country. Further announcements of funding are due in the coming months under the town and village renewal scheme, the outdoor recreation infrastructure scheme and the CLÁR programme.

This is not an exhaustive detailing of activity across the system under the umbrella of Our Rural Future in recent years. Committee members will be aware that more detail of actions delivered by some 25 Departments and agencies has been reported through a series of seven progress reports to date. The implementation of actions under the policy is supported by an implementation advisory group, the membership of which includes several Departments and key rural stakeholders. Our Rural Future runs until the end of 2025 and work is well under way on the development of a new iteration of the policy from 2026. Indeed, the programme for Government commits to the development of a new policy. It will seek to build on the momentum achieved to date but must also recognise and address the challenges that remain and that will emerge over the coming years in rural Ireland.

While the new policy is still in development, the central principles that underpinned the current Our Rural Future will also underpin the new policy. These guiding principles for the development of the new policy include: ensuring the policy is rooted in extensive consultation - I will outline some more detail on this aspect shortly; recognising the interdependence of rural and urban development; recognising that rural Ireland is not homogenous - not all rural areas are the same and our policies and interventions must take account of that; and the importance of recognising the balance between what is working well versus the challenges that remain.

I mentioned the importance of consultation. Much work has been done in this regard over recent months. The process of gathering views to inform the new policy commenced with an online survey earlier this year, followed by a series of eight stakeholder and public events that took place across the country and online. Taken together, we have gathered the views of almost 2,000 people during the consultation process so far. The insights shared through this process will be invaluable in shaping our response to the opportunities and challenges faced by rural communities.

To briefly summarise for the information of committee members, some of the main themes emerging from the consultation to date include support for ongoing investment in digital connectivity, enterprise growth and community infrastructure, and a shared ambition to further strengthen local economies and enhance quality of life. There has also been strong support for a focus on infrastructure, housing, rural transport, essential services and continued investment in town regeneration. The feedback received to date will be central to shaping the direction of the new policy.

Informed by what we have heard to date, the Minister, Deputy Calleary, will shortly publish a public consultation document setting out the key emerging themes and priorities for the new policy and seeking views in relation to same. This will be the final formal stage of the public consultation process, and we would of course welcome any written submission committee members may wish to make in due course.

Importantly, the public consultation process and our ongoing bilateral engagements with Departments will directly inform both the strategic direction of the new policy but also the development of a clear whole-of-government set of actions for delivery which will seek to deliver real benefits for rural communities across the country.

I also note that over the lifetime of the current policy, continuous dialogue with stakeholders and people in rural Ireland has been important, and this will continue to be the case in the coming years through structures such as the rural ideas fora and the rural youth assembly.

I hope this brief outline has been informative for committee members. I look forward to hearing the views of committee members, and my colleagues and I are happy to respond to any questions they may have.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Mr. O'Brien very much. I will respectfully go the members, both online and physically present, for their contributions and questions. We have in the region of five to seven minutes per person. Anyone who wishes to ask a question or make any contribution may raise their hand.

Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Gabhaim buíochas as ucht an ráiteas. I thank Mr. O'Brien for his opening statement and for attending this committee meeting. I have spoken to the Minister about this at length in my capacity as rural development spokesperson for my party, Sinn Féin, and I have raised it on the floor of the Dáil. There was a missed opportunity in 2001 to 2005 in Our Rural Future, notwithstanding some of the really solid proposals that were in it and the progress on some of the objectives contained within the plan, in that it left out housing. Housing is mentioned in the document but one could not say it is featured in it in any great sense. From my conversations, in particular with people of my age, but with all age groups living in rural Ireland, the single biggest threat to the future of rural communities is housing, the inability of people to build homes in the areas in which they grew up and in which they wish to raise their families, and the inability to get anything resembling an affordable home in a rural community. There is a particularly pronounced manifestation of the housing crisis, especially in coastal rural communities, and I am thinking about my own area in County Waterford, but this is replicated all around our coastline, where the increased demand for holiday homes and investment properties that are then used as short-term lets on online platforms interferes with the regular market price. I understand that these matters are the responsibility of the housing Department and the housing Minister. I am also concerned about the pace at which social housing has been developed or, in many cases, has not been developed in rural communities, but rather in towns and cities, where it is painfully slow. These are the big issues that need to feature in the new plan.

I have been thinking about this an awful lot. A rural development policy and strategy are quite rightly being developed by a section in the Department and the Minister, Deputy Calleary, but in my opinion and that of many people to whom I speak, the greatest single input is housing. The plan needs to be co-authored by the Minister for housing because the existential crisis for rural communities is the lack of suitable housing for local people. I understand the Minister has formally met with the Minister for housing to discuss these issues, and I welcome that. I asked the Minister, Deputy Calleary, earlier this year if he had met the Minister for housing but at that point he had not. I put the question to him again last week and he told me that he had had several engagements, and that is very welcome. There should, however, be a level of co-ownership with the Minister for housing when it comes to the rural strategy.

To what extent is the Department engaging with officials in the Department of housing, outside of ministerial meetings, to tackle these issues? I am thinking particularly of guidelines for rural planning and increased funding for local authorities that are dealing with additional costs for infrastructure in rural areas and for building. Another critical issue holding back development is the Gaeltacht planning guidelines. To what extent will housing be front and centre in this policy document?

Mr. Fintan O'Brien:

I thank Deputy McGuinness. I agree that there is no doubt about the centrality of housing, both as a rural issue and a national issue, and that interdependence I talked about between rural and urban. They are part of the same argument and they cannot be separated. From our point of view, when we look at the themes that are emerging from the policy, be it balanced regional development, quality of life, employment or growth, all of those things interlink back to the housing issue. That has been the most common issue as we have gone around the country, and online and in talking to stakeholders. When talking to the OECD about the work it has been doing on a review of rural policy, it pointed to housing as a major infrastructural issue as well.

Deputy McGuinness notes that they are matters for the Department of housing but there is a whole-of-government approach, which is really important. As was noted, the Minister has met the Minister, Deputy Browne, and reiterated the importance of clear housing actions being a core part of what is in our policy. From our point of view, as I understand it, the Department of housing is also engaged in its process of developing a new national housing policy, and a lot of effort is going into aligning ourselves and making sure we are not at cross purposes. One of the things we are doing at the moment is engaging in a series of bilateral discussions. We have pretty much met all relevant Departments at this stage. We have gone through with them where we are at the moment and what the emerging issues are. Clearly, in the discussion with the Department of housing, the feedback from us has been that the housing issue has come up again and again in our consultation.

I mentioned in my opening statement that the Minister would be launching a public consultation document. That is now with Departments for their views. We want to get that out as soon as possible. Once that is out there, we will be back working bilaterally with Departments, including housing, and making sure we reflect in the narrative how important issues like housing are and also that the series of actions I discussed are clear, ambitious and timebound. I cannot imagine that housing would not feature centrally in that regard. It is a long way of answering the Deputy's question but we are very much engaged, along with a range of other Departments.

Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is positive to hear. I hope the proof of that will be in the document when it is published or goes out to consultation.

I have a similar question about the bilateral meetings that are ongoing with various Departments. What ongoing engagement is there with Uisce Éireann in particular? Although it effectively gets its direction in terms of how much money it has to spend on capital projects from the Government in the NDP, what engagement is there with Uisce Éireann about prioritising infrastructural investment in wastewater and water services in rural areas to facilitate house building? What engagement is there with regional assemblies and local authorities, either individually or through their representatives on national frameworks, in particular in terms of regional development in the case of the regional assemblies and the regional spatial and economic strategies, RSES, and with the local authorities and the local government sector?

I see rural transport is mentioned, which is really positive. The feedback I get from people involved in the delivery of rural transport services is that the approach of the National Transport Authority when it comes to route selection, approving routes or making changes is creating huge problems for users and the usability of the service. In many cases, they are great services, but sometimes changes come down the road and nobody really understands why because they did not originate in the county in which the changes occur. Is there anything in the draft document about the democratisation or decentralisation of Local Link and rural transport planning?

Mr. Fintan O'Brien:

There are a couple of points to respond to there. We have not directly engaged with Uisce Éireann. We have taken the approach to date that, under existing policy, we would engage via the Department on actions to be delivered on water, and we have taken that approach for the new one. We are engaging quite widely, though, and we have either met or are scheduled to meet some of the other bodies the Deputy mentioned.

We had good engagement with the local authority City and County Management Association committee on rural development during the summer. I cannot remember the exact date. As a Department we also have a quarterly meeting with the CCMA where we discuss shared priorities. It is a key delivery partner for us and we try to keep in touch with it as much as possible. I know it will be having a national forum in November and we are slated to go to that. More generally, we would be in contact with the local authorities on an ongoing basis across our schemes and policies. As I have said, they are key for us.

We are also due to meet the regional assemblies in November to get their views. One of the things we talk about quite a lot is balanced regional development. The regional assemblies are at the core of this to understand their perspective and understand where the various regions see the priorities and the challenges. This will be very useful engagement for us also. We are also meeting the Western Development Commission in the coming weeks. It has a particular role in the region it serves also.

That leads me to one of the things the OECD mentioned when it came over with a number of international experts, both academic and OECD-based, and they were looking at our system. They were struck by how many different layers there are between central government, local authorities, the local development companies which do an unbelievable amount of work on the ground, and regional assemblies. It took them a while to get their heads around these layers and where they all fit together. This is something we are thinking about ourselves, in terms of clarifying that environment in which rural development policy works.

With regard to Local Link, I do not really know how those routes are chosen. When Deputy McGuinness mentions top-down, certainly one of the principles we would see in relation to rural development is place-based idea. It is not possible from our offices in Dublin and Ballina for us to design schemes that suit every single rural area. Many of our schemes, be they LEADER or some of our more nationally funded schemes, are based on this idea of local consultation and local authorities engaging with communities. This is how we deliver value for money and how we get schemes and initiatives that impact what people on the ground want. This principle is very much at the forefront of our thinking.

Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have been reading through the budget documentation over the past fortnight and I realised the town and village renewal scheme has been cut by €1 million. It has been cut from €22 million to €21 million in this year's allocation. If we put this into an inflation calculator, it amounts to a €2.2 million cut in real terms. As somebody who worked in local government and served as a local councillor for many years, I see the value of the scheme, but I also understand how scarce money can be and how construction inflation is really hampering the ability of local authorities such as Waterford City and County Council to carry out work and deliver projects on the ground. Is there any comment on this? I do not expect Mr. O'Brien to give me a different result from an inflation calculator because, depending on the reference amounts put in, you can get an effective cut of €2 million or €3 million. I did an average on a couple of different calculations and I got €2.2 million. In numerical terms, it is a €1 million cut to the town and village renewal scheme.

Mr. Fintan O'Brien:

From our point of view, the initial allocation that came out in the budget was €21 million. The note I had for 2025 was €20 million, but I can double-check that. From our point of view, these allocations are finalised when they go through the process with the committees and they get signed off at the end of the year. There has been a lot of development and investment in the town and village renewal scheme, with approximately 900 projects around the country since 2020. I am happy enough that I have seen quite a lot of them and there is a lot of good stuff happening there.

We are very conscious of that inflationary pressure and the idea of getting bang for buck and whether this is being eaten into. We see this across the rural regeneration and development fund, RRDF, and the town and village renewal, TVR, scheme. We have even seen it in smaller schemes such as CLÁR. To a degree, one of the ways we have tried to handle this is that while we cannot control inflation, obviously, we have been speaking to local authorities as we have gone along. One of the things they have asked about is the fact that they cannot get as much as they used to for some of those maximum values in particular bands of schemes. For example, CLÁR used to have a maximum of €50,000 and this has gone up to €65,000 this year. This is not fixing inflation but we are trying to be cognisant of these challenges. Part of the process is continuous engagement with local authorities as they go through projects. As cost pressures continue to arise, we are trying to deal with them, making sure we are staying within budget and seeing whether we have to cut our cloth on certain projects. There is a constant whirl of engagement with local authorities. We have the very challenging task of trying to implement a range of projects with this inflationary pressure. We are aware of it. Personally, I do not have a fix for inflation but we are very much aware of it.

Sarah O'Reilly (Aontú)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Mr. O'Brien for the presentation. I want to give an example of my town. I am from Bailieborough in County Cavan. We got the great news at the beginning of October that we were getting €792,000 for an extensive town centre plan. This is great and brilliant, but the people are not all that excited because, in 2023, we got up to €100,000 for a town centre plan and, in 2016, we had approximately €30,000 for a town centre plan. The people see we have three plans and not much has come out of them. In many rural town centres there is a big problem with derelict buildings, derelict sites and sites belonging to people who are in England or away and nobody can get anybody to do anything with them. They are a huge eyesore and a blight on the towns.

There is a feeling that money could be used better. The taxpayer does not see they are getting value for money from all these plans. They see consultants, that there is public consultation and that things go out all the time for public consultation, but there is no move on from the plans. They see surveys and architects and all these people benefiting, but the plans seem to sit there and there is nobody there to drive them on and put action into them. I see this as a huge problem. We all welcome it but there is actually no excitement about €792,000 because it is for another extensive plan. I have a concern about all of the plans that are sitting there, which have all gone to public consultation and nothing is driving many of them on. I know there is a plan to drive on this plan - I hope - but this is a concern I have.

I am on this committee and I had no idea that announcement was going to be made. It would have been nice if we had even received an email about it when it was announced. That is another thing.

The town and village renewal scheme is good and most of the towns and villages in my area have all benefited from it, but the application process is very difficult for ordinary volunteer development groups. This needs to be addressed. You nearly have to be a professional and most groups have to nearly employ somebody to fill out the forms. This is stopping people from applying for these schemes. I know there have to be strict rules for governance in these schemes but many voluntary groups are not able to go through with the schemes as they would have to be professionals.

Some of the schemes are used as painting schemes. We see loads of murals and loads of lovely painted buildings in towns. They are beautiful for a year or two and then the paint starts flaking off. Perhaps we could have something more substantial with the money. As I have said, many town centres have derelict buildings. Perhaps that money could be used by the local authority to compulsorily purchase, CPO, or buy a site that is an eyesore, derisk it and sell it on. That was an idea that might have been piloted, and it was a really good idea, but I have not heard of it since. Perhaps it is still in operation. The painting schemes are grand for a while but it is papering over the cracks.

Mr. Fintan O'Brien:

Regarding the idea of town centre first plans and project development measures, I agree wholeheartedly that plans must lead to tangible action and investment.

Maybe four or five years ago, there was a bit more of a scattergun approach to how those plans were funded. We have tried to rationalise that through the town centre first plans in order to have one avenue. We also have, and I think this is the funding the Senator is referring to in Bailieborough, this idea of either category one or proto-development measures to get bigger projects ready to hit the ground. What we were seeing across schemes was that an awful lot of the time at the start of projects, they were not quite shovel ready because the investment was not there to get the planning ready and get the permissions ready. It is important to build towards such actions.

One of the things we have done recently is to have a person to drive the process of moving from plans to actions. I have met the town regeneration officer in Cavan quite a few times. Therefore, our support for town teams is feeding into town centre first plans and feeding into actions. Certainly in the last couple of years as we have gone through application processes for, say, town and village regeneration or the RRDF, we have started to see the influence of the focus on planning part. The town regeneration officer is driving really high-quality applications and projects. I understand that quite a bit of money has gone into that. Some of that is that mix of the theory of how this works and the practicality of getting things on the ground in towns. That is the balance we are trying to get to. We have rationalised that approach, but at the core of our thinking is still the idea that planning leads to better applications and better projects that deliver real benefit.

The Senator put her finger on a really important point in relation to the application process in towns and the capacity and skill sets that exist. As we have been going through this consultation process, we have started to look again at what our application forms look like and simple things like that. I was looking at a form for my dad the other day for another part of the Government that was 36 pages. I have been in the Civil Service for a long time, and I could not make head nor tail of it to be quite honest. Therefore, I understand that frustration.

There are certain towns where by happenstance or whatever there is a person with the skill set to take it up and do a very professional application or plan. There are certain ones that do not, and certain towns or communities that possibly do not even know where to start. It is on us, in terms of communication etc., to make that process a little easier. Therefore, we are looking at our application processes and reforms. The town regeneration officers are important in getting out and supporting communities as well. One of the things we are thinking about as a possible emerging action in this new policy is more direct engagement with communities to explain what the schemes are, what they fund and what is required. We hope to put in place a simplified application process and to provide a little more direct help. We have not figured out exactly how to do that yet. It is certainly something that has been coming to us through the consultation process. We have things like funding to help town teams to get themselves started and maybe get a little bit of help. Maybe there is something we can do a little bit more directly.

We keep the elements of various schemes like the painting scheme and the town and village scheme under review year on year. Three or four years back, there was quite a focus on the idea of town painting enhancement in town and village renewal. It was up front and centre, but it has disappeared back into the depths of the scheme as we have prioritised other things in recent years. I have seen great examples of it. When I down to west Clare every summer, I see some unbelievable murals in Milltown Malbay that make the town look great. The Senator is right, however. It is so much more transient than a physical remote working hub or a community centre. We do a review every year of what we are funding. We have not done a front-and-centre painting scheme in a couple of years.

Absolutely, vacancy and dereliction is a massive issue. We have seen this idea of changing priorities again in the town and village renewal scheme in the last two years. We brought a portion of money out of the main scheme - the building acquisition and land acquisition measure - to allow local authorities to buy buildings and plots of land and develop them for strategic purposes. They are required within three or four years of getting that town and village renewal money to come back to us with a proposal on another one of their schemes and say "now that we have purchased this house or building, this is what we are going to do with it". That seems to be quite popular. It seems that there are quite a few sites and things out there - I do not want to call them low-hanging fruit - that local authorities have been eyeing up. That is working quite well. Quite a lot of our schemes will have a focus on strategically important buildings that have fallen out of use, such as a remote working hub in County Mayo. I cannot remember the name of the town, but it was the first project I visited when I joined the Department five years ago. There are lots of examples of banks and post offices. The local authorities have bought Garda stations, old creameries and all kinds of buildings that we are looking at reinvesting in and making real community assets out of them. That will continue to be a core part of what we are trying to do. I imagine it will be a core part of what is going to be in the urban renewal fund, URF, in future as well.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Senator. We have two more speakers indicating, so I am going to go next to Deputy Aird.

William Aird (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The witnesses are very welcome here today. I have a few things I would like to say. I thank them for all the work they have done previous to this in the local authorities. I was there for years, and we benefited in no uncertain way from the schemes. I was involved in an awful lot of the schemes and the filling out of forms and everything. I agree 100% with what Mr. O'Brien has said about the forms. This problem is found in every Department, as he has outlined. I am sorry to say that it is getting worse. I do not know why, or who designed these application forms, but they certainly should look at the people at the other end who are all voluntary.

I commend the local authorities because they are rolling out all these different schemes. There is one thing I would like to say: in any project the Department sends up for approval, a huge number of working hours go into it. Whatever happens or whoever is adjudicating on them, if you do not get the money for the project, that is the end of it. I have asked on several occasions - hopefully I will get answers now that I have been elected to the Dáil - for details on what happened and who adjudicated. I have asked to be given the marks to understand why we did not get it. We had a beautiful project recently in Mountrath in my own county, involving a walkway from the main street. I was very disappointed that it did not get approved for funding. Each individual town and village throughout our county is entitled to a share of the pie. It is important to do it from that point of view.

I will go back to the housing issue. There has to be more joined-up thinking as regards housing in urban areas and dereliction. We are all talking about dereliction. Everybody is coming here. I hear it day in, day out from all the different speakers in the Dáil. It is about putting boots on the ground. When I was on the council, I encouraged it to buy sites for rural houses and houses that were left unoccupied in urban areas and all that sort of thing. It would go through compulsory purchase orders, CPOs, and eventually it would get them. However, we could be talking about ten years by the time we would see the completed project. That is very unfair to everybody. People in the areas living close by want to see all these sites developed. People on the housing list would love to be living in that house or whatever the case may be. A little more joined-up thinking is needed. We must try to put a timeframe on the time that elapses from when a local authority buys an old house - or two or three houses together, as Mr. O'Brien mentioned - to get it done up or whatever it is. Surely a timeframe can be put on that. That is a huge problem I have seen down the years. When a great project is brought out, everyone is delighted and excited to see it - Mr. O'Brien spoke about painting - but the next thing is that it goes on and on and the good goes out of it.

We can see the schemes that were brought in that worked very well. Under the rural housing scheme, people got a grant to do up an old derelict house. There were two things in that. It gave an opportunity to a person in an urban area who wanted to live in a rural setting. A person who was born and reared in a rural setting, but was not lucky enough to be a farmer's son or daughter and could not get planning permission, could avail of this scheme to buy a rural house that was run down and get a grant to do it up and live in the rural community.

If we are serious about rural Ireland, we have to stand back and take a good look at all our villages in rural Ireland. If people cannot get planning permission and live in the rural area where they were reared, why are we doing so much talking about rural Ireland? That is the first thing. People want to live in rural Ireland in places like Ballacolla, in my local area, and all the different areas where there are small populations. There is benefit to that. It keeps the school going. It keeps all the local sporting activities that are there going.

When a person moves into a town, they get involved in all the sporting activities in the town, which takes from the rural area. I have seen that, but we just talk about it. I have made representations thousands of times for people in rural areas, only to be told by the local authorities that they did not have a local need. I would be told that I was there for the formation but we never said that. This came out through ministerial orders that were put down on local authorities. I am getting an opportunity here to say what I have been saying for the last 40 years on local authorities. The people who are deciding are not allowing it to happen. I do not see anything wrong with keeping our villages alive. That is why there is nothing as bad as seeing a rural school closed. When I pass through some of my communities, I see old school houses that are closed. They are all turned into community initiatives that the Department funds, and I accept that, but it is heartbreaking to see. This should never happen. That is why I am encouraging this at the moment. I am very concerned about my local school in Wolfhill, County Laois. It is a most beautiful school, which generations of people down through the years have attended. We are seeing such schools disappear before our eyes because we are not growing rural Ireland and rural counties. I want it to stop. Please bring this issue to the table in the new programme. Simple things can have great results for rural communities.

I want to acknowledge the work that was done on initiatives like Local Link. There is more work to be done. We have a hop-on, hop-off bus service and a bicycle hire scheme in Portlaoise. Both are working brilliantly. I was the first person to ride one of the bikes at the launch of the scheme, when I was a member of the county council in Portlaoise. Initially, people laughed but now they are queueing up for the bikes. When I travel, I use public transport whenever I can. I see people coming out of housing estates, getting on a bike, leaving it at the train station and coming to Dublin to work. That is what public transport is about. This scheme has worked. I compliment and thank the Department for it. The new programme definitely needs to have more joined-up thinking.

Climate change rules come under the remit of the witnesses as well. I thank all the officials who have worked hard to get the scheme in Mountmellick up and running. At least we have moved on to a more critical stage of it. It takes a lot of time and it is very frustrating.

We have to prioritise areas that have plans for greenways but have received no funding yet. I find this very difficult. I have been speaking to the Minister, Deputy Calleary, about it since I was elected to the Dáil. When the grants come out, we usually get them last, after everyone else. I look at what is in it for my county. I have three projects on the go. I am trying to get a greenway off the ground and we are trying to include that. There has to be more joined-up thinking on priorities on the part of Coillte and Bord na Móna. I am trying to get Bord na Móna to the table for a natural, proposed greenway that we have from Portlaoise. I am passionate about this. It was not a railway line; it was just a line that was used for moving peat off the bogs. The existing line has a very small gauge. It goes under the railway line, two main roads and two local roads. It could not be built today, as permission would not be granted to go under a national railway line. All of that is there but I am meeting obstacle after obstacle. I am really sick and tired of it. I am sorry to say this in public, but I am sick of it. I thank Laois County Council for coming on board with me. Everybody involved is pushing for it but it is just not happening quickly enough. That is why I am saying that when we have natural things within our county, everybody needs to come in and work for the greater good. That is all I am saying. It is not for me and it is not about votes. It is about leaving something for the next generation of people. We can see what we did with bringing biodiversity back in our towns that we had ignored for years. Bicycle lanes are another good example. I have been in politics long enough to see what happened. The wheel is turning. I ask the Department to consider simple things like that.

In Portlaoise now there is a grand little park where there is biodiversity, nature and everything. Kids are using it. I did not have that when I was a small lad in Portlaoise. Keep up the good work. I would appreciate it if the witnesses could answer some of my questions at the end. I do not want to take up anybody else's time.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you, Deputy. I ask Mr. O'Brien to be as brief as possible.

Mr. Fintan O'Brien:

I will try my best. The Deputy touched on many different policy areas which have different issues and challenges. It highlights what we mean when we talk about a whole-of-government approach. This is challenging but it is what we are trying to capture as best we can. I will try to respond to the Deputy's points in the order he mentioned them.

I hope the committee will understand that I am not a housing expert, but the centrality of housing is coming through the process. When our Department invests in community centres, walkways or greenways, they are linked to the idea that they feed into viable rural communities. It is not one thing over another but rather a cross-government approach that we are trying to get to.

The idea of joined-up thinking is entirely common sense. I do not have any issue with it but common sense is not always that common. We certainly keep it in mind when developing our policies. We are talking to the Department of housing in relation to national housing policy. We know that the Department of tourism has been developing its tourism policy and we are trying to engage on that and make sure there is a joined-up approach. National policy on tourism has to be linked in with how that works in rural Ireland. This came through in the consultation a lot. The same point applies to disability strategies. Whatever it might be, that joined-up thinking is really important.

What the Deputy said about County Laois is reflective of the balance we are trying to get. I appreciate the Deputy's comments in relation to some of the good investments that have been made, but there is more to do. It is not a case of cheerleading for all the things that have been done but ensuring a balance. Yes, there is positivity and growth, but there is more to be done. That is what we are trying to get in the policy. The bus that goes across County Laois is a brilliant example of something simple that works amazingly. This has brought many benefits to the people in the area. I know that an RRDF project is near to opening in Portarlington as well. That is going to be a good day. I am looking forward to that one.

Volunteers, who were mentioned by the Deputy, are the key to it all. In the Department, we provide pots of money for schemes. Without volunteers, community groups and local authorities driving things on, they are just pots of money. There has been quite a lot of talk about volunteer fatigue, which was highlighted by the OECD recently. Do we keep on going back to the same guys? We need to think about how we support that. There is a volunteer strategy coming. When we did the rural youth assembly recently, I was very struck by the passion and interest of that cohort of young people in being involved in their communities. That gave me a bit of hope that maybe it is not just the same people again and again.

Local authorities are a key element. We spend a lot of time talking to local authorities. They have a lot on their plate. They are doing an awful lot of the heavy work in relation to our investments. One of the things we are trying to do is to support them a little bit more. We now have what we call capital delivery teams. This is basically a cohort of people in local authorities who are focusing on getting our rural development schemes done. That is about delivery, speed and quality. This model is starting to work really well.

Regarding the outcome of assessment processes, they are competitive processes and for quite a lot of our schemes demand outstrips the available funding. The Deputy asked for clarity on how we actually mark them. There are different things for different schemes. We look at things such as whether the application ties in with our policies on rural development and whether it fits the scheme's objectives. As I mentioned to Senator O'Reilly, we sometimes change them from year to year, depending on the feedback we receive. Cost is a massive element, and again this goes back to earlier comments on inflationary costs.

Regarding delivery, within local authorities we look at delivery records and financing in hand to make sure the capacity is still there to deliver more projects. I think the capital delivery team is really helping in this regard. We also consider the intended impacts or results of a project. What the project is actually going to deliver is another element of the scoring part of it. There also has to be a demonstration of need, and that is linked to geography and the dispersal of funding. We do not want to be in a situation where we are going back to the same spot and funding the same town again and again.

We do examine geographical dispersal. I understand it is frustrating to have an application refused when all the work goes into it and the community is behind it. We do, however, engage with local authorities after the process to give them feedback. For example, we intend to open another category 1 under the RRDF later this year. For the past couple of months, we have talked to the local authorities about the possibility of refocusing certain projects that might not have got through before or examining elements that caused concern. There is ongoing engagement to help the projects to get through. We like funding projects, but at the end of the day, it is a competitive process. I hope that answers a good deal of the Deputy’s questions.

Eoin Hayes (Dublin Bay South, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the delegates for attending and giving us this briefing. It is very helpful for us to understand everything. I realise it takes some time to prepare for such meetings.

I welcome everybody in the Gallery. Perhaps this is not the sexiest topic for people from college but it is really important. Rural Ireland, in particular, has been left behind by successive Governments over many years. I am a Dublin-based TD, so many people watching at home might be wondering why I am speaking about this. Like many people in Dublin, I have many family members and friends from rural Ireland. My parents are from rural Ireland, and my grandmother was born in Ballina, where the Department has an office. Therefore, I am very familiar with the place.

I acknowledge the work the officials do, in addition to that of the rural TDs who have spoken so eloquently about rural issues. There are many challenges and some very difficult issues. I am reminded that, in 1840, there were 8 million people on this island, which is more than there are today. That was under British rule. Many of the villages were thriving back then. We can see today that there is the issue of dereliction and of rural communities being left behind. We need to do much better.

We have talked a little about joined-up thinking and co-ordination across many Departments in respect of housing and infrastructure, and also the role of Uisce Éireann. I acknowledge that this co-ordination is critical but I want to focus a little more on the Department’s role and charter. In the first instance, I want to raise the issue of economic development in rural communities and how we can do it well. There are success stories that I examined. Westport is probably a good example, and that is because of the multinational presence. The Bandon–Kinsale area has also benefited from multinationals. I would like to hear some commentary from the delegates on working with IDA Ireland, Enterprise Ireland and all the various agencies to attract high-quality employment to rural areas. Could they also refer to how remote working may be changing the nature of work in rural communities and their capacity to stay in them?

It was stated there is about €20 million in funding for the RRDF. I want to get a better sense of the total funding being put into economic and rural development at a wider level. The sum of €20 million is good, and I am glad to see it, but in general the enormity of the problem, particularly in rural communities, is such that it merits a significantly larger amount. I would like to get a sense from the Department of how it approaches that.

I am quite concerned about men’s health, including their mental health. I will be talking about this later today and also about loneliness. I have been doing a lot of research on it. Rural loneliness is particularly acute, not just among older people but also younger people. When I spoke to some young people from SpunOut who came here to lobby Oireachtas Members, there was a young girl who was talking about her brother. She said he did not really drink, so he did not go to the pub, and did not play any sport, so he did not go to the GAA club like the rest of his schoolmates. Where does he go? There is a question to be asked about what social outlets and developments exist, particularly for young people in rural communities, to ensure people are connected.

I endorse the Department’s perspective and that of the OECD on there being layers of agencies. Probably the most stunning part of becoming a new TD is understanding the various bureaucracies that exist. Clarifying the responsibilities and the focus of public administration to solve some of the problems is a huge issue. There is an enormous responsibility on the political system to figure it out. Too often politicians point to there being so many agencies, civil servants and public sector workers but it is stunning how much the latter get done given the dysfunction in the political system. I acknowledge that but we have a genuine responsibility to do more in this regard.

If the delegates could revert to me on economic development and connectedness, I would appreciate it.

Mr. Fintan O'Brien:

No problem. On the last question first, I completely agree. If I, having been in the system for a long time, find it complicated, it must be a genuine challenge for someone in a community group who is trying to understand it. We are aware of the need to simplify it.

The Deputy mentioned our guests in the Gallery. One idea we focus on in rural development is that of the profession as a specialty. We talk a lot to the higher education institutes. We have funded a couple of bursaries. There is a master’s degree in research and rural development. We regard this as important. Rural development policy has come more to the forefront in recent years; it is a little more visible. There is expertise and a skill set, and there is an understanding that goes with those. One of the reasons we engage with the OECD and EU is that there are building blocks of theory and understanding. I am delighted that all the guests in the Gallery are here today.

The Deputy mentioned being from Dublin but having relatives down the country. One of the key points I made at the start is that this is not a rural issue as opposed to an urban one; they are one and the same. It is a national issue. What really gets my goat is a rural-versus-urban discussion about policy.

The OECD did not pull us up on, but would have mentioned, economic development. When we invest in remote working, a community centre or somewhere that is derelict, it delivers a benefit. However, we are trying to develop further our thinking on how it feeds into the long-term economic development of a town. Regarding our schemes in recent years, and as I implied to Deputy Aird regarding scoring, we want to know more about how the economic development will have an impact. Economic development is certainly part of the approach but there are also the social and cultural aspects. It is about getting the balance right. That would be at the centre of all our schemes. We talk to a number of agencies about this. The Western Development Commission, which falls under our aegis in the Department, announced recently that it had reached the €100 million milestone in relation to its Western Investment Fund. It is directly investing in regional SMEs. We have talked to officials in the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment, IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland during consultations. The regional enterprise plans will form part of the approach. IDA Ireland has a 55% target for regional investment over the next 15 years. That is absolutely central. It goes back to the idea of everything coming together, including jobs, facilities, housing and infrastructure. That is what it means to me. Associated developments, such as the establishment of new technological universities and remote working, are factors. Remote working has been a game changer, in my view.

I live in the midlands and the Department is based in Dublin and Ballina. The flexibility is a completely different world from what it was five years ago. I have been in a number of the remote working hubs that we fund around the country. Every time I go, I find a new story, such as somebody from Kilrush who is working for a multinational or someone who is working in Miltown Malbay for the holidays. The hubs work brilliantly and add so much to the process. Our target was to get to 400 hubs. We are pretty close; we are over 390. Many Deputies and Senators use them themselves. That has been really important.

The Deputy was asking about the quantum of investment in our suite of schemes. We have what we call the rural development investment programme. The allocations will be finalised when they go through committee at the end of the year, but I will outline what we are looking at from budget 2026: the local improvement scheme for non-private roads, €17 million; the CLÁR programme, which is focused on depopulated areas, €12 million; the town and village renewal scheme, €21 million; and the outdoor recreation scheme, which I discussed at a committee meeting here a couple of weeks back, €17 million.

The RRDF, which I suppose is the biggest of our schemes in this area, will be €60 million again this year. LEADER will be €32 million. LEADER is slightly different to the rest of them because that is a multi-annual issue. There is €180 million in that pot. The €32 million is slightly down on last year because of where we are in the programme. That will ramp up again as we go through it. Some of the things the Deputy mentioned related to those outlets. We fund the community centre investment fund outside of the rural development aspect. It is more on the community side, but there is €20 million in that for 2026.

Isolation and loneliness comprise one of those things we have been talking to people about. It is not something that is fixed by one agency or one Department. There are lots of different ways that it manifests itself and there are lots of different causes to it. I imagine that would feature in Our Rural Future. There is a number of things our Department does in relation to supporting men's and women's sheds and the social inclusion and communication activation programme, SICAP. I mentioned those community centre investment programmes and even things like the Tidy Towns groups. We are going to the Tidy Towns national awards on Friday. The amount of community involvement that those groups bring in is phenomenal to see. My favourite day of the year in the job is going to meet 600 Tidy Towns volunteers. It is just remarkable what they do and what they do in the community.

There is a recognition of the isolation and loneliness issue there. Do we have it cracked? We do not, but we are talking to various different Departments at the moment in relation to that. I think I have gotten most of what was mentioned.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The first part of our show has come to a close. I genuinely and sincerely thank the witnesses for being with us. We are going to suspend for ten minutes. We will be back with the next part of the show. The theme will be the same. Deputy Healy-Rae has an interest in the next element, which is all about community and rural development.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are now moving to the second part of the programme this morning. It is a review of Our Rural Future: Rural Development Policy 2021-2025. We have representatives from People and Place and the Local Development Companies Network, LDCN. I thank them for being with us.

I will now read a note on privilege and housekeeping matters before I begin. Witnesses and members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make any charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that would be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity.

Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction I may make.

Members attending remotely are reminded of the constitutional requirement that to participate in public meetings, they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex. This is due to the constitutional requirement that to participate in public meetings members must be physically present within the confines of the place where Parliament has chosen to sit. In this regard, I ask members participating via Microsoft Teams to confirm they are on the grounds of the Leinster House complex if they wish to contribute to the meeting. I remind all those in attendance to make sure their mobile phones are switched off or in silent mode.

Today's meeting concerns a review of Our Rural Future: Rural Development Policy 2021-2025. The strategy was launched as a blueprint for rural development when it was published in March 2021. Now is an opportune time to review the strategy, in tandem with the ongoing consultation to forge a new successor strategy for the 2026 to 2030 period. We look forward to reflecting on the strategy and identifying the challenges and opportunities for future rural development. I welcome from People and Place, Maynooth University, Dr. Breandán Ó Caoimh, head of social policy, who is attending virtually; and from the Local Development Companies Network I welcome Mr. Brian Kehoe, chief executive officer of Wexford Local Development, and Ms. Martina Earley, chief executive officer of Roscommon LEADER Partnership. They are all most welcome. I now invite Dr. Ó Caoimh to make his opening remarks.

Dr. Breandán Ó Caoimh:

I welcome this review of Our Rural Future, and I welcome the open and consultative manner in which it is being conducted. Good policy stems from ongoing stakeholder engagement, not just when policies are being formulated or at the end of their implementation cycle but right throughout their delivery. Good policy is strongly associated with good governance, and in respect of rural development this implies ongoing engagement, co-decision-making, and power sharing with and among rural communities, civil society, the private sector, public bodies and elected representatives. Good governance is about nurturing and sustaining partnership processes in rural development. It involves harnessing the knowledge and social capital in our rural communities and supporting structures that empower rural citizens.

Our Rural Future rightly acknowledges the contribution of LEADER to the development of rural areas, and while LEADER is a programme through which organisations and projects are supported, it needs to be seen, celebrated and promoted as much more than that. LEADER is a way, a methodology and a mechanism through which the bottom-up approach is nurtured, and through which stakeholders pool their diverse, cross-sectoral expertise and devise and deliver strategic actions that are appropriate for their localities.

Autonomous LEADER local action groups, LAGs, and local development companies have been integral to the delivery of Our Rural Future, and I salute their animation and co-delivery of projects that have been, and are being, supported through the RRDF among other funds. I recommend further investment in their capacity to stimulate, facilitate and guide projects of varying scales. I also encourage investing in the capacity of the LAGs themselves, through core funding, training, capacity-building, internal evaluation and reflective praxis to support and sustain good governance.

LEADER is widely acknowledged for its contributions to rural development, yet its impacts, and indeed those of many other measures, are generally under-recorded or they are limited to mainly quantitative indicators. Through my associations with the North Atlantic Forum and the Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation, I have seen first-hand the merits of qualitative methodologies, living laboratories, rural-oriented universities, action research, the arts and other innovations in capturing rural citizens' and other stakeholders' views, perspectives and experiences. I recommend a more holistic, engaging, and creative approach to embedding an evaluation culture within rural development.

There is high regard, especially internationally, for the seminal work done by Professor Jim Walsh, Brendan Kearney, Patricia O'Hara, and the late Packie Cummins among others, for their holistic reviews and advancement of rural development policy and practice in the 1980s and 1990s. The observations they made then are highly relevant in 2025 and I recommend we revisit their recommendations and embrace the inclusive, holistic and multidimensional approaches they pioneered.

Today, Ireland has fewer local action groups or local development companies than it had in the 1990s, when the population of rural Ireland was considerably lower. Moreover, during the past two decades, our State has gradually directed their territories towards geographical alignment with county boundaries that were drawn in the 16th and 17th centuries. It is evident that in order to give real effect to the first principle of the LEADER methodology, namely the area-based approach, we need to provide for a 21st century geography and to enable much greater innovation in the delineation of the spaces in which rural development is organised. This is particularly relevant in the west of Ireland, where the scale of counties is much greater than in the east, and it is especially relevant in the Border counties, as natural areas of development straddle the border with the North of Ireland. There is, therefore, a need for a more interjurisdictional approach to area-based development.

Rural Ireland is much more diverse and less homogenous than it was in 1988 when the EU White Paper on rural development was published. There is, however, a tendency not just in Our Rural Future, but in public policy more generally, to overlook geographical patterns across regions and counties. Maynooth University has been to the fore in mapping the changing dynamics of rural spaces. Harnessing the evidence that has been generated by their spatial analysis would allow for a much more strategic targeting of investments and a more bespoke delivery of initiatives. I recommend, therefore, the updating of the typology of rural Ireland. I also recommend the mapping of rural development investments, and an approach to evaluation that measures real associations, if any, between inputs, processes and outputs. We should resist the temptation to claim as successes or impacts deliverables that might otherwise have been achieved.

Mapping should extend beyond the policy domains covered in Our Rural Future. We need to map the totality of investments going into rural areas, and to track these investments so that we really know if there are synergies between policies. In this regard, I wish to refer the committee to the work of the European Spatial Planning Observation Network, ESPON, which, albeit some years ago, mapped the distribution of Common Agricultural Policy funds. I recommend that we undertake a similar approach in Ireland. The delivery of the national development plan and the national planning framework needs to contribute to the delivery of initiatives such as CLÁR, as well as the various support and investment mechanisms for our offshore islands.

In a current role, as an independent external evaluator of EU LIFE programmes, I have collected evidence of the symbiotic relationships between vibrant rural communities, the Irish language, and heritage and biodiversity. Farming with nature is working for farmers, despite what the agricultural industry may tell us. It is working for the rural economy, and it is working for the plant and animal species on which our health, well-being and economies depend. Such approaches need to be sustained, and I recommend mainstreaming and continuity, rather than a scheme-based approach to farming for nature, underpinned by proper payments to farmers that recognise the true value of ecological services.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Dr. Ó Caoimh for a very comprehensive and interesting statement. He is here virtually with us, from Cahersiveen we understand. He is most welcome and we thank him.

Dr. Breandán Ó Caoimh:

Yes, thanks to the national broadband plan, and these investments are really important.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Absolutely. I will now move on to Ms Earley for her opening statement.

Ms Martina Earley:

I thank the committee for this opportunity to consult with it. My colleague, Mr. Kehoe, and I are here representing more than 50 local development companies in Ireland, which have more than 2,500 staff and enjoy huge engagement at board level from voluntary activists in rural areas. I will give some information about our network.

The Local Development Companies Network, LDCN, is the national representative body for local development companies, LDCs, in Ireland. We are non-profit, community-based organisations that deliver a wide range of Government-funded programmes aimed at tackling poverty, promoting social inclusion and supporting community and economic development.

Local development companies deliver programmes such as LEADER, the social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP, the rural social scheme, or RSS, Tús, WorkAbility and the local area employment services, along with a number of key programmes such as the rural recreation scheme, support for social enterprises and support for climate and environmental initiatives.

Local development companies are active in supporting employment and careers in rural areas, through LEADER, SICAP and social enterprise support. They have a role to play in revitalising rural towns and villages through initiatives supporting economic development such as tourism. Participation, leadership and resilience are enhanced through local development structures and facilitated by integrated teams working in local development companies.

The renewal of Our Rural Future also presents an opportunity to secure the future of the rural social scheme, which has become a key lever for rural development and an important vehicle for the delivery of a wide range of rural services. RSS participants are integral to meals-on-wheels services and rural social enterprises, and to the maintenance and enhancement of outdoor recreation facilities, including walks. We would like Our Rural Future to commit to the implementation of all relevant recommendations in the recent RSS review, and to delivering increased top-ups for participation aimed at demonstrating the value of the scheme to rural communities.

While Our Rural Future is a valuable strategic document, it does not reflect the distinctive role that local development companies play in supporting rural development in Ireland. Local development companies have a presence in every village, town and county in Ireland, where they have long-term relationships with communities and community groups, going back 31 years.

Local development companies have considerable know-how in both the general practice of rural and community development and in the specific areas of work encompassed by rural development, such as climate, social inclusion, enterprise and social enterprise development. Local development companies engage locally, regionally, nationally and at European level with key agencies, and they play an important role in connecting individuals and community groups to relevant supports across all of these levels. They are seen by communities and people living in local areas as honest brokers, which is of considerable strategic value, not only with respect to macro issues such as immigration, but also with respect to more parochial issues like obtaining permissive access to private land, which is essential for the development of outdoor recreational infrastructure.

Local development companies have a grassroots reach and capacity to support communities with boots on the ground that is uniquely broad, but this local reach is married with capacity for nationwide collaboration and co-ordination through the local development companies network. They are therefore extremely well placed to play a leading role in the local implementation of national policy.

Local development companies have proven themselves to be exceptionally responsive and flexible, having played central roles in the national response to Covid, Ukraine, Storm Éowyn and the climate challenge.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Ms Earley very much for her very informative opening statement. I now invite members to make comments and ask questions.

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am glad to get the opportunity to speak. As the Acting Chair is well aware, I represent a rural county, although of course we have great towns. We have a vast rural territory. The issue of loneliness, including for farmers, was mentioned earlier.

I am very grateful for Ms Earley's overview. I welcome especially Dr. Breandán Ó Caoimh. I know him very well. He is originally from Gneeveguilla and he lives in Cahersiveen. He is a fierce man for rural Ireland and he has done a lot. We really appreciate him. We are very proud of him, as he does great work for young and old. He understands the issues we have.

When we talk about rural development companies, we have great ones in Kerry. We have the south Kerry partnership and partnerships in east and north Kerry. IRD Duhallow straddles the Blackwater river. It serves the western part of north-west Cork and the eastern part of east Kerry. It is under the stewardship of Maura Walsh and Joe McCrohan, who was here last week with the social farming group. They do great work for rural places such as we have in Kerry.

We were sad that IRD Duhallow was moved fully into Cork and it no longer works in east Kerry. The areas on either side of the Blackwater river have the same cultural values and issues and even though the river goes through the area, it is as if it never did because they are the same kind of people. We have the same again in south Kerry where people from west Cork interact a lot with people in south Kerry. They have the same issues of mountainy and maybe not-so-fertile land, but they make the best use they can of what they have, and always have done. They have survived through thick and thin.

The rural social scheme is vital for rural places, for fellows to make a few bob and to do good for their area. They have done great work under Maura Walsh, Joe McCrohan, Eamonn O'Reilly and all the core staff. We really need to keep those things going full belt and to enhance them everywhere we can. The only way we can enhance them is to get more funding all the time. As we all know, because of health and safety regulations and all of that, the money does not go as far as we want it to go.

I have a couple of issues that have been giving me a lot of bother in recent years. I have raised them several times in the Dáil with the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and whoever else. One of the biggest issues we have at the moment is planning. Many people who would build a house for themselves are not being allowed by what I call foolish strategies and nonsensical rules. One rule is the strict urban regeneration rule, which was to prevent people coming out from towns, but what it is actually doing is preventing people from building where they were brought up and reared by their fathers and mothers. They might have a site right next door to them or might be able to get a site from a neighbouring farmer or landowner but they are not permitted to do that because of this rule. I have asked the Government about it at every opportunity. I make no bones about highlighting it here because it is ridiculous. I heard Deputy Aird talk about farmers. Farmers sons and daughters were hurt for a long time but they are being facilitated now. It is the people who are living in rural areas who perhaps do not have a farm, who work in Liebherr, Fexco or Munster Joinery in the place we mentioned, Gneeveguilla, in east Kerry.

A farmer's son or daughter is considered, but a neighbour who has always lived in the same place is not considered. I am asking that this be looked at.

We have another terrible issue. We have way over 100 km of national primary roads. Someone who wants to build a house where there is an existing entrance or exit onto a national primary road will not be allowed to build a house and use the existing entrance. These people would build the houses themselves. They would borrow the money and get it. They would work for it. All they are looking for is planning permission. I am asking that the Government look at this. I am also asking that this committee further that request and add its weight to it because it is reasonable. It is just for a house for people to live in. When these people cannot get permission they move into towns, and some of them are going away to Australia. I was at a function the other night where ten people from one little pocket will be gone for Australia before Christmas. Those things are terrible.

I do not want to take up the meeting. I am glad to get the opportunity. I was a member of this committee in my first term here and I appreciated the work that was done by it then. It is doing great work. We will all work together. We have a purpose here, which is to help the people in rural areas on all the issues that they have. Planning is not the only one.

We have a list of local improvement scheme roads in Kerry like no other part of the country. We have more than 600 on the list. That started out with almost 800 roads on it back in 2018. We are not even down to 600. Those are rural people. They are not private roads, for fear anyone thinks they are. They are roads where there could be ten, 16 or maybe 18 houses. People and farmers are in and out of these roads but, because they were never taken over by the local authority, they had to go on the LIS list. The amount of funding we are getting is only doing between 12 and 20 roads every year. We need to address that too.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I ask Dr. Ó Caoimh to respond to the Deputy first.

Dr. Breandán Ó Caoimh:

That is wonderful. I thank Deputy Healy-Rae for bringing to life what I was trying to explain around the natural areas of development. The area-based approach is one of the core principles of LEADER right across the European Union. The Deputy referred to the case of IRD Duhallow. Its natural areas of development straddle the Cork-Kerry border. It is all part of Sliabh Luachra and the same cultural identity. I can vouch for that. The way that LEADER has been cajoled into this narrow county boundary geography and, in some cases, municipal district geography, has broken up that natural area of development and severed parishes, severed links and social capital at local level. Deputy Healy-Rae is quite right in that respect. That is the point I was trying to make, namely, that we need to be much more flexible and innovative and have a 21st century approach, not the 16th century or 17th century colonial top-down approach, to deciding the boundaries of rural development. That should be a decision that is made locally and it needs to happen in the next round of LEADER. The Deputy is quite right in that respect. Indeed, with west Cork, which the Deputy mentioned as well, the Beara Peninsula as a unit is something we need to move towards. I am saying that having been an officer in the GAA. I know people's county identity is so important but let us park the football and hurling there and be much more innovative when it comes to the delivery of policy.

I also want to take up Deputy Healy-Rae's point about planning. That links in with my point about the diversity of rural areas. I was suggesting the updating of the typology of rural Ireland. It is over 30 years since the typology was first published. We have the OECD typologies that talk about the intermediate, right up as far as the peripheral rural areas. We need a similar typology for Ireland, so that we understand the differences across rural areas. While there may be some areas under pressure from urban-generated housing, there are other areas that have suffered from depopulation and badly need to be supported to regrow their populations to become vibrant and resilient. We need a much more tiered approach to planning.

The Deputy is also correct that not everybody who works in rural Ireland is necessarily a farmer or a fisher. There are other jobs linked with the rural economy. I am based in a rural community. I can do my work remotely, I am part of the community and I am involved in it as a volunteer. There are people who have come to rural communities and can make a contribution through economic activities other than farming and fishery. We need to update the list of occupations and modernise the criteria around planning as well. When plans are being formulated at local area level, they need to be done in a much more inclusive way. Ms Earley talked about community development. Our planners, when they are trained in the universities, are equipped with community development skills but they are not given the scope to apply them in practice. There is potential for collaboration with the local development companies in formulating plans, so that the local authority plans are much more bottom up.

I welcome the provisions in the town centre first policy the Government has published and is rolling out. It talks about the town centre first plans being community driven and driven by town teams. I would see a role for the local development companies in sitting on those town teams and having the resources to support and animate them, so that the town centre first plans can feed into local area plans and county development plans and bring about change that way, from the bottom up and much more evidence based.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Dr. Ó Caoimh. I am heartened by the vision he has. I hope that would be brought forward through policies to streamline the process, particularly in relation to planning.

William Aird (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the witnesses. I was involved in the LCDC for years when I was a county councillor. The money it brought in was fantastic. There were people representing all the different bodies on the different committees. The money was divided out and everyone had a say in it. That is important. That is what Dr. Ó Caoimh was alluding to as well.

I raised planning earlier, and I agree with everything that has been said in that regard. It is very difficult and we need to get it changed, as Dr. Ó Caoimh said. I do not agree with everything Dr. Ó Caoimh said. He alluded to the Beara Peninsula. Reading into what he said, is Dr. Ó Caoimh trying to take Cork people over to Kerry to play football? Is that what he is saying because that is what I got out of it? Surely to God, of all the counties, Kerry people are the natural footballers and the ones we are all looking up to. Kerry is the team that always has to be beaten. I propose, in all fairness, that we leave Cork with the players it has. That is all I would say in passing.

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are quite prepared to take you on with the team we have. We do not have to go into any other county to take their players.

William Aird (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is nobody elected who does not agree with what Dr. Ó Caoimh is saying. It is about trying to make it workable. As I said, in the next 20 or 30 years, we will have to think outside the box to see what is going to happen. We have to try to visualise where our communities are going to be. That is why I said earlier that we should strive as public representatives. I do not know any public representative who would like to see a school close in his or her area. I see schools that closed in the 1950s, the old school houses. I am repeating myself but I am saying it only because the issue of communities was brought up. The towns have now moved out to those rural schools and they may be needed. We should learn from what happened. It is the same with the old railway lines, which were laid through sheer sweat, and dug by hand without machinery or anything else.

What did we do? Somebody somewhere decided we would close down these railways as they were no longer needed. Was there nobody out there to say, "Stop, leave them as it is. Let's go forward for the next 20, 30 years and see what happens"? We should have all those railway lines going into the rural areas where they were. The witnesses spoke about Cork and the old railway line going in there. It is absolutely disgraceful. Anyway, that was a huge mistake Ireland made and I do not want to see any mistakes made now.

I strongly believe that when we build something and we have schools in your local area, bus stops and everything, we should keep them there. That relates back to the planning. If we allowed people to live and build their houses in those areas, they would all be vibrant. It is not everybody. Dr. Ó Caoimh is an example here today. He is remotely feeding into this meeting and it is working 100%. There are people in this country who would like to live in areas like where he is today and they should be afforded that opportunity. Some 20 years ago, they could not do that because their job was in Dublin or whatever. Five or six years ago, Dr. Ó Caoimh would have had to be up here In Leinster House to take part in the meeting. He would have had to leave at 5 o'clock in the morning to be here, but people no longer have to do that. They can do their work remotely. Everybody needs to take a few minutes to step back - all the planners and the people who are making these rules - and say, "We are where we are and all this has moved on. Let's look at what we could do for the next 20 years in a rural community." There is no point talking about it if you are not going to do something. That is all I want to say on that.

I do not see anything wrong with what the witnesses' organisations are doing or what has been spent on it for years. They have gone into communities that are so deprived, did work there with the people, brought the people passionately with them and supported all the different funds. All that started out voluntarily. In fact, there were a lot of IFA people involved at the time because it was rural. It then grew and grew. There is not a community now throughout my county that they do not touch, whether it is rural or urban. The one good thing about it is that initiatives like those for people who are living on their own and are getting older, they can go in there and cut the grass at a reasonable price, or do the shopping for them and visit them. That is very important and it is all part of their remit.

That funding is being well spent; there is no question about it. It is all part of what we are trying to do. In all my years on that committee talking about value for money, you can really see value for money in this. You can see it on the ground and you can allude to it at county council meetings.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will move to Ms Earley and then, if there is a need to double-check to see if Kerry is trying to sneak some Cork players across, I will go to Dr. Ó Caoimh. I will go to Ms Earley first.

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have lads coming up all over Kerry. We do not need other counties.

Ms Martina Earley:

It is great to hear the support of Deputies Healy-Rae and Aird, in that we do not have a rural future without rural people, rural communities, farmers and small businesses.

There are three points I would like to come in on. There was reference to the rural social scheme. That is key in terms of socialisation and helping our farmers stay on the land and farm. It is a key rural development driver. Unless the implementation of the changes is put in and prioritised, extending it to people who do not have a herd number but are connected in the community - what Deputy Healy-Rae talked about - that scheme is going to be finished in the next few years. It has to be prioritised to keep rural Ireland open.

Deputy Healy-Rae talked about planning permission. In my county of Roscommon, we have planning but the issue is the LEADER funding. The businesses we want to support have planning in place but LEADER has been cut substantially so they cannot progress. The figure under previous programmes has been almost halved in the past 12 years and that is a key issue.

On the area-based approach and the voluntary boards, I thank both Deputies for their involvement in local development companies. It is fabulous to hear that and we are committed to the area-based approach.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does Dr. Ó Caoimh wish to respond on the points made by Deputy Aird?

Dr. Breandán Ó Caoimh:

I might have been an officer of the GAA - I was treasurer of a club - but I certainly was not much good on the pitch so I will leave the hurling and the football to the hurlers and the footballers. The GAA looks after its own business. I was making the point more generally in the way we approach rural development.

Deputy Aird has a lot of experience in that. I was very struck by his references to the railways. When you think of our climate emergency and the need for us to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and giving people a choice as to how they get about, if we had kept the railways people would have so many choices. We would not have as many environmental problems and we would have a much more vibrant and living countryside today if people back in the 1960s and 1970s had the type of vision the Deputy has articulated.

I was also taken by his point on learning from what happens. The Deputy has insights and knowledge but that knowledge needs to be disseminated. I mentioned the work I do in Canada. There are books written about what is happening in rural development so that people beyond the likes of Deputies Healy-Rae and Aird and so on really know what is happening.

I refer the committee back to the 1994 evaluation of the first LEADER programme that Brendan Kearney and his colleagues edited - that type of documenting of what Ms Earley, Mr. Kehoe and their colleagues the length and breadth of Ireland are doing. We need to invest in telling that story, putting that narrative out there and recording the totality of what they are doing, not just through LEADER and SICAP. I am glad to hear Ms Earley articulating the importance of the rural social scheme as well. It is about the totality of the package and how each of the elements link together.

As the committee acknowledged this morning, all of this is happening but, in many respects, it is happening despite the context, the cutbacks in funding, the challenges with the Common Agricultural Policy and the Local Government Reform Act 2014 which shoehorned local development in under the remit of local authorities. Local authorities are very good at what they do and they need to have more autonomy and resources in order that they can do things like providing water services and infrastructure, both of which were mentioned. However, giving them oversight of local community development is inappropriate because that stifles creativity at local level. It has also put a layer of bureaucracy on top of project promoters who are trying to develop SMEs and other projects in rural Ireland.

Certainly, there needs to be a repeal of the 2014 legislation. The Government has indicated it will repeal elements around the re-establishment of the town councils and I welcome that. It is very good for counties like Monaghan which had a number of town councils. For towns such as those in County Limerick which did not have town councils, there is a need for town councils to be provided so that we have a much more even approach to the geography and governance of rural towns. The 2014 legislation was enacted without due consultation or the type of process the committee was doing here this morning and has been doing for Our Rural Future. We need a Green Paper before a White Paper or legislation is produced, so that it has stakeholder input. That needs to inform the repeal process over the coming months.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Dr. Ó Caoimh. I will go to Mr. Kehoe to make his observations on the questions thus far.

Mr. Brian Kehoe:

I want to mention the Tús scheme, which scheme that covers all of Ireland, both urban and rural, but is a key support for rural areas in particular. It is a work placement programme, as the committee probably knows, which provides 12 months' work experience in a community. It plays a huge role in maintaining services, providing facilities and maintaining those facilities in rural areas. The criteria are quite stringent in that participants have to leave the scheme after a 12-month period. The criteria to come onto the scheme could also be relaxed. Without the rural social scheme and Tús, many services would close and many facilities would not be maintained properly. Some rural areas are at breaking point as there simply are not enough people to maintain facilities in particular.

What has been really positive over the past 10 or 12 years is that the State has invested hugely in community facilities with local groups. However, there is a challenge to maintain those facilities and run them properly. We can rely on local volunteerism but we all know that is stretched at the moment. Schemes such as Tús and the RSS are key to maintaining those services and facilities in rural areas.

John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will now go to Deputy Hayes and ask him to observe our time restrictions.

Eoin Hayes (Dublin Bay South, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the witnesses for coming in and for their presentations and input. It is a critically important issue for the country. We are struggling with how to reinvigorate rural Ireland. We all see it. I am a Dublin-based TD but I have a lot of family and friends in rural Ireland. I travel there quite often. We see it in every town and village: the dereliction, the lack of economic development and the struggles that rural people often have, whether it is getting planning permission for housing or finding a job and being able to work remotely.

Regarding the points Dr. Ó Caoimh made on sustainability and rural Ireland, I am struck by the fact that farmers are often the stewards of our rural environment and nature. From my exposure to farming communities, I know people are doing really important environmental work and it needs to be lauded and supported. I want to acknowledge that.

Dr. Ó Caoimh presented some interesting questions in terms of the mapping of funding in rural areas. There is an interesting question around the geographical spread of wider economic development. When you think about the multinationals putting FDI in rural communities, CAP and where that is going, as well as the rural funds, how does he propose we monitor that properly and understand where the money is going?

Dr. Ó Caoimh also made a great point on how local action groups are demarcated by county. I am partial to his view on modernising our public administration and not necessarily being stuck in the 16th and the 17th centuries and with the British demarcations. I am interested in understanding what the alternative is. Is it provincial or more granular? How do we think about that demarcation? We are going to have to draw boundaries in some way in terms of public administration. I am interested to hear what the alternatives are.

Dr. Ó Caoimh's perspective on rail services is well taken as well. I am struck by the fact that in 1840 we had rail services all across the country going into small rural towns and now we have very few. That needs to be revitalised for people to be connected.

To Mr. Kehoe and Ms Earley, the wider question I come back to quite a lot is following the money. It is extremely concerning to hear that LEADER has halved in 12 years. There are threats to the CAP at the European level and where it is going to go in Ireland.

Thinking about it at a wider level, I grew up in a rural community in America for about half my childhood. Back in the 1800s it was a big lumber town. There was a row of houses and it was called millionaires' row because that was where all the millionaires lived. Fast forward to today, there is no lumber, no industry - nothing. The town is dependent on mostly public institutions such as hospital services and colleges to provide employment.

That question of economic power and how that gets realised in rural areas and changes over time is an important question for us to deal and grapple with as a country. That can be seen in places like Westport. It has AbbVie and hundreds of high-paying jobs which has created a huge economic powerhouse in the far west. This can also be seen in Canada and the natural oil resources they had in rural areas. I am conscious of how we think about that economic development question and where the money is being invested. How do we make sure it is being done in a way that is balanced in those communities?

I am also struck by the point about the consolidation of funding and the duplication of services. What should that look like in terms of the consolidation of funding? What should we be doing better? What should we be asking the Department to do to provide that in a more targeted way that does not result in lots of different funds going into the ether?

Mr. Brian Kehoe:

In relation to LEADER, it is probably unique in terms of funding programmes because it is strategic. We are tasked with developing a strategic plan for an area and, based on that plan, we are awarded funding. All of the local action group areas would have developed a strategy in consultation with local communities. It was not just with community and voluntary groups. The consultations were quite well attended by businesses as well. It is a bottom-up approach. I know it is a cliché but that is what it is. It is asking people what they want to see in the plan and, it is hoped, being able to deliver on that. It is different from other programmes which tend to be announced. There is a call for proposals, the proposals come in and they are awarded funding. There is nothing wrong with that and it is welcome in rural communities, but is not necessarily strategic, particularly at a local level.

In terms of monitoring, LEADER is extremely well monitored, as we know. It is heavily monitored, which is not a bad thing. There is probably is a bit of a gap with the streams of funding that come on stream at local level. A lot of them are filtered through the local community development committees in the local authorities. There should be a database somewhere that is able to identify who has received funding. It does happen in some areas, but there is possibly a little bit of work to be done around that.

While LEADER is a funding programme, it is very much a developmental programme too. We see it as unique. Our staff work with rural communities to develop projects and plans in those areas but also to develop their capacities. They also motivate and energise people. It is not like we put an advertisement in the paper, put a call out for proposals and sit back and wait to see what comes in. That is not how the programme works. It is very much staff out on the ground. The term that is used is animation, but we prefer to say motivate and energise. It is basically creating enthusiasm in rural communities for what is possible in their area. Often it may not be LEADER. It could be community recognition funding or town and village renewal funding. When working with a community, our staff will signpost them to that funding if we think it is appropriate and relevant. It is an aspect of LEADER that has possibly got lost over the last programme or two. The resources certainly are not there to do it. Ideally, we would have more staff to get out there to animate and work with communities and businesses.

The nature of the programme and the funding there now means it is extremely tight. A lot of time is spent on processing applications and administrative work, which is a pity.

Dr. Breandán Ó Caoimh:

I second Mr. Kehoe's point on the importance of the community development approach and working with the project promoters. I have tracked the LEADER investments and the journeys the project promoters have been on. They may initially need some training, a feasibility study or a small technical support grant. Having that relationship with the LEADER officer is really important in their journey to becoming much more sustainable.

In response to Deputy Hayes's questions, and I thank him for them, I talked about farming with nature. There is a lot of emphasis now on farming for nature, but I prefer the term farming with nature, with biodiversity and with our natural resources. Farmers are providing those ecological services but are not being sufficiently paid for the public good they are providing.

There are various schemes in operation, such as the LIFE programmes. I am doing an evaluation at the moment on the Corncrake LIFE initiative. The corncrake is of course symbolic of rural Ireland and our summers. It is an iconic bird. That scheme is coming to an end. Some of its elements will be taken up in other schemes but there is a stop-start nature to the schemes. That is very difficult for farmers when they are trying to plan long term. Farming should be done on an intergenerational basis. We need to move away from the start-stop way of doing things so there is continuity in the supports for farming with nature. We also need to involve the wider rural community outside the farm gate.

Deputy Hayes also asked about the mapping of investments in rural areas. Mr. Kehoe is quite correct in his response on the monitoring of LEADER. I can tell the Deputy exactly how much LEADER funding has gone into every town and village in Wexford, Roscommon and every other county, but can I present the same data in respect of Enterprise Ireland, IDA Ireland, Fáilte Ireland and other agencies? Where is their investment going? This is public funding. The Deputy mentioned foreign direct investment and other private investments. Those will not happen because private investors will not take the risk and they cannot take the risk until the public sector makes the investment first. We saw that with roads, infrastructure, electricity and so on. We need to map the totality of what each public sector body is doing, break that down geographically and refine that.

On the other question on the alternatives to our 16th and 17th century colonial boundaries and so on, I refer the Deputy to the work of one his colleagues. He was a Senator at the time, Deputy Malcolm Byrne. He is now a TD. He did a piece of research that looked at the way local government is organised in Ireland at some of the alternatives around the municipalities as they have in other European countries. Within the pre-existing county structures, one can provide for a much more localised system of government. The French system is very much based on the mayor. In the other systems, there are citizen juries and so on in Germany and the Alpine states. There are templates from other European countries and other OECD members that we can look at.

The Deputy referred to the success of Westport. It had a town council, a town architect, a vibrant civic society, a lot of community development and local government through the town council working with the business community, schools and community and voluntary bodies. That is the type of model and approach that the local development companies are promoting, but we need to invest much more in that, do so much more universally and sustain it.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Dr. Ó Caoimh very much. I ask Ms Earley to be brief.

Ms Martina Earley:

I will respond to Deputy Hayes's recollection about the collapse of the lumber industry in Canada. I recall three examples in our own company. This is the same for every company because we are community-led and innovative companies. In the early 1990s in the north Roscommon-Leitrim area, there was the closure of a power station and the end of the coal-mining industry. There were two community-led projects that the LEADER programme and CLÁR programme supported: the Arigna Mining Experience, which is now a whole tourism project and social enterprise, and The Food Hub in Drumshanbo, which was one supplier but is now at several reiterations. There are over 350 people now employed in that area. Rather than having one, there is a multitude.

Currently in Ballaghaderreen, we are needs-led. Our company responds to the needs. Integration was an issue in Ballaghaderreen. There was a large influx of numbers. We developed and sourced funding for childcare provision there under the community recognition fund. We are working on a whole plan for the creative sector. We are working with Enterprise Ireland on a whole response to the need to see new people as an asset in terms of their huge creativity and where they are coming from. We are putting in place a whole plan to support that. The answer to the Deputy's question is that local people have the solutions. They need to be resourced.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Ms Earley and Deputy Hayes.

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can I make one point?

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Deputy get it done in a minute?

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will. It is something I wish to highlight to Dr. Ó Caoimh. We have a social farming model in Kerry. It is different from the rest of the country. It is to help to people. The participant is usually maybe a boy or a girl who is a bit slow and from a town or a village. They go out into the country and they see what is happening naturally. The farmers do not look to be paid or anything like that. In Kerry, there are between 40 and 60 participants at the present time. The farmers are not being paid; it is totally voluntary. To keep it flowing and keep health and safety right, they had been getting €100,000. They are looking for a bit more than that this year to survive. I know Dr. Ó Caoimh is aware of this model. It needs to be expanded right throughout the country. It is in operating in Leitrim, but they are doing it in a different way. I am asking this committee to support the call we heard from those who were here last week. They made an excellent presentation. I know Dr. Ó Caoimh would be in favour of this as well. We need whatever help we can get to give them whatever help they are looking for to keep this going. They have made several other inquiries, but they just cannot get it together if they do not get another bit of funding.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Well done. I am clearly running close to the edge of time. I have a contribution to make.

I have found this session, and indeed the session earlier this morning, interesting and extremely engaging. There is a lot of positive stuff coming. There are many great ideas coming from the members and those who are online as well. It is clear from Dr. Ó Caoimh's contribution that the model he and the other witnesses mentioned is compelling. We could do many sessions on the same topic, and we would not run short of conversations.

I was blessed and fortunate while I was with the council to sit on the board of Galway Rural Development. I loved every minute of it, including engaging with the LCDC. One of things that I find compelling about works done through the RSS, Tús, FÁS or the LEADER companies is the community enhancement and village enhancement schemes. We could talk about the community walks, forest walks, all of the community development projects, the home visits to the elderly and all of that. All of these outstanding things happen as a consequence of LEADER funding. Wonderful work has happened as a consequence of work through SICAP. I am interested in that. I was still sitting on the board last year before I arrived here. I felt that the devastating cut to LEADER funding was nearly a slap on the wrist for LEADER companies that wanted to do more because the applications were flowing in to continue to develop and enhance communities.

If there is one thing that collectively we would all wish for - Deputy Danny Healy-Rae has mentioned it - it is that we would continue to enhance these schemes and continue to encourage the Department to fund more of them. In addition to the community element, these schemes support people who are on, or may otherwise be on, social welfare payments as opposed to being out there doing great work. They love it; they do not want to be at home. There are a few things I would wish for. I am not asking for responses on this in case we are over time. I ask that we look at the eligibility criteria for participants and consider putting in place an incentive such as an additional allowance that participants would get, rather than just doing it for €20 more than they would be getting sitting at home. The RSS allows farmers to take up schemes like that. It allows them to go out and get away. We have spoken about men's health and positive well-being. All of that kind of stuff lends itself to the great feeling that a person has when they have made their contribution to their community.

We have three minutes left.

Is there anything Ms Earley wanted to add to what I said by way of closing up?

Ms Martina Earley:

I work at European level with a lot of projects and I am very supportive of the fact that the Government has a dedicated rural development Department and a rural social scheme. We are seen as a leading light in Europe for rural development. This policy is proof of that. I call on the committee to maximise our involvement and engagement so that the best policy is delivered for rural Ireland. We are here and we feel we are an underutilised resource. We are very much open to involvement. I again thank the committee for the engagement.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does Mr. Kehoe have anything to add?

Mr. Brian Kehoe:

I echo that. It was said earlier that we have a huge reach in terms of our involvement in communities. I do not think there is a community in which we are not involved. There is a resource there. We are happy to be very much involved in the policy but, more importantly, in the delivery of what flows out of the policy because we can lose sight of policy and focus on programmes. This is an opportunity to take a step back, see what the policy is about first and foremost and then look at whether we have programmes that are fit to deliver on those policies. That is important. Like Ms Earley said, we have been in this business for 30 years. We have learned a bit along the way. There is a lot of know-how and expertise in local development companies that can be tapped into in the delivery of this policy.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Danny Healy-Rae mentioned the unique projects or schemes in Kerry. Before I close it out, could some of those unique schemes be brought to east Galway and the west of Ireland? Does Dr. Ó Caoimh have any closing remarks?

Dr. Breandán Ó Caoimh:

Deputy Healy-Rae is correct again. I have done the external evaluation of Kerry Social Farming and it is commendable. That voluntary model is working. It is working in Kerry and in the IRD Duhallow area. It is very consistent with enabling people with disabilities to progress to improve their social skills and get out there. As it is also consistent with Government policy in terms of personalised plans and the empowerment of people with disabilities, there are two strands of Government policy working well together and it certainly merits further resourcing. I also concur with what Ms Earley and Mr. Kehoe said about rolling out more rural development through the local development companies. I also see scope for rolling out a collaborative approach to planning and place making through them as well.

I will recap what I said at the outset. The committee should keep the dialogue open and communications going with those of us who are involved in rural development. The committee is doing it now when it is doing a review but as the policy is being rolled out, stakeholders need to be at the table in order that we can work with the committee in enabling it to be effective and can contribute to the monitoring, enhancement, improvement and review of it all of the time so that we are really delivering the best for the people of rural Ireland.

Peter Roche (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Well said. It has been our pleasure hearing from the witnesses. This session was really engaging. I thank members for their contributions. I also thank our gallant students who have sat there so quietly during the two hours. We will chat to them after the meeting has concluded and we would like to get a photograph taken with them. I thank the secretariat for its support during the meeting.