Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)

Funding of anti-poverty networks arises from the White Paper on a framework for supporting voluntary activity and was originally administered by the Combat Poverty Agency on a three year contract basis.

This function transferred to my Department from that agency late in 2003. My Department sought work plans for 2004 from each of the ten national anti-poverty networks funded under the White Paper and, pending review, there was little option at that stage but to agree to extend funding for 2004 on a one year contract basis.

The Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs was established by Government in June 2002 with a mandate to produce a more co-ordinated engagement by the State with communities around the country as they pursue their own development. In establishing my Department, it is clear that the Government was placing a focus on communities, particularly those vulnerable or under threat. In such cases, the provision of support to enable communities to identify and address problems in their own areas is seen as the best way forward. Those communities may be in rural or inner-city settings, grappling with difficulties caused by a range of factors, including declining population, unemployment, language issues, social disadvantage or drug misuse. While most such communities or groups of communities can be defined in terms of geographic location, others will be defined on the basis of a common focus on a particular issue.

The Department's commitment in the context of the National Anti-Poverty Networks is to focus on concentrating available resources on support for communities experiencing disadvantage, exclusion and isolation. In line with this commitment, I decided to continue funding for nine anti-poverty networks in the amount of €1.35 million for 2005. This represents an increase of 5% over 2004 for the networks concerned. However, in the context of focusing my Department's resources on disadvantaged communities, continued funding of the CWC could not be justified.

There is in existence a well-developed structure providing supports to the sector. My Department will spend €2.3 million in 2005 on six regional support agencies providing support and advice to the community support projects. In addition, my Department funds 38 partnership companies for €45.7 million, 185 community development projects and 32 community partnerships. Under the White Paper on a framework for supporting voluntary activity, 70 networks and federations are supported to the tune of €4.2 million.

The CWC differs from the other groups funded under the national anti-poverty networks in that those other groups, in the main, deal with specific target groups. The other nine anti-poverty networks, which will continue to receive funding have a specific focus on Travellers, unemployment, refugees, rural poverty, lone parents, older people and disabled people. The CWC is the voice of community workers rather than of disadvantaged communities. It overlaps with the function of other networks and as such fails to meet a number of the key criteria suggested by the White Paper on supporting voluntary activity.

I cannot accept the implication in the motion before the House that the range of excellent people working in communities experiencing disadvantage and isolation cannot develop informed positions and articulate valuable opinions on a range of issues without the intervention of the CWC. To take such a view would be to deny the individual and collective wisdom that has been accumulated by people working directly in local and community development work over many years. The purpose of this decision is to support this activity as comprehensively and efficiently as possible. The key point is that the groups being funded are supporting disadvantaged communities. I do not regard the CWC as being in that category.

See this speech in context