Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

Does the Taoiseach accept that the community and voluntary pillar is far from fully representative and that the change he mentioned, which took place at the end of the previous agreement, the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness, resulted in the exclusion of significant actors from future deliberations in the social partnership process? These include the community platform, which consists of organisations such as the Community Workers Co-operative, the Irish Travellers Movement, and the National Women's Council, a significant actor in its own right. Is it Government policy to extend its punitive approach to the community and voluntary sector to the granting of funding to such bodies, as decisions made by other Departments appear to indicate? Will NGOs receive funding on the basis of whether they criticise Government policy?

To what extent are environmental NGOs adequately represented in the community and voluntary pillar, given that they do not appear to be represented at all? While the addition of groups representing older people and people with disabilities is welcome, what plans, if any, has the Government to ensure the community and voluntary pillar will be treated in exactly the same way as the other pillars when Sustaining Progress is, I hope, replaced by another agreement? If IBEC, ICTU or the IFA were to disagree with the eventual agreement, the organisation in question would not be excluded from future partnership talks.

See this speech in context