Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

The answers given by the Minister of State are far from satisfactory. How will the saving of €150,000 he believes will accrue from this decision be allocated? Will a specific disadvantaged community receive €150,000? Will ten communities be allocated €15,000 each? Will 100 communities be allocated €1,500 each?

Most of what the Minister of State said is not true and does not bear scrutiny. Of the other nine groups in the National Anti-Poverty Network, several are involved in general activities, including identifying poverty and providing resources to alleviate it. If the Minister of State is arguing that the Department's policy is to address niche poverty, the problems are more serious than we thought.

It is not true that the Community Workers Co-operative operates as an organisation of community representatives. It is, like each of the other nine bodies in the anti-poverty network, a representative community organisation. If the Minister of State does not see that distinction, I despair of the reason for the Department's existence. It seems that a saving of €150,000 is to be made because the Government has decided that this body, which has been told it will not participate in the social partnership process because it has disagreed with the Government, should have its funding discontinued on the basis that it has identified how Government policies are operating negatively and to the disadvantage of the poor. The Minister of State does not realise that his Department's decision has created a sense of fear throughout the community and voluntary sector that those groups which receive Government funding are likely to have that funding removed if the Government disapproves of how they operate.

It is obvious from the testimonials of the nine other organisations involved in the anti-poverty network that the Community Workers Co-operative does valuable work in terms of training, organising seminars, issuing publications and so on. All this work is dedicated to the identification and alleviation of needs in disadvantaged communities. It is unbelievable that the Minister of State contends that the €150,000 to be saved by his Department will somehow be put to better use for disadvantaged communities when the Combat Poverty Agency, the State body set up to advise the Government on how resources in this area can best be used, has said it will be counteractive to remove this funding.

How will the PEACE II programme operate when funding is only made available for the additional work that is done through the programme itself? There will be no workers to deliver that programme because of the removal of core funding.

See this speech in context