Jerry Cowley (Mayo, Independent)

I am pleased to speak on the Dormant Accounts (Amendment) Bill 2004. The Bill seeks to provide for the disbursement of these funds in a more focused and effective way for the purposes of tackling disadvantage. I sincerely hope it will do so. The idea of raising money from dormant accounts resulted from the Committee of Public Accounts inquiry into deposit interest retention tax. Everyone was pleased that the money would be used to alleviate economic, social, educational or physical disadvantage in the community. This is something the Government and the Opposition, when it gets into power, will strive to achieve. However, the difficulty is the finite budget. If there is another fund which can be used to conquer social and economic disadvantage, so be it. The fortunes were good. The Committee of Public Accounts made its recommendation and money from dormant accounts in banks, building societies and post offices was transferred to the dormant accounts fund managed by the National Treasury Management Agency. The idea was that people could claim back their money at any time. Therefore, provision had to be made for this.

The fund has worked very well. An opportunity was provided for charities to make a claim and I understand that a minimum of 100 charities made applications. Some €30 million was distributed in one year from March 2004. Some €60 million was taken from bank accounts which were lying dormant for more than 15 years. The funding was distributed to many good causes, including community centres, youth clubs, playgrounds, pre-school services and so on. Half the total funds were earmarked for the Government's RAPID and CLÁR programmes and drugs task forces. The former Minister for Finance and Deputy, Charlie McCreevy, made this decision in 2000 and people had until March 2003 to claim the money in these old accounts.

The fund amounted to €172 million in January 2004, which is a great deal of money. In 2003, €196 million was transferred to the fund, of which €24 million had already been reclaimed by the original account holders. The idea was that people would apply for funding to Area Development Management Limited, which would assess the applications and make recommendations to the board. If the recommendations were accepted, it would negotiate with the charities on how best to spend the money. Responsibility for this lies with the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs.

This scheme has worked well and the Government should be congratulated on setting it up. However, there should be more emphasis on older people in the disbursement of this funding. While I recognise that money has been disbursed to older people's causes, emigrants also need to be remembered. I have a vested interest in this regard because St. Brendan's Village, Mulranny, made an application for funding, which was successful. The money will be used to continue the work which is being done to support older people and carers in the community. We are trying to make things better for older people. Safe Home, the national repatriation centre, is also located in St. Brendan's Village. This provides accommodation for more than 400 people throughout Ireland. An outreach service is provided to the general community which supports older people.

This fund, which is geared towards social and charitable purposes, has been a success. It is geared towards those who work with the poorest in society, those who are socially and economically disadvantaged and people with disabilities. Approximately half the total funds are earmarked for the RAPID and CLÁR programmes and drugs task forces. This was an excellent decision given that these are the areas of greatest advantage. Whether one is disadvantaged does not just depend on where one lives, and I know the board takes this into account. The dormant accounts fund has distributed €30 million since March 2003. Last January's tranche covered 102 projects, ranging from payouts of €300,000 to €880,000. This is a great deal of money out of a €60 million fund from bank accounts that have been lying idle for more than 15 years.

The idea of funding social, charitable and economic activities from dormant accounts is an excellent thing to do. Some time ago, Deputy Keaveney suggested that Criminal Assets Bureau funds could be used to help areas affected by crime. This would be a good way to support voluntary effort. The previous speaker referred to the value of supporting voluntary effort. Given finite Government funds, voluntary effort does not receive the support it deserves. Having worked with the national federation of group water schemes, I am very aware of the voluntary effort provided. The amount of voluntary effort necessary to set up all these group water schemes and keep them going with very little support is a great credit to communities. That these water schemes are still being run on a voluntary basis speaks volumes about the commitment of people in local communities.

There is great potential in this which the Government should not forget. The Government would not be able to run these schemes from a financial point of view. Voluntary effort allows older and disabled people and so on to be supported in their communities. While there is an emphasis on supporting the private sector by providing tax breaks to people to provide facilities for older people, there should be more emphasis on empowering communities to provide these facilities. Much lip-service is paid to community care and supporting people in their communities. If people cannot be supported in their homes, they should certainly be supported in their communities. There is great potential through the voluntary housing association to provide the necessary facilities such as sheltered housing facilities. However, this depends on funding, and funds are always finite.

There should be an emphasis on breaking down the barriers that prevent communities from providing a full package of support and care to older people. Capital funding is available under the capital assistance scheme for low support housing, but the defined revenue funding stream does not exist to allow older people to be supported by staff who could be employed by voluntary housing associations. Funding is not available for community groups, housing associations and so on who would wish to provide a greater degree of support for older people in their community in high support facilities. These barriers should be examined.

The idea of supporting volunteers through the dormant accounts fund is a good way of dealing with this issue. It makes sense because supporting volunteers is value for money. If that effort did not continue, the Government could never replace it. This effort will not be appreciated until it is lost. The number of people volunteering is decreasing all the time. It is opportune for the Government to examine this area and provide the necessary support to volunteers to ensure the numbers volunteering do not fall and that more people are encouraged to volunteer.

Programmes for the training of volunteers allow young people to engage in training to be of assistance to their community. Such work helps young people to stay out of trouble and to foster the ethic of helping and supporting one's neighbour, which they would have learnt from their peers and parents. Those engaged in voluntary work in the community show good example and the fewer people engaged in it, the fewer examples there are of such good work. It is extremely important that young people are supported in the community.

The dormant accounts fund has contributed to such support. The fund has contributed to projects in west Tallaght on horse care. Such innovative programmes are of great benefit to communities and to young people.

Other countries such as Germany have used dormant account funds in this way. However, people look to Ireland and what the Government has done in this respect. It is calculated that the UK would have at least ten times more deposits in dormant accounts than Ireland. Such funds present a great opportunity. Perhaps it is timely to suggest that the UK Government should do more to support older people, particularly older Irish emigrants, many of whom are in poor circumstances and have had little support from the UK Government. They have received good support from the Irish Government in recent years through the DION committee which has done great work in supporting our older Irish emigrants. While what the task force outlined was very much a blueprint for what needs to be done, the funds provided by the Irish Government have not been sufficient to meet what that task force clearly outlined. The UK Government also has a responsibility in this area.

Those emigrants did a great deal for this country. They sent home remittances, which is well documented, amounting to more than we ever got from EU Structural Funds. Those remittances constituted a fund that was available to this country to support entire communities along the west coast in particular when we had no other money. They kept entire communities alive and the lights burning over those dark years when we had no other help. Not alone did those emigrants support this country, they also supported the UK. They helped build cities and towns in the UK, they ran farms and factories, built roads and bridges and so on. Many of the men who built Britain are now living in difficult circumstances in the UK and the UK Government has a responsibility to support them. In light of the introduction in the UK of a scheme similar to the dormant accounts fund, the UK Government should not forget those Irish people. In the case of the Irish Government, this fund will be a source of funding to help Irish people at home and abroad. It is important that the UK Government meets its responsibilities in this area which, to date, it has not.

A major proportion of the moneys in dormant accounts were deposited by members of our elderly population. Much of the money that is available to the State is the hard earned savings of an older generation who contributed to this State at home and from abroad, many of whom are no longer with us. Life was not easy for them and this State had nothing to offer them. Those who went to England were economic migrants. They had to leave this country and by so doing we did not have to look after them. We have the lowest pension bill in Europe because many of our people emigrated when we had nothing for them. We owe them a moral debt.

A considerable proportion of the money in dormant accounts belonged to those people who worked hard to eke out an existence and to put money aside, whether on deposit at home or abroad, for the rainy day. They never forgot this country in all the time they were away. They lodged their small savings in credit unions and banks in towns and cities throughout Ireland. Those deposits are what constitute many dormant accounts. It is only fair that this money would be used in so far as possible to support our older people in particular. Such use of this money would serve as an apt remembrance of our older people who helped build this State and the UK.

Any source of funding available for this fund, whether from dormant accounts, life assurance policies or the proceeds of the Criminal Assets Bureau, would be welcome. The moneys in the fund are being used in the right way.

In regard to the Health (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, I know of people who had money illegally taken from them by the State and such moneys must be repaid to those people. However, if it is not possible to trace such people or their relatives, I can think of no place more appropriate for such money than this fund. I am not saying that those people should not have such money returned to them or to their relatives, but where it is not possible to trace them, this is a critical fund for such moneys.

There are many uses to which available money could be put. The application of this fund is a good example of what can be done if money was available to do the things that really matter. For instance, it could be used to provide people with disabilities with the services they need and to give them a right to that service rather than their being dependent on what is provided in the budget. The difficulty with the Disability Bill is that it is so tied to budgetary provisions that, while many people will be assessed, thousands will not get the service they need. If there was an unlimited fund available, that would make all the difference.

Hundreds of thousands of children are living in homes where the income is considered to be below the poverty line. They are living in relative poverty below what is considered to be a minimum income required of €175 per week. These people are on the breadline and do not have enough food, warmth or even a second pair of shoes. We hear about those people at budget time. We are aware of the work done by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul in this area. Such deprivation exists and if money was available to address that problem it would change our society.

This Bill is appropriate. I hope it continues to address the serious needs that exist in society.

See this speech in context