Paudge Connolly (Cavan-Monaghan, Independent)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill, although I will have great difficulty in supporting it. It is a retrograde step to remove an independent board and place its duties in the hands of a Department. That sends out the wrong signal and will leave the Government open to the charge of political favouritism, particularly when grants are given in Ministers' areas. We have only to look at where grants were given in the past. It may be a coincidence that, perhaps, a better quality application has come from counties Kildare, Kerry or Cork, which seem to get more than their punching weight and do well when it comes to the disbursement of particular funds and grant aid.

I welcome the fact that the Government has tried to retrieve this money and to tackle the issue of the funds that had been lying in bank accounts and insurance companies. I suspect more money is hidden in people's homes and caches, effectively the savings of old people. The decision to retrieve that money and disburse it to worthy causes is admired. Another issue that is popular is that the Government is taking this money from the banks and ultimately it benefits people. Most people feel it is acceptable for the Government to take the money from banks. In other parts of the island there have been similar efforts in terms of people relieving banks of their moneys and we will hold judgment on how that benefits communities. That, however, is a different operation.

In the past I would have been critical of the disbursements board for particular reasons. One can be critical of a board and how it disburses its fund, but at times I wondered whether there was political patronage involved. At no stage did I suggest we should get rid of the disbursements board. The reason I was critical was that my constituency of Cavan-Monaghan fared particularly badly. In October 2004 there was a grant disbursement of €17.2 million and Cavan and Monaghan were the only two counties that did not receive funds. That sent out a bad message to us, given that a minimum of 52% was meant to be targeted at areas in RAPID, drugs task force and CLÁR areas. It was also meant to benefit those who were socially, economically and educationally disadvantaged and persons with a disability. I have no doubt that under each of those headings our constituency met all those criteria. I was extremely disappointed given that Cavan and Monaghan belong to the BMW region.

Since then, I acknowledge that a reasonably substantial grant was divided between the two counties, in the communities of Ballybay and Cootehill. That is welcome and will do much for those areas. Between them, counties Cavan and Monaghan had 15 applications, seven from Cavan and eight from Monaghan, all of which were worthy projects. These counties in disadvantaged areas appear to be at the bottom of the list when it comes to disbursement. I hope that the new group will look at this issue given that the disbursement fund accrued from areas throughout the country.

I have no doubt that an equal amount, if not more, per capita is to be found in the Border areas. I suggest that the disbursements board look at dormant accounts in Northern Ireland. Will the Government make an effort to ascertain whether there are such funds in banks and post offices there belonging to people from the South? It has nothing to do with dodging taxes, but for many people in counties Donegal, Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan and Louth, the nearest town may have been in the North where they would have done their banking. I have no doubt there are similar difficulties in those areas.

The original concept of the Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursements Board was that it was independent, transparent, impartial and accountable. The intention of the former Minister for Finance, now European Commissioner, Mr. McCreevy, was that no hint of favouritism would attach to the allocation of grants from the fund. Given that more than 50% of that fund goes to the greater Dublin area one has to ask questions, particularly since it was meant to be targeted at CLÁR and disadvantaged areas. How disadvantaged is the greater Dublin area? The view of the then Minister that the dormant accounts funding should be distributed independently of Government was right. Why did the Government decide to change that?

The board of trustees was to distribute the funds in accordance with guidelines and it was to be free from interference by the Government. In other words, canvassing would disqualify in the truest sense of the word and there was to be no possibility of the dormant accounts fund becoming a slush fund for any Government or party. Applications were to be evaluated by Area Development Management Limited, ADM, prior to board approval and drawdown of grants approved, subject to a legal contract agreement with ADM on the board's behalf. More than three years later the Government described the independent disbursements board as not the best one to make these decisions.

Is the Government admitting that those on the board wasted millions of euro? Has it evidence that the board members are not suitable to be on the board? How on earth could it have reached the conclusion which casts aspersions on the integrity and probity of board members? Dormant accounts funds have already been disbursed to community groups across the country which fall into the categories outlined.

The independent disbursements board was established to ensure that dormant accounts funds would be targeted specifically at the disabled, marginalised and socially and economically disadvantaged in our society. Instead it appears from the Government's requisitioning of the allocation of funds that the funds will become the plaything of Ministers, who will dispense them to maximise political advantage.

When the idea of a national lottery was conceived in the 1970s by Joe Connolly, community games president, he did not envisage it as a catch-all benevolent fund to be allocated at the grace and favour of the Government of the day. Joe Connolly originally envisaged the national lottery as an exclusive sports fund to finance sporting and recreational facilities in Ireland. There is no doubt that had the national lottery stuck to its original agenda in the past 18 years, Ireland's haul of medals from the Olympic and European games would have been correspondingly larger. However, the green-eyed monster took over and the lottery funds became another example of a political slush fund to secure political advantage.

I expressed the fear in March 2004 that the scrapping of the independent disbursements board would have the effect of transferring the dormant accounts to the direct control of Ministers. The temptation will always be there irrespective of which party or parties are in Government to use this fund for their pet projects in the various constituencies with the aim of mopping up the last vote. Irrespective of which party is in Government, there will be short-term gain for the Government, but in the long term it is better to leave the matter to an independent board. At a later stage when the Government is in opposition it will shout "political favouritism". The Government should look long and hard at this Bill.

The reasons advanced for the transfer of responsibility were somewhat less than convincing and amounted to a lame excuse. Surprise was expressed by the Government that the dormant accounts fund was in excess of €180 million. It cannot have been unaware of the substantial unclaimed funds that lay in the various financial institutions throughout the country. I find this hard to believe. The Revenue Commissioners and the various tribunals have been trawling bank accounts to investigate hot money and expose corruption. An audit of the dormant accounts in the various financial institutions does not amount to rocket science. The concept of a dormant accounts fund did not just come to the Minister in a vision. The amount currently lying unclaimed in dormant accounts and life assurance policies has been estimated at approximately €500 million and may be considerably higher.

The Government's expressed surprise at the extent of the sums in dormant accounts is a tacit admission that it had bitten off more than it could chew in the management of the fund. The national debt management board does not appear to have any difficulties and enjoys a fair amount of success in this responsibility. The outgoing disbursement board consists of nine members and the board will have 11 members when reconstituted. What is to prevent the Minister simply adding another two members to the existing board? I do not know why he cannot add the extra two and reach some form of compromise.

The assessment process is also to be drastically altered by the provisions of this Bill. The involvement of ADM Limited will also be terminated. Why is the involvement of ADM Limited being terminated? Has it done something wrong? Is it responsible for wasting millions of euro? I do not understand this. The board is a board of repute. It has good knowledge of what happens. Instead the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs will make this assessment and will call the shots as far as the assessment and approval of applications is concerned.

This is a far cry from the transparency and accountability the then Minister, Charlie McCreevy, envisaged when setting up the dormant accounts fund. In the past many Government functions such as judicial appointments and the allocation of State briefs have been taken out of the hands of the Government and allocated to independent bodies. This Bill is the very antithesis. Functions are being taken from an independent agency and handed over, virtually exclusively, to the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. What qualifies the Department to consider cases involving persons with disabilities? Does it have specialists in the area of disability? Is the Department medically expert? Is the Department a "Jack of all trades" in that it can pronounce on matters and issues concerning the socially, economically and educationally disadvantaged? The Department must employ many experts and I would be interested to see their CVs.

It would be a retrograde step for the functions of an independent and impartial board such as the Dormant Accounts Disbursements Board to be so subsumed. I cannot in conscience support this legislation.

See this speech in context