Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)

Deputy McGinley makes an interesting point. The purpose of the establishment of the new board is to give the appearance in the public arena of transparency. An emasculated board is to replace the independent board in a move designed to convey the pretence of an accountable structure. In reality, however, the only person who can adjudicate and disburse funds is the Minister. It is with the latter that all power will rest.

There is no doubt that Ministers must have functions of responsibility and leadership. However, it is not democratic that only the Minister can make funding allocations and that the associated board is akin to a man of straw whose purpose is to give the impression of some level of accountability. This is not the way to disburse funds. Notwithstanding that the funds in question are windfall funds, they are also citizens' funds, moneys that have been lying dormant in banks and other financial institutions and monetary schemes which have never been activated. They do not quite represent taxpayers' moneys but are nevertheless citizens' funds which should be disbursed in accordance with reasonable accountability and criteria.

Under the provisions of this Bill, the Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, is setting up the parameters and structures for what can only be described for a slush fund. He should be ashamed to present such blatant and brazen legislation to the House. I have never seen a proposal of this nature. What makes it so blatant and brazen is its purpose of dissolving the independent machinery set up by the former Minister for Finance, Charlie McCreevy, to ensure there would be transparency and accountability in this matter. We are talking about hundreds of millions of euro which have lain dormant in financial institutions for a period. We are transferring moneys from an accountable body to an unaccountable creature of the Minister. Essentially, it is the Minister who will distribute these funds. Somewhere in the bowels of the Fianna Fáil organisation, a think tank is preparing for the next election. More than anything else, Fianna Fáil is keenly aware of how to get people elected by cleverly addressing local politics. Nothing beats a couple of slush funds in the run-up to an election. At the local elections several months ago, both Government parties, Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats, got a hammering. The Government sees that steps must now be taken to ensure it will not happen again. One way is to provide large sums of money for the relevant Minister to dispense in a carefully selected fashion to maximise electoral return for the Government.

The special savings incentive scheme, set in motion by the former Minister for Finance, Mr. McCreevy, is another element in this slush fund approach to be realised in 2006. While taxpayers have invested in the scheme, 25% of taxpayers' money to the Exchequer will still be paid out by the Government. This particular slush fund will come on stream just before the next general election. The good feeling of money coming from the Government is intended to bring about a desired electoral result. Deputy Howlin detailed the remarkable situation whereby local authorities had a certain role in the dispersal of funds from the national lottery through the sports capital programme. However, it was removed for the exclusive authority of the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism. Several slush funds are now nicely in place to pour money in great waves at the people most likely to be needed to vote the right way in 2006, the year of the slush fund.

The Government is transferring power from an independent accountable body to a non-independent, powerless body under the Minister's control. Will the House be informed of any other reason why the dormant accounts fund must be handed over to the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs? I cannot think of any but I would be delighted if he could so I can retract all I have said on the matter.

All Members recall the run-up to the last general election when RAPID co-ordinators toured the length and the breadth of the country, assembling local communities in every parish hall. They requested communities to detail projects they wanted in their areas, to explain what facilities were necessary. It was said the RAPID programme would improve everything. Money was no problem since €2 billion was earmarked in the national development plan for the programme. Every community was told of the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Finding the end of the rainbow turned out to be the problem. The money was never realised and when the 2002 election was over the promises were never delivered.

In today's published Estimates for public services, RAPID will receive €8.8 million for 2005 to cover both current and capital programmes. Last year, the figure was €3.3 million. The promise was of €2 billion but in reality it is €3.3 million. What a lie to perpetrate on every disadvantaged community.

This fits in perfectly with the argument that this Bill is another RAPID programme. However, in this case the money will be delivered as the slush fund exists. The RAPID programme was a promise that could not be met. Since it suffered at the local elections, the Government will not be caught out a second time with non-delivery. It sees slush fund delivery on a large scale as the answer.

It is scandalous. If the public only knew what was going on, there would be an outcry with calls for the resignation of the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, and his Ministers of State, Deputies Noel Ahern and Batt O'Keeffe. The Oireachtas is brought into disrepute when legislation is introduced that no Member can defend. The Bill's provisions are similar to an all-powerful tinpot dictatorship giving handouts to the peasant, cap in hand, begging for the dispersal of funds. In this case, the all powerful coalition Government hands out the funds it thinks appropriate to the deserving poor in disadvantaged areas so that they will be grateful when the next general election comes around. The Oireachtas demeans itself by passing such legislation which lends to public cynicism as to what we do in the Houses. With a Bill of this nature, it is frustrating for Opposition Members because there is nothing we can do. We can speak out but it is like voices crying in the wilderness. The numbers are not there to prevent the Bill being passed. The purpose of the legislation is to ensure the numbers will still not be on this side of the House to amend this Bill in the future.

Communities are also suffering from this frustration. By serving on my local drugs task force, I know the national drugs strategy never got off the ground because of the lack of a sure source of funding to employ people on a regular basis to carry out the strategy's work. Funding was irregular and the local drugs task force did not know from year to year whether somebody who was employed would be employed the following year. It never knew whether a project for which it had applied for funding would be funded. Since I have been on the local drugs task force for the past number of years, no more than 50% of funding sought has been granted. Part of the reason was the matter was not taken seriously and there were cutbacks. Funding for the young people's facilities and services fund was severely cut back but there is now talk of funding coming on stream. I have no doubt it will come on stream and I do not expect anymore cutbacks between now and the general election in 2006 or 2007. If I went into Paddy Power's tomorrow, I could put €10 on that and be absolutely certain that would be the case.

The communities have been let down over the years. Funding has not been forthcoming, although commitments have been made. Community organisations which were there to help out and to liaise with State agencies did not get the support they needed. There is a degree of disappointment, frustration and cynicism. The Minister will now be able to turn on and off the tap in terms of the disbursement of these funds whenever he wishes. Much money from the dormant accounts fund is going to disadvantaged communities but it will now go to such communities exclusively at the behest, grace and patronage of the Minister.

Funding for community co-operatives, which were outside the House protesting the day before yesterday, is being cut off despite the good work they have been doing. These co-operatives are doing very useful community work. The Minister will be able to pick and choose. He will be able to say to such groups that they are not being supportive in the way he would like, that they are too independent, that they are making too many statements and that their publications are critical of the Government and that as a result, their grants will be cut off and the disbursement of funds for staff and projects will end. This Bill allows that to happen and that is the problem with it.

This is a bad day's work and we will vote against this legislation. I hope we will be in power after the next general election and that one of our first acts will be to dissolve this legislation which dissolves the 2001 and 2003 legislation and the independent structures in place so that they can be replaced by non-independent, non-transparent and patronage-style structures which undermine and usurp democracy.

See this speech in context