Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)

No Member disagrees with a review of the disbursements mechanism. As projects come on stream and additional moneys are made available, common sense dictates that matters be reviewed. People's needs change, if not on a weekly basis, on a yearly one, so that one will always have to deal with different sets of circumstances. However, Deputy Haughey's claim that this legislation is necessary is not true. It may be necessary from the viewpoint of a Fianna Fáil backbencher or Minister.

The Bill was introduced because the Government was clearly surprised at the amount of moneys available from the dormant accounts fund. Initially it was believed the fund would only amount to a once-off €100 million. Now it appears it will reach an excess of €225 million, not including the life assurance policies upon which the Government is now about to lay its hands. In the same context as the taxpayer contributes to the public purse, these moneys do not belong to the Government. These moneys were scraped together by people on average incomes, put into accounts to ensure a decent burial for themselves and in the hope that in the event of a posthumous debt, it could be claimed by their dependants. In some instances, there were no dependants; in others, they did not know about the funds. No matter what efforts are made to track people down, there will always be the untraceable individuals.

Taking these factors into account, where is the best place for the moneys? It is disingenuous for the Minister of State, with a troop of backbenchers behind him, to tell us that the best place is in the Government's coffers, as a little slush fund for it to dish out before the next election. Will the Government Members hold their hands up to admit the Bill is simply a mechanism for them to get their hands on money to win the next election? It is a return to the old style politics of cap in hand. Instead of applications being made and then assessed by an independent board, groups will now have to go to their local Government Deputies to ask them to put in a good word with the relevant Minister.

I do not deny that the projects are deserving. In 2001 the then Minister for Finance, Mr. McCreevy who subsequently went to a better job, introduced the first Dormant Accounts Act. He stated on Second Stage:

To get away from the problem of having the Government blamed of having a slush fund, it has been decided to establish a board of trustees. The board will distribute the money, subject to guidelines and without direction from the Government. . . .

[I think this is] the best approach . . . to give the power to distribute it to a disbursals board and not the Minister.

However, in this amending legislation, the power will be given to Ministers. The then Minister for Finance recognised the inherent dangers in allowing the Government to distribute these moneys. At that time, the fund was put at €100 million. Now, the fund has risen to €225 million, set to rise again due to annual interest on the fund of €4 million. One must consider this in the context that the disbursements board has only distributed €5.6 million, despite the torrent of applications, and the original legislation has not changed in respect of the groups being funded.

Before the last general election the then Minister of State with special responsibility for local development, Deputy Eoin Ryan, now gone to warmer climes, introduced a new programme known as RAPID. Clearly marketed, its very name captured its intention to front load plans for disadvantaged communities above all other local authority plans. Areas that had suffered large degrees of disadvantage were to receive investment for plans the residents believed were necessary. I was part of a group, that sat for nights on end, that involved every local group such as the nuns, the shopkeepers, the people who cleaned the church and the priests. They genuinely became involved in the projects. Their application did not, as the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív often claims about these projects, include everything and the kitchen sink. They had realisable goals for necessary improvements to their community. Some were small, such as pedestrian crossings; others large, such as community centres. However, as soon as the general election was over, the RAPID programme stopped. If it were not for the continuous hard work of a small group of people who push to have little improvements made to their communities, none would occur. However, the large funds from the RAPID programme did not come through.

Yesterday, every Member received the National Roads Authority's plans for roads, bypasses and ancillary works. I noted funding designated for Blackpool in Cork city that should have been put in place four years ago by the National Roads Authority. It was to include ancillary works when the bypass was completed. However, this year it will be completed under the RAPID programme. It is not RAPID funding. The Minister of State and I know it is not. However, that is how it will be advertised. If a bollard is erected to stop cars from mounting a footpath, it is now put down to the RAPID programme, when the funding really comes from ongoing National Roads Authority projects. The RAPID programme was designed to be additional funding and not a replacement of local authority funding.

When one sees what has happened to national lottery and RAPID funding, the Bill's intentions are clear. The original Bill's intention was far-seeing, particularly considering the current crises in health care, child care and services for people with disabilities. Several Members claim streamlining the administration of the dormant accounts fund through the Department will reduce costs and be more effective. The running costs of the board of the dormant accounts fund was €148,000, including set up costs. Anyone who says the reason it is being moved is for reasons of cost and efficiency——

See this speech in context