Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 10: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if the Community Workers Co-operative received a favourable report from the Combat Poverty Agency in its most recent evaluation of organisations funded by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5799/05]

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 12: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the new criteria which have been introduced for the national anti-poverty networks programme and which the Community Workers Co-operative has failed to meet. [5779/05]

Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 19: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the process which has been carried out to determine that the Community Workers Co-operative alone of the ten national anti-poverty networks, has failed to meet the necessary criteria for funding. [5780/05]

Seán Ryan (Dublin North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 20: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views on the opinion of the director of the Combat Poverty Agency that the CWC has been at the forefront in supporting the development of an independent voice for persons who are excluded, in playing an essential role in the provision of information and resource guides on anti-poverty policy development and providing support to the most marginalised communities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5540/05]

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 21: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the reason he decided to withdraw funding from the community workers co-operative as announced in January 2005; if his attention has been drawn to the concern in the community and voluntary sector that the CWC may have been penalised in this manner owing to its criticisms of Sustaining Progress; if he has plans to restore funding to the CWC; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5798/05]

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 24: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views on whether the perceived increased top-down control of community organisations by his Department which has brought about frustration and increased concern in the sector will be further drastically increased by his decision to withdraw funding from the Community Workers Co-operative; if he will reconsider his decision; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5541/05]

John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 28: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views on whether the PEACE funding which has been allocated to the Community Workers Co-operative is the amount received for a cross-Border project from 2002 until June 2005. [5782/05]

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 31: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the criteria under which the Community Workers Co-operative lost its funding from his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5813/05]

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 35: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the Community Workers Co-operative has been funded under the national anti-poverty networks programme since 1993, is named as an anti-poverty network in the Government's White Paper, Supporting Voluntary Activity, and that all assessments of its work confirm that it meets the criteria for an anti-poverty network. [5778/05]

Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 37: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views on whether the removal of the €150,000 core funding will result in the closure of the Community Workers Co-operative. [5785/05]

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 43: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the reason he has decided to remove funding from the Community Workers Co-operative. [5776/05]

Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 45: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views on whether the outcry from hundreds of local and national organisations (details supplied) working against poverty reflects the importance of the anti-poverty work of the Community Workers Co-operative. [5781/05]

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 52: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if his attention has been drawn to recent criticisms of his decision to withdraw funding from the Community Workers Co-operative by representatives from a wide range of anti-poverty and community organisations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5814/05]

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 53: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if criticism of Government policy is grounds for having State funding removed from community and voluntary groups. [5777/05]

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 55: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if he has introduced new criteria for organisations to achieve funding under the national anti-poverty networks programme; if so, when these criteria were introduced; if the ten anti-poverty networks were informed of these criteria; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5815/05]

Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 57: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views on whether the closure of the national office of the Community Workers Co-operative will put the possibility of continued funding under the PEACE programme seriously at risk given that the contract for the project is between the national organisation and the PEACE programme. [5784/05]

Seán Ardagh (Dublin South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 264: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his plans for the funding of the Community Workers Co-operative in the Rialto area; and his views on whether the work and support of the co-operative has been of great benefit to the voluntary and financially sponsored organisations in the area (details supplied). [5829/05]

John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 265: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the reason for the withdrawal of funding from the Community Workers Co-operative; if he will reverse this decision; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5846/05]

Bernard Allen (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 266: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the reason funding has been withdrawn from the Community Workers Co-operative national organisation; and if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the decision to withdraw funding has been viewed as an attempt to silence an organisation which has sought to promote debate on the way in which to tackle the causes of poverty and injustice in society; and if he will reconsider his decision. [5871/05]

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 10, 12, 19 to 21, inclusive, 24, 28, 31, 35, 37, 43, 45, 52, 53, 55, 57 and 264 to 266, inclusive, together.

I have dealt with this issue comprehensively during Priority Questions and in previous questions on the matter in the House. The position is that in the context of concentrating the focus of my Department's resources on communities experiencing disadvantage and isolation, I did not believe continued funding of the Community Workers Co-operative could be justified. I prefer my Department's resources to be concentrated directly on communities suffering disadvantage.

In this context, the Community Workers Co-operative falls short of the standards of the White Paper that each network should have a membership base which ensures the voice of disadvantaged marginalised groups will find expression in relevant national fora and that individual networks should be genuinely representative and avoid unnecessary overlaps vis-À-vis each other. Other anti-poverty networks which will continue to receive funding have a specific focus, for example, on Travellers, unemployment, refugees and rural disadvantage.

It has been asserted that the Combat Poverty Agency's evaluation of the work of the Community Workers Co-operative was positive. However, the documents provided by the agency do not demonstrate that the Community Workers Co-operative is focused on communities experiencing disadvantage.

With regard to the project involving the Community Workers Co-operative under the PEACE programme, I have no function in the details of the contract between the CWC and the implementing agency. ADM and the Combat Poverty Agency are jointly responsible for implementing the relevant measure of the PEACE programme. I understand, however, that discontinuing funding of CWC as an anti-poverty network does not, of itself, put the operation of this contract at risk.

The CWC decision does not affect the funding for the Rialto Community Network, which will continue to be supported by my Department under the community development programme. The number and nature of the correspondence I have received on my decision suggests an orchestrated campaign rather than a spontaneous response.

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With regard to the PEACE programme, how will the contract be fully implemented given that the removal of its core funding would mean the Community Workers Co-operative will cease to operate beyond 31 March?

The Minister of State offered general reasons for the removal of all funding from only one of ten national networks, the Community Workers Co-operative. He misunderstands what precisely the Community Workers Co-operative does. For instance, it provides material and news within the sector but more importantly — this is clear from the correspondence received by the Minister of State — it has helped groups within various sectors move forward in a more structured and organised manner and plays a vital role in evaluating national policy. It would be a major mistake to take the view that State-funded organisations should be gagged if they do not agree with some of the measures in which the State is involved.

The Minister of State referred to an orchestrated campaign. While the national organisations may have communicated with one another, all of them have written to the Minister of State on this issue. They did not do so because they were asked to write to the Department stating that funding for the Community Workers Co-operative should continue or they believed they had nothing to lose. Rather, from what I can gauge, it is generally believed that the CWC has a distinctive role to play in the sector.

The Minister of State referred to the positive report from the Combat Poverty Agency. As he is aware, the agency went much further than that by expressing genuine concern that the Community Workers Co-operative will be forced out of existence by the withdrawal of its core funding.

The Minister of State misinterpreted my comment that the Community Workers Co-operative is regarded as a trade union in some quarters. The quarters to which I was referring are the Department and the Minister of State. Individuals in the sector belong to their own trade unions. It is incorrect to view the role of the Community Workers Co-operative as a trade union.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am sorry if I misinterpreted the Deputy's remark regarding trade unions. The PEACE programme is operated directly by ADM Limited and the Combat Poverty Agency. If the Community Workers Co-operative has a difficulty continuing with the programme, I am sure the matter will be examined. The general opinion, however, is that problems should not arise regarding the programme.

Contrary to what the Deputy indicated, my comments were not general. The Department assumed responsibility for the programme after its three-year timeframe had elapsed. It was the function of the Department to evaluate the programme in accordance with criteria specified in the White Paper. We obtained work plans last year and, having examined the work programmes, we decided whether the organisations concerned focused directly on groups suffering disadvantage and isolation.

The Deputy stated that the Community Workers Co-operative does considerable good work, publishes news and materials and helps groups. While that may be the case, the Department's decision was taken on the basis of criteria laid down in the White Paper concerning what groups funded under the programme should be doing. Our decision was, therefore, based on the work programmes as presented to the Department.

The Community Workers Co-operative is different from the other nine networks because the latter have a much more focused approach and operate much more in accordance with the criteria laid down in the White Paper and applied by the Department. The other networks focus on particular disadvantaged groups such as the unemployed, Travellers, refugees, those suffering isolation or rural poverty, lone parents, disabled people and older people. It was on this basis that the Department made the decision to spend the resources available to it on those working at the coalface with groups suffering disadvantage or isolation.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

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.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not sure what questions Deputy Boyle has asked.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State should write down my questions. He tried this tactic earlier.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Boyle made a speech rather than asking questions.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State can read the questions I submitted.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State's difficulty is that he is answering too many questions together.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will try to respond to Deputy Boyle's questions. The saving of €150,000 is relatively small in the overall context of the budget of €300 million for such community programmes. However, this saving does not represent a cutback. The overall funding in this area will increase by 8% this year.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To what purpose will the €150,000 be diverted?

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The group in question is not the only one with which the Department works. Our function is to examine the situation in communities and to bring order and coherence to the various schemes that were funded by various Departments in the past. We have made some decisions that may be deemed harsh but they have been for the greater good. Last year, we agreed funding for 15 new community development programmes. This year's funding will be spent appropriately in working with communities to alleviate disadvantage. The other nine groups are much more focused and targeted in working with individual groups.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not true.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We see the Community Workers Co-operative as the voice of community workers. That is evident from the co-operative's work plan and programme.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not true either and the Minister of State knows it.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The other nine organisations are much more targeted. This was one of the key elements of the White Paper, which provides that continued funding of the networks be reviewed at the end of the contract period, that the key criteria should include a membership base that ensures the voice of disadvantaged and marginalised groups will find expression in relevant national fora and that individual networks should be genuinely representative and avoid unnecessary overlaps vis-À-vis each other. The Community Workers Co-operative did not have its own focus or niche area and it overlapped with other groups.

The Department gives significant support to communities in assisting their self-development. We fund 38 partnership companies, 185 community development projects, 32 community partnerships and six regional support agencies. Moreover, under the provisions of the White Paper, there are 70 networks and federations. Last year, we made some savings in regard to the regional support agencies by refocusing and reducing numbers. It is our role to constantly undertake such reviews and we will continue to do so. We cannot hope to improve the sector by adopting a policy based only on constant giving. We must evaluate and make decisions. In this context, it may be that some organisations which believed they were doing well will be obliged to alter their focus.

This action is not being taken because the organisation in question has taken an independent line. As a consequence of my responsibilities in two Departments, I am aware that community and voluntary organisations are well able to stand up for themselves. The notion that the Government is being hard on a group or wishes to take it out because it can stand up for itself and give a contrary view is nonsense. Contrary views are given all the time and it is the purpose of such groups to provide input. There is no basis for the contention that the Department is venting its anger at one group.

I will not comment on the involvement of the Combat Poverty Agency in this matter. The actions of that group are its own business and I will not cause a row with any other State agency. The Combat Poverty Agency originally operated the scheme and may be loyal to that procedure. However, it was decided the scheme should come under the aegis of my Department and the White Paper provides the guiding principles in that regard. We must evaluate and make decisions based on ongoing changes. We have made such a decision in regard to the programme, which was previously evaluated and received a positive recommendation. We are retaining nine of the anti-poverty networks and are providing increased funding. These groups have submitted good work programmes on which the Department can co-operate over the next two years.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Of the questions taken together by the Minister of State, the greater number were in my name and those of my colleagues. Will I have an opportunity to respond on this issue?

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The allocated time of 18 minutes is almost up.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has that time been exceeded already?

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, the time has expired. Deputy O'Dowd may respond briefly.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have heard some soporific views expressed on the other side of the House. The Government is about to commit a political raid on the €200 million contained in the dormant accounts fund for those most in need, the community and anti-poverty organisations. In the past, decisions were not made on behalf of those groups by the Minister of State or his Department but by the Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursements Board. The Minister of State's political raid on that €200 million is disgraceful and shameful. He stands accused of the most awful political action in taking from community anti-poverty groups, which represent the most needy in society, the facility of an independent decision-making process in regard to the badly needed funding they receive. The Minister of State is taking for himself the decision-making capacity to distribute that money as he wishes and at his consent. The issue has been utterly politicised.

I do not know much about the organisation of which the Minister of State has spoken. However, it is clearly a well organised group with nationwide experience of working in this area and it has been treated shamefully by the Government. The Minister of State has handled this matter in a disgraceful fashion and should resign.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will allow Deputy Boyle a brief supplementary.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand the nine remaining anti-poverty networks are all based in Dublin. The organisation for which funding is to be discontinued is the only one of the original ten which is based outside Dublin, in the constituency of the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív. The Minister's silence on this subject is appalling.

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Today, it was alleged to me that within days of the announcement of the withdrawal of funding from the Community Workers Co-operative funding was announced for organisations with no involvement in either anti-poverty or equality measures.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The dormant accounts fund is a different issue and legislation on it will be debated in the House either this evening or tomorrow. Approximately €60 million has been allocated by the Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursements Board.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It was independently allocated. Now it will be decided by the Minister's political masters.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Funding is going to those groups most in need. Those groups will be targeted in the future, even with our introduction of changes to the board's structure and improved governance. Regarding Deputy Boyle's questions, it has nothing to do with where the groups' staff are located——

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It has nothing to do with their views or their location. The Minister of State is not giving any answers.

Séamus Pattison (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Allow the Minister of State to conclude.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It has nothing to do with that whatsoever. The Deputy is playing the "25 counties against one" game. Decisions are based on who the groups work with, not on geography. The target groups, be they unemployed, refugees, elderly, Travellers——

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Where is the decentralisation programme now?

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It has nothing to do with where the staff are working. Last year savings were made by the Department and, at the end of year, these were provided for some groups in one-off funding.

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is it true that these groups had no focus on equality or anti-poverty measures?

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are satisfied that the work those organisations are involved in conforms to the purpose and programme of the Department. There is ongoing funding under the national anti-poverty networks. The spare funding was from other programmes from within the Department with no relationship to the programme. Funding came from end-of-year savings in the Department. At the end of each year, the Department receives submissions from organisations in the hope that there may be a one-off payment. Those groups that received it are working in the general field. The issues that they are addressing are in accordance with the work of the programme.

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The same can be said of the CWC.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The funding came from one-off savings. This is annual funding which is a different programme. The CWC may get funding from other sources but not under this programme.