Damien English (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 4: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the reforms proposed for the delivery of the RAPID programme in view of weaknesses identified in its recent evaluation report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [31396/06]

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The RAPID programme aims to ensure priority attention is given to tackling the spatial concentration of poverty and social exclusion within the 45 designated RAPID areas. In addition, RAPID priority status was recently extended to Ballyfermot. My Department, with the support of Pobal, has overall responsibility for the co-ordination of the RAPID programme. As I indicated in my response to Question No. 41 of 14 June 2006, it is a matter for each Department to respond to the recommendations in the report in respect of their specific areas of responsibility.

It is important to note the report indicates that, in general, the experience of the RAPID programme has been positive. The report found that the programme has made substantial progress in identifying the needs of disadvantaged communities and in implementing important local projects in response to locally identified needs. A number of weaknesses in the delivery of the programme were identified, pertaining to strategic planning, limited implementation of the programme in a small number of areas, the interaction of some State agencies in some areas and difficulties in identifying sources of funding for some projects.

The report recommends enhanced monitoring structures, the adoption of annual work programmes and improved corporate and business planning in agencies to prioritise RAPID areas for investment. I have initiated a process to implement these recommendations. My aim is to address the identified weaknesses by working with the various stakeholders at national and local level.

Damien English (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am glad the Minister went through the faults of the report, so I will not have to list them, and the changes that need to be made. There is a lack of focus in a few RAPID areas and that is addressed in the report. It might help to have a person in each of the various bodies that are dealing with the RAPID co-ordinator assigned to RAPID. It is hard to get things moving at a fast pace, so there should be one person in the council who deals with the RAPID co-ordinator and reverts back to the council staff. Fingal County Council is starting that initiative in a few areas of its business so we should consider the same option for RAPID. There should be one person in the health board, the Garda, the council and so forth in charge of bringing back the message.

In some areas the priorities we and the co-ordinator have for RAPID are not always a top priority for the residents of those areas. Sometimes RAPID is more involved in social capital, for example, providing a community magazine or newspaper, rather than providing for people in the area who do not have central heating, whose houses have damaged windows or where there is a litter problem. The priority does not seem to be getting the area in shape first and then doing the additional, nice things.

Many of the RAPID areas are older council estates and the houses are now worth a great deal of money. People who try to buy their houses are hit with the market price, minus a percentage for the number of years they have been renting the house. They cannot afford to buy them. The council, therefore, is left with hundreds of houses that must be maintained but it cannot afford to maintain them to a high standard. If we relaxed the conditions for certain age groups in the RAPID areas, people could buy their houses. Money raised from the sales could go into the council fund to repair the other houses or to bring the area up to a certain standard.

The people I have in mind are generally older people who want to provide for their future but they do not own an asset. If they try to buy their house, they will be caught by the conditions. Perhaps there is room within RAPID to consider an initiative to help them. It might also help the area by generating money and by giving people more responsibility.

The Minister referred to including the Ballyfermot area when the RAPID boundary was extended. What are the procedures in other towns and counties for the extension of RAPID? In some places there are estates located side by side and only one of them might be in RAPID. The boundaries were well drafted but there are a few areas where they could be moved slightly to make it more effective. Will the Minister explain the procedures for doing that?

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy's first question is valid but nobody has an answer to it. No matter what structure one puts in place, it is dependent on people. Some people are good and some are not so good. There is no logical reason for Kerry winning so many All-Ireland titles. The people are no taller, stronger or smarter than the rest of the country, although they think they are. There is something in the people and in the culture to make them succeed in Gaelic football.

The same issue arises here. We cannot create a system or structure that guarantees that everybody within that system or structure works efficiently. To a certain extent we must turn that into a strength, in other words, make it more competitive. The areas that get ahead will get more and the areas that do not could be shown up, which is the best way to get them going. A major finding in the report is that some areas are getting ahead while some are not.

The second issue is agencies. I am taking two approaches to that. One of the dividends of the cohesion process is fewer bodies in every county. I hope, therefore, that we will make fewer demands on bodies such as FÁS, the VECs and so forth to have to run from body to body. As a consequence, I hope they will be able to send more senior people to the few bodies that will remain. In County Meath, for example, there will be one Leader partnership for the county. Instead of four or five agencies, we will now only require one person to go to one meeting per month. That makes sense. However, the quid pro quo must be that it is somebody more senior who has more clout in the subdivisions within their own organisation to make things happen. There is a methodology behind what we are doing. People from the agencies must take responsibility.

I sometimes wonder if the second issue could apply to the House. Some of the debates that get headlines in the newspapers do not relate to what people come to me about, which is always houses, roads, social welfare and other practical matters. I am driven by the practical issues that affect people. Obviously, there are very poor housing estates. My colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, in his capacity as Minister of State in another Department must carry out the big refurbishment of those estates.

With regard to smaller works, there is huge demand for the cleaning of estates, fixing boarded-up houses and getting them back into the market. There was a meeting of the national monitoring committee today at which we considered how we could do more for estates with the enhancement scheme. One of the frightening things is that we cannot spend the money. Amazingly, many of the people involved in estate enhancement have not yet spent the 2005 money, let alone the 2006 money.

To give them a better opportunity to plan we said we would provide the 2006 and 2007 money together. I was hopeful that some might spend the two years' money in 2006. In fact, the opposite is happening; the tendency is for them to spend the two years' money in 2007. It is an amazing world. People, particularly local authorities, keep telling us they have no money but when we provide it we cannot get the work done. There are issues in that regard and today we discussed ways of rewarding those who get up and going and penalising those who sit on their butts and do not deliver after all the talk.

The Deputy asked a valid question about extending the RAPID areas. The Ballyfermot area was separate so I will deal with that first. When the initial analysis was conducted, Ballyfermot qualified. What disqualified Ballyfermot was the fact it had been given a European programme called URBAN. Somebody made what I consider a wrong decision, that if an area is given the URBAN programme and qualifies for RAPID in every respect, it cannot participate in RAPID as well, even if it is the most deprived area in the country. It was a long process to get it right but Ballyfermot should have been in it on the first occasion. That is the reason it is included now.

The Deputy is correct that there are areas adjacent to existing RAPID areas that have a good case for inclusion. There might be new housing estates which did not exist when we started. RAPID is different from CLÁR. CLÁR is about leverage funds so all I need do is double the funds and double the area. It is quite simple. However, as RAPID involves prioritisation of mainstream funding across all Departments, if I double the areas I will dilute prioritisation by half. That is the challenge. If I ever get around to looking at extensions and adjustment of borders on the basis of new statistics, it will be in the 5% to 10% bracket. It will not be a doubling like CLÁR. If I doubled it, I would undermine the basis of the programme, which is prioritisation. It is not analogous to CLÁR, which is 90% about leverage funds. All I did in that programme was double the funds and double the areas.

Was there another question?

Damien English (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I asked about people buying their houses and whether there is any hope for them. I do not expect a full answer today as it is a new topic I have raised.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy made a fair point. The Minister of State and I have discussed that issue. A valid argument can certainly be made because the more people who own their houses, the better. However, there is a snag. I have been a great proponent of people owning their houses from the day I was elected to this House but I have been told that, in certain cases, when people bought the houses, particularly in towns with third level institutions, within ten years all those houses were let. This gave rise to a new type of dereliction, with landlords letting the houses to students, migrant workers and so forth. The houses in the estates were not cared for.

Damien English (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am glad the Minister is thinking about it. He will get support from this end. We can invent new clauses to prevent problems arising. RAPID was to correct problems of the past, such as bad planning, bad housing and so on. Can we learn from the RAPID report and the work of RAPID to prevent this happening again in other areas? Whose job is that?

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Deputy looks at even the physical design of new estates, he will see it is much different. The second issue is providing the facilities as well as building the houses.