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

Throughout the local development sector there is grave concern at the savage cutbacks that have been imposed on Pobal and its staff with resulting negative impacts on local development companies and partnerships.

The establishment of the ADM company under the partnership process was a significant step in delivering necessary centralised and efficient back-up to hundreds of local development projects across Ireland, with which the Minister and I are familiar. The evolution of ADM into Pobal under the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs was a milestone in creating an accountable and more effective local voluntary and social economy sector. The organisation has received a great deal more work in terms of invigilation and an increased accounting role as a result of the recent changes introduced in the management of such companies.

The Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs has, under budget 2009, imposed a savage 33% cut in the administration and support costs of social inclusion programmes which are managed by Pobal, with a clear indication that even more severe cuts of up to 50% will apply in 2010. As I understand it, the result will be the loss of almost 100 jobs in Pobal.

I am informed by Pobal staff representatives that 74 redundancies are now being sought from a workforce of 250. I am aware also of course that 90 Pobal workers have less than two year's service and that their work has developed as a result of recent changes introduced in the organisation. Clearly, these extraordinary cuts in a relatively small organisation seem totally disproportionate, even in the context of the overall severe budgetary cuts being imposed for 2009. The Department's justification is to enable the maintenance of frontline services but the key liaison support and development functions performed by Pobal with local agencies will clearly be damaged by these cutbacks. The result will be major cuts at local level in supports for effective and transparent delivery of funds to communities. Cuts will also affect specialist support staff in employment, community development, and educational disadvantage, including disadvantaged groups, Travellers, lone parents, prisoners and citizens recovering from addiction.

Similarly, cuts will affect the connection between Departments and beneficiaries at local level, in addition to their impact on evaluation and research capacities, the production of strategy guides and good proactive tool kits, and in necessary networking meetings of partnership staff, and other cross-learning events.

The local development social inclusion, LDSIP, programme supports local agencies such as partnerships to address complex problems of inequality, poverty and social inclusion. The Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, and the Department of Finance value for money review of the LDSIP clearly identified the need for ongoing "sophisticated" evaluation and ongoing guidance and technical support for local groups. However, the Department has said it is employing the Centre for Effective Services, CES, to design a successor programme to the LDSIP. I understand that the CES received funding from Atlantic Philanthropies in addition to funding from the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs.

Why could the work not have been carried out by Pobal? There does not appear to have been any tendering process for the work that will now be carried out by the Centre for Effective Services. I am further informed that Pobal was not given a chance to tender for the project, which seems central to its statutory remit and for a task in which it has built up 16 years of valuable experience. The VFM to which I referred identified areas for improvement in Pobal but it did not question the fundamental capacity, integrity or efficiency of the organisation. How can its vital public support and invigilation role in local development be effectively delivered with the massive cut of 100 jobs?

Ireland is plunging into a severe recession, partly due to gross errors by the Government since 1997. Unemployment may rise to in excess of 10%. The impact may be most severe in disadvantaged and low income communities. It seems crazy therefore to impose this level of cutbacks in Pobal that will have a knock-on effect on important local employment and enterprise programmes across the country that are served by Pobal.

The Ceann Comhairle is aware that I have long experience as a community activist with local development projects. I am a long-time director of Coolock Development Council and of the Northside Partnership and a number of its related companies. As a community director, it is always reassuring to know that Pobal exists and that high standards of invigilation and audit are being maintained. The new light touch invigilation proposed by the Minister, including an end to quarterly reports that must be presented to and invigilated by Pobal, will result in weakening the system of accountability, which may have disastrous consequences. I am also a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, which is currently invigilating a major State agency where it appears lapses occurred.

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

I fully concur with the Deputy on the need to keep an eye on money and to make sure it is spent where it should be spent. Pobal is a private company. It is not a statutory company or agency and it is important that one would understand that.

What is proposed is a 33% cut in funding for 2009, as referred to by Deputy Broughan, relating to administration and overhead funding. It is not commensurate with overall funding for programme delivery for 2009. The reduction in the administration funding available to Pobal reflects an emphasis on the prioritisation of front-line services over intermediary and ancillary supports.

As the Deputy is probably aware, Pobal administers a range of programmes and schemes on behalf of my Department, namely, the local development social inclusion programme, LDSIP, to which Deputy Broughan referred, and the dormant accounts fund, DAF, which will give rise to less activity next year because it has less money. It is inevitable that this would happen over time. We are considering the structure of the community services programme, CSP, in order to streamline it. Other programmes include the RAPID programme, the rural social scheme, RSS, and grant schemes to community and voluntary organisations. The overall provision in the Abridged Estimates for 2009 for these programmes is just under €175 million.

As previously indicated to the House, my primary concern is to make every effort to ensure that the front-line services provided by, or supported through, my Department — especially those focused on the needs of the most socially deprived communities — are protected. That is being achieved by requiring significant administrative savings in my Department and public bodies within its ambit, through the cessation of the use of intermediary bodies, such as community development support agencies and by reducing administrative overheads across bodies such as Pobal. In that way, the wide range of services my Department provides, including services under its social inclusion programmes, can be broadly maintained.

It is appreciated that Pobal has had a key role in the delivery of successful local development services and programmes for many years for several Departments. The Government has acknowledged the work and commitment of board members past and present, both individually and collectively in contributing to the many achievements of the company. It is those achievements and commitment that gives confidence that the board of Pobal will support the Department in prioritising the restricted resources that will be available in the coming years in the interests of the programme beneficiaries. Intensive discussions are ongoing with Pobal in regard to how the administrative costs and overheads can be reduced while maintaining service delivery at 2008 levels.

The situation amazes me but it is inevitable in politics. We are told there are too many overheads and too many administrators. We hear that every day from the Opposition. I have been trying to rationalise this sector for a long time, as it was all over the place with community partnerships, area partnerships, Leader companies and Leader partnerships. There was a significant amount of companies. I have streamlined all of that and I will keep streamlining it.

Deputy Broughan might disagree with me but my absolute obligation is to get the money on to the ground. We have to look after the money but that does not have to be done through the creation of endless reports that do not determine the value for money on the ground. I am determined to protect front-line services for people who need them and if that means cutting administrative overheads then so be it. I look every day at ways of cutting the administrative overheads right across all of the agencies under my Department. I am right to do that. I have been doing it for a long time.

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

The Minister should not damage the services.

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

Let us compare the relative overheads of the community services programme and the rural social scheme, one we inherited from another agency to which the Deputy referred as being before the Committee of Public Accounts. The rural social scheme was conceived by me and operated by my Department. One can ask the people on the ground which one is working better. If we ask Deputy Bannon which scheme works better, he will tell us.

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

Do not drag Deputy Bannon into it.

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

It is the one with the slim overheads, the get out and do it scheme. That is the one Deputy Bannon would say delivers on the ground. I will stick by that approach. I know one thing; I will have the support of the main Opposition party in what I am doing.