Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 3: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if he is satisfied himself that rural businesses and community groups have ease of access to information and advice at a local level with regard to the setting up of new enterprises or community projects; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2810/09]

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

In line with the commitment given in the Agreed Programme for Government, and on foot of the cohesion process recently completed by my Department, there is now one integrated local development company in any given area of the country and fewer local development companies overall. These new, more coherent delivery arrangements provide full county coverage and enable rural businesses and community groups to readily access services, including information and advice, and to make maximum use of the funding available for rural development.

The Deputy will be aware that the Leader element of the new rural development programme includes particular measures in support of business creation and development. There is specific funding provided to foster awareness of and animate the programme and this supports rural community groups and enterprises in taking advantage of the opportunities under the programme. This major funding programme, which is now being rolled out across the country, will also be implemented by the new integrated companies.

Information is available to prospective businesses wishing to start up in Gaeltacht regions from Údarás na Gaeltachta, a body that comes under the ambit of my Department. In addition, Údarás provides information and advice to assist community groups and co-operatives to set up local enterprise projects and put together community development plans.

Under my Department's enterprise fund for non-Gaeltacht islands, assistance is made available to entrepreneurs wishing to establish new or expand existing enterprises on the islands outside the Gaeltacht. The scheme is administered locally by the relevant county enterprise boards, from whom information and advice is readily available to the communities concerned. An integrated company, which is dedicated exclusively to the islands, has also been set up, in fulfilment of a further programme for Government commitment.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Minister is aware, these concerns have been raised by elected members of his party. There is great concern at present about the number of State agencies and, in the Agreed Programme for Government, Fianna Fáil gave a commitment to the effect that there would be one-stop shops in the county. The Minister said that he has set up mechanisms, but there is a great worry about the clutter of State agencies, such as the Leader programme, Enterprise Ireland, the county and city enterprise boards, Údarás na Gaeltachta, the Western Development Commission, Shannon Development and FÁS. People are concerned that one agency may be subsidising another to keep people in jobs.

The people who really need money and want help in setting up businesses still do not know where they have to go to get the grant aid they need. There is total confusion. Those in Fianna Fáil as well as Fine Gael and people in the community are concerned about this and believe there is too much duplication. I want to know what the Minister can do to stop this wastage of taxpayers' money so that we may have a one-stop shop. If someone is coming into the Gaeltacht or a town in any county, there should be a one-stop shop where he or she can submit proposals and ask for help. Instead, people are being told they have to go hither and thither, and it is taxpayers' money that has to pay for all these agencies.

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

I do not know whether the Deputy had a question, but well said anyway. I could agree with him more.

On becoming Minister of State with responsibility for the Gaeltacht, one of the first things I did was to say I would cut down on the number of people giving out grants in the Gaeltacht. At that time people could go to Leader, the partnership companies, the enterprise board and Údarás. I said there was no need for enterprise boards operating in the Gaeltacht as we already had Údarás, Leader and the partnerships. Then I amalgamated Leader and the partnership companies, so I started with four agencies and reduced the number to two.

I am sure the Deputy's colleague, Deputy McGinley, has listened with interest to the great debate on Raidió na Gaeltachta, where I said that my vision was that by 2013 we should have one community-based agency in the Gaeltacht. I do not see why we have to have two and I agree fully with Deputy Ring in this regard.

Obviously, we are committed to the current rural development programme in the Gaeltacht. I do not see why we need two organisations in the Gaeltacht to operate the rural social scheme and the social economy and so on. In relation to areas outside the Gaeltacht, as the Deputy is aware, we have now brought the Leader and partnership companies together, which I believe is reasonable. That was a fairly tortuous effort and I thank Deputy Ring and all the other members of his party for their support in that process, both in principle and at an individual level. It was most helpful. My colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy John Curran, is looking at the whole relationship between partnerships and community development projects. They need to be aligned and cannot operate as if they are all independent empires. I am fully with the Deputy on this point.

He mentioned the Western Development Commission. It is not one of the more expensive commissions, with 16 employees and costs of around €1 million in administration annually. That said, we need to have a mature debate about the structures and the overlaps. Unfortunately, sometimes when decisions are made there is a natural knee-jerk reaction on the ground and everyone takes their cue from this, rather than analysing the initiative taken in the first place. I would be more than willing to engage, at committee level, in teasing out these issues. As I stated in a television interview today when I was asked about the Meitheal Forbartha na Gaeltachta and Údarás issue, the only thing that counts is delivery to the people on the ground.

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

This is an interesting discussion but I want to allow a supplementary question.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am glad the Minister offered to come to committee and it is the place to discuss this. However, the Minister should do a cost analysis on these groups. The main concern is that one State agency is paying the other to keep the offices open. This is not why the Minister established them. His intent was to help create employment in the regions and this is not happening. We need an investigation to examine what agencies exist, what are their functions and with whom have they dealt. The reaction I get from people in my community and throughout the country is that they want this rationalised and done so quickly.

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

I agree with Deputy Ring. It is true that if I ask an average partnership how much it is getting from my Department, and for example the answer is €1 million and I then ask how much the turnover is I will probably be told it is €3 million or €4 million and that it is great to have leveraged out this extra €3 million. The disappointing aspect is that it was leveraged out from other State agencies. The obvious question is whether it would be better to issue one cheque for €4 million and be done with it. Some of this can be rationalised and some cannot; I do not have a problem if it involves a community employment scheme.

I have been trying to simplify it step by step and eliminate duplication. In practice I have found that often it is easy to figure out where one would like to be and where one would have it if one were to start again. The problem is to find a path from where we are to where we want to go taking into account human issues. We have been proactive in examining this issue. Perhaps we can do more and I am open to suggestions.

The problem with an outside report is that sometimes when one receives it one finds that one does not agree with it. To a certain extent, we in this House should use our collective wisdom more. There was a big debate about what was stated about the first Dáil. I would like to see more interaction among ourselves with all of us bringing our wisdom from the ground. We should be the consultants because every Deputy knows what is going on in his or her constituency.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It would be a lot cheaper.

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

It would be a lot cheaper and it might give us better answers and allow us to build up a consensus on where we go.