Seanad debates

Wednesday, 9 November 2011

Community and Voluntary Sector: Statements, Questions and Answers

 

1:00 pm

Photo of David CullinaneDavid Cullinane (Sinn Fein)

I welcome the Minister to the House for the discussion on this important issue. I recently met representatives of the Waterford City Community Forum, which advocates on behalf of many community and voluntary organisations in Waterford. They have been seeking to meet Members of the Oireachtas to discuss the cuts in the funding of the forum itself and the funding of community and voluntary projects across Waterford. The same thing has been happening across the State. I am a former voluntary member at management level of the Larchville-Lisduggan community project in Waterford. I worked as the financial director of the company.

I support a previous Senator who called for the introduction of multi-annual budgets, as that would give certainty to many projects. I regret the fact that the democratic and voluntary elements of community development projects were undermined when they were brought into the partnership process. We are discussing the voluntary sector here today. Many people give up their time voluntarily to do huge amounts of work. If the services they provide were not provided, it would cost the State more money. An economic argument could be made to the effect that if we reduce the funding given to the community and voluntary sector and make it more difficult for people to help and assist those organisations in a voluntary capacity, somebody will have to take up the flak. Some other State agency will have to do what many of these volunteers are currently doing. I do not think it makes economic sense for us to be cutting funding from many community and voluntary projects.

As I wish to be helpful to the Minister, I will make a number of proposals that he might like to take on board. My first suggestion relates to the Dormant Accounts (Amendment) Bill 2011, which was discussed in the House recently. I suggest that we could ring-fence €50 million in funding from dormant accounts for community and voluntary organisations.

Second, I suggest we could use the proceeds of crime. As we are aware, the Criminal Assets Bureau confiscates money and assets from members of criminal gangs and drug dealers who are devastating communities. I strongly believe that when assets, including money, are seized, their value should be ring-fenced and reinvested back into communities that are being devastated by the activities of criminal gangs and drug dealers.

The third thing that could be considered by the Minister is a VAT refund scheme for charities. Everybody understands that we are in tightened economic circumstances. We all understand that the Government is looking to make savings. The Government has to be clever in what it does. If it takes funding from community and voluntary projects, especially projects that depend on volunteers, it will make it more difficult for them to provide the much-needed services that many people have spoken about during this debate. Senators have commended volunteers for their efforts. If the Government makes it more difficult for them to operate, other State agencies will have to come in and provide those services. That will cost us more in the long run.

I hope the Minister will respond to the specific points I have made about the multi-annual budgeting of State-funded community and voluntary projects and the ways in which money can be ring-fenced. If the Minister does not support what I have said, perhaps he can tell us where these projects can get the money they require. Funds need to be ring-fenced to support the community and voluntary projects that do such tremendous work across the State.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.