Sharon Keogan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Minister is welcome. I thought this Commencement matter would be a good opportunity for him to clear the air. The issue on the table is the allocation of €1.1 million to LGBTQ+ projects, having been diverted from schemes for the Traveller and Roma communities, migrant integration and Magdalen laundries redress. This was revealed by Deputy Tóibín through documents uncovered by a freedom of information request. The Minister’s personal request in 2021 to reallocate funding of €750,000 to the LGBT community service funding call, thereby doubling its Exchequer funding, was characterised as a "once-off exceptional measure". However, such was not to be the case as November 2022 saw another request to transfer €350,000 out of a fund for Travellers and Roma to LGBT projects. We are aware the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform informed the Minister’s Department this amounted to 6% of the Traveller and Roma budget and that it should not lead to future spending commitments.

Additionally, these moneys were funnelled into projects which were originally not selected to receive funding. Almost €100,000 was gifted to the Transgender Equality Network Ireland, TENI, which has had its HSE funding repeatedly suspended in recent years due to poor accounting governance. A memorandum noted the TENI proposal was among five projects the Department sought to have reviewed by an external examiner due to different views internally on its application. It seems not all in the Department are happy to continue unquestioningly funnelling taxpayers' resources into organisations which cannot meet minimum accounting requirements.

While it is desirable that public moneys be used for public good and unspent moneys serve no one, the question many people have about these revelations is why only LGBT organisations received the funding. How was this decision made? What was the process by which recipients of the funding were selected over other community projects? The Minister’s Department has an extraordinarily wide remit. Were there no other initiatives that would have benefitted from the funding? What about the disability sector under his remit? What about children in care, childcare or immigration integration? These funding decisions have led to accusations of the Minister engaging in ideological parochialism, prioritising pet projects which fall under his Government remit over others. I am sure he can see how some might receive that impression. I thought he might like to address the matter and put it to rest.