Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 94: To ask the Minister for Finance if he will ring-fence receipts from the Criminal Assets Bureau for drug prevention and rehabilitation programmes. [18174/05]

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I cannot in principle support the ring-fencing of receipts from the Criminal Assets Bureau for any specific project. In the first instance, ring-fencing constrains the Government in the implementation of its overall expenditure policy. If it were agreed that projects in communities affected by drug abuse should be funded by ring-fenced revenues, it would set a precedent that would make it very difficult to refuse other representations that might be made in the future to earmark revenues for other specific purposes.

If certain revenues were ring-fenced for particular projects within the overall fight against drug abuse, any projects thus funded would be dependent on actual revenue collected. Therefore, a fall in revenue might imply a fall in expenditure on these particular projects. Moreover, considerable resources are being allocated already to the fight against drug abuse by a range of Departments and State agencies as well as the community and voluntary sector. For example, in 2004, the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs was allocated €26.756 million for drugs initiative-young peoples facilities and services fund, with the Departments of Education and Science and Justice, Equality and Law Reform also being allocated amounts.

In addition to funding being provided through the Exchequer, the Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursement Board's disbursement plan provides for the distribution of funds to assist programmes or projects targeting three broad categories of persons, including those affected by economic and social disadvantage. In this regard, the Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursements Board has authority to allocate a total of €60 million from the dormant accounts fund. At least 40% of this total is earmarked for programmes or projects within RAPID, CLÁR and drugs task force areas.

Not all the revenues or proceeds of assets seized are drugs-related. It would hardly be a cost-effective use of scarce resources to try to apportion the proceeds into drugs-related and non-drugs-related moneys.