Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 358: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the action he proposes to take regarding the concerns of the Dyslexia Association of Ireland in respect of the review he is carrying out on the scheme to support national organisations in the community and voluntary sector (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23398/10]

Pat Carey (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The organisation in question is funded under my Department's Scheme to Support National Organisations in the Community and Voluntary Sector and has been allocated funding of €80,352 in 2010. Contracts with the various organisations which are being funded under this Scheme are due to expire on 31 December 2010. Officials in my Department are currently carrying out a review to evaluate the Scheme and its operations and I hope that this process will be completed by the autumn.

All organisations involved in the Scheme, including the Dyslexia Association of Ireland, are being consulted as part of the review process.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 359: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if he will withdraw the requirement that projects funded under the community development programme close and instead allow them to engage in the local and community development programme on an equal footing with the partnership companies, retain their company structure, retain their assets and retain their independence, autonomy and accountability. [23440/10]

Pat Carey (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy is aware, the Local Development Social Inclusion Programme and the Community Development Programme were my Department's two main social inclusion/community development programmes. These came to an end on 31 December last and have been superseded by a new integrated programme, the Local and Community Development Programme (LCDP). A key difference between the new LCDP and its predecessor programmes is the fact that, when fully implemented, it will be delivered nationally on an integrated basis by a reduced number of companies.

It is important to note that, despite what is stated by some community development projects (CDPs) and by others, integration does not mean closure of a CDP or the cessation of CDP activities in any given area. As has been stated previously, any worthwhile community development activity or service delivered under the CDP can continue to be delivered under the new LCDP and by the same staff who currently do this work. My Department has set out a model involving full integration of CDPs with local development companies (LDCs), but has made it clear that other options can be considered and that it is not a question of 'one size fits all'. The only option not acceptable is one that seeks to preserve the status quo: some models proposed by CDPs and other parties in the period since the launch of the LCDP have had to be rejected on that basis.

In recent weeks, however, my Department has been able to respond positively to a number of other alternative models put forward by both LDCs and CDPs. While agreement has not yet been fully finalised in these cases, I am satisfied that the real possibility for agreement exists. Additional proposals from other CDPs or LDCs are also being considered positively but are less developed at this stage. I can assure the Deputy that my Department will continue to respond positively to all constructive proposals that it receives.

In a full integration situation, all assets and net liabilities would usually transfer by agreement. However, my Department has made it clear that other arrangements are possible if sought by CDPs or LDCs - for example, the ownership of buildings need not transfer to the LDC.