17. Is there any reason why the Chief Executive of Belfast City Council was selected to be part of the group examining the review of the community services programme as opposed to elected councillors? There appears to have been a deliberate policy within the Department over the years to exclude local representatives?

1. The Department decided to include the Chief Executive as he was managing the programme. There is no deliberate policy of exclusion but your concerns are noted for future reference. The Department asked all the political parties for comments/submissions in relation to the consultation process, and we are willing to meet with the 26 councils to discuss the document.

17. If the response you received after meeting the councils was that more resources were needed, would the Department have the flexibility to provide additional funds?

1. There is no way that the Department could give such a commitment. Recommendations will be made to the Minister and funding will be considered thereafter.

17. Do you accept that had councils been more closely involved in this process in the past, the serious disparity in funding contributions between councils could have been prevented?

1. We readily accept the unacceptable variations in spend across the councils. Accordingly, there will be related policy recommendations in the final report when it is published around the end of March.

17. What is the benefit of this review process, which seems like unnecessary bureaucratic Departmental intervention? After all, the councils on average contribute 81% of this funding as against 19% from Government.

1. The Community Services programme had not been updated since the mid-1970s (when there was no rationale for funding) and was therefore seen as needing modernisation. The purpose was not just a review of Government's interest, which is £2.5m, but of the total £11m spend. As this programme will be the main source of funding for councils in the future - after European funds cease - it is important to have a strategic plan.

17. I note that the Department's funding contribution has reduced from some 75% of the overall sum in the 1970s to 19% today. Now that the European funds are coming to an end, the Department is encouraging the councils to take more of a lead when for years it ignored them. Could this sudden outburst of goodwill towards the councils have anything to do with the fact that the Department is finding difficulty in funding this programme and wants to pass on its burden of responsibility?

1. The purpose is simply to give the councils their place as they should always have been - they are recognised as having been often bypassed in the past. It is an attempt to offer a new vision for the 2000 era and not a question of transferring responsibility.

17. The Department has built up a network of voluntary organisations with no real regard to sustainability or to duplication of expenditure. Does the panel accept the need for rationalisation in the sector?

1. The question of expenditure must be considered in the round; there is a clear need for close co-ordination with other related funding programmes to get best value for money.

17. There is very significant disparity between the Department's contribution to the Law Centres and the CAB regionally, both of which receive £400,000 pa, and the independent advice centres, which receive just £20,000 pa. I am concerned about the high proportion of expenditure within the CAB, Law Centres on administration costs, which seem to be on a par with those of the front line work. I would therefore like a written response from the Department of its funding figures for these organisations and independent advice bodies.

1. We will respond in writing. As a point of information, the Government provides these bodies with 40% of their total funding. NICAB and Law Centres have built up their funding over a considerable period whereas the independent centres are only three years old; their funding will rise as they become more established.

17. I note that only 8% of the budget has gone to grants for community groups. What is the Department's direction in terms of the enabling role that the councils should be playing?

1. The presentation did draw attention to the comparatively small spend on those groups, many of which have not received the recognition due for their contribution to the community. The Department would welcome a planned integration approach, as this would send a positive message to other funders.

17. Given that European funding is due to end in six years' time, it is all the more important that the voluntary/community sector develop action plans for their future sustainability, especially since it is strongly felt that the 33,000 people involved are doing a good job. There seems to be a lot a wastage in the system. Does the panel accept the clear need for a strategic view?

1. Most Departments argue that they adopt a strategic approach to funding, which can be improved upon, and would be supportive of these aims and objectives. As no more European funding is expected, this £11m programme of mainstream funding becomes all the more important, as does its endorsement factor.

Social Development Minutes 10 February 2000