Moves by the Government to silence State watchdogs in areas such as poverty, inequality, discrimination and human rights are a worrying development
A FEW HOURS before the Budget was announced, the head of the State's independent agency on tackling poverty, Kevin O'Kelly, received the phone call he had been fearing for months from a Government official.
The Combat Poverty Agency, which has operated for the last 22 years as a voice of authority in tackling deprivation in society, was the subject of a Government review. The State-funded group, which has been a stone in the shoe of successive governments, has frequently criticised policies and shone a light into forgotten corners of society. It had come close to abolition before, after insisting on highlighting conditions of poverty the government of the day did not want to acknowledge. But now, it seemed, it had finally run out of road.
The message from the official at the other end of the line was that the organisation's days as an independent agency were numbered. It would be subsumed into the Department of Social and Family Affairs within weeks. A new "strengthened" body to tackle poverty would be established. Office space and computers had already been set aside.
"It was being presented in public as a kind of benign merger, but it had all the characteristics of a hostile takeover," says O'Kelly. "We had been hit with a recruitment embargo more than a year before. The terms of reference for the review were deeply flawed, and didn't take any account of the organisations we worked with. Most of our concerns were just brushed aside. It all felt very undemocratic. In the end, it felt like a big stitch-up."
It wasn't the only phone call of its kind made that afternoon. The Equality Authority - the only agency in the State backed by legislation to investigate and compensate those discriminated against by employers and service providers - was told that its budget was being cut by almost half.
In addition, a group of 15 staff at the authority, which has highlighted numerous cases of discrimination involving government departments, would be moved out of Dublin to Roscrea, Co Tipperary, even though this decentralisation programme had been officially halted.
Meanwhile, the Irish Human Rights Commission, the State's watchdog on human rights, was told that its funding would be cut by a quarter, forcing it to shed staff and curtail its politically sensitive investigations into areas such as disability rights and extraordinary rendition of US terror suspects.
The State advisory body, the National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism, which has clashed with the Government over its pronouncements on immigration, was also to be axed.
In one fell swoop, it seemed, the Government was moving to silence the voices that were fulfilling their statutory remit to tackle the social ills of injustice, inequality, poverty and discrimination. Many employees felt civil servants and politicians were pulling down the shutters on those agencies which had been most vociferous in their criticism of the Government.
"You can't but conclude that the economic crisis is perfect cover for what seems to me to be a vindictive backlash against the impressive work by these agencies in promoting equality and challenging discrimination," says NUI Galway law lecturer and equality expert Donncha O'Connell.
"It's asset-stripping of the most vicious kind. This is tragic for those who will undoubtedly continue to experience discrimination in all of its forms in a much harsher economic climate. Yet the savings to the State by such cuts will have a negligible impact on the overall economic situation."
KEVIN O'KELLY SAYS his first suspicion that Combat Poverty was under threat came a year and half ago when the Government decided to carry out a review of the organisation.
"At the beginning we were quite happy about it. We thought it was a good idea. Then we realised the whole process was deeply flawed. First of all there was an immediate embargo on recruitment, pending the completion of the review. That weakened us as an organisation," he says.
"A few months later, we got to see the terms of reference of the review, which didn't even mention the word 'poverty'. None of our stakeholders would be consulted as part of it. We were told, these are the terms of reference, whether you like them or not."
Soon, O'Kelly says, it became clear that the steering group of Government representatives were keen to merge within the Department of Social and Family Affairs or some other structure.
At meetings, he says he expressed concerns that such a move would be hugely retrograde in terms of anti-poverty policy and would undermine structures that are in place to tackle poverty in Ireland.
"But, to me, the decision had already been made high up even before the steering committee sat or the review started," O'Kelly says. "It felt very undemocratic because of the total lack of consultation."
What felt most worrying, he says, was the way a decision to merge the agency with the department was being presented in public as a cost-saving measure.
"It started out as a review of the direction of the agency, and then later seemed to be justified on the basis of cost savings, which was never an issue," he says. "It's important to understand that the Government and the department have always had a jaundiced view of the role of Combat Poverty. Many civil servants aren't receptive to policy advice, which is one of our key functions.
"There were times when there was political resentment at our comments around budgets or government policies. But that is our role: we are an independent body, and if the system isn't working we have to say so."
O'Kelly's contract expired yesterday and is not being renewed. The agency's 18 staff will shortly transfer to the Department of Social and Family Affairs. There are seven senior positions in the agency which were never filled due to the public service recruitment freeze.
"Quite honestly, I don't see it working," O'Kelly says. "I can't see it continuing to protect and promote the ethos of Combat Poverty. How can it? It will be impossible. Everything will be on the department's terms.
"I'm very disappointed and frustrated. We did a great job over the last 22 years. We raised a large number of issues which are now accepted as government policy. The issue of child poverty, for example, is now a major priority. It took time to get those issues on the national agenda. It's going to be much harder to do that in the future."
GIVEN THE FOCUS on the massive public backlash against spending cuts in general and the decision to means-test the medical card for the over-70s, it was hardly surprising that Government moves to close or restrict the work of the agencies received so little attention and prompted so little debate.
There has never been much public support or understanding of the work of many human rights or equality bodies. The abstract language of rights causes many to glaze over. Others see the agencies as part of an unnecessary and expensive tier of politically correct quangos which have sprung up over the last decade or so.
Joanna McMinn, a founder of the Equality and Rights Alliance - a coalition of more than 50 organisations set up to oppose the cuts - acknowledges there is a problem with public perception.
"There is an anti-quango feeling out there, and no one disputes the need to rationalise many services. But these are important agencies serving a hugely critical role in defending and protecting people at a time when many more will be vulnerable in the midst of an economic downturn," she says.
"People mightn't realise, but cases taken against discrimination by pregnant women unfairly sacked from their jobs or migrants being exploited have sent powerful messages out to employers. They've contributed to a cultural change where these things are no longer acceptable."
There have been occasional exceptional cases when the work of agencies has captured the public imagination. When 74-year-old Phyllis Fahey, backed by the Equality Authority, won an age discrimination case this year against Ulster Bank after being refused a loan, she became a kind of national hero. Tabloids excitedly portrayed her as the doughty septuagenarian who had taken on the banks and won.
"This is subtle bullying of older people," she said at the time. "This is happening in every walk of life and I would say to people: 'Don't be afraid. Take them on.' The lack of humanity towards older people, particularly people in care, is appalling."
Mostly, though, the unglamorous work of the agencies takes place behind the scenes and involves anonymous individuals defending their rights.
What worried many about the Government's efforts to neuter the State watchdogs was what they saw as the double-speak it used. While politicians talked about strengthening the agencies, they also emphasised the need to save money.
Fianna Fáil Minister of State Martin Mansergh told the Dáil that the aim was to bring about a more citizen-friendly system of government which would enhance awareness of, and access to, State agencies and be greater value for money.
The reality, says Kevin O'Kelly, is that merged agencies are being starved of adequate resources and will increasingly be confined to an advisory role rather than that of independent watchdogs.
"It's hard to see, for example, how Combat Poverty's successor will ever be able to come out and raise questions or criticise government policy. And if it does, we certainly won't see it in public," he says.
In the absence of a public outcry, it's unlikely that the decisions to close agencies or cut their funding will be reviewed. Immediate issues such as medical cards and education cuts will always grab the headlines before notions of equality and human rights. But Joanna McMinn says the fight to ensure that government remains in the vanguard of equality and human rights promotion and protection will continue.
"When such fundamental decisions as the dismantlement of our human rights machinery are taken behind closed doors, democracy is stifled, accountability muted and equality undermined," she says.
"Today, the equality and human rights of everyone in Ireland are under threat - not just those of marginalised groups and communities."
