151 / 264
GAZETTE
JULY
places the control of such centres in the hands of the local
community, so that law centres do not become glorified
information centres which give people the mere
knowledge of their rights.
Let us now look at the experience of Coolock, for while
there is much to be learnt from the experience of Britain
and America, in this field, we must recognise that Law
Centres in Ireland must of necessity adapt to the
particular situation in Ireland.
In laying the groundwork for greater community
involvement there are three lessons to be drawn from the
Coolock experience. Because of the lack of Civil Legal
Aid to date, Coolock has been geared of necessity to case
work. To have ignored this present existing need for
individual legal advice—which cannot be obtained
elsewhere—would be to bury our heads in the sand. This
necessity for individual casework is likely to continue for
the foreseeable future until a proper Legal Aid Scheme
takes the casework pressure off the Centre, to allow more
rapid development in other fields.
While casework will, for the time being, be our major
concern, this need in no way exclude the community
aspect of our work. Indeed to allow this to happen might
set a dangerous precedent for Coolock.
There is already an attitude prevailing in the area that
sees the Law Centre as a casework agency.
We have to start to develop our links with the Com-
munity now and to extend the range of work we do. But
this work cannot be seen as two distinct blocks, so that on
the one hand you have casework, and on the other com-
munity work. The two are very much interrelated, and so
those involved in casework have an essential part to play
in the Community aspect, and those primarily involved in
community work must have a thorough knowledge of the
casework. This can be seen from, for example, group work
arising out of the Centre's casework. In order to have any
real understanding of that group, and credibility with it,
the community worker must have knowledge of the legal
situation involved, but it is also essential that those in-
volved primarily in casework, and who have the practical
experience of dealing with the problem know what the
group concerned is doing, and are able to introduce in-
dividuals to it effectively.
But this inter-relationship of work brings special
problems at Coolock, because of the small number of full
time staff. Overlapping of the work should not happen
thus leaving the two aspects of the work isolated. While it
is easier for a person engaged in community work to ar-
range his time to allow himself to keep up-dated on the
casework, it is far more difficult for those engaged in im-
mediate casework, to arrange their time to allow for the
wider work of the Centre.
But if we accept that we want to make the Coolock
Centre a Community Law Centre, we have to accept that
the work I have already mentioned such as group and
educational work, is also essential, and cannot be put con-
tinuously on the long finger.
This can be achieved by restricting the amount of
casework adopted, and by dropping a particular category
of cases, e.g. consumer rights. While this might be prac-
tical in a situation where Legal Aid is available, where
there is little or no other source of help, I do not think
such a solution would be practical. The only other alter-
native is to attempt to slow down the rate of growth of
casework which will allow a day or two per week to be set
aside for the Centre's wider work. This will in effect mean
that people will have to wait somewhat longer for help, ex-
116
cept in obvious cases of emergency. If we agree that the
wider work of the Centre is at least equally as important
as the casework, though perhaps less tangible in its im-
mediate results, then given our present staffing situation
at Coolock, we have no other alternative.
But once we take this decision we must do it openly ex-
plaining to the Community why we have taken the deci-
sion.
Another aspect of the Centre's work which we have to
look closely at is that of student involvement. Clearly the
Centre needs student help in order to be able to manage
the amount of casework with which it has to deal. Also
students could help in the wider work of the Centre, for
instance in the field of educational work, and producing
literature on rights.
However we should develop a greater sense of team
work at Coolock between full time workers and students,
if the students are to be involved fully in the Centre's
future. As students are already playing a large part in the
Centre's work, mainly in the evening and atweek-endsat a
time when the full time workers are not there, there is a
gap in the Centre's life which needs to be closed. We can
do this, in the first place by organising regular meetings of
all those working at the Centre, which would investigate,
not only the practical workings of the Centre, but also
would discuss fully the development of the Centre and its
whole approach to the work. If we are to develop
Coolock as a Community Law Centre which has a definite
meaning for the people of the area, we cannot afford to al-
low a situation where the work of the Centre is split
between two groups (i.e. full time workers and students)
who never actually discuss in detail their approach to the
work. This is a situation which could in effect give the
Centre two separate existences, a situation which could
destroy the work of developing the Centre's community
identity. It is therefore essential that all those working at
Coolock work in the fullest sense as a team.
We have to ensure that future Law Centres in Ireland
are controlled by the Communities they serve, rather than
by central Government. This is essential if they are to
undertake the kind of wider work of advocacy for the
local Community that we have already spoken of. We
therefore have to look seriously and urgently at the need
to develop for the Coolock Centre a base of Community
control, not because the present method of management
has restricted the Centre'e development, or would be
likely to in the future, but because it must surely be
accepted as a basic principle, that if we are talking about
a Community Law Centre, then it cannot be such truly
until such time as that Community is given an effective
voice in its running. If we consider the Coolock Centre as
belonging to Coolock, then we must accept that it can
never be there until that Community controls it. Not only
this, but it would make the task of expanding to the
Community's needs far easier and more likely to succeed
if the Centre was regularly in contact with local
representatives who knew they were in a position to direct
the Centre's work. I would suggest that we seriously
consider such a management system for Coolock now. I
believe that persons should initially be drawn from local
groups such as tenants associations, trade union
branches, pressure groups etc. as representatives to sit on
a Management Committee for the Law Centre, and that
FLAC could also be represented on such a Committee.
What should be done is to at least make a commitment to
such a development at Coolock, and begin to sit down
and work out the details in the near future.