David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy O'Brien and the Chair for her indulgence.

We will all look at this through the lens of what is closest to us. I do not intend to get caught up in the hyperbole of this issue with regard to the commentary that will flow from this locally. It is obviously an issue that will be contentious in Waterford and Kilkenny. This boundary issue has been contentious for some time. I have not been one of the politicians that has increased the temperature on the issue and I accept that we need to have a structure, process and framework in place that focuses on the needs of the people who live there and not on all the other issues that seem to gravitate around this issue, which are sometimes somewhat unhelpful. I have no difficulty in principle with a solution being found. The difficulty is that the solution which has been brought to the table is very late in the day in a Bill which was designed to do something else. Notwithstanding that the Minister of State flagged up that he intended to look at a solution and mechanism such as this, the detail of it is now before us and concerns us. I have spoken to councillors and the management in Waterford and they are concerned about the process. They have no problem with good planning and sustainable development but they have concerns about the democratic element in this.

I want the Minister of State to help me to understand how this would work in practice. We have the example of Waterford and Kilkenny. I understand that this urban district committee would involve the metropolitan area of Waterford city and the part of south Kilkenny that was subject to a potential boundary extension. Approximately 45,000 live in the metropolitan part of Waterford city and approximately 7,000 live in that part of south Kilkenny, coming to approximately 52,000. The vast majority live in Waterford, yet there are three elected representatives from Kilkenny and three from Waterford. The Minister of State can obviously see how difficult that will be from a democratic point of view for people who live in Waterford. They will be very concerned about that. That just relates to the composition of it, not the people who will come from outside, as Teachta Casey mentioned. The powers and functions that the committee will have will concern members even more. What relationship will it have with the two councils and, specifically for me, what relationship will it have with Waterford City and County Council? My understanding of the amendments is that they will have powers to formulate their own local area plan but will that local area plan be able to supersede area plans which have already been crafted by local authorities? If that is the case, that creates other democratic problems in the sense that there are 32 councillors in Waterford who could formulate a plan which could then be superseded by a smaller number who are not elected to that body. We do not know how they are appointed.

That is going to be problematic. The same thing applies in the case of development plans. Will these other councillors be able to vary development plans? If so, how will that work in practice?

I will give a simple example of the types of practical things that need to be worked out. If the committee of six councillors decides that under the local area plan, a road should be built somewhere entirely within its geographical area, which will include the entire area of Waterford city and the smaller area, there will be budgetary implications. Given that the budget is decided by the councils, how will this work? People are struggling to understand how it will work practically. The Minister of State is correct when he says that this proposal has not gone down well in Waterford for all of these reasons. People are not opposed to a solution, but they do not like this solution. Like Deputy Ó Broin, I think it would be better if the Minister of State were to withdraw these amendments. I know from speaking to management personnel in Waterford City Council that they have not been consulted. They are aware that some sort of proposition is being put on the table, but they have not been consulted on the detail. How can we force something on local authorities when local authority management is saying it does not see how it will work? Neither management nor councillors has been consulted. The Minister of State has said that members of his own party in my constituency are concerned about this as well. Strong language may have been used if emotions were running high. They are concerned and they should be consulted.

I suggest it would be best to withdraw these amendments at this point. My strong advice to the Minister of State is to withdraw them and revisit them either in the 2019 Bill that has been mentioned by Deputy Ó Broin or in a separate stand-alone Bill. We need to examine this dispassionately and appropriately without jumping to conclusions. It should be given the proper consideration. We need to look at how it would work practically. I am certainly up for that. I want something that will work. I do not believe the process that is envisaged here will work for Waterford and Kilkenny, whatever about the other areas. A one-size-fits-all approach will not work here. I have set out my concerns. As I have to return to the Committee of Public Accounts, I might not be here when the Minister of State responds. I am sure Deputy Ó Broin will update me on what he says. I thank the Chair for her indulgence.