Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Docklands Consultative Forum is dealt with in Part 5. The same structure is being replicated here as existed in the Dublin Docklands Development Authority.

I was a member of that authority for a number of years along with many other councillors. A similar structure for the appointment of local authority, community, business members and so on is being provided for in this legislation. The first problem with it is that it is a forum. It is a place where people come together and talk, it is not a place where people make decisions. Deputy Stanley's amendment suggests replacing the word "may" with the word "shall" because section 33(1) simply states the forum "may consider and advise" the council. Surely the forum "should" consider and advise the council. It is not much of a consultative forum if it does not do that and if it has a tentative rather than a specific mandate to do so. I am not sure the wording is adequate. I would like the provision to be strengthened and perhaps the Minister of State might deal with that in his response.

The legislation refers to five organisations which, in the opinion of the Minister, are representative of the community, five organisations which are representative of economic activity in the area, five public authorities and so on. One of the amendments names various geographical areas in the community. They are set out in the amendment and include City Quay, East Wall, Irishtown, North Wall, Pearse Street, Ringsend and Sheriff Street-Seville Place. The communities want to have these areas represented on a geographical basis so that we do not end up with non-geographical representation. They want even geographical representation. The legislation provides for "not less than 5 organisations" but they are all organisations and how are these organisations going to put forward members? Will there be a plebiscite? How will nominations take place prior to the Minister making the formal appointment? Will the Minister of State clarify that issue?

I am glad the Minister of State said he was interested in strengthening the forum in terms of reporting powers and giving it a level of oversight. There is a danger that it will just be a talking shop. It may well end up like the previous one. Many people in a representative capacity came together but were not able to effect anything. Everything happened outside their remit. I would like the body's powers to be strengthened. In addition, it should have an oversight role to allow it to ensure that objectives and targets are met. The regeneration of the docklands was a fantastic idea in theory. Principles were laid down and there was a master plan. We had everything except the delivery. It did not deliver social and economic regeneration in equal measure as it was supposed to do.

We need to ensure that not just economic regeneration is delivered on this particular occasion. We are talking about thousands of jobs. Some 23,000 jobs are meant to be created as a result of this. There will be enormous development in terms of office blocks and residential developments and huge opportunities for training and employment. There will be enormous opportunity to get this right for the docklands. That is the nub of the matter. We need to get it right on this occasion. The docklands consultative forum could be the key to doing it, if we can get it right, but it needs to be more than a consultative forum. It must have an oversight role so that it can ensure targets are met, social regeneration is not forgotten about, social housing is provided, employment targets are met and all the rest of it. It would report to the Minister and this committee. It would also be possible to bring in the Dublin City council development unit. That sort of bite is needed. I would welcome an amendment by the Minister which would tighten up this section.