Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for their contributions. I know they are well meaning and the contributions are made in the interests of trying to ensure we get this right.

Before getting into the detail of the proposed amendments, it is important to note, and I agree, that unique consultative arrangements were put in place in 1997 when the DDDA was set up. These have been referred to by the Deputies. The input from interested parties in the docklands was previously channelled by the docklands council to the authority. The advice and feedback from that council, which included representatives from community groups and business interests, as well as Government Departments and semi-State bodies, was invaluable in formulating policy and strategies in the past. However, in dissolving the authority and transferring its functions to Dublin City Council, I was equally anxious to ensure that the voices of residents, businesses and other parties with an interest in the area are heard. Accordingly, the legislation provides for a docklands consultative forum to provide an appropriate assembly for this specific and valuable purpose. In devising the composition, role and functions of the new forum, the consensus of the outgoing docklands council, the board of the authority and the city council was sought. The definition, composition, role and functions of the forum are detailed in Part 5 of the Bill and the related Schedule. It should be noted - I note concerns of Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan in this regard - that four elected councillors who are accountable democratically to the communities living in the docklands are on the forum.

I do not intend to accept amendments 13 and 15. It is adequate for the forum to have the option to advise the council and its strategic policy committees rather than compelling it to do so. The section as currently drafted does not preclude the forum from considering and advising the council on relevant issues but it does provide the flexibility for the forum to consider and advise on all or some of the issues as priorities arise, depending on their importance at any given time. If the forum was required to address all issues, as the amendment suggests, it could place an undue burden on the work of the forum. We must recognise that the members of the forum will be volunteers.

In the case of the proposed amendment No. 14, I do not consider the amendment necessary as the term “employment” listed in the current draft of the Bill encompasses all types of employment. Therefore, I do not intend to accept it. Indeed, being too explicit as to the forms of employment may in fact diminish other non-listed types of employment, which could cause problems down the road.

Similar to the reasons I have given in regard to amendments Nos. 13 and 15, I do not propose to accept amendment No. 16. The consultative forum already has the power to consider and advise the council on matters set out in subsections (1) and (2) of section 33. The intent of subsection (3) of section 33 is to allow the democratically elected council to request the forum to consider any issue under subsections (1) and (20) and, if so, the forum shall so consider the issue. The provision of an instruction to the elected council is outside the scope of this Bill.

I do not intend to accept amendment No. 17. I believe that it is important that the forum represent the full spectrum of stakeholders in the docklands, as did its predecessor, the docklands council, and this is adequately addressed in the Bill. The composition of the forum is detailed in section 34 of the Bill, which provides a mechanism that allows nominations from a number of interested stakeholders in the docklands area, including community, educational, business, and political stakeholders and from public authorities who have an interest in the area.

I do not intend to accept amendment No. 18 as the method of identifying and appointing an independent chair to the forum, as the provision set out in subsection (2) of section 34 of the Bill is sufficient and appropriate. The position of chairperson is important for the effective operation and administration of the forum and it is crucial that an independent chair, who is not aligned to any of the nominating groups, is appointed.

Finally, I do not intend to accept the proposal contained in amendment No. 19. As previously stated, the composition of the forum, as well as its role and functions, were devised in consultation with the outgoing docklands council, the authority and Dublin City Council. The composition of the forum is set out in some detail in section 34 of the Bill, which provides a mechanism that allows nominations from a number of interested stakeholders in the docklands area. This composition ensures that all interests are adequately represented on the forum. In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the composition of the docklands forum as detailed is well balanced, reasonable and reflects the complementary interests of the docklands community.

Some Deputies mentioned reporting and oversight. I have already mentioned that the reports will be sent to the Minister and laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. This in turn provides an opportunity for the relevant Oireachtas committee to scrutinise the report or to call the relevant officials before it if the committee wishes to debate some of the issues in the report. This provides for transparency, oversight and scrutiny. I am prepared to reconsider the title of the consultative forum and its terms of reference to consider whether we can strengthen oversight. However, I must make clear that decision-making will remain with the elected council of Dublin City Council which, as members will agree, is the democratically accountable body. However, I am prepared to consider the oversight role of the consultative forum as its focus is to progress the interests and objectives of the docklands area.

I have outlined my reasons for opposing the amendments, but I am prepared to work with Deputies to ensure we have a system that will work and that will improve on those we have already seen.