Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

Following on from that last sentiment, I equally have little confidence that the Bill will deal with this matter. People from all sides of the political spectrum repeatedly state they want improvements in local government. Undoubtedly, this sentiment is shared by the majority of citizens. Sometimes, people spit the word "council" in the same way they spit the word "politician" because of their frustration and anger with the failure of councils, much like the failure of the Government, to deliver what people want and expect from them.

When one seeks to address people's appetite for better local government, one must start with the basic question of what local government is for. If one does not set out to develop legislation and policy based on an accurate assessment of what local government is for and what people expect from it, one will not get far.

One needs to start with the brass tacks. What people want from local government is apparent to me on a weekly basis, namely, the availability of affordable housing, the maintenance of roads and parks, support for the local economy, the local community, youth projects and sporting activities, the provision of playgrounds, decent local public transport and amenities, and the protection of the environment. They want proper planning and development that is transparent, in which they have a say and is rational as opposed to the irrational, anarchic and developer-driven economic and planning development we saw during the Celtic tiger period and that played such a critical role in crashing this economy.

If these are the service priorities that people believe local government should have - I should add basic elements such as decent water infrastructure and proper waste, recycling and environmental policies and services - they also want some say in setting those priorities. They want real influence, not pretend influence or fake consultation, on a weekly and monthly basis. This seems to be what the starting point should be.

The way for a Bill to address this matter - generally, Bills do not do this - is to provide resources. Without resources, activities cannot be undertaken. It is evident that the Bill will fail, as we are doing the opposite of providing resources. We are slashing the funding and the number of front-line staff needed to deliver these services. This slashing has been intensified and accelerated by the financial crash, the economic crisis and the austerity imposed by the previous and current Governments, but it is worth saying that there has been a long-term process of robbing local authorities of the resources they need to provide the services that people expect. Year on year, people in my locality and I have watched the steady decline in the number of individuals employed by the council to perform basic functions, for example, cleaning streets, maintaining houses, and so forth. Councils used to perform these functions, but they no longer do because they have no one to do them. People are driven around the twist by seeing council houses boarded up for months or years. Does the Minister of State know how angry that makes people who have been on a housing list for ten or 12 years? Not a week goes by in which people do not say this to me. They are driven demented by it. In many cases, they are the very tradespeople who could fix those houses. They wonder why they cannot be employed to do the work. Thousands of unemployed tradespeople in the area are just sitting around and would love to do that work. They would also love to provide local services and to maintain, protect and develop the local environment and its amenities. They do not understand why this is not being done.

We are moving in the opposite direction. This Government imposed a 9% cut in the local government fund in 2011 and another 9% cut in 2012. In 2013, the figure will be 2% against the laughable background of the introduction of a property tax and the big lie that it would improve the level of resourcing to local government when it was really just going to be absorbed by paying off bankers' debts.

See this speech in context