John Halligan (Waterford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have argued from the outset that the sweeping reduction in the number of elected representatives as set out in the Bill has the potential to create a damaging distance between voters and local government. Having served as a councillor for many years I know all too well the importance people place on knowing an elected representative in their community and on having personal contact with that representative. At a time when it should be promoting and developing active citizenship the Government is instead putting in place a policy that will further detach many citizens from the elected representatives. I have read the Bill carefully and I agree with some of its aspects. It would be naive of me, having been a councillor for 14 years, to say that significant reform is not needed. I am not saying that every village or main street in the country requires a town council but the fact that large towns, such as Tramore in my own constituency, of Waterford, which has a population of 10,000 are to be left without political representation is a step too far. The closure of area offices in well-populated rural areas such as Kilmacthomas in County Waterford will undoubtedly cause difficulties particularly for older people. I am disappointed that as with the campaign to abolish the Seanad, the Government has no interest in proposing reform.

Slash and burn appears to be the order of the day.

It is incomprehensible that legislation to provide for the election of mayors is not already in place given that the mayor is an important figure in any city and is still elected by a pact system. I must admit that I was elected through this system. That is wrong. The vast majority of people do not accept that and want to be able to vote for their mayors, yet we have not even put in place proper legislation as to when we will elect a mayor in Dublin. Perhaps I am wrong on this. Anybody who served on a council will know that the committees were always divvied out depending on the party that had most seats on the council. That was wrong. Very competent councillors were excluded because they were not members of the main parties. I suppose all parties were affected by this depending on whether Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil or Labour had the power on the council. That was fundamentally wrong. I always found that the committees that were money-spinners inevitably went to people on the pact who were in Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil or Labour. That was wrong. Even the budgets were entirely economically controlled. One would say they were not but they were controlled apart from car parking charges and small issues. They were almost entirely controlled by the central government. I am disappointed that there is no reform along those lines.

It is being claimed that the changes proposed in this Bill will allow for savings of between €40 million and €45 million. That is overly simplistic. It is an assumption that larger local authorities serving larger populations will automatically be cost-effective. That has not been the case across Europe. If one studies Europe and even town councils in the US and Canada, one can see that this is not the case. A large body of research suggests that there is a weak link between size and efficiency in local authority mergers with little or no effect on savings in most services. One can get these statistics anywhere one likes. Extensive international research on local authority amalgamations suggests that one-off transitional costs can hugely limit the potential savings that may arise from mergers. Again, these are all studies that have been carried out in central Europe. In particular, we should look at the system in France. I accept that there are certain areas where economics of scale may exist such as sharing IT and back office services but surely a shared service arrangement would have been a more practical solution.

I would have liked far more time in which to speak but I would like the Minister to clarify why these costs are still not available. We are told that the Waterford city manager has estimated that it will be an up-front cost of about €2 million excluding the cost to the State of staff members who are made redundant as a result of the merger. The question of whether the savings will outweigh the costs has not been answered adequately. This question needs to be answered. We certainly have not been told what improvements to services will come about as a result of mergers. How much time have I left?

See this speech in context