Martin Ferris (Kerry North-West Limerick, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

There is no doubt that our system of local government needed overhauling and we would not argue otherwise. Local government is one of the most important of any type of democracy and if it was properly reformed it would have a good deal to offer. Successive Governments have talked about the need for reform and then used that concept to cut the heart and soul out of the system. There has been a cynical, snide suggestion that town and county councillors were made up of elected representatives of the Ballymagash variety but that is an insult to the men and women who have given tremendous service in their lifetime to represent the people, some of them having done for many years. They do not deserve such commentary.

This is not to say that Sinn Féin does not agree that reform is needed, but that reform should not involve further centralisation as that would be a step backwards and result in a cut in funding to local authorities. The continued trend of the erosion of the powers of council in planning, housing, transport, roads, waste management and water has to stop. It does not have to be that way. Unelected county managers cannot have power and be unaccountable to those elected by the local people, but that is what is happening. I assume the Minister served on a council at one stage. Many of the powers that county managers have goes against the grain of what local communities require. There was a time when such posts were filled by local people with a commitment to their area and while a high standard of professionalism is to be welcomed, the parachuting of powerful of unelected county managers from one place to another, taking decisions divorced from the democratic process, must be challenged. Local authorities must be accountable to the public for their actions. Local services must represent best value for money and be accessible to those who need them. Planning is an area for local involvement and accountability to local people.

An integrated and holistic approach to planning by people who know an area intimately and know the history of its infrastructure and the needs of its people is clearly in the interests of citizens. Decades of bad planning decisions have had a devastating effect on parts of this State. I remember visiting Carlow, which is in the Minister's constituency, a few years ago when it was flooded. We had to travel on a tractor and trailer to get through parts of it. Parts of the area outside Newbridge were also flooded. That was all due to irresponsible decisions and bad planning by planners and so forth.

Far form localising and democratising the process, there is now an attempt to further distant it from elected councillors. This is not the proper way to go about it. Provision in respect of planing needs to be adequately resourced to meet the needs of those applying for planning and the requirements in respect of policies and laws. Many complaints by the public go uninvestigated because there are not enough local authority personnel to process them. The public service embargo needs to be lifted to allow local authorities to employ a sufficient number of officers. One can see where local authorities are understaffed across the spectrum throughout the country. That has a knock-on effect in terms of roads, drains and the waste collection in areas where there is still such a public service.

In recent years we have seen the effects of a combination of bad planning decisions and global warming which has caused flooding in places where it was unheard-of for generations. Planning decisions have been made which are not even in line with the councils' own climate change policies. The old section 140 - I know it was abused in my own country - gave power to councillors on planning decisions and consideration should be given to reinstating that. Responsibility comes with good elected councillors doing their job, and the vast majority of councillors do that.

In the Minister's 200 page Bill, nowhere do the words "councillor" and "power" appear in the same sentence. It has nothing to do with local government. It is an attempt I argue to centralise power in the Custom House and disempower councillors.

Part 6 contains provisions relating to the alignment of the local and community development sector with local government. The Bill provides for the establishment of local community development committees as committees of the local authority in each local government area. The local community development committees are to prepare five-year plans for their respective areas and they are to be piloted in ten areas, including Limerick. The Bill provides for staffing of these committees made up of various local interests and members of the local authority among others.

With regard to Leader companies, I think everybody has been in touch with their respective area. Their staff, the trade unions and the community are all concerned about local authorities having powers to decide how funding is allocated instead of the Leader companies. This represents a more centralised, streamed-down form of local authorities and they have the power to determine that. The Leader companies have recognised interested internationally as representing best practice. I understand all Members have been lobbied by the people who work with Leader companies.

There is a concern that Leader companies will lose their independence which has been an essential ingredient of our success. It seems that at best the Leader companies will have service level agreements with the local community development companies or even worst. Will we have a situation where Leader companies will have to tender in competition with the private sector? That is a major concern.

Those of us who came through the political chain from town council to county council, and some of us ended up here, see the value of the work that local authorities at town council level can do in their respective communities. Sinn Féin had a councillor in Listowel, Tony Curtin, who passed away earlier in the year. He was nearly 80 years old. The Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Jimmy Deenihan, would have known him personally and he would have been related to him. When I attended his funeral in Listowel I met a great number of people who spoke of the work he did for his community. I heard of the personal connection he had with people in the more deprived areas in the housing estates and so forth and the work he did on their behalf was recognised across the political divide in those areas. He left an outstanding legacy in term of his work ethic, honesty and integrity. I could say the same about most of the councillors I know. Taking away their power and the loss of the local connection where people have been on first name terms with local councillors is a step backwards. It is a step that will erode the democracy that was there and which has served us well.

In terms of local democracy, the connection between local councillor and local communities, people knowing councillors on first name terms and knowing their problems, good councillors in most areas have done the right thing. Good councillors have always been re-elected because of their work ethic and what they have done for their areas.

Sinn Féin has argued consistently that there was a need for reform but this type of slash and cut is certainly not reform. It is taking power away from local communities in local areas and centralising it more and more. That cannot be a step in the right direction. It is a negative step and it will not help people access their needs and entitlements.

Waste management services are managed by local authorities but this may be taken from them in most areas. The local authorities ran a waiver system which was of assistance to old age pensioners and those in need. It was a fantastic affordable service which has been privatised and as a consequence people who live in the most vulnerable and disadvantaged areas and elderly people who depended on the waiver, have nothing. It means the people who most need the services are not in a position to pay or else they are cutting back on food and heating expenditure or some other necessity in order to meet the payments. Privatisation has not worked and when it was introduced the enticement was that the service level would remain as was and at an affordable rate. However, it has gone the other way. That reasonableness and affordability has gone. In all areas where services have been privatised, costs have risen. Isolated areas which formerly had local authority collections are now deemed to be unviable and the collections have been discontinued. This is an example of what happens when power is taken away from local democracies.

See this speech in context