Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State. Some of the matters I will address may be covered in that document and, if so, I ask the Minister of State to forgive me.

I have always looked on county enterprise boards as fulfilling three broad tasks. First, they worked in geographic areas and industries which, because of their scale, did not attract the attention of IDA Ireland. Second, they worked in smaller towns in rural areas without a population mass to attract the IDA's attention. Third, they also worked to support social enterprise as well as the strictly for-profit enterprises that we all try to focus on in these straitened times. In considering any legislation to change the current system of operating county enterprise boards, we want to see that those three things are protected as a minimum and, if possible, improved upon.

There is nothing that operates so efficiently and effectively that it cannot be improved. Sinn Féin will not oppose this Bill today, but I am advised that we will table amendments to enhance the provision of the scheme and minimise the risk of unintended consequences. There can often be unintended consequences when one is introducing such legislation.

The Bill covers a hugely important area. Some 99% of enterprises are SMEs, and these account for over 70% of employment and are spread across all communities and regions. County enterprise boards have played a key role in developing and supporting this sector. They set out to provide a seamless and comprehensive set of supports from start-up and consolidation to growth and sometimes even the export of goods. That sort of seamless system of supports must, at a minimum, flow from this legislation. This concerns the integration of business supports and structures.

The beauty of county enterprise boards was that they were rooted in the community. Small business people did not feel they were walking into officialdom when they visited county enterprise board offices. The Minister of State and I both know the same people from the Sligo and Leitrim county enterprise boards. They had a different way of thinking from local authority officials, who had budgetary and many other responsibilities also. They had to stick within their budgets and ensure that essential services were provided in line with the county development plan. County enterprise board staff had a different framework and a different way of thinking. They were looking for opportunities and explored the potential of business ideas to provide local employment. They worked with people to that end, but it can often be difficult to measure the value of that work. County enterprise board staff could spend days working with somebody, yet not one job might emerge. Does that mean their time was wasted? I do not believe it does. It was a process that people had to go through to satisfy themselves as to whether there was an opportunity involved. I believe that was a good investment in time.

Having looked at the legislation, I have some concerns that that kind of free thinking - as opposed to the narrow view of some offices - might now change when this function goes to local authorities. I certainly share the concerns that have just been expressed by Deputy Calleary. There is a risk that we will de-democratise this whole process if we put it solely in the hands of officials. That has to change. If we are talking about empowering local government, it has to be about more than adding functions to local government, while keeping elected representatives at arm's length from the operation of those functions. Empowering local government should mean empowering local communities. The only way we can do that is by giving greater, not less, power to those who are elected by such communities to represent their views.

Sinn Féin supports the real empowerment of local government. We also support the idea that local government should play a greater role in the economic development of local areas. That does make sense. A good example, from which we can learn, is to be found in Belfast. The Belfast authorities are actively promoting economic development for that city.

Part of the problem with the county enterprise scheme was that both local authority staff and county enterprise board officials would love to have been able to get out and do that promotional job of selling. However, they did not have the funds to do so. They were operating on a shoestring budget and I do not see that changing any time soon with this legislation unless adequate funding is provided.

The first aspect of county development boards was that they touched on businesses and local areas that did not enjoy the support of the IDA. This was particularly the case with smaller towns and villages in rural areas. I am struggling to see how this legislative change will make it easier for somebody working in a small town or village to envisage a viable business that could be of benefit to such an area. I also struggle to see how the changes being mooted in this Bill will make it better or easier for entrepreneurs, or how it will provide additional supports to such people. Perhaps the Minister of State can help me understand that a bit better. Perhaps it is in the service level agreement, which I have yet to read.

There should be a single point of contact in looking for support. Starting a business is a big risk and people are dealing with uncertainty. It is more difficult now because of difficult negotiations with banks. People need to focus on the business, not on form filling or bureaucracy. In providing support in working through regulations and identifying what is available, including hard and soft support, a single point of contact would be welcome in the new local enterprise office. We cannot have people wondering to whom they should go after this or the next person.

Many Government programmes such as the loan guarantee scheme, micro-enterprise loans and tax support are underperforming. The figures given by the Minister of State demonstrate this point. That is partly because many people do not know about these programmes, which is a damning indictment. It means our communication network and those who should be supporting and advising small and medium-sized enterprises are not getting the message across. We must be 100% certain the new arrangement will, at a minimum, ensure what is available is communicated to those who want to set up enterprises.

Something else should be done in conjunction with this measure. The Minister of State probably agrees with me, but, because of his role in government, he cannot say anything about it. There is a risk that good legislation which I hope this is what this will eventually be will be of little value unless we change the system of rates for businesses. This is particularly true of small and medium-sized enterprises. The current system of having a notional, rateable valuation and assessment of rates is regressive and unfair. It can only be fair if it is linked with the profit and income derived from the business. If there is one single thing that scares people and stops them from going into business and also forces businesses to close, it is the current regressive system of business rates. I asked the Minister of State to persuade the Government to examine the system of assessing and billing businesses for rates. It need apply only to small and medium-sized enterprises. If we had something like this, along with this legislation, it could make a huge difference. I am told his proposals were included in the programme for Government and that there was not much consultation with the smaller medium-sized enterprise sector or the existing county enterprise boards. County enterprise boards have contacted me and probably every other Deputy in the House and believe there was inadequate discussion, even though it had taken three years for the legislation to be tabled. The delay creates uncertainty and people do not know what is going to happen. Perhaps it has undermined confidence in the county enterprise board structure. Small and medium-sized enterprises need certainty and a stable environment. They need certainty that the support will be available when they need it and that it will be available in three or five years. I hope the protracted timescale in introducing legislation has not dented this certainty.

The county enterprise boards have built up knowledge, experience and expertise in local areas. We need to see something in the legislation or the guidelines associated with the legislation and the policies to ensure the experience, knowledge and way of thinking to which I referred translates to the new bodies. We will have questions on the transfer of assets and liabilities which may be covered in the service level agreement. Are physical assets being transferred to local government? Will liabilities be transferred to Enterprise Ireland or local government?

With regard to staffing, I am sure a commitment will be given that the terms and conditions of workers will be honoured. I am aware that there are long-term temporary contract workers involved and we seek to ensure their terms and conditions will be covered under such a guarantee.

Sinn Féin does not oppose the Bill, but it will table amendments. We see this as an opportunity and the key criterion is whether the outworking of the legislation will mean disadvantaged areas like the one I represent will be better or worse. Will assistance be provided for areas that do not have the benefit of IDA Ireland support? Will there be positive discrimination and extra support for particularly disadvantaged areas? Will there be the minimum of bureaucracy and form filling for those who have the idea and the commitment to set up an enterprise? Will it cover social enterprise, those enterprises that do not set out to make a profit but to make a better community? We will also look at the risks of moving responsibility for local development further from the people elected to represent the views of local communities.

See this speech in context