Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill and, in principle, support the concept of a directly elected mayor, but I would like to see it delivered in the context of wider local government reform. Many city regions do very well. In fact, it is not something that would cost; it could be an engine for a whole lot of other things that would benefit the whole country. While a directly elected mayor for Dublin is an obvious first step, if we are serious about balanced regional development we need to put mechanisms in place that give practical effect to it. It would happen in Dublin as a first step, but would be followed in places such as Cork and Galway.

In terms of the geographic location of what is proposed, the footprint is too narrow. The functional area of Dublin is much wider than the city and county of Dublin. It has taken time for the term "the greater Dublin area" to gain acceptance, including in the Minister of State's area. Telling Meath people that they are part of the greater Dublin area takes a while to be accepted.

I listened closely to Deputy Eamon Ryan's contribution. He identified four key areas that the directly elected mayor would be responsible for or directly involved in. The first was the greater Dublin transport authority. The second was planning and housing, including land use and transportation planning. The third was waste and he spoke about the balance of power. After the Covanta experience I can well understand that. The fifth was the city of culture, which I can also understand because the city is steeped in culture and there is so much to be showcased. I agree that these ideas should be included in the mayor's remit.

However, the Dublin and mid-east region have been for many years involved in collaborative land use planning. There is or at least there should be a direct connection between land use and transportation planning. On those two critical functions, it would be an error to limit the city region to Dublin city and council. Instead, the functional area should include all or part of the surrounding counties. The same can be said in relation to waste policy.

The boundaries of counties, or shires, began to be carved out following the Anglo-Norman invasion in the 12th century. County boundaries are unresponsive to the needs of a shifting population. They were built on the supposition that a population and the land it works are permanently linked. As such, ideas such as migration and population growth are incompatible. If we consider population spread, it is clear that the greater Dublin area now spreads almost as far as the midlands. It is difficult to see how a directly elected mayor would not be constrained by a limited geographical area in dealing with most of the key issues raised.

One of the big failings in many of our public services is that most operate to their own regions, whether it is the ESB, the health service etc. If we were to design a system from scratch, the local government regions would be co-terminus with those of other service providers. That should be included in any reform package. For example, Denmark replaced 13 counties with five regions and amalgamated many municipal councils as part of a municipal reform in 2007. Denmark also changed policing districts and electoral wards as part of the process, given that they were both also based on the municipal system. Denmark is a country to which we look in terms of good local government. Also, there was reform in Northern Ireland some years ago and it is no longer based on the county system.

We need to rethink the functions of each tier of local government. Michael Lyons was commissioned in the UK to carry out an independent review of the UK's local government system. He concluded that place shaping or the creative use of powers and influence to promote the general well-being of a community and its citizens should be the primary purpose of local government. When we think of community in this country, we tend to think of it at a much lower level than county level. Organisations such as the GAA, the credit union movement and Tidy Towns all function below county level. As stated by others, in that context the abolition of the larger town councils, in particular, was a mistake. Many of them were very good on what I would describe as soft services. These services involved people and the facilitation of the creativity we see at community level. Many of the municipal districts could be recast as district councils in time. While I completely understand that Irish people identify with their counties for a variety of reasons - usually in September - that does not mean that the best way of organising and delivering local government and public services is at a county level.

A lot of work has been done and there has been a Green Paper and a White Paper on local government. Mr. John Gormley was very much the driver behind this when he was the Minister with responsibility for the environment. A mountain of work has been done on the issue and we should re-examine it rather than reinventing the wheel. We appeared to be tied into an Anglo-Norman fixation that everything has to happen at county level. This is not how people function. These are imaginary lines for many people and, if we are to have something that can work in symmetry and deliver what we want it to deliver, we must redraw them along the lines within which people actually function.

A directly elected mayor for the greater Dublin region is a good idea, but let us get it right if we put it in place.

See this speech in context