Michael Harty (Clare, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I also speak in favour of this motion.

This is an issue which is not confined to Cork. It also relates to boundary changes in Waterford and Kilkenny regarding Ferrybank, Roscommon and Westmeath regarding Monksland, and also in Clare and Limerick. In the last case it proved a very contentious issue in 2011 when Limerick city proposed to annex a portion of south east Clare into Limerick city. A committee chaired by Denis Brosnan proposed to incorporate Shannon Banks, Westbury and the parts of Limerick University which lay on the Clare side of the river into Limerick city, including the parishes of Meelick, Parteen, Ardnacrusha and Clonlara.

Anyone familiar with Clare hurling will know that most of our senior teams which have been successful in recent years come from that area. I am sure people in those areas would not swap the saffron and blue for the green of Limerick, although I am originally from Limerick myself. These are the issues that are important to people when a boundary change is proposed and they are not to be underestimated.

Such was the opposition to this proposal that it was not politically possible to pursue it and the then Minister, Phil Hogan, decided not to act on the annexation proposal. A group called Clare Against the Boundary Change campaigned on the matter for several years and on one occasion had a rally attended by 10,000 people. That was democracy in action, when people successfully voted with their feet to oppose boundary changes. Recently the matter was proposed once again by a Sinn Féin councillor but I hope that will not happen as I had assumed the issue had been finally but to bed.

This is an issue which will arise in many areas in future. It may be the areas to which I have referred, but other areas may have boundary extensions imposed upon them. There are historical, sporting, cultural and social reasons for our existing boundaries. Boundaries should not be interfered with lightly by technocrats and bureaucrats who do not understand the significance of place in Irish society. These factors are very important to people who live in these areas. On Thursday next, I understand Deputy Eugene Murphy will introduce a Bill, the Local Government (Amendment) Bill 2017, which aims to ensure that local communities have a final say in any proposals for a county boundary change, which effectively happened in Clare six years ago. It would place a requirement on the Minister with responsibility for local government to hold a plebiscite on any boundary change that would require a majority to decide on whether a boundary change should take place. This Bill deserves close scrutiny.

Boundary changes are usually proposed by bigger authorities to annex profitable areas of smaller authorities, of course under the guise of better administration and governance. Quite often, such changes and marked out with a ruler and take no account of parish, townland or natural boundaries. This is the case as it pertains to the proposal to annex Monksland in Roscommon to Westmeath. This is counter to the ideals of balanced regional development, which is proposed and promoted in the Programme for a Partnership Government. The main impetus for boundary changes are, of course, financial and relate to commercial rates and property tax. They take from the smaller authorities, which further reduces their ability to provide services, roads, housing, infrastructure and amenities.

The justification for such boundary extensions are not well founded in many cases. I believe an alternative solution is available. Adjoining councils should work in partnership if it is to the mutual benefit of both councils in terms of service delivery and regional development. It should not be to the detriment of one council over the other. In the case of Clare County Council, annexation of south-east Clare would not in any way enhance Clare to reach its full potential. If urban expansion is at the expense of rural communities then it is against the ideal of balanced regional development. Annexation should not be an acceptable model. Meaningful co-operation and engagement would be a far better and more productive method of dealing with boundary issues, rather than annexation, and it should observe the democratic will of the people. Boundary changes are another demonstration of how the dismantling of local government removes democracy further away from the people. We should have a return to the local government structures that were dismantled in 2014. Then we could have some meaningful democratic dialogue on boundary change.

See this speech in context