Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

As I prepared my remarks I reflected on the fact that the very first contribution I made at a Sinn Féin meeting after I joined the party was to ask a councillor what was the state of play with the expansion of the city boundary. That was in 2007. Talk of it has been rumbling on for years at that stage with little progress being made. I was informed by councillor Fiona Kerins that it was dragging on and unlikely to be resolved any time soon. That proved to be correct. I asked that question at the time because it was been discussed then and the boundary had always seemed to me to be nonsensical and completely out of date. When I looked into it years later as an elected representative, as a member of Cork County Council, that proved to be the case. The last boundary revision had been in the 1960s with that revision only going east and west. The northern and southern extent of the city dates from the 1940s. It dates from a time when Rochestown was a quiet village on the way to Passage West and when Grange, Togher and many other places were farmland. The status quo was unsustainable, and the possibility of no change would have been disastrous.

This clearly needed to be addressed, but it proved impossible over the years for the council to come to any agreement, under successive managers and sets of councillors. It proved necessary to operate via national policy and national legislation. At first, the proposal from the then Minister, Deputy Kelly, was a merger contained in the Smiddy report, which was followed by the McKinnon review, which ultimately proposed an expansion rather than a merger. I believe that was the correct decision. Sinn Féin, for its part, throughout this process has played a constructive, informed, active and pivotal role, which has significantly influenced the process. It may be speculation, but I suspect that if Sinn Féin was willing to accept a merger, the Government may not have instituted the McKinnon review. It became apparent after our opposition, as well as significant opposition from Fianna Fáil and some Independents, that it would not be possible to get legislation for a merger through these Houses. We were the only party that maintained a consistent position of opposition to a merger across both councils. We were firmly of the view that a merger of the city and county council would be disastrous. That was my view when I was a county councillor. It would have constrained the growth of the city and it would make no sense for a major city like that not to have independent local government of its own. By the same token, I do not believe that places in west, north or east Cork such as Adrigole, Shanballymore or Rockchapel would have benefited from an enormous so-called local authority for a population of 500,000 that would still, even in an unfocused way, have been driven largely from the centre. I do not believe it would have been in the interests of either city or county to have two competing sets of interests and priorities in that way. I strongly believe Cork needs two local authorities with two separate executive and two separate elected bodies in order to be in a position to provide services to a satisfactory standard and to focus on the differing priorities of city and county.

We believe that there is a need for a separate county council based on the core rural areas, the large county towns and market towns, with a strong focus on agriculture, agrifood, fisheries, rural development and tourism. It goes without saying that the focus and priorities of the county will be different from that of metropolitan Cork. We believe there is a need for a separate, strong metropolitan council, with considerable focus on industry, investment, urban services, transport with a focus on commuting, and a strong strategy for support of the areas in the commuter belt with a key emphasis on public transport. This will also need a joined-up strategy for retail and commerce, and ensuring there is a balance between adequate provision for industry and retail on the fringes of Cork city and, on the other hand, protecting and reinvigorating the city centre, which is a priority for all parties. Our city centre is a valuable and prized possession. A strong focused metropolitan council is the best vehicle to deliver this.

I note in Galway, where there has been a proposal for a merger, that it is the districts in more peripheral areas further from the city that are most opposed to the proposition of a merger.

Some of this is about coherent planning because the pattern for development, to a large extent, has already been set. The manner in which the city and its suburbs and nearby towns will develop over the next 20 years is already relatively clear. We already have a relative sense of what it will involve. The county council's plans have long foreseen development in the new areas. The towns outside the city, as they are properly called, are clearly under urban influence but I believe they can and must retain their own distinctive identity within an city council. That is a challenge for the city, and I urge the city council to engage properly with these areas coming in, to delegate decision making to the most local level possible, and to value and promote the separate identity and sense of self that these localities have. These are places such as Ballyincollig and Blarney but there also needs to be a focus on some of the urban villages that have been a little neglected such as Blackpool which has suffered from a lack of focus.

I also urge the city council to maintain some of the key programmes that have been a success in the county. Both councils have initiatives from which the other could learn. The city council should try to keep the best of what happens in these localities supported, and that includes local community funding.

It is clear that for the city, its suburbs and the outlying towns, the major development that will happen will be to the west of the city towards Ballincollig, Carrigrohane and to the east of the city towards Carrigtwohill. Regardless of who governs it, those areas will be significantly transformed. The key focus needs to be the infrastructure being put in place and coherent planning. There has been some talk in media circles and among some commentators that this expansion will lead to sprawl. On the contrary, it the last 20 years that has given us sprawl. There has been significant sprawl, perhaps too much, in some of the areas immediately outside the existing city boundary. If we are to develop the kind of density of development that we need to see, I expect that would come better from a single authority properly focused on the development and planning of an urban area of a city council. The most important element is that they are well planned and planned in a co-ordinated, sustainable way that is in the interests of those communities.

There is a big focus on Cork in Project Ireland 2040 and Cork is planned to be the fastest growing city in Ireland. There is only so much more growth that Cork can take if we keep asking people to travel everywhere in their cars. Cork city is already under serious pressure in terms of traffic. There is a serious need for investment in public transport. That should start with intensified bus services, including a bus rapid transit. We need to move in the medium term to having a light rail system. I recall a debate in January during which the Minister, Deputy Ross, promised me that the Cork metropolitan strategy would be published in February but we still have no sight of it, nor an indication of any sight of it. That needs to be progressed. Regardless of whoever governs, we need to ensure that people can live in sustainable communities that are not choked up by traffic and that attract further inward investment. We need to see that strategy published.

There are issues with this Bill. I note it is silent on the McKinnon proposal for a Cork economic development and planning board. Perhaps that is contained in the amendments to which the Minister referred and he might clarify that. That is quite curious. Our submission had a proposal that was not dissimilar, albeit it was proposed for the entire county rather than an area including the city and its surroundings. Our submission states:

there are aspects of our local economy, transport infrastructure, employment, and land use & population growth which are of concern and interest to us all. For example, the future of Cork Airport matters to ... [the entire region] , and we will all benefit from the Port of Cork reaching its full potential...

Sinn Féin proposes a County Wide, ‘Cork Strategic Authority’, above...County and City Councils.

That would be given...responsibility for areas such as...regional strategic planning...co-ordination of cross county local services...infrastructural planning...economic development [and] tourism...

[We felt] A Cork Strategic Authority would be a new start for Local Government in Cork, it would ensure two Local Authorities not in competition with each other, but entering in to a new area of cooperation, ensuring minimising of duplication, while retaining distinct identities...two financially sustainable entitles. The benefits of a merger, without the loss of identity, or reduction in Democratic Representation, loss of focus, and reductions in services we fear a merger would mean.

[We also] believe that it would set an example which could be followed in other Parts of the Country, and would be a potential solution to many [other] challenges facing other Local Authorities.

We were encouraged to see the proposal for a Cork economic development and planning board, but where is it in this legislation? The Bill only refers to a threadbare implementation oversight group. Will it be addressed later? The purpose of the economic development and planning board was more than just managing the transition expansion. It was also about enhancing co-operation and ensuring co-ordination on areas of shared interest and joint policy. The two local authorities have developed joint strategies in areas such as housing and tourism. The board would also be a suitable body for managing potential disputes about financial aspects. Where is it? Perhaps it might be included in an amendment on Committee Stage, but it was not referred to in the speech, although it would be the subject of a substantial amendment. I appreciate that there are time constraints. However, it is not quite ideal that we will be dealing with substantive amendments on Committee Stage on matters such as the plebiscite. It would have been preferable if the Bill published in the autumn had contained these details as it would have allowed for greater discussion and consideration. That being the case, we will engage on the substantial amendments on Committee Stage.

The other significant issue is finances. This legislation will not cover the quantum involved in equalisation. It does not govern the amounts that will be involved or the exact formulae which will be used. However, it does govern some of the frameworks such as timeframes for reviews, frequency of reviews, how disputes will be resolved, debts attached to assets, the transfer of assets and so forth. Careful consideration needs to be given to these matters. The framework at which we ultimately arrive in this legislation will have a significant impact on finances.

I have consulted the city and county councils, my other Cork colleagues and Deputy Ó Broin and we will be engaging on the basis of evaluating both sets of views. It has long been our position that there is a need for financial fairness which we proposed in our 2015 submission. There is a need for local equalisation. Responsibility for the administration of this formula would rest with the strategic authority which would review it periodically. This would allow both councils to set their own rate of valuation, taking into account the differing needs and commercial realities in both authorities, while also ensuring the county council would remain not only viable but well funded and prosperous on a permanent basis.

Concerns have been expressed by representatives in county council areas that there will be implications for these communities if the financial package is not arrived at properly. There are legitimate concerns which I recognise and acknowledge. There are also concerns on the city side. In reality, local government is generally underfunded, but these arrangements have to be got right. We are anxious that the Bill be fair to both local authorities. For our part in Sinn Féin, we will analyse and decide upon them based on our view that we need both Cork County Council and Cork City Council to be financially viable and that we have thriving and well supported communities.

Some concerns have been raised about the issue of county and city sheriffs and whether the legislation properly accounts for necessary changes in their powers. Will the Minister of State address that issue?

Cork needs to be a thriving city, county and region as a counterbalance to Dublin which is increasingly coming under pressure. The country needs this to complement Dublin, not to be a threat to it. To do this, we need strong independent and well funded local government, with significant capital investment in transport infrastructure and public transport. I hope the Government will prioritise these matters. If we get it right, this legislation will be important and assist. Committee Stage will be key, given the amendments on the financial framework. The planning board issue also needs to be reconsidered.

See this speech in context