Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Indeed and I suppose it could read: "That was the year of the [Brexit] bother." Borders and boundaries matter. We can understand why people have strong views about their locality because they have strong ties to the area they live in which is part of their make-up as individuals and as communities, and they form strong bonds through the GAA and other sporting organisations. All these things come into play when people talk about boundaries.

In Cork it is slightly different from Drogheda because it is not a question of transferring out of one county into another. The same applies in south Kilkenny and it was a contentious issue in Waterford as well. As a citizen who will now be living in the city when previously I resided in the county and as a public representative for the past 25 years for the area that will include all of the new city council area, which has come in from the county, I know this is not very contentious because there was a protracted discussion after the Smiddy report which recommended one authority. That did not gain enough traction or support there or in this House. We then moved to a conciliatory approach ending with this Bill.

I have been on record for a long time as saying that Cork City Council needed a boundary extension. In times past, we measured boundary extensions in metres, 400 m or 500 m, here and there, which had no significant impact on the city, as the metropolitan area, to plan for its citizens and the region beyond. Just as Dublin is my capital city, Cork is our city of the region, not just for the citizens who live in it but for those who use it from time to time. For that to be the case, it has to plan with a strategic long-term vision. This boundary extension will allow that to happen.

It is important to consider what has happened to date with this and previous boundary extensions. When there is minimal change, it does not encourage the local authority outside the city borough area to spend on the periphery of the boundary. That has been very evident in my constituency, Cork North Central, and particularly in the investment that should have gone into the county environs of the north side of the city because it knew that at some stage in the future it would be transferred to the city. Why then would it invest in it? When there is no investment in those areas it is the citizens, the people who reside on the boundary, who suffer most. They suffer for a few reasons, incompetent planning or lack of a strategic vision for the area and then lack of investment in infrastructure and the public realm. That has happened all over the constituency I represent, from Knocknaheeny down to the Mallow Road, across to Kilbarry, Ballyvolane, up into Banduff, Mayfield and Lotamore. There has been ad hoc development in all those areas for a long time. There was no strategic planning whatsoever. At least from the point of view of the boundary extension we will now leap well into the county area so that the city can plan strategically for the next 50 or 100 years. It could not do that until now. It always had to build within its own footprint. It was not able to cater for the citizens who reside in the urban area and could not expand to ensure that it could have proper investment, and strategic planning to allow for a city to grow in a way that would benefit citizens who live there and who come to work and socialise there.

From that perspective, I have always said we need a boundary extension.

The Minister of State knows as well as I do that once one puts a pen to a map, there will be strong views in some quarters. By and large, there have not been considerable objections but strong views have been aired on the issue of Blarney and Tower being brought into the city area. These were expressed by the county council as a collective through its mayor and chief executive officer. I am sure the views were also conveyed to the Minister of State. These views, expressed by some local public representatives and the county council as a collective, have not gone away. I find it amazing that there has been commentary by public representatives who are much further from the proposed boundary than I am. They seem to have very strong views on what should happen and believe there should be no boundary extension. Everybody has to accept that we need to address that.

I refer to compensation and the need to ensure the citizens of the new Cork County Council area will not experience a reduction in the standards they expect from investment due to the loss of a rates base to the city council. There are many proposals on this in the legislation, not least on the issue of a review "not later than ten years" after the first making of a financial settlement. Of course, the county council would not like it to occur before ten years. There is merit in some of the arguments put forward, however. If in the years ahead local authorities have borrowing requirements, as I imagine will be the case, they will need to have certainty on balance sheets, assets, liabilities and income. If they want to invest in housing, water and sewerage infrastructure or whatever else is required in public-realm investment, they will need to know what their balance sheet is. With uncertainty, it would be difficult for them to raise or borrow money. This is a key point to be examined. We need to tie this down. That there is to be a review "not later than 10 years" means it could come very quickly, which could undermine the new county council’s ability to fund itself with certainty in the years ahead. I would like the Minister of State to examine this. Our spokesman, Deputy Shane Cassells, has also raised this. There is merit in addressing some of the concerns that exist.

These concerns are highlighted by the council itself. It has concerns over being able to fund the peripheries of the county, as stated by Deputy Michael Collins. The large rates base comes from the area that was previously around the city, including industrial parks. To lose a lot of this rates revenue is fine if the compensation is certain for a number of years, but having no certainty diminishes the county council’s ability to invest.

We must also discuss the quality of life of citizens, where citizens reside, and future investment and planning. I have referred to the extension of the boundary. There is no doubt that there has been poor planning and vision for the north city environs, to say the very least. The only major public transport infrastructure we have is a two-line railway from Mallow to Glounthaune junction. There is then a single line to Cobh and Midleton. Regardless of what the Minister of State does, I would like him to consider the fact that along the railway line car salesrooms and warehouses have been built but people have been housed miles from the line. If one takes the train to Mallow from Midleton train station, it journeys through an industrial park of low-density warehouses, panel beaters' shops and car salesrooms. It then passes through farmland at Water Rock, where it is now proposed to build thousands of houses. This is fine as it is along the railway line. One then reaches Little Island and Glounthaune. There are very fine car salesrooms there. In fact, I bought a car from one of them myself. The point, however, is that I never envisage somebody going on a train to Harvey Norman to buy a bed, and I certainly do not envisage him or her going to a car salesroom on a train to buy a car. There is a good chance that one would drive to these places. We have not used wisely the infrastructure available to us.

After Little Island, one journeys into the city, out through the tunnel and towards Blarney. The first major park one meets is Blarney Business Park, which is full of car salesrooms, and there is also an NCT centre. We are squandering a very important asset, namely a railway line that should be used to move people from high-quality residential areas to areas of high-quality work. There should not be spread-out industrial parks in which there is no high-density employment. They contain warehouses primarily, except in Little Island. In general, there has been appalling use of critical infrastructure for which any other city would give an awful lot. The Minister of State should consider this and encourage local authorities to act. I blame Cork County Council for this because it was primarily responsible. Whoever dreamed up the plan was not using the public infrastructure that has been in place for a long time wisely and correctly. It was mismanaged from that perspective.

Overall, the city is small by international standards but it can grow and has considerable potential. It has critical mass, a deep-water port, an airport and some very fine infrastructure. There are also the people, who make any region. There is a major multinational base with pharmaceutical, medical devices and software companies.

There is one piece of infrastructure missing. I cannot blame the planners for it but I can blame the Minister of State and Government. I refer to the north ring road. A corridor was originally identified from the Glanmire bypass across the north city environs, over to Kerry Pike and down to Poulavone, Ballincollig. We need to get that back on the plan. More than anything else, it would open up the region to development. We all forget that the Jack Lynch Tunnel is now the only link in a modern region between the north and south. When the tunnel is closed for maintenance, chaos descends not only on the city but also on the region. Traffic from the north and east cannot gain access to deep-water ports, ferries, airports, hospitals or colleges. Therefore, we need to ensure an orbital route is provided. I do not expect it to be built today or tomorrow but it must be put in the long-term strategy envisaged for the region. I implore the Minister of State to talk to the powers-that-be to insist that an orbital route at least be included in the plan and design with a view to putting funding in place at some stage in the future. It is critical. If anything happens the tunnel, Cork city and the south Munster region close down, as was evident when there was flooding or other problems. If there is a catastrophic event in the tunnel or structural damage requiring it to be closed for a period, there will be major challenges. For all these reasons, I would like the Minister of State to consider the matter.

I concur on the concept of the boundary extension. I raised the fact that there was some horse-trading done between the two councils. One could argue it was distasteful at times. Certainly, the issue of Blarney and Tower was raised by the local authority itself, and it was the only area it asked us to highlight as a bridge too far or, I should say, a land too far. In general, however, a boundary extension is merited. It can allow the city to expand.

That should be done in a planned, meaningful way that benefits the residents who live there. There are turf wars between CEOs, councillors and Deputies, but the most important thing is that services are delivered for the people who reside there, be it in the county or the city.

See this speech in context