John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

This was a day when the Minister of State could have made a name for himself for ever by including Kilkenny in the consideration for city status. I heard Deputy Grealish and others discuss the significance of the corporation, as it was then, the urban council and so on. These bodies could learn from the experience of Kilkenny city, where the destruction of local government was begun in previous legislation brought in by the then Minister with responsibility, Noel Dempsey. In response to significant outcry from Kilkenny city, that Minister put into the legislation that Kilkenny would be recognised as a city for ceremonial purposes only. Since then, it has been all downhill for local democracy. That kind of destruction of local government was continued by the Minister of State's colleague, Phil Hogan, when he was the Minister with responsibility for local government.

Having worked in local government, and having been a member of the county council, surely the Minister of State would have seen at first hand "the need for local democracy", as Deputy Michael McGrath put it, and the pride local people have in local democratic structures. That pride no longer exists, as the Minister of State knows well because he can see the difference between the county council on which he served and the current one. It has nothing to do with the members but rather their ability to effect change and bring real democracy to their local area.

When the then Minister, Mr. Noel Dempsey, decided Kilkenny city was no longer a city, it was his decision. He dressed it up in the legislation, but it was a three-card trick and it was not okay. The Minister of State knows the value of a corporation or an urban council. He knows what a city needs and what people demand for democracy. We should, like France, look to the lower structures of our representative bodies, such as local councils. I encourage the Minister of State to restore city status to Kilkenny, to look at Galway and similar places and to ensure the need for a local council is central to any reform.

There must be a council for each city as well as a general county council representing that city council, which is how it functions best. People used to know their local councillors and were able to approach them directly about issues that affected their lives. Local organisations such as the Irish Farmers Association, the chamber of commerce and so on were able to engage with them. The rates were struck and the money was spent wisely.

With the changes that have been implemented, there is a major division between city and county and a massive scramble for the funds that are necessary in order to give life to a city. Cities and large urban centres are the centre of the economic development of counties.

There is also the historic value the medieval city of Galway, as Deputy Grealish described it. I could equally describe Kilkenny as the medieval capital of Ireland. Over the years, the corporation, as it was then, was central to the economic and social development not only of the city but also the county. We have lost that in the context of local government reform. We lost the direct input in the context of people's desire to have their local place recognised in a way that reflects their values. We did it, as did every party, but it caused terrible problems for local government. Previous speakers referred to local electoral areas, administrative functions and council staff. They also referred to local people knowing the staff and who to go to when there was a problem. That is no longer the case and people's democratic input into their councils has been weakened as a result

This legislation makes provision for plebiscites to ask people if they want directly-elected mayors. The Government ought to issue an instruction to the effect that there should be directly-elected mayors in Cork and Dublin. The mayors of other urban centres and cities should be the leading figures in their respective democratic structures. It should be they who lead local councils because this would restore the pride of people and members in the structures designed to represent us all. There is an opportunity in this Bill to correct the position in this regard. The Minister of State indicated that he will bring forward amendments. However, I had been led to believe that this was a done deal on foot of a headline that appeared in the Kilkenny Peoplesome time ago. I thought the Government would actually do this and restore the corporation or the urban council but instead, it is re-enforcing a botched job on councils throughout this country. From the perspective of finance, it does not cost much more, or perhaps the same, to have a corporation, a mayor, a county council and a chairman discussing and debating the issues of the county and reaching real decisions. However, when I go to a county council meeting and sit in the public gallery, I am struck by the number of reports they have to have in order to do anything. Perhaps that is why the Minister of State's colleague cannot build houses. The information about housing and everything else in the county or city is actually held by the local authority but we have outsourced the work to voluntary housing agencies and now nobody knows what is really happening. I am told that much of the delay is in the context of how the Department views these applications when they come before them. The delay in this regard is the reason that houses are not delivered.

Why do we not ask ourselves what happened in the past that we can learn from? In the 1950s and 1960s, when there was no money, huge local authority housing estates were built all over the country. People had the opportunity to rent their own home, and, following a period, could buy their own home. They could aspire to owning their own homes. It was a successful model that delivered. Surely the Minister of State could be pushed to ask the County and City Management Association what its members are doing that they cannot deliver the necessary houses. He must be tempted to do so. Is he not tempted to ask them why they cannot deliver CCTV in conjunction with the Garda in Urlingford, County Kilkenny, and similar places? Why is that bureaucratic obstacle there? I think it is because the members of the council have been deprived of the right to instruct the chief executive - previously the county manager.

The Minister of State makes much play in this Bill of a county manager being one person, a chief executive, but he knows that in Kilkenny we had a county and city manager, Paddy Donnelly, for years. Mr. Donnelly did not merely run the council effectively and efficiently, he promoted Kilkenny, he developed it and he supported the mayor and chairman of the council to achieve what they wanted. Once that model is in place and working, it restores people's pride in their own place and in their public representatives. Regardless of what criticisms can be made of politics, the mayor was always respected and supported. Now we have people in Galway appealing to the Minister and Deputy Fitzmaurice asking the Minister of State to meet. The Minister of State comes from that background and I encourage him, as someone who is young in political terms but who has served in many different positions, to take the best of what he learned from there and not allow the County and City Management Association to tell him what to do.

In his heart and soul, the Minister of State knows what needs to be done. He knows that the power must be tilted from the chief executive to the members. In the context of the debate on the Bill, he is being told to do that. I recall the recent Carlow-Kilkenny by-election at which Deputy Bobby Aylward was elected. When constituents were asked, it emerged that major issues about which they were concerned were the restoration of Kilkenny corporation, reinstating city status and the position of mayor. Those of us on this side of the House committed to that as part of the by-election. If that is to mean anything, young Deputy Cassells, who is sitting in front of me, should cross the Chamber to the Minister of State and tell him that, as part of the confidence and supply arrangement, we must deliver on that promise, otherwise it was a con job on the people. We cannot have that in politics, can we? The Minister of State has a great deal of scope in this area. There are many things that he can do to change the current situation and restore the better parts of that which existed in the past and create the type of confidence in local government that is needed at this point.

The way I think chief executives work - I might be wrong in this regard - is that they agree to fix a pothole for a councillor or to allocate a house. They listen to councillors but, in return, the latter must vote for the budgets put forward. Councillors might get potholes fixed but, as a result of what I have just outlined, the budgets of local authorities are not being administered correctly, efficiently or in the interests of the people we serve. The courting of members of local authorities goes on and on until a majority of councillors are entrapped in this game of promises to repair potholes, etc., while the bigger picture goes unaddressed.

The Minister of State needs to speak to those county managers and demand from them a standard in the delivery of the services for the public we represent of the highest order. It might be no harm if all the political parties were to meet their councillors and inject a bit of backbone into them to ensure that they acknowledge their obligations and responsibilities and act accordingly. That also needs to be done because it is a two-way street. The people are demanding it.

The Book of Estimates comes out at the end of each year and is gone through as quick as one would say a Hail Mary. The results are very different and one would have more hope with a Hail Mary than with the Book of Estimates.

The Minister of State is in a position in which few Ministers find themselves. I am not playing political games with him. I have said this to him privately. He is in a position to leave his mark on the Department, turn it back towards democracy, enlighten the local authority members as to their role in a new democratic process and strengthen the role of mayors and that of chairpersons versus that of chief executives.

See this speech in context