Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government for attending the Chamber to hear my views on this matter affecting the Carlow-Kilkenny constituency.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have just noticed the word "terminate" in the Deputy's submission.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That word has been used many times this week.

I ask the Minister to terminate Waterford County Council's application for 6,000 acres in County Kilkenny that will change the administrative boundaries of south Kilkenny. This is causing much annoyance, anger and antagonism among the citizens of south Kilkenny. If this proposal goes ahead it will mean that Waterford not only gets 6,000 acres from Kilkenny, but also approximately 5,000 people with a projected population of 18,000 in the next ten years because of the infrastructural developments that have taken place there at the behest of Kilkenny County Council. Not only do people feel culturally——

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At the behest of this Government.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Successive governments. County Kilkenny has not received as many facilities in several years.

Approximately 5,000 people do not want to move to a new county or province. The land in question is in County Kilkenny and within the Waterford city environs. The area includes Belview Port and the lands in the area that have been rezoned by Kilkenny County Council. The lands around Belview Port were purchased with the IDA, Waterford Harbour Commissioners and Kilkenny County Council while Waterford City Council decided it did not want to participate at the time. Numerous public meetings in opposition to the Waterford take-over of these lands have been held in Kilkenny, with more than 10,000 signatures opposing the take-over handed into Waterford City Council. I hope the Minister understands the complexities involved in Waterford City Council's proposal as emotions are running high on this issue.

Parish boundaries, not to talk of county boundaries, are a major issue in counties like Kilkenny and Waterford. These boundaries are the basis for what happens in rural areas especially in sport and ecclesiastical matters. If this proposal went through, Kilkenny GAA would lose a club and highly valuable property. Slieverue GAA club's pitch and clubhouse would become part of County Waterford. I do not want a situation arising where Eddie O'Connor, Willie O'Connor and Christy Heffernan would hurl for Waterford. Kilkenny GAA has set up a special committee to examine the matter and it is opposed to the proposal. It has been to the forefront, in addition to the confederation of south Kilkenny communities, in gathering signatures and mounting a campaign against this proposal. No one should be forced to abandon their cultural identity. We have learned this over many years. If the Minister allows this proposal to proceed, an atmosphere will be created that will take many generations to overcome.

The first step that needs to be taken by Kilkenny County Council is to bestow urban status on the area's largest inhabited area, namely Ferrybank. This would give the area the necessary recognition for it to develop all the services for the area. The next step is the development of the area through the planning, land use and transportation study plan, PLUTTS, following along the lines employed by Cork city in its LUTTS plan. The PLUTTS plan was recently established between Kilkenny County Council and Waterford City and County Councils to draw up a blueprint for the planning and development of Waterford city environs for the next 20 years. It is a co-operative approach to develop infrastructure and services for the most important asset in the area, the people. However, the ink was barely dry on the plan when Waterford City Council decided to make the application for the 6,000 acres. The people of south Kilkenny were not happy at this preliminary strike on the most valued rezoned land around Waterford Port.

A co-operative approach rather than a confrontational one is the best resolution to this matter. Kilkenny County Council and its people have always supported Waterford City Council. There were no objections to any plans or proposals Waterford had for the south Kilkenny area, such as the airport, the sewerage facilities for Waterford city and the attempts to upgrade the institute of technology to university status. Kilkenny is determined to ensure this application does not go ahead. The money that will have to be spent on consultants by local authorities and the Department should instead be channelled into better use for the people of Ferrybank and other affected areas. The nonsense must stop and the Minister must terminate the process as the submission date of 26 September has passed. It would be better to get on with the co-operative approach rather than the confrontational in this matter.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I had not noticed the use of the word "terminate" in the final sentence of the Deputy's submission. What is most interesting is that county boundaries were drawn in 1604 when the last county, Wicklow, was created. We have such a passionate interest in county boundaries. The Deputy was really winning up to the point where he pointed out that Kilkenny might lose some of its star hurlers. As a Wexford man, that tipped the argument for me. I understand the extraordinary passion that exists on this issue. Recently when in Limerick and Clare, I foolishly decided to be on a radio talk-in show to discuss a similar process occurring there. It is not a bad idea for Ministers to listen but in this case it was very much one-way traffic. One lady compared the process to Operation Barbarossa, suggesting bridges would be torn down to prevent this happening. I have a more anodyne response but I have listened to the points made by the Deputy. I agree that co-operative approaches resolve many problems.

Under Part V of the Local Government Act 1991 and associated regulations, a local authority may initiate a proposal for the alteration of its boundaries. A formal boundary alteration proposal must identify financial, organisational and other implications. It also involves invitation of public submissions and consultation with the other local authorities affected by the proposal, prior to submitting a formal application to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The initiative in the early stages lies, therefore, within the proposing authority.

While no boundary application from Waterford City Council is before the Department, I am aware a proposal for a boundary extension in accordance with Part V of the Local Government Act 1991 was agreed by Waterford City Council in July 2005. The proposal involves the inclusion of an area within the city boundary which is in County Kilkenny. Any subsequent boundary extension application would statutorily come before me and it would be inappropriate, therefore, at this juncture for me to comment on the proposal. However, I can outline the process to the House which will demonstrate that it will not take place for some time.

Under the current provisions, Waterford City Council has invited submissions from Kilkenny County Council and from the public. Kilkenny County Council is allowed up to six months to consider the proposal. During this time, Kilkenny County Council may make a formal statement of response adopted by the county council members to the proposal. Any such response would cover the financial, administrative and other implications the county council may wish to raise.Following consideration of the outcome of the public consultation process and KilkennyCounty Council's statement of response, Waterford City Council may decide to submit to me a formal application for a boundary alteration. As I have already stated, it has not yet done so. I am sure its members will read carefully the comments put on the record of this House by Deputy Hogan.

In the case of a disagreement, which I suspect exists, between the authorities concerned and before deciding on an application, there is a provision for the establishment of an independent boundary committee to examine all aspects of the proposal. Deputy Hogan knows me well enough to be familiar with my views as to who should make political decisions. However, that is the law. The committee may make such recommendations with respect to the boundary as it considers necessary in the interests of effective and convenient local government. Such a boundary committee must consult the local authorities concerned and where the proposal relates to a county or city boundary, must invite submissions from the public and may conduct an oral hearing if necessary.

On receipt of a boundary committee report — this is the position in law — the Minister may prepare a draft order altering the boundary and must have regard to the report in deciding whether to make the order. Significantly for this debate, any draft ministerial order to alter the boundary of any county or city would require a positive resolution by each House of the Oireachtas before coming into force. I can think of one or two other boundary issues that would cause some interesting and fractious debates in the House.

Therefore, the statutory process allows ample opportunity to hear and respond to the views of people affected by any proposed boundary alteration. The process is sufficiently robust and responsive to ensure an outcome that takes account of any such views. I note in particular and am inclined to underscore the comments about the necessity for people to sit down together. This should not be limited to discussing boundary change issues like this as other councils have issues where boundaries are contiguous and boundary changes are not proposed. A greater degree of co-operation would better serve the people in such administrations.