Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I see that Deputy Pat Buckley is here this morning. The two of us fought in the trenches when the boundary transition between Cork city and county was undertaken in 2017. Will any assessment be undertaken now or at some stage in the future to scrutinise the successes and failures of the expansion of the Cork City Council boundary? The purpose of the question is not to reignite the debate, which goes back to 2016, but is motivated by a genuine desire to undertake an analysis of how the boundary transition has worked or not worked. I live in the new city area. To be fair to Cork City Council, I contend that we have seen an improvement in services locally in Glanmire and other areas such as Blarney, Tower, and towards Donoughmore and Inniscarra.

Any process which involves essentially doubling the population of the city and increasing its size fivefold geographically is bound to pose challenges and I will speak about some of them. Before I give a few examples, I will first say that all citizens of Cork, especially those in transition areas, were told repeatedly that by transferring into a new jurisdiction, the level of service they received would not be affected or diminished in any way. This has not been the case. I have identified a few areas. There are more which we might discuss in future. I highlight development contributions. When the city initially took over large tracts of rural agricultural land in the former county area, there was no policy about planning contributions devised for agricultural buildings. Farmers who were building farm sheds, outhouses and so on were charged commercial rates as if they were building in the city centre. It took about 14 months for that process to be weaned out. That is an example of where the boundary transition did not proceed as smoothly as it could.

A second point relates to planning applications for one-off houses. Many of us speak about the national planning framework and its potential impact on rural housing. Aside from the national planning framework and its impacts, there is clearly a different interpretation of the existing development plan in Cork City Council. The council has a higher success rate in delivering one-off houses in those former rural areas. That is down to a different interpretation of the existing plan.

The third point relates to local improvement schemes, LIS, and community involvement schemes, CIS. There are many roads in rural areas which people pay a contribution towards. They typically pay a contribution of between 10% and 15% to have the roads done. Many of those projects were lined up but unfortunately when the boundary transitioned, the schemes all fell by the wayside. I asked the Minister for Rural and Community Development, Deputy Humphreys, about the issue a number of times via parliamentary questions. She said that perhaps Cork County Council would give some of its budget for CIS and LIS to Cork City Council. That suggestion is not workable. We know that one jurisdiction will not give some of its roads budget away to another jurisdiction.

I will refer to planning enforcement, which is my main motivation for tabling this Topical Issue matter today, after the Minister of State replies. The agreement between the two local authorities was that Cork City Council would take on new planning enforcement files and Cork County Council would continue to engage with active planning enforcement files on its own system. Unfortunately, after the transition, Cork County Council received legal advice that I believe goes against the spirit of the agreement it entered into, that it would now not be the competent authority to prosecute any planning enforcement issues. That is a major cause for concern and goes against the spirit of the agreement.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue and providing an opportunity to update the House. The Cork boundary alteration is the most significant of its kind undertaken in the State and represents a major reorganisation of local government in Cork. The main aim of the boundary extension was to allow the potential for further development within a new Cork City Council area, while also incentivising higher density development and reducing the risk of sprawl. The extended city area now includes Ballincollig, Carrigrohane, Blarney, Glanmire and Cork Airport and the population of the city increased by more than 85,000 people.

The Local Government Act 2019 was enacted on 31 January 2019 to provide for the transfer of part of the administrative area of Cork County Council to the administrative area of Cork City Council. This took place when the new councils took office after the local elections in May 2019. The Act also provided for the establishment of the statutory Cork boundary alteration implementation oversight committee to oversee arrangements for the alteration of the boundary in accordance with the statutory implementation plan. Responsibility for the detailed planning and implementation of the reorganisation process rests primarily with the two local authorities, subject to the guidance and supervision provided by the oversight committee to ensure compliance with the implementation plan. Work on finalising the transfer of functions was completed in late 2020 and both authorities have confirmed that all the actions contained in the statutory implementation plan have been discharged with new service delivery models now in place in both authorities.

The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is aware that a small number of outstanding practical issues are still being worked through by both authorities with support being provided by the Department. We are confident that these outstanding matters will be settled soon. These matters relate to sections 13(1)(a), 31 and 34 of the Local Government Act 2019 and they mostly relate to planning matters and responsibility for individual planning cases that were in train at the time of the boundary transfer day. The Department is working closely with the two local authorities to resolve these matters. Should the need arise, the Local Government Act 2019 also provides a mechanism for resolving outstanding issues up to and including a ministerial decision.

Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State. This is not an attempt to rehash the boundary argument that we had four or five years ago. I welcome the Minister of State's comment that responsibility for settling outstanding issues resides with the two local authorities. At the same time, it is subject to the guidance and supervision of the oversight committee to ensure compliance with the implementation plan. The Minister of State has identified a number of problems, although they are described as a small number of outstanding practical issues. How many times has the oversight committee met subsequent to the boundary agreement? What was the outcome of those meetings? What advice was given to both local authorities? These issues have continued for a couple of years. As a representative in the area, I do not see any resolution to the outstanding problems. If it is open to the oversight committee to ensure compliance with the implementation plan, I ask the Minister of State to go back to the Minister to ensure the oversight committee reconvenes to resolve the outstanding issues. This is unfair for people.

The real motivation for me raising this is planning enforcement issues. People who lawfully carry out developments within the confines of planning legislation often live beside people who do not. Those people see the failure of Cork City Council and Cork County Council to deal with active, outstanding planning enforcement issues. That needs to be met head-on.

I do not care which authority is to resolve those outstanding planning enforcement issues. I just want them resolved. That is the least people in those areas can expect.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I hear the Deputy very clearly on that. The Minister is hopeful that the outstanding matters can be resolved between the two authorities in the coming weeks. Therefore, while a review to determine the overall success of the boundary extension may be considered in the future, at this stage of the implementation it would be premature to look at that. It is considered beneficial to wait until both authorities have had time to settle into their new jurisdictions and there is sufficient data to do a review, as outlined.

I also consider it important to allow the local authority a sufficient period of operation, taking account of the additional stresses and strains Covid has put on the implementation period. As I indicated, the Minister is hopeful the outstanding matters Deputy O'Sullivan has raised can be resolved in the coming weeks.