Seanad debates

Monday, 16 December 2013

Local Government Reform Bill 2013: Second Stage

 

6:20 pm

Photo of Diarmuid WilsonDiarmuid Wilson (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

First, I welcome the Minister, Deputy Hogan, to the House. While he is always welcome, I do not welcome this legislation and believe the Minister's last minute decision to amend the Title of the Bill before Members to include the word "reform" sums up all that is wrong both with the Bill itself and the Government's approach to the issue of real reform. Having been elected on the back of a commitment to reform, the Minister has shoehorned the word "reform" into the Title of this Bill for the sake of appearances but forgets to include even the slightest nod towards the concept of meaningful reform anywhere else in the Bill's almost 200 pages. Far from introducing real reform and bringing the citizens closer to the system, the Local Government Reform Bill 2013 takes a machete to local democracy. Instead of thoughtful reform, one gets the chop, chop, chop of local democracy. If passed by this House, this Bill will make Ireland one of the most centralised states in the democratic world. This centralisation is achieved in this Bill through the abolition of town councils, the slashing of council numbers, the continued dilution of the powers of local authorities and the half-hearted gesture towards directly elected mayors.

The Government's unsuccessful attempt to abolish this Chamber was another element in that centralisation agenda but one which thankfully was rejected by the people. Were the Government or the Minister even remotely interested in the concept of real political reform, they would have learned the lessons of the Seanad referendum campaign and would have withdrawn this Bill. The Minister would have seen what happened just over ten weeks ago and would have learnt that real reform must start from the bottom up and must be built on the engagement of the citizen. As matters stand, the tier of government closest to the citizen, that is, local government, clearly is the place to start. Sadly but not surprisingly, this Bill completely misses that opportunity. Ireland has one of the weakest systems of local Government in the Western world and yet, Fine Gael and the Labour Party have come up with a Bill that will make local democracy even weaker.

Across the Western world, ordinary citizens perceive themselves to be increasingly alienated from the decision-making process. This is a deeply worrying and dangerous development and never have voters felt more powerless or disillusioned. Across Europe, disgruntled and disempowered voters are turning to parties at the margins and seek answers outside the democratic process. However, the Government's response to this trend is to take what few decision-making powers voters already have on local issues and to place them in the hands of a few bureaucracies. The advent of modern technologies and the evidence of greater involvement of younger people in community, social and voluntary activities demonstrate the potential that exists to allow one to engage citizens in reshaping local political structures. A local government structure is required that empowers local leadership, engages citizens and gives them a voice in local decisions. A system is required that works on the ground to support local businesses, revitalise town centres, sustain local sports and recreational developments and work in partnership with the education providers. This Bill misses all of these opportunities. The elimination of the 80 town councils nationwide and the removal of councillors from rural areas - with an increase in representation in Dublin - simply exacerbates the gap between elected representatives and the citizens.

Let me give my county of Cavan as an example. I am sure that the Minister is familiar with the county. Many hardworking and dedicated people from his own party, my party and none have served their local communities for decades. With one fell swoop of his pen they must witness the abolition of their town councils and the disenfranchisement of the people that they have represented, in some cases for decades. That is unacceptable.

At the end of May next year there will be what is called local elections but the word "local" should be removed because, regrettably, they are no longer "local." There is one six seater electoral area in Cavan that covers a geographical area that spans a distance of almost 40 miles and stretches from Blacklion to the Dublin side of Cavan town. The rural part of the constituency or local electoral area - let me call it an electoral area because the local part has been removed - people living on the Dublin side of Cavan town and all the way to Blacklion must elect representatives for the same electoral area. The population is concentrated in Cavan town and the greater Cavan area. The possibility of anybody from the rural part of that electoral area being elected is slim. I firmly believe that there should be positive discrimination towards rural Ireland and shall table amendments to support my belief.

Political "reform" is not about reducing the number of elected county councillors in rural Ireland and moving the seats to the greater Dublin area and the east coast. That is not local democracy or political reform. Changing the title of county manager to chief executive is not political reform. As the Leader alluded to, there is a provision to give local councils more power to select who sits on the various committees. My party shall table amendments on the matter on Committee Stage.

Instead of implementing radical reform, the abolition of town councils will centralise power and rather than moving power closer to the citizens, the Bill will make it more distant. In place of efficiencies there will be large, inflexible organisations where size is mistaken for savings. During the recent Seanad abolition referendum, Fine Gael asserted that Ireland's size meant that we did not need the Seanad or second parliamentary Chamber. To bolster the spurious claim some Government representatives, namely, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, was wheeled out to quote statistics on the Nordic countries that only have one chamber, he stated that they had an average number of 160 national parliamentarians and claimed that it was time Ireland had fewer politicians as if there is better democracy and governance with fewer public representatives. Thankfully, the people of this country rejected the Government's plan to get rid of the Seanad. Let me explain what would happen if we followed the logic of the Government, and that of the Minister, who claim that we would have a far better democracy. It is like claiming that we would have better hospitals if we had fewer doctors and beds. It is like saying we would have better schools if we had fewer teachers but more pupils. Their logic does not make sense and, thankfully, the public saw through the Government's plan.

I wish to raise an issue mentioned by the Leader.

We will table amendments on Committee Stage on this matter. I will outline the position on the first amendment we will table. As worded in the Bill, the procedure will be for an official assigned by the county or city manager, chief executive or whatever the new title will be, to select all of the members of the local community development committees. This includes selecting the elected councillors to sit on the LCDCs. The Association of County and City Councils finds it incredible that power would be given to an official to select unilaterally the members of the committee. What is worse, it is stated in the Bill that the full list will be put before the elected council, which will, without addition or omission, agree to the list provided by the official. This, in essence, means the council will become nothing but a rubber stamp. How in the name of God is this political reform? It is certainly not democracy. Another amendment we will table relates to the naming of the cathaoirleach or the use of the title "mayor".

I do not welcome this legislation. I know the Minister probably means well. I know he has been working hard in the Department. That he has been working so hard means he is not very popular with many in the electorate. I suggest he should put this legislation on ice and listen to his colleagues. Any of his colleagues I know are altogether sensible. The Minister should listen to the suggestions they are making and the amendments they put forward. Certainly, we on this side of the House will be putting forward amendments. Perhaps the Minister should consider listening a little more to public representatives, those of his party and others, and listening a little less to officials. Regardless of whether the Minister believes it, I firmly believe the winners from the Minister's proposed reform will be the officials. They will no longer have to deal with town councillors. They will have seven fewer county councillors to deal with in my county. The losers will be the ordinary people, especially those of rural Ireland, as far as this legislation is concerned. We will be putting forward several amendments and we hope the Minister will genuinely consider them and make a proper decision in respect of them.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.