Martin Conway (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister. It is to his absolute credit that he has delivered on a commitment made to the Irish people during the most recent general election campaign that there would be radical local government reform. This was the final point in Fine Gael's five-point plan and the Labour Party also made a significant commitment in respect of this issue. In its election manifesto, Fine Gael committed itself to streamlining local development, economic development, etc. That commitment is being delivered upon in this Bill. In its manifesto, the Labour Party referred to greater oversight, effective auditing and so on and those matters are dealt with in the Bill. There is no point in repeating everything that has already been said but I do wish to make a number of points.

I direct anyone who suggests that we do not have a mandate from the people to deliver this reform to the result of the general election in 2011. If one talks to ordinary people who are not involved in politics and who are struggling to run businesses, etc., one will discover they are of the view that what is being done here is extremely positive. The reforms provided for in the Bill are sensible and should have been brought forward years ago. There has not been any type of reasonable reform in the area of local government in the past 100 years. The previous Administration introduced its own reform plan, Better Local Government. I suggest that said plan should have been titled "Bad Local Government" because it created the position of director of services and those who occupied them were each paid in excess of €100,000 per year. Some counties still have up to nine directors of service as a result. Thankfully, however, the numbers have already been reduced. I am of the view that they can be reduced even further.

Under the provisions in the Bill, councils and their members will have the power to reject any recommendation which comes before them in respect of persons nominated for the position of chief executive. What will happen in circumstances where the elected representatives want a particular candidate and, as a result, veto every other nomination which comes before them? Will the Minister comment on this matter, which was brought to my attention recently? All sorts of situations could arise. If the Minister is not in a position to provide an answer now, there is no major panic about it and he can do so in his own good time.

As Senator Cummins indicated, there are just a couple of minor amendments which we would like to be made to the Bill. If the Minister can see his way to accommodating those amendments, we would all be extremely happy.

Whenever one does something dramatic in the context of reform, it is difficult to bring everyone along. If one asked every councillor throughout the country to outline his or her ideal local government structure, one would probably receive 950 different proposals. Something had to be done and the system had to be streamlined. There are currently too many councillors and that matter is being dealt with in the Bill. I am of the view that the legislation is extremely positive in nature. When matters settle down in the aftermath of next May's local elections, people will recognise that what is envisaged represents a fundamental and effective reform of local government.