Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Obviously, Senator Jim Walsh has not read my Second Stage contribution in relation to what I indicated were new powers and responsibilities to the local government sector. This amendment reflects the shared service nature of what we will have in the future. Many Members of the House have said to me, and I am sure Senator Jim Walsh, as a businessman, would agree, that things move on and there are new ways in which we communicate with people and do business. There will be 83 fewer local authorities and consequent reductions in reports, audits, corporate functions, budgets and various processes. There will be 192 fewer structures when account is taken of the dissolution of regional authorities, county development boards, county enterprise boards and various other boards. What we had under Better Local Government - A Programme for Change, with which the Senator will be familiar, was the setting up of a huge number of additional structures in local government, but that did not always mean a better service was provided to the people. There were directors of services and a mushrooming of additional grades. This did not mean a more meaningful engagement with the public. In fact, there was centralisation of all services in national government, particularly since the abolition of domestic rates. All sorts of agencies have been established that have bypassed local government. I propose to reverse that trend.

The shared services agenda, which is part and parcel of the public service reform agenda of this Government, is an opportunity for one or more authorities to come together, by agreement, as Senator David Norris has rightly pointed out, to share services for the purposes of efficiency and in order that administrative arrangements can be entered into that are more satisfactory. The cost of delivering those services, given that people will pay more in user charges at local level, will mean a lesser burden on people who are paying currently, particularly the small business sector. I would have thought Senator Walsh would have supported me on that issue. If we are to reduce the burden of commercial rates on small businesses and provide more resources to the priorities of a particular municipal district or between authorities in a region, for example, in the south east if Wexford is of a mind to co-operate with Kilkenny to develop, say, Rosbercon, that can be done under the provisions of this legislation. That would ensure Waterford and Kilkenny would co-operate better and that Wexford and Kilkenny would co-operate better on various matters. There has not always been good co-operation.

Equally in regard to executive implementation of the policy decisions of the elected members, a structure is not needed in every town and village to provide a service. We are not in the horse and cart era any more. Thankfully, we have moved to the 21st century where we have different means of communications than in 1898. While those structures fitted the time, they do not fit it now.

Senator Cáit Keane asked about passing a motion and whether it would have a benefit in the Kells situation. I cannot predict what the Kells members of Meath County Council will do but I am giving an assurance to members of Meath County Council that if they use that opportunity for the rates or the charges that come from those particular lands, I am sure a commonsense approach will be adopted that will allow the income from those lands to accrue for the benefit of the people for whom it was originally intended in the Kells area.