Seanad debates

Friday, 20 December 2013

Local Government Reform Bill 2013: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

12:55 pm

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

The majority of Government amendments to be taken in this grouping arise directly from an amendment I will address shortly concerning local economic and community plans. Under the new provisions for local authorities in sections 66A to 66H, local community development committees are to be tasked with preparing integrated local economic and community plans for their areas for the first time. These plans will have economic and community elements which will be prepared separately but in parallel. I will address this in more detail when I get to amendment No. 89. Consequently, the provisions in the Bill as published relating to the development of a local and community plan are to be replaced by the new provision. Therefore, in this grouping, I will address the amendments that will give effect to this change.

Amendment No. 49 deletes from section 128 of the published Bill the references at section 128C to the local and community plan as the new provisions in section 66 will now instead provide for local economic and community plans. As a consequence of this deletion, technical amendments to renumber the provisions in section 128 are covered by amendments Nos. 45, 50, 54, 61, 62, 66, 68 to 74, inclusive, 76, 77 and 82. Amendments Nos. 31, 32, 34, 36, 38, 39, and 78 to 81, inclusive, all provide for specific references to the local and community plan to be replaced by reference to the local and economic community plans or to the community elements of the plan, as the case may be. Amendment No. 37 alters the reference in this part of the Bill to the duration of the plan from five to six years. The change to the duration of the plan from five to six years is being provided for in the amendments I am tabling for section 66, which will provide for the local economic and community plan, and for the harmonisation of the planning period of this plan with other local authority planning processes, including the new regional spatial economic strategies.

Amendment No. 44 introduces a new function for local community development committees asking them to consider the economic elements of the plan before it is finalised to enhance co-ordination with the community elements of the plan and ultimately integrate the economic and community elements into a single plan. Amendments Nos. 67 and 75 make minor adjustments to the provisions for making regulations relating to local and community development committees.

I will now deal with the amendments tabled by Senators. Amendment No. 46 proposes to add a focus on social inclusion as an issue to which LCDCs should have regard. A similar proposal was made on Report Stage in the Dáil and I undertook to consider the proposal when framing the proposals for the local economic and community plan, which will be the key focus of the work of the LCDCs. Accordingly, I consider that the intention of this amendment is met through the provision in section 66B(3)(a)(i), which we have yet to debate, for a focus in the plan on the need to tackle poverty, disadvantage and social exclusion.

Amendment No. 35 is one of a number relating to the description of the key responsibilities of the LCDCs. I am satisfied that the wording set out in the Bill referring to the local and community development of each area properly represents the role and functions of the proposed committees. This includes the responsibility the committees will have for certain local development programmes. Accordingly, I do not propose to accept the amendments to remove the references to local and community development or to remove the word "local" from the phrase "local and community development". I believe these two amendments would limit the scope of the LCDC functions to dealing with community development supports and activities. This would be inconsistent with my policy intentions, which seek to give the committees a management and oversight responsibility for local development and community development programming at a local level. Therefore, I oppose them.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.