Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

We touched on this earlier when discussing Senator Humphreys's amendment. I know he had to step out so I did not give the full answer at the time. I do appreciate and understand the reasons and logic behind these proposed amendments. We have had some direct engagement with Senator Humphreys. I thank him for that. We have discussed this and I understand where these amendments are coming from. We have also had engagement with some of the councillors from within the city at the regional meetings. They also would have flagged this with us at an earlier stage. Likewise, Dublin Chamber of Commerce was in with us recently to discuss some of its concerns about the Bill's effects. I know it is also working closely with the Senator in that respect.

While I do understand what those proposing these amendments are getting at, they are unnecessary as the relevant provisions in section 62 of the Local Government Reform Act 2014 provide appropriate mechanisms for regulating the number of members appointed to regional assemblies through the establishment order process. We do not believe we need legislation on this issue. I understand why the Senators want to put these provisions in legislation, but there is a mechanism which can deal with them.

In addition, there are some other changes included in the formula of this amendment which we do not think would work. I am happy to go through them, not to be critical, but just to point out some of the changes which we think the amendment could lead to. The Senators can bear that in mind as we go forward with the discussion. We can engage further with Members if need be. We are happy to do that. This legislation might not be the appropriate place for these provisions, but I understand why people want to achieve this balance.

Senator Humphreys's amendment specifies a formula for determining the number of appointees to the regional assemblies in order to change their internal balance of power in favour of the large local authorities. This is an important policy shift which would require further amendments to both the primary and secondary legislation. It is also meant to get representation based on population trends. For example, under present arrangements the Eastern and Midland Regional Assembly has 38 members, the Southern Regional Assembly has 33 members and the Northern and Western Regional Assembly has 25 members. This includes the regional assembly members appointed to the Committee of the Regions.

Based on the 2016 census, if the numbers of members of the regional assemblies were altered in accordance with the ratio of one member to 55,000 residents, as in one of the proposals being put forward in the amendment, then the Eastern and Midland Regional Assembly would have 42 members, the Southern Regional Assembly would have 29 members and the Northern and Western Regional Assembly would have 15 members. I am aware that the Senator proposes a minimum of 18 members and a maximum of 45 members for the regional assemblies. I will come to the issues raised by that proposal in due course. The amendment also proposes a number of complex alterations to the legislation. I will work through each part of the amendment in order if that is what people want me to do. I am happy to do that.

Under the Local Government Act 1991 (Regional Assemblies) (Establishment) Order 2014, SI 573 of 2014, no local authority appoints fewer than two elected members to the regional assemblies. Reducing this to a minimum of one, as the section 43(4A)(i) proposed by the amendment provides, while implementing the ratio of one elected member to 55,000 residents, as set out in the proposed section 43(4A)(iv), would leave some areas with a single representative at regional level, particularly in the Northern and Western Regional Assembly. Furthermore, in the Northern and Western Regional Assembly the Senator's proposals would create a situation where representatives from three local authorities, namely, Galway, Mayo and Donegal county councils, which currently account for ten out of 25 members on the regional assembly, would form a majority of eight out of 15, outnumbering the representatives from Roscommon, Leitrim, Sligo, Cavan, Monaghan and Galway city. Raising the number of members from 15 to the proposed minimum of 18 might also ameliorate the imbalance caused by the arrangements proposed by the Senator, but it is unclear under the proposals how these supernumerary numbers would be distributed. Again, I am just pointing out some of the difficulties with the amendment. I am sure that these can be looked at and debated.

There is a reference to "electors" in the proposed section 43(4A)(ii) but elsewhere in the amendment reference is made to "residents" and to "population resident". The terminology used in the amendment is inconsistent. In addition, the language in section 43(4A)(ii) does not propose a ratio for numbers of electors to elected members. It is also the case that the size of the electorate is generally proportional to the size of the resident population and therefore the relative proportion of electors to elected members across local authorities would not be expected to differ significantly from the ratio of residents to elected members.

On the proposed section 43(4A)(iii), in practical terms and based on analysis conducted by my Department, the complex proposals set out in this section of the proposed amendment would not appear to make any difference to the numbers of elected members on regional assemblies, if implemented. Based on our calculation, when rounded to the nearest whole number there would be no change in the proposed numbers of regional assembly members if ratios of representatives to residents are made to fall within the plus or minus 10% range proposed. It is therefore unclear what this part of the proposed amendment is intended to achieve.

On the proposed section 43(4A)(iv), it is unclear which local authority it is proposed that members be added to or removed from should a regional assembly's membership fall outside the range of 18 to 45 members, as proposed in this section. The Northern and Western Regional Assembly, for instance, would have 15 members under the ratio set out in the proposed amendment. This would be raised to 18 as per the proposal but it is not clear how the three extra representatives would be allocated in a manner which is fair to all.

To conclude, I am opposing this amendment for the reasons I have outlined, although I am willing to engage further on the issue with a view to examining, if required, the composition of the assemblies. To clarify, we are willing to engage on the issue with a view to examining whether it is necessary to alter the composition of the assemblies through the appropriate legislative mechanism, which is the establishment order, rather than this planning and development Bill. The Senator might want to engage with us further on that issue between now and Report Stage. We have already had some brief discussions. I know that the efforts here are genuine. It is hard to get amendments fully right when tabling them. We recognise that there is a deficit there and we are willing to work on it through the appropriate mechanism if Members would agree to engage with us on that issue.