Seanad debates

Tuesday, 18 December 2018

Local Government Bill 2018: Second Stage

 

12:30 pm

Photo of John Paul PhelanJohn Paul Phelan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Irrespective of the title - Senator Craughwell spoke at length about subsidiarity - the reality is that since the abolition of domestic rates in 1977 effectively local government has had to subsist by having limited sources of funds from a very small pool of people and a handout from central Government. That has meant that real power in local government has been strangled since then and much of it, such as it exists, lies with the executive.

I have been and will continue to be a staunch supporter of the role of councillors, but we must acknowledge that some of the councillors' powers lost were lost because they did not want to have them. Senator Murnane O'Connor and others spoke about consultation with LAMA and the AILG. When I got the job one of the first things I did was to meet representatives of LAMA and the AILG. I never said it on the record before, but I say it here now. I asked them about additional powers for councillors and no suggestion was forthcoming from the two representative groups. My jaw hit the table. I suggest that councillors who are watching tonight should raise the matter with the people they elect to represent them. From day one I had a little list of things that should be devolved back to councillors.

Most Senators who contributed spoke about the role of directly elected mayor. The relationship between the directly elected mayor and the manager should be exactly the same as exists between a Minister and a Secretary General of a Department. With the notable and obvious exception of planning, in particular, and the human resources hiring and firing function, every function of the executive, should be given to the directly elected mayor in consultation with the remainder of the council.

No power should be removed from the already limited powers councillors have. The key power councillors have in the passing of a budget or a development plan should certainly still reside with councillors. I absolutely agree with Senator Nash. I was in local government when the changes to the SPCs were introduced. It was envisaged to be something it never became. In fact, in some areas at least for councillors it became much more time-consuming with little real result. We should have a council head - it will not be the Minister. There should be a mini-cabinet style approach. This is what I will say in my speech in January. It should be on the basis of the block system that already exists at local government level so that all the groups on the council are represented.

It would not be acceptable for the directly elected mayor to bring in their own outsiders. We have to have people who are elected. That is very achievable and would not require significant resources. However, it would mean a much more direct role particularly for those councillors in the executive functions of the local authority that they are part of and also by extension hopefully for the other councillors. Councillors have that level of consultation and involvement with each other in their own groups. We all know that from our experience at local authority level. I am not sure if Senator Warfield was elected the last time or not.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.