Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I rise to support the amendment. It is very relevant. Public policy should always be measurable and should always be reviewed. There should be specific timeframes attached to it. Without that, the public cannot be protected and the interests of both councils cannot be protected either. This section provides for arrangements to ensure the delivery of services to members of the public residing in both jurisdictions. It deals with arrangements concerning the impact of the boundary alteration on members of the public living in both areas and arrangements relating to financial matters - a very broad brush - and the financial autonomy of both councils. Whether or not this is working will be a big question in the future. The Department very often makes recommendations around the structure of local Government without consulting with the public living in the area. Carrying out plebiscites before any structural reconfigurations take place works very effectively in other jurisdictions such as Finland. We are not sure if this will work or not. If we can learn anything from the 2014 Act's reconfiguration of local government, I can tell Members that throughout the country it is not working.

I wholeheartedly believe that most of the towns around this country that are struggling are in that position because they do not have local authority autonomy. I refer to towns like Letterkenny and Castlebar where hotels are closing. Those regional towns do not have the structure of local Government to draw down State support to provide for their needs. While that continues, the counterbalance required in places like Cork cannot be delivered. It is very important to have a timely review that is measurable, has clear objectives and into which everyone has an input. That must include public consultation and an input from the elected members of both councils.

I know that the Members from Cork are speaking from the heart and I support everything they say. They are raising very valid concerns and this is the place to do it. However, a review would serve the people of Cork well. There is no question about that. This is not a political attack on the Minister of State or his officials. Departments, not just the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment, have very lofty objectives. Lofty objectives may suit the political narrative but they do not suit public policy. They are not measurable. One cannot measure lofty objectives. I am not saying that this is a lofty objective, but the objective should have specifics that are measurable.

I commend the Minister of State on this Bill. I disagree fundamentally with latching Galway onto it. That does a disservice to Galway and to Cork. They should be separate. However, the Minister of State is endeavouring to improve Irish local government. We may disagree on certain aspects of it but this is the right thing to do. Cork needs to be strengthened. It needs city status. It needs to be beefed up if the objectives of the national planning framework are to be realised. We must measure progress if we are to do that. One of the recommendations from this House, an amendment which I put forward, was for this national planning framework to be debated and voted upon in both Houses of the Oireachtas. Unfortunately the Dáil did not support that amendment and therefore the Dáil and Seanad did not have an input. However, a measurable review mechanism should be built into this Bill. It would serve local government well. In fact if it worked here, it could be replicated elsewhere.