Kieran O'Donnell (Limerick City, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

This important role is reflected in section 32, which provides for the mayor to establish a Limerick mayoral advisory and implementation committee. One of the functions of the committee, which is to be chaired by the mayor, will be, "to promote, foster and support economic, touristic, social and cultural activities in Limerick, in particular the rural areas thereof". I specifically came up with that wording. When I was doing the legislation as it was originally structured, there was a separate definition in the context of rural and urban areas. As Senators Gavan and Maria Byrne will be aware, in the context of Limerick and the amalgamation there, it is important that we are as one. If the mayor wishes to set up separate committees, he or she may by all means do so, but this point is very important in the context of the two amalgamated councils - one significantly rural and the other urban. I am going outside what I said but I was specific in that wording in order that it would encompass all aspects. I very much appreciate the intention of the Senator's amendment but cannot accept it on the basis that it is already dealt with in the Bill. It is a matter of which I was very conscious but I have expanded on from where I was coming in this regard. It is important that we work as one on this issue.

The new subsection (8) in the amendment proposes that the mayor would have responsibility for organising and chairing the JPC. Senators may be aware that the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024, brought forward by the Minister for Justice, was recently passed by the Houses of the Oireachtas and has just been signed into law by the President. Under its provisions, JPCs are to be stood down later this year and replaced by local community safety partnerships, LCSPs. The amendment relating to the mayor being chair of the joint policing committee, therefore, no longer has a context for discussion and cannot be accepted. I note the import, however.

The appointment of chairs to the LCSPs is a matter which may be subject to regulation by the Minister for Justice. Although I am on record as being in favour of a role for the mayor in the new local community safety partnerships, the Minister has outlined in the Houses that the role of chair will be an open position. I am on record, however, as stating that I would like the mayor to be chair of the new LCSP. Obviously, that is a decision for the Minister. I have discussed the matter with her. It is separate legislation. The role of chair will not specifically go to local authority members but there is nothing to stop them from being chair if they wish to put themselves forward for the selection process for the role. It is similar to the local community development committees. In that context, there is nothing to preclude an elected mayor from seeking the position. I would like to do more. I am working on that but it is outside the scope of this legislation. I am in discussions with the Minister for Justice on the matter.

I note that in the recent Seanad debate on the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act, the Minister for Justice introduced an amendment under section 114 relating to the election of the chair, which provides that regulations made under subsection (1) "shall not, insofar as they make provision for the election of a chairperson and vice-chairperson of a safety partnership, make provision that precludes the election of members of local authorities as such a chairperson or vice-chairperson". The amendment was agreed to and is included in the Act. I am on record with regard to this matter. We are working on this but it will come through regulation from the Minister. That whole area of the appointment of a chair may be subject to regulation by the Minister.

The new subsection (9) in amendment No. 11 proposes that the mayor shall have executive powers with regard to waste management. As set out in the general scheme of the Bill, all executive functions provided for under the Waste Management Act 1996, and all executive functions relating to waste and waste management arising from EU legislation, are responsibilities to remain with the DG. This has been reflected in Part 2 of Schedule 1 of the Bill, which contains provision from legislation that deals with the operation of waste management to be retained by the DG. Therefore, I cannot accept this amendment.

Waste management plans have been adopted on a regional basis to include the entire country. In 2021 it was agreed that the regions would together prepare one national waste management plan for a circular economy. This plan will be made in the coming months. This successful collaboration has allowed Ireland to continue to satisfy the binding requirements set out in Article 28 of the waste framework directive regarding the production of waste management plans.

New subsection (10) proposes that the mayor shall have executive responsibility for public realm improvements, including vacant or disused public spaces. The purpose and effect of this amendment is not clear in terms of whether it is proposing a role for the mayor in the advancing of public realm improvements or in the consenting processes. In this regard I would note a number of general points.

The Planning Act does not specify development types under the label of "public realm improvement", although it does set out that all local authority works are exempt from planning permission. It should be noted, however, that certain development types, the thresholds for which are relatively low, require the local authority's own development process under section 179 of the Planning Act and this is a reserved function of the elected members. As this Bill does not create new functions relating to development consent nor does it remove reserved functions from the elected members, I cannot accept this amendment.

New subsection (11) proposes that the mayor shall have oversight with regard to the implementation of the Limerick regeneration projects, and any subsequent regeneration programmes, and shall produce an annual report to be delivered to councillors regarding the status of the regeneration programmes. I agree the mayor will have an important role in the oversight and development of regeneration generally in Limerick. That has been reflected in this Bill. As noted, section 32 sets out the mayor will establish a Limerick mayoral advisory and implementation committee. A core function of this committee, chaired by the mayor, will be the co-ordination in Limerick of measures giving effect to Government policy concerning the regeneration of towns.

Further to this, section 33 provides for the mayor to chair the Limerick Project Ireland 2040 delivery board, which will focus on the implementation of the national planning framework and the national development plan in the Limerick region. One of the main functions of the delivery board will include engaging and collaborating with bodies involved in “the arrangement, co-ordination and provision of social and economic regeneration measures including the development and improvement of land and infrastructure”. Again, I provided for it in the Bill. The mayor will play a key role in these areas. Again, while I accept the spirit of the Senator's amendment, I cannot accept it on the basis that it has already been incorporated into the Bill.

On a more general note, regeneration projects do not have a separate statutory basis. In Limerick, the Limerick regeneration framework implementation plan is the programme of works setting out the shared vision for stronger communities within regeneration areas. The local strategic advisory and monitoring group oversees the implementation of the plan. This advisory group includes representatives from community, and other bodies and is chaired by the chief executive, which will be a role for the mayor going forward. A mayor will chair the advisory group.

New subsection (12) proposes that the mayor would have a role in land acquisition, under section 213 of the Planning Act, subject to the ratification of purchases by Limerick City and County Council. The provisions of the Bill aim to allow for the mayor to have a role in relation to the acquisition for the performance of the functions of the local authority. However, a resolution of elected members is not required under section 213 of the Planning Act as it is an executive function. As stated above, the Bill does not remove, alter or create new functions. Therefore, this amendment cannot be accepted.

Amendment No. 12, meanwhile, would require the director general to submit a list of executive functions to the mayor and elected members. That comes from the Civil Engagement Group.

I acknowledge the intentions of the Senators in terms of ensuring clarity for the new mayor in his or her role. The scale of the task proposed is something that I have come to have a very good working knowledge of. The vast bulk of the work that my officials and I have carried out on the Bill since publication has been on identifying functions of local authorities from across the entirety of the Statute Book. This is a completely new departure so it is a new measure. Truthfully, this has been an enormous task. It has involved reviewing legislation as far back as the Poor Relief Act of 1838, and has involved interaction with every Department of Government as well as many of our agencies. Many of these functions are set out in Part 2 of Schedule 1 as functions that will rest with the director general. I think we are all struck by the scale and diversity of those local government functions.

As Members will be aware, functions at a strategic and policy level are to vest in the mayor.While these typically account for only a few sections of an Act, they are the key overarching functions without which the more numerous operational functions could not be given effect. Therefore, in the allocation of functions between the mayor and the director general, quantity is not the only metric.

Given all this, to provide in statute that the director general must prepare and submit a list of executive functions previously held by the chief executive is a significant and onerous task. However, I do have an alternative proposal for how this could be accomplished, at least in part, on an administrative basis. The Local Government Management Agency has published a catalogue of over 1,000 services that are provided by local authorities. In addition, my officials have prepared an explanatory table of all the functions from the enactments listed in Schedule 1. There is no difficulty in making these two pieces of work available to the mayor and the elected council. The combination of these would go a long way to achieving the intent of this amendment.

In time, I would like to see something similar to the Local Government Management Agency catalogue of services being produced for statutory functions. I believe that the background work on this Bill would provide a very useful starting point for such a project and my Department would be happy to share the work it has done.

I will conclude by noting that the main role of the director general will be to support the mayor in the effective administration and day-to-day running of the local authority. In the performance of those functions, they will be accountable to the mayor and this information will be available to the mayor.

Elected members may also request this information by virtue of section 149 of the Local Government Act of 2001. This provides that a chief executive shall, when requested by the elected council, report on actions taken or planned in the exercise of their executive functions.

While it is not possible to accept this amendment, I thank members for the opportunity to set out my thoughts on how its aims may be achieved.

Amendment 13 proposes that in advancing moneys to the mayor the Minister for Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery, and Reform would consult with the mayor and elected members. The provision of funding for the mayor will be agreed by the Minister and the Minister for Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery, and Reform as part of annual budgetary negotiations and through the normal Estimates process.

The Government is committed to ensuring that the local government sector remains vibrant and sustainable and is well equipped and properly resourced to deliver the key functions within its remit.

The funding system for local authorities is a complex one, as authorities derive their income from a variety of sources including commercial rates, charges for goods and services, local property tax as well as funding from Departments and other bodies.

I understand that the amendment from Senator Higgins and the Civil Engagement Group may wish to align some of the budget processes. However, the mayor’s budget relates to their mayoral programme, developed by them from the manifesto they put before the people of Limerick. It is something that the successful candidate will have put to the people about how they will spend the specific allocation and is part of their mandate. Consequently, I do not wish to complicate the process by introducing further levels of consultation. For this reason I cannot accept this amendment. I will put this in context. The annual budget from the council continues. It is brought by the mayor or DG but it continues to be a reserve function of the elected members. The mayor is getting an annual allocation of an extra €8 million or so into Limerick for their mayoral programme which they will have put by way of a manifesto to the people of Limerick when they put themselves forward in June. I would also mention that the Limerick mayoral consultative forum. The mayor will bring their programme to the elected council, the members. It is something for which they have a democratic mandate. It is important that they retain control over that process. They bring the programme to the chamber for consultation but the chamber cannot veto their mayoral programme. It is something different but it is something that the mayor will have put to the people. I return to the fundamental principle that it is based on a democratic process and what the people will have voted on to elect them to the mayoral office. However, in the practical world of politics, I would expect any mayor to get the support of the chamber to secure proper validity for their programme. If you look at Bristol and Liverpool, these are issues that did arise at the time.

I would also mention that the Limerick mayoral and government consultative forum provides a mechanism for engagement between the mayor, the Minister and other Ministers, including the Minister for Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery, and Reform, on an ongoing basis.