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

I thank Members for their contributions. Amendments Nos. 47 to 66, inclusive, have been grouped for discussion so I will speak about them as a whole. Amendments Nos. 47 to 50, inclusive, seek to change how council members and others are to be appointed to the advisory and implementation committee. The role of the committee will be to support the mayor in preparing and implementing their mayoral programme.It is in my view entirely fitting that the mayor should be the person to appoint the committee members to have broad representation in this committee. I do not believe that amendments constraining the mayor in this regard would be beneficial to the overall functioning of the office of mayor. For that reason, I cannot accept these amendments. This particular Limerick mayor advisory and implementation committee is for the implementation of the mayor's programme. The mayor will be getting up to €8 million per year from the Exchequer towards that programme, which he or she will put by way of a manifesto to the people. It is, therefore, very much an advisory group within section 32. It provides for members of Limerick City and County Council to be on that committee as well.

The removal of the word “and” in amendment No. 49 does not appear to have any purpose and, accordingly, I cannot accept it. The reference in amendment No. 47 to "paragraph 18 of Schedule 2 to the Local Government Act" is incorrect and similarto the reference in paragraph 18 of Schedule 10. It is only a technical point. We can all make those.

Amendments No. 51 to 60 seek to add detail to the functions of the committee in areas including biodiversity, sustainable development goals, social cohesion and social inclusion, culture, creativity, the arts, music, the Irish language, an inclusive public realm for Limerick, social and cultural participation in Limerick, intergenerational activities, and the Traveller culture and specifically the social, educational, and economic inclusion of members of the Travelling Community in Limerick.

In the interest of bringing coherence and a degree of flexibility to the functions, I have not attempted to list every individual policy area. For that reason, I believe the functions as drafted will work well and I am not minded to accept the amendments. We have tried to be very inclusive within section 32(5), which proposes to:

(c) ... foster and support economic, touristic, social and cultural activities in Limerick ...

(d) ... sustain employment in Limerick ...

(e) ...enhance cooperation between nominating bodies,

(f) ...the consideration of any matter that may affect Limerick or Limerick City and County Council ...

(g) the coordination in Limerick of initiatives, services and funding giving effect to Government policy to support rural areas, and

(h) the coordination in Limerick of measures giving effect to Government policy ... [including] the regeneration of towns.

I want to give that flexibility. The mayor can cover any area within the committee.

Amendments No. 61 and 62 relate to the removal of references to Government policy with regard to support for rural areas and the regeneration of towns. I cannot overemphasise the importance of working in collaboration with existing and future Government policies in these areas and, therefore, I cannot accept these amendments. When the Bill was originally drafted, it had separate defined committees for rural and urban areas. Limerick City and County Council is one of those local authorities that amalgamated, and Senator Cummins will be well aware of this in Waterford. It is about bringing people together. It is up to the mayor if he or she wished to set up defined separate committees for rural areas. I have no issue with that. However, it is important that we show this cohesion because, certainly, it is a key feature in bringing the two local authorities together, one from, let us say, a city focus and one from an urban one but with a large rural focus.

Amendments Nos. 63 and 64 relate to issues such as the inclusion of urban areas with regard to the regeneration of towns in Limerick and the re-municipalisation of waste services in Limerick. I believe the functions, as drafted, will work well. I am not minded to accept the amendments. We already discussed that at length under various legislation. That stays with theCEO and the Executive.

Amendments Nos. 65 and 66 relate to a role for elected members for the dissolution of a committee, and the potential for a member of a committee or subcommittee to recuse themselves, if appropriate. In respect of dissolving committees, this structure is specific to the role of mayor. I believe it is appropriate that the mayor should make that decision. I do not think we should have a situation of setting up a committee and having a mayor implement his or her programme and then someone who is not the mayor could basically dissolve it. That is not the purpose. This legislation is written in the positive, not in the negative. It is about being forward looking and having engagement and collaboration rather than any form of conflict.

Regarding a member recusing themselves where they have a conflict, the Bill as it stands provides for just such a mechanism. Consequently, I do not think a further amendment is necessary here.