Frances Black (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am concerned that we are seeing a deeper erosion of local democracy and further centralisation. The move from a six-year local development plan to a ten-year one means that elected councillors who already do not have the powers may never get an opportunity to work on the development plan for their local area. This is a key reserved power. By diluting it, the Bill will further undermine local democracy at a time when it is widely accepted that local government needs more power, not less, to allow it to deliver for communities. As my colleague Senator Boyhan said, the AILG and LAMA have been extremely outspoken in their opposition to this proposed change. I am concerned that the Government is not taking on board the experience and expertise of councillors, who understand their communities and the needs of those communities. They have a democratic mandate to represent the people. The requirement to align development plans with the national planning statement goes completely against the principles of subsidiarity and the idea that decisions should be made as close to the citizen as possible.

I urge the Minister of State to listen to the councillors - I know he was a councillor at one point - including councillors from his own party and to reconsider this change.

Amendments Nos. 135 and 140 seek to keep the duration of development plans at six years rather than the proposed ten years. Amendment No. 137 seeks for the review to be conducted four years into the plan rather than eight. I ask the Minister of State to very much consider accepting these amendments.

Amendments Nos. 138 and 139 seek to explore the pressing need for the creation of a statutory basis for the provision of independent political and technical advice to local councillors. This is very important. The need for this advice has been raised by the councillors' representative bodies, such as the AILG and LAMA, and has been a regular part of the contributions made by councillors appearing before the Seanad Public Consultation Committee, which was chaired by the Leas-Chathaoirleach, during its examination of the future of local democracy. We learned so much in that committee. The role of councillors is incredibly demanding, particularly given that many of them have additional work or caring responsibilities. That issue came up a great deal. The work of local authority strategic policy committees is very detailed and councillors need high-quality advice to be able to represent the interests of constituents.

We all know as Members of the Oireachtas that we would be lost without the help of our staff and the independent advice we get from the Office of Parliamentary Legal Advisers, OPLA, the Library and Research Service, the Civil Service and the secretariat in the case of the Government. The work we do is complex. It requires people with a democratic mandate to consult those with special expertise to make an informed decision in line with our values. The extraordinary size and intricacy of this Bill confirms that such assistance is needed. There is no doubt about it. Councillors lack all of that help. This is a problem particularly for newly elected councillors, Independent councillors and councillors from small parties who may not have experienced party veterans to rely on for guidance. Again, I ask the Minister of State to accept at least one of these amendments to take this issue forward. I ask him to listen to the councillors who are engaging in good faith to lay out the support they need to serve their communities. They do phenomenal work and this support is vital for their work. Let us make the changes we need to ensure they get what they need.

Amendment No. 141 seeks to delete section 42(5)(b). We have already outlined in some detail our opposition to the extension of the time between local development plans. This is why we are also perturbed by the prospect of an already unacceptably and undemocratically long ten-year window being extended by ministerial order. Even if this is a provision which is designed to be used sparingly, a potential 12-year period for local development plans freezes out newly elected councillors with a new vision for the area. This undermines their democratic mandate and makes the development less responsive and legitimate. This subsection is misconceived and should absolutely be deleted.

If the Minister of State will not accept our previous amendments seeking to delete section 42(5)(b), perhaps he will consider adopting one of these two amendments. Amendment No. 142 would allow the Minister to extend the plan at the behest of the elected council itself rather than an unelected manager. We continue to be sceptical about the wisdom of the 12-year plan in the Bill. At least, however, this extension would have come at the request of the elected councillors themselves, which seems more legitimate than the existing proposal in the subsection. Alternatively, amendment No. 143 would empower local councillors to overturn an extension requested by the chief executive. This would provide a democratic control on this power and would make the request for an extension more legitimate. We have tried to be constructive and to come up with multiple alternatives to make this section fairer. I hope the Minister of State will engage with this issue and give these proposals real consideration. I would very much ask him to do so.

Amendment No. 150 seeks to include considerations as to the location of cultural, social and recreational facilities in the city in a settlement strategy. Due to the extreme lack of access to space that cultural communities face in Ireland, cultural infrastructure must often be set up in ad hoclocations randomly dotted around cities. This can lead to tension, especially in areas where music, performance or dance venues exist close to residents. If cultural development is to happen in a way that works for both cultural spaces and residents, there needs to be a co-ordinated approach to this. These resources could also be incredibly useful to the public as there is very little data available to event producers and organisations on what spaces are even available to them. The Arts Council recently conducted a survey of venues in the night-time economy. It would be far more appropriate for our planning systems to be providing this data. Having an idea of the location and extent of these types of spaces could serve a dual purpose: from a planning perspective and also in creating a valuable resource for cultural organisers.