Local Elections Bill, 1972: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Mr. Moore

On the last occasion I welcomed the Bill not for its quantity but for its quality. It is a very short Bill, indeed, containing very important provisions which will lead towards better local government. I do not think anybody will disagree with section I which repeals the section of the 1963 Act dealing with the registration of voters, or section 2 which removes certain membership disqualifications for such reasons as having drawn public assistance or having been bankrupt within a certain period. This is in keeping with the policy of the Government since the 1930s. They extended the franchise to people other than property holders and house-holders. They also extended the vote to young people. At that time unless you were a house owner or a property owner you could not vote in the local elections. As far back as the 1930s the Government removed this inhibition. This Bill is in keeping with the Government's policy of extending the franchise to all responsible citizens.

It may be said that it is not proposed in this Bill to hold the elections this year, and that is true. There will be an opportunity in the interim between now and the holding of the elections for us to have a good look at the whole structure of local government. There is a desire on the part of the people to become more fully involved in local government and, indeed, in central government too. It may be regretted by some that Dublin City Council were not restored in this measure. They will, of course, be restored next year when the local elections are held. The reason for the abolition of Dublin City Council may not be relevant to the Bill but previous speakers referred to it at great length. For the record, Dublin City Council were abolished because they refused to strike a rate. On 5th March, 1969, while sitting in committee, the council adopted the estimate.

For some reason, known to a few people, the council changed their minds at the public sitting and refused to strike a rate. Members of local authorities must at all times act with a sense of responsibility and with a due appreciation of their obligations and duties. In this Bill the Minister is seeking to provide us with a good code of local government. While I would welcome the restoration of Dublin City Council, at the same time I think we should have some guarantee that members will not abuse their powers by failing in their duty to the people, thereby leaving the people without representation.

Many of the members of Dublin City Council were also members of various bodies, such as the vocational education committee, the Port and Docks Board and certain city hospital boards. On the abolition of the council they lost their representation on these various bodies. The Minister might consider reappointing these people to these bodies. They gave excellent service on these bodies. Such a step on the part of the Minister would keep these people au fait with changes in relation to these various bodies and, if they are reelected next year as local authority members, they can continue the good work they have been doing.

We have now a breathing space in which to prepare for greater perfection in the machinery of local government. Matters have changed since 1969 at both political and local level. People are much more aware of the value of a local authority. I can see a new era beginning in the sphere of local government. There are lessons to be learned from what happened both North and South. Henceforth there will have to be a much greater liaison and integration at central government and local government levels. Only in this way can real democracy be achieved. I look forward to the time when we can have a series of bodies, starting at local level, with connections and relations with central government.

An Ceann Comhairle

It would seem, Deputy, that this is outside the scope of the Local Elections Bill.

Mr. Moore

I am just looking to the future.

An Ceann Comhairle

I know, but we cannot discuss the whole question of local government on this limited measure.

Mr. Moore

I accept your ruling. We have to prepare for the local elections next year. This is a short Bill, but it is an important one. I doubt if anyone could oppose anything in the Bill. There may be criticism of the fact that the local elections were not held this year but this is not the first time such elections have been postponed. At the time the Dublin City Council were abolished they had become the targets of certain elements in the city, such as politically activated housing groups and others.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are getting away now from the Bill.

Mr. Moore

I just referred to it in passing.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair hopes nobody will dwell on matters outside the scope of the Bill.

Mr. Moore

I accept your ruling, but I think this was raised by the previous speaker. I sincerely hope that the local elections next year will result in a truly democratic local government structure. This Bill is designed to remove certain restrictions. There is a school of thought which holds that local government should not be restricted. I am not a member of that school. Property owners are of the opinion—not all of them, of course— that they should be given some special concession. The principle of one man/one vote is a truly democratic principle. There are certain extensions in this Bill. The right to hold office is extended to people who draw public assistance or have, within five years before the election, been adjudged bankrupt. This section is very necessary because under the old legislation there was also such a restriction but to my knowledge it was never enforced. In one case at least it certainly was not enforced. The Bill clears away any doubt in the minds of local authorities on what may prevent a person becoming a member.

Although it is a short Bill it has very important provisions and it will be generally welcomed by the people. Next year they will have to elect or re-elect councils. I think this Bill is a good indication of the Government's intention to further democratise the whole system of franchise. We should not be selective in our application of the right to vote. Next year we shall have votes at 18 if the people so decide. This is not necessary in the case of local elections but the people will get an opportunity of expressing their views on the matter. Today's youth mature much younger than was the case with my generation. With the worldwide trend to give votes to people at a younger age, having satisfied ourselves that this is right, we should fall into line with other countries which are doing this.

It will mean a tremendous increase in the number of voters in the next election in 1973. I look forward to a revolutionary era in local government. We can be confident of this because we shall have the youth to a great extent and we shall have extended the franchise generally and, therefore, we shall have much deeper interest by the people as a whole in local government. Giving the right to people to be totally involved in local government is a very good augury for the future. No matter how good central government may be if we have a bad local government structure it will not add to the total happiness of the people or result in the achievement of the common good. Good local government will have good results generally and if people are involved in it they will be much better citizens and give their labour and time much more freely. We should pay tribute to members of local authorities all over the country who give their services free without any thought of reward. Perhaps we should say that they are the salt of the political bodies.

I hope that next year when the elections are held we shall see the beginning of new-look local government and this will coincide with our entry to Europe. While we may have much to gain from Europe, on the local government level we can certainly offer something to Europe. I welcome the Bill and congratulate the Minister on introducing it.

Mr. Cooney

I should like briefly to deal with the reasons the Minister gave for introducing the Bill. His first reason was that it was necessary because of the impending reorganisation of local government. In that connection I should like to say briefly that the one aspect of local government which needs reorganisation is the dead hand of central government on the activities of local authorities. A White Paper has been issued on the reorganisation of local government and we have heard the chilling news that McKinsey is now looking at the management structure of local government—chilling, in my opinion, because everything to which McKinsey puts his hand in this country turns into a bureaucratic jungle in which Parkinson's Law runs riot. Perhaps I am simplistic about this but all that is necessary, in my opinion, to remedy many of the defects in the present local government structure is to allow local authorities the autonomy they deserve, which, in fact, they have and which the legislation governing the matter envisages that they will have.

They are composed of elected representatives with highly skilled professional advisers. With all respect to the Minister I do not think that he and his advisers are any more competent to advise the local authorities on their functions than the local authorities themselves. I particularly regret that the personnel structure of local authorities is being examined by a firm of American management consultants. These people have been steeped in the American management philosophy of vertical integration of responsibility or whatever their particular gobbledegook is for describing their activities. They have already had two forays into this country via CIE——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should keep to the Bill before the House.

Mr. Cooney

With respect, one of the reasons for the Bill is the question of the reconstruction of local authorities as outlined by the Minister in his opening statement. I want to refer briefly to some aspects of reorganisation which I submit——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That would mean discussing the White Paper on Local Government.

Mr. Cooney

It is my case that an elaborate reorganisation is not necessary and an elaborate reorganisation has been put forward as necessitating this postponement.

Mr. Cunningham

But it will be the subject of another Bill.

Mr. Cooney

At this stage it is no harm that the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary should know that some of us have a "thing" about McKinsey and their reasons for having it would be relevant to any future legislation.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair could not accept that argument in that we would be getting away from the Bill and its purpose.

Mr. Cooney

The purpose is to postpone the local elections and one of the reasons for the postponement is the pending reorganisation.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): On a point of order, I think the Deputy is making the case that no elaborate reorganisation is necessary and that, therefore, postponement of the elections is not necessary.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy may make that point but he may not go on to discuss McKinsey and the reconstruction of local government. We are confined to what is in the Long Title of the Bill.

Mr. Cooney

With respect, would I not be entitled to make the point and give reasons for making it?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

In that case, the discussion would roam over the structure of local government and other Deputies would be entitled to the same latitude and that would get away from the Bill before the House.

Mr. Cooney

I do not want to come in conflict with the Chair and I accept the ruling as reasonable with some respectful reservations. The next reason the Parliamentary Secretary gave for postponing the elections was that it was necessary to alter the residential qualifications of voters. At first sight it seems democratic that in any election any citizen should have only one vote. That applies the standard of Parliamentary elections to local authority elections but, after all, they are two completely different concepts. I can see nothing wrong in theory or practice in allowing residential qualifications which will permit a citizen to have more than a single vote in local government elections when that vote is being cast for different local authorities. The principle would clearly be obnoxious in relation to Parliamentary elections if a person were to have more than one vote, but in the case of local authorities, I do not see anything obnoxious, harmful or undemocratic in it.

Each local authority should be an autonomous body in charge of their own particular region and each and every person who is affected by their activities in that region should be entitled to have a say in elections to it. Consequently, a property owner who might own property within the jurisdictions of two local authorities, as a democratic right should be entitled to have a say in the elections to each body. I personally am affected in that I have a property qualification within the urban area of Athlone while I reside in the county, and I think it is democratic that I as a person coming within the ambit of two local authorities should have a say in the elections to these bodies which are separate and autonomous. There is nothing undemocratic in that and it is regrettable that the Minister has not given us some reasons in his arguments as to why the Government sought to change this aspect of the law.

The other matter I would like to deal with is the matter of the voting age. As far as I can foresee, it will be necessary, after the referendum, to introduce a further piece of legislation to enable people to vote at 18 years in local elections and I think it would not be a wild forecast to say that this referendum will be carried comfortably and that the age will be reduced to 18. In anticipation of that, it would be no harm, and it would not be an impertinence on the part of the Department of Local Government, at this stage to allow votes at 18. It would be administratively convenient too in so far as it would save having to introduce another piece of legislation at a later date. Possibly this will be incorporated in the composite Bill to amend and reorganise local government generally but it would be an earnest of the Government's sincerity in relation to the Referendum Bill if they were to provide votes at 18 at this stage.

One further point is that it is a pity the opportunity was not taken in the Bill to exempt Dublin Corporation and Bray Urban Council from the postponement of the local elections, particularly Dublin Corporation. Dublin is the capital city of the country and what affects Dublin affects everybody and not just the residents of this city. There are so many developments taking place that it is doubly or trebly unfortunate that there is no elected body of persons in control in Dublin city at this time. We know that there is a vast development plan on the horizon in relation to Dublin Port and that the development plan for the city itself, the Planning Act development plan, is under review. There are developments taking place all over the city and it is essential that there should be an elected body to deal with these matters. It is not good enough, in my opinion, that they should be dealt with by a commissioner who of necessity is of the Establishment and whose perspective in these matters must necessarily be different from that of elected representatives. Having regard to the critical changes which are brewing in relation to Dublin city, it is essential that as wide a perspective as possible be brought to bear and for this reason I think it retrograde that the postponement applies to Dublin Corporation.

Another aspect of the activities of this commissioner is in regard to the siting of the new civic offices. A site between Christ Church and the river has been tentatively chosen. This is the most historic part of Dublin. The earliest settlement——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair would hope that the Deputy is not going to discuss that matter at this stage?

Mr. Cooney

With respect, I am giving reasons why Dublin Corporation should be exempted from the provisions of this Bill and I think this particular reason is highly pertinent and relevant.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That would be a detail at this stage.

Mr. Cooney

If we are to make merely passing remarks on a piece of legislation going through the House, it is interfering with our function. I say this with respect.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair is bound by what is in the Bill and can only deal with what is in the Bill. That is all the Chair can do.

Mr. Cooney

If I might make the point, what is in the Bill is the postponement of local elections and I am arguing that Dublin Corporation should be exempt from that postponement.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is going on to elaborate in regard to planning, and so on.

Mr. Cooney

I am giving some reasons why Dublin Corporation should be exempt and the particular reason is the siting of the offices for Dublin Corporation. I am suggesting that the site picked is of such historic significance and in such a strategic situation in regard to the make up and composition of central Dublin that it should be preserved as an open site or there should be adequate debate on this site which cannot take place, involving the citizens, unless their elected representatives are in the position——

Mr. Moore

This House passed a Bill entitled the Dublin Corporation Bill to build the offices there.

Mr. Haughey

Where would the Deputy put it?

Mr. Cooney

The cattle market where there are acres and acres of clear ground already owned by the corporation, which is of no historic significance but which is geographically suitable and in an area which could do with the uplift which the civic offices would give.

Mr. Haughey

Would the Deputy not think they should be as centrally situated as possible?

Mr. Cooney

The North Circular Road is not as central, geographically speaking, as the site in front of Christ Church, but the difference is of such relative smallness that it makes no difference. Having regard to the advantages, I think there is a chance now to save this historic site as an open space for future generations. If we put glass and concrete palaces on it, it is gone forever. A cattle market in the middle of a capital city in 1972 is surely an anachronism and it must go. I imagine that from the technical point of view, it would be much easier to design for and build on that site rather than on the difficult soils which one must necessarily get beside a river.

Mr. Cunningham

What about the fair green in Ballydehob?

Mr. Cooney

If the Parliamentary Secretary wants to apply the standards of the Inishowen Peninsula, he may do so.

Mr. Cunningham

It is entirely irrelevant on this.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair at this stage, as the Deputy will see, must point out where this discussion can go.

Mr. Cooney

The remark of the Parliamentary Secretary is regrettable if it typifies the thinking of the Government in relation to these matters.

Mr. Cunningham

It just shows how wide what the Deputy is discussing goes. All proposals for development could be discussed as well as the one the Deputy is discussing.

Mr. Clinton

A lot of things need badly to be discussed and the Parliamentary Secretary knows it.

Mr. Cooney

I am talking about the plight of Dublin Corporation where there is no elected body, not discussing the affairs of any other local authority, because there are elected representatives here to keep an eye on the Parliamntary Secretary and to make sure that if there are any developments in their regions, they are discussed by the elected representatives and not by some commissioner appointed by the Establishment.

Mr. Moore

The public representatives in Dublin decided on this site when they were in office.

Mr. Cooney

I do not quarrel with the wisdom of the elected representatives who made that decision, but I suggest to them that having seen that site cleared and having learned of its archaeological significance, they might reconsider their decision without doing any harm to themselves.

Mr. Moore

The Deputy is confusing two sites—the historic one is at High Street. We cleared some slums from the area where the offices are to go.

Mr. Cooney

If the Deputy reads the last booklet issued by Bord Fáilte, he will see a report by Mr. O'Riordan, the archaeologist, and that the present diggings are taking place adjacent to Christ Church.

Mr. Moore

That is right.

Mr. Cooney

If it was preserved as an open space these digs could be extended to cover the entire area.

Mr. Moore

I think the Deputy is confusing the two there.

Mr. Cooney

I am not. That is only one of the things that face Dublin Corporation in relation to the future shape and condition of this, the capital city of the nation.

The only other point I want to make is in regard to the removal of the disqualification of bankrupts. The proposed change is perhaps too simple. We could have a situation where persons who are undergoing the process of bankruptcy could continue to be members of local authorities. I do not know whether this is altogether desirable. I think it should be expanded so that they would be suspended or disqualified and that their entitlement to return to a local authority would not arise until such time as they had been discharged from bankruptcy or until whatever proceedings were in hand were fully and legally concluded. It would not be good for the standing of local authorities to have persons on them who were actually undergoing bankruptcy proceedings. It would take from the dignity and stature of these authorities. If a person is unfortunate enough to perform or do an act of bankruptcy he should lose his seat until such time as he has been discharged. The present disqualification affects him even after his discharge. I think it would be sufficient to change that aspect of it.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I have been a member of a local authority for about 22 years. I think it is regrettable that just at the point at which new members, particularly young members such as we have in County Mayo at the moment, have got to know something about the local authority an election will be held and they will be out on top of their heads and a crowd of bigger "gobbilloons" will come in. I think local government elections should not be held inside a period of roughly ten years.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That would have to be in a different Bill.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I think there should be an extension of 12 months. This has gone on for the last 35 years or more and there has been no objection to it. At one time the period was three years. Then it was brought up to five years. Most of the councillors who went in when it was three years came out with less knowledge than they had before they went in because they knew they would go out anyway. We have a lot of five year plans in this country and a lot of boards and other things dealing with this. The longer the term we give to these people the better, so long as they are democratically elected. The country is overrun by boards but in a year like this when the turf is very wet the boards are more inflammable than the turf so we cannot object to them. I cannot understand how any Deputy can object to the extension. I see Deputy O'Hara here. He will get in again, just as I will at the head of the poll. If I went up as a communist it would make no difference.

Mr. Haughey

Would you not think of extending the period for the Dáil while you are at it?

Mr. J. Lenehan

I would love to do that. We have the power for seven years. It will not be my fault but the fault of the boys over there.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are not discussing that.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I have never been asked to put them out of power. An extension of 12 months is very reasonable. I know it has nothing to do with any legal problem or anything else but there is no party in this country at present with the price of their break-fast left to them as a result of all the propaganda carried on in the last few months. This has been the standard practice for years. I am sure the Leas-Cheann Comhairle knows this as well as I do. We never, if we could avoid it, held two elections in the one year unless, say, a referendum and some kind of election at the one time and this usually happened to misfire. This is normal practice and I fail to see how anybody can object. Many people get up here and say they would like to see a general election in the morning. They would in their "barney". They would be out on top of their heads. It is all right for me. I have a safe seat.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are dealing with local elections now.

Mr. J. Lenehan

There are many Deputies here who are county councillors. They could go out as quickly as anybody else. They come in here using political bluff but I believe that anything passed in this House by the Government in power is pretty reasonable. The gentlemen on the other side will oppose it for the sake of opposition. What has happened in front of me? There is nobody at all left. Of course, they know they will never get in again and they have all gone.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The local elections.

Mr. J. Lenehan

There is nobody on the benches in front of me unless the Holy Ghost appears. None of these people was ever on a local authority. Deputy O'Hara, myself and other people have been for many a day on local authorities and have suffered at our own expense. These geniuses, who should be on these benches but have evaporated, will tell us what to do. It is very difficult to tell me, someone who has spent 22 years on a local authority—I think Deputy O'Hara has spent a little longer—what to do. It is very difficult to take away from us the type of support we get in our constituencies. I am not saying we are exactly right, we could be slightly wrong, but it is rather strange that no matter what guns are ranged against us when it is all over we are there and the boys who pulled the triggers are gone. I have survived in a political jungle for a long time. I have been a member of every board that ever existed in Mayo. I have been a member of vocational educational committees and committees of agriculture. I am a member of the Western Health Board. Unfortunately, on one occasion I had to leave before the meeting was finished but I told the wife to stand the boys a drink if they came——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This has nothing to do with the Bill.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I do not get up very often. I want to say that I believe in the Bill. Even Deputy Fitzpatrick, in his wisdom or lack of it, will agree with me that there is not a great deal to do except to pass the Bill and to postpone the elections.

I live in a territory where I have the devil's luck. I am the only man in Mayo ever to get into this House as an Independent. I would have loved a local election next June to test my popularity again. I do not want to put the people to the expense of a local election. Most of us who are on the council are men of wisdom, capable of conducting the affairs of the county.

I am not exactly sure as to which side of the House I am on. I am in the middle at this moment. We should pass the Bill. If it comes to a vote, I will vote with the Government. In 11 years I voted once against them and I have been examining my conscience since. I never was as sorry. I won my case.

Mr. Briscoe

There is not very much one can say on this Bill and keep within the rules of order. In relation to section 1 there have been critics of the fact that the Government have not seized this opportunity to make the voting age 18 instead of 21 There is nothing wrong with letting the people decide this issue in the referendum to be held in the autumn. The Government may favour votes at 18 but if they were to introduce votes at 18 they might be accused of being presumptuous if they were to do so in the same year as a referendum was being held to test the issue. This matter is one for the people, from whom we derive our authority, as anyone who has read the Constitution recently will know.

In regard to the referendum which has been announced for the autumn, the young people who are concerned about votes at 18 should make their voices heard. They should get themselves ready. In a very short time the referendum will be held. It takes some time to get one's point across to the public. The young people who are concerned with this matter should be working on it. They may be disappointed if they rely on the political parties to work for them. The effort may not be as intense as they would like.

There is one provision in the Bill with which I agree but with which Deputy Cooney disagrees, that is, the provision for one vote only. In future it will not be possible for a person to have two votes in a local election. It is right that every elector should have one vote. The fact that a man may own property is irrelevant. It is not fair to give a man a second vote because he owns property or a business premises.

Mr. J. Lenehan

The Deputy should make it clear that he is not advocating the abolition of proportional representation. His remarks could be misinterpreted.

Mr. Briscoe

I thank the Deputy for making that clear. It is important that I should not be misunderstood. A man who has a place of residence apart from his business premises can make a choice as to his vote.

I am glad to see the provision that allows a bankrupt who, after a period of five years has not discharged his bankruptcy, to vote. If all our creditors were suddenly to foreclose there would be quite a few vacancies in this Dáil. Perhaps some of us are more fortunate than others in who our creditors are. Bad luck can force a man into bankruptcy through no fault of his own. The social stigma attaching to not being allowed to offer himself for public office was too harsh.

I do not think it matters where the new municipal offices are to be providing the offices are modern and have the amenities the public require. It is of the utmost importance that the offices and the City Hall should be of such a nature that the people can be proud of them.

I should like to remind Deputy Cooney that in 1924 his party suspended the Dublin City Council for six years for roughly the same crime as that for which Dublin Corporation were suspended in 1969. Members of the Labour Party and the Fine Gael Party thought that the then Minister for Local Government and the Government would not have the courage to suspend the city council. It was stated by Deputy Cluskey that Fianna Fáil found themselves in a minority in the city council. Fianna Fáil have never been in a majority in Dublin City Council. Their representation never exceeded 18 out of 45 members. Resolutions were put forward by the Opposition parties in Dublin Corporation which had no relevance whatsoever to that body and the law agent would advise the member proposing the motion that it was not in order, that it did not come within the functions of the city council but the motion would be accepted by the Chair. There was considerable abuse. The Opposition parties killed democracy in Dublin Corporation. These are facts that should be stated and that I am justified in stating in view of statements made last week.

I hope more of the Deputies here, in particular those on the Opposition side, who criticise what happened in Dublin Corporation—even though many of them were not members—will offer themselves for this onerous work. There is much more work involved in being a member of a local authority than there is in being a Member of this House because of the larger number of committees which operate. I am sure Deputies who are members of local authorities will agree that their functions in the latter bodies are much more time-consuming than their work as Members of Dáil Éireann.

Mr. Clinton

One can readily understand the reluctance of the Government to face the electorate in local elections, or indeed in any other elections. Their record is such that they would face inevitable defeat. Of course, they will only face the people when they are dragged before them. Unfortunately, the Opposition have not got sufficient voting power to bring them before the people unless some of those who have defected from Fianna Fáil change their minds and go the whole way and insist that the people make their decision. I know that the Government are dependent to some extent on people like Deputy Lenehan——

Mr. J. Lenehan

The Deputy should not worry about me.

Mr. Clinton

His personal humility has been extremely impressive this evening. Section 3 proposes to postpone the date of the local elections until June, 1973. Unfortunately I was not able to be present in the House when the Minister gave his reasons for this postponement but I assume that one of the reasons must have been that expressed by the last speaker, namely, the reluctance to have more than one election in the same year.

This year we can expect an election in a certain part of the country which, in itself, will test the opinions of the people. To that extent the Government will not be able to avoid hearing the voice of the people. As Deputy Lenehan has said, it has become the normal practice in recent times to avoid having local elections, to postpone them from one year to the next, and, in this way, postpone the evil day. However, in view of the position at the moment it would be desirable to have local elections.

In the Dublin area we have no corporation, neither is there a Bray Urban Council. At a time when major changes are taking place, it is not possible for a public representative to deal properly with the serious problems that have arisen in the Dublin city region. As a public representative, I face this situation every day. I represent an area where the corporation have had considerable influence and the circumstances I come up against call for a public representative to be active at local level. At the moment this is not possible.

Now when a representative writes on behalf of a family of six people who are living in one room, he is lucky to get a reply in two months; frequently it is merely an acknowledgment but there is nothing further the representative can do. At a time when there is such severe hardship and where people have to endure appalling conditions, this is not good enough. As a Deputy I have represented parts of Dublin city but since I became a Deputy in 1961 I have never known such an appalling housing situation as that which exists in Dublin city today.

I am sure the Leas-Cheann Comhairle is ready to tell me this is not relevant to the Bill and, up to a point, I agree with that. However, one must refer to the seriousness of a situation that defers the re-election of members of Dublin Corporation. Nobody could overstress the seriousness of the situation where there is nobody in the Dublin city area to come between the man-in-the-street and the bureaucrat. It is far too serious to decide lightly not to have an election and, at the same time, not to find a way to ensure that the public are democratically and properly represented.

Some time ago I suggested something which might get round this— where, instead of appointing a commissioner in June this year, the Minister might decide to appoint 45 commissioners and let the members of the corporation go back in that capacity. If this is feasible it should be given serious consideration. If a similar way could be found to get back public representatives in the Bray Urban District Council, personally I would not object to the postponement of the elections in the present year.

In fact, one might make a case for having a longer period between local elections—perhaps seven years instead of five years. I do not know if this aspect has been considered. If a member of a local authority retires or dies he can be replaced in a democratic way and I think it is good to have this kind of flexibility. Through circumstances over which the Government cannot have full control, if it is found inconvenient and unnecessarily expensive to hold elections, it is right that the powers should be there to have this kind of postponement.

My serious objection to the Bill lies in the circumstances of the present time and because of the unfortunate situation in relation to housing in the Dublin area. The people are suffering considerable hardship and there cannot be any democratic intervention on their behalf. Very serious problems have arisen—problems more serious than the siting of the municipal offices. The planning of the Dublin city and region, the preparation of programmes dealing with roads and communications, are matters which should involve public representatives. They should not be excluded from consultation because the Government do not want to have elections at the moment.

Serious problems have arisen with regard to the health services but nothing can be done about them. It was asked why a way cannot be found to elect members to vocational educational committees. Education is an extremely important matter, and this applies in particular to vocational education in view of the community schools proposal. In an area that contains almost one-third of the population, it should be possible to find a way to get democratic representation on these bodies. The Minister was able to find a way to put members on the Eastern Health Board. I do not know what were the legal difficulties but they were overcome by selecting members of the corporation who were Deputies and putting them on the health boards. In fact, Deputies, who were not members of the local authority, were put on the health boards.

If it is possible to do that in relation to the health boards, one finds it difficult to understand why it is not possible to do it in relation to the vocational education bodies and the school attendance committees. I hope that arising from this Bill there will be a serious search for ways and means that would ensure represententation of this kind for the people. There is also this very important question of the whole reorganisation of local government. The proposals in the White Paper in this regard are drastic so far as the Dublin region is concerned. This matter is being dealt with without there being any consultation or any observations from the people who, normally, would have a say in such matters. When the Minister was speaking I do not know what effort he made to explain what are his intentions in relation to all these serious matters but if there is to be postponement a great case would have to be made for it, having regard to the seriousness of the situation in the Dublin area.

The Bill makes provision for votes for all people who have reached the age of 21. Somebody said that it makes provision for voting by all responsible people. I think there are many irresponsible people at 21 who are eligible to vote. However, I suppose somebody must decide who is responsible and who is not. Regarding the granting of votes at 18, it is accepted generally in this House that when this matter is put before the people in a referendum they will vote in favour of the proposed change. While we cannot anticipate the result, could we not make provision that in the event of the people deciding in favour of the change, it would then be possible, without further legislation, to have this change implemented? I am no legal expert but I find it difficult to understand why this could not be done. It would be a method of avoiding further legislation.

Regarding the question of those declared bankrupt, there are many such people who are innocent. It is not a matter on which one could generalise but bankruptcy in itself should not deprive people in the way in which they have been deprived in the past. A case can be made for removing this clause from legislation and of finding some other way of describing a person who, because of some crime he had committed, would be ineligible.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Local Government (Mr. Cunningham)

As I indicated at the outset, the Government's decision to seek authority to postpone the local elections was based on two considerations. In the first place, legislative proposals relating to changes in the structure of local government arising from the White Paper on Local Government Reorganisation are being prepared and it would not have been possible to have this legislation dealt with before June. Secondly, it was considered undesirable that the local elections and the referendum in relation to accession to the European Communities should be held so close to one another. The desirability of postponing the elections in these circumstances has not been called seriously into question.

I would like to deal as fully as I can with the points that have been raised in the course of the debate. Many Deputies raised the question of local elections in Dublin city and Bray. In fact, this Bill does not affect in any way the position in relation to the the holding of local elections in these areas. The removal from office of the members of these councils remains effective until a new election is held under section 45 of the Local Government Act, 1941. This section requires the Minister to fix a date for a new election which must be within five years from the date of removal from office. The date of the new elections could be fixed to coincide with the date of the next local elections but if a later date were chosen for the new elections in Dublin city and Bray, no local elections would take place in these two areas on the date fixed for local elections generally. In other words, if local elections were to be held this month it would not automatically follow that elections would be held in Dublin city and Bray. The White Paper on Local Government Reorganisation put forward for consideration the suggestion that a single authority should be established for the entire area of Dublin city and county. The future structure of local government in this area is still under active consideration and it would be inappropriate to hold the new elections until the future shape of local government in that area has been decided.

Deputies Treacy and Desmond sought a categorical assurance that the local elections will, in fact, be held in June, 1973. They pointed out that a Presidential election is due to be held between April and June next and that this could clash with the local elections. Doubts were raised as to whether it would be possible to have the legislation on local government reform enacted and implemented within the next 12 months. I do not know the precise circumstances which will prevail in 12 months time. All that can be said at this stage is that the intention is to hold the next local elections in June, 1973, and it is intended to proceed with proposals for local government reform as quickly as possible.

Another matter raised was the question of the voting age for local elections. As I indicated at the opening of the Second Stage debate, the Government's attitude is that the people should first be given the opportunity of deciding by referendum on the voting age for national elections. If the people approve of votes at 18 at the autumn referendum, the Oireachtas will be asked to approve a similar reduction for local elections. On this basis, 18 year olds would have the vote at the next local elections.

Were we to accept Deputy O'Donovan's view that a voting age of 18 should be specified in this Bill, it would not give them the vote at 18 one hour earlier because the vote can be exercised only at an election. Much has been made of the fact that if the people decide in favour of votes at 18 it will be necessary to bring in another Bill to reduce the age for local elections. Deputies may not be aware that a Bill will be necessary in any event to make the necessary consequential changes in the Dáil electoral law and the intention would be to include the local elections voting age in that Bill, in other words, to do the two jobs at the one time.

Deputy Esmonde pointed out that there is no guarantee that the people will approve of votes at 18 at the referendum. We on this side of the House have a healthy respect for the will of the people and we do not propose to anticipate their decision on this matter. Had we, for example, tried to anticipate the people's decision on the EEC issue, I am quite sure that there would have been an outcry from the Labour benches. I see no reason why a different standard should be applied in the case of the voting age.

The removal of the property qualification for the local government vote was welcomed generally as was the removal of membership disqualification on the grounds of receipt of general assistance. Deputy Fitzpatrick and Deputy O'Donovan felt that disqualification on the grounds of bankruptcy should be retained but I think they were in the minority on this. I would like to remind the House that the Joint Committee on the Electoral Law which sat in 1960 and 1961 recommended the removal of this disqualification so far as membership of the Dáil is concerned.

Deputies Begley and MacSharry asked for removal of the disqualification on the grounds of failure to pay rates. This particular disqualification is contained in the Local Government Act, 1941. If a person who is a member of a local authority withholds from that authority the money it needs to discharge its duties and to provide the services required by the community, it seems to me only proper that the fitness of that person for membership of the local authority should be called into question. I think this proposition would be generally accepted.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The position then is that he could be bankrupt and owe money to the whole country, but if he paid his rates he would be qualified to sit and if he did not pay his rates he would not be qualified.

Mr. Cunningham

It is up to the people to decide on this issue. If he becomes a candidate they have a say in the matter. A person who is elected to look after the people and who does not contribute to the pool himself is in a different category vis-à-vis the people who elected him.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): He might not have been a bankrupt when he was elected and he might become a bankrupt afterwards and still remain a member for four years.

Mr. Cunningham

The position of part-time firemen was raised. As the law stands anybody who holds any paid office under a local authority is debarred from membership of that authority. On the face of it there seem to be fairly good reasons for this and it would not be difficult to envisage a situation in which there could be a conflict between a person's interest as a public representative and in his private capacity as an employee of the local authority.

I might however mention that a Bill is being prepared to up-date and consolidate the law relating to disqualification for membership of the Oireachtas and of local authorities and the necessity for the retention of each individual disqualification will be examined afresh in the context of this proposed legislation.

Deputy Dowling referred to the position of postmen. The position of employees of State Departments generally is that they are not disqualified by statute from membership of local authorities but under their conditions of employment they may be required to resign their posts when they become candidates for local elections. I understand that postmen and certain other employees of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs are permitted by their conditions of employment to become members of certain authorities but not of others. I would emphasise that the point at issue here is a matter of conditions of employment and not of disqualification for election.

Deputy Treacy inquired about the purpose of school attendance committees. These committees are appointed for the cities of Cork, Dublin, Limerick and Waterford and for the Borough of Dún Laoghaire. They are charged with the enforcement of the School Attendance Act in these areas. In all other areas the enforcing authority is the Garda Síochána.

I think I have dealt with most of the points, but one point was raised by Deputy Fitzpatrick and I am sorry he is not here at the moment.

Mr. Clinton

He is here.

Mr. Cunningham

This point was raised by Deputy Fitzpatrick, Shadow Minister for Local Government. During the debate he said that when it comes to planning appeals there is nothing short of corruption. This is a statement by a Shadow Minister for Local Government, a person who is a solicitor. This type of dishonest statement is unworthy of the Deputy.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I did not get that.

Dr. O'Connell

Would the Parliamentary Secretary repeat that?

Mr. Cunningham

I will. During the debate last week Deputy Fitzpatrick said that when it comes to planning appeals there is nothing short of corruption.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I repeat that and the whole country believes it.

Mr. Cunningham

I would suggest to the Deputy that if he has knowledge of corruption he should know what action to take.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I would suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that he should take the Planning and Appeals Bill, 1969, which has been on the Order Paper since 1969 and which was introduced by Kevin Boland to clean up this corruption——

Mr. Cunningham

He has a duty as a Deputy and as Shadow Minister, and it is within his knowledge as a solicitor what he should do if he has information or knowledge of corruption in planning appeals.

Dr. O'Connell

If there is an appeal to the Minister, is this not open to grave abuse?

Mr. Cunningham

The Deputy said that there is nothing short of corruption.

Dr. O'Connell

It is not open to grave abuse?

Mr. Cunningham

He did not say that. What he said was: "There is nothing short of corruption."

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I invited the Parliamentary Secretary to come down to the town of Cavan and explain two decisions and he did not come.

Mr. Cunningham

I want to make it clear that he is not accusing the local authorities. He is not accusing the planning authorities. He specifically says it is only in the case of planning appeals that there is corruption. In other words he is accusing the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary. He has narrowed it down to two persons.

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 13th June, 1972.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 7 Jun 1972