I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Kieran O'Donnell. It is fortuitous that we have a Limerick man doing this job.
Local Government (Mayor of Limerick) Bill 2023: Second Stage
I leave that up to the Ceann Comhairle's wise viewpoint. The Ceann Comhairle will appreciate if I plead the Fifth Amendment on that.
I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
I see my colleague here from Limerick, Deputy Maurice Quinlivan. I am delighted to have the opportunity to bring the Local Government (Mayor of Limerick) Bill 2023 before the House, which is an historic moment for Limerick and for Ireland.
The purpose of this Bill is to establish the new office of a directly elected mayor for Limerick City and County Council and to provide for the direct election by the public of a person to that office. The Bill provides for the transfer of executive functions currently carried out by the chief executive of Limerick City and County Council to the directly elected mayor, as well as additional functions conferred under the Bill. The Bill provides for structural changes in connection with governance of the area of Limerick City and County Council, in particular in relation to the current roles of cathaoirleach and leas-chathaoirleach of the council and the role of chief executive of the local authority.
This Bill delivers on a programme for Government commitment and reflects the vote, or plebiscite, of the Limerick people. Published last month, the Bill is a key milestone on the way to having the first directly elected mayor in Ireland. This is one of the most significant reforms of local government since the foundation of our State, with Limerick leading the way.
Over the last decade we have already seen a suite of wide-ranging reforms of local government. During that time local government legislation brought about significant reforms in the way local and regional government is organised including more devolved powers to local government; strengthened oversight and governance arrangements, with the primacy of the elected council reinforced, which I believe is very important; a more effective means by which citizens can be involved in the affairs of their local authority; and an improvement in the financial stability and fundraising powers of local authorities, such as through the introduction of the local property tax. The role of councillor has also been put on a more sustainable, viable pathway for anyone who wishes to pursue such a career.
Today we are embarking on another very significant local government reform with this legislation. The Bill provides the mandate, structures and means to deliver on the ambition of the office of the first directly elected mayor of Limerick. It provides a major opportunity for Limerick to forge an enhanced local government. There is huge potential to develop service delivery and accountability locally and to add value for all the people of Limerick.
As Members will be aware, when approving the publication of the Bill, the Government decided that the election of a directly elected mayor of Limerick will be held on the same date as the local and European Union elections in 2024, which will be held in early June 2024. As we look around Europe, we see that directly elected mayors are a feature of local government in many countries. I firmly believe that a directly elected mayor is a natural evolution for local government in Ireland as we now go into the second century of our foundation as a State. In that regard, the Bill will allow plebiscites to be held by other local authorities on the question of whether an office for a directly elected mayor for those administrative areas should be established, and for the electors of those areas to elect a mayor.
I want to elaborate on the main provisions of the Bill. The Bill is divided into seven Parts, with 60 sections and three Schedules.
Part 1 of the Bill covers sections 1 to 7, inclusive, and addresses preliminary and general matters. It contains standard provisions relating to the Title, collective citation, commencement of section, definitions, etc. Section 5 provides for the application of the Local Government Act 2001, the principal Act, in the case of Limerick to be subject to the modifications contained in Schedule 3. I acknowledge that Deputy O'Donoghue from Limerick is also here today.
There is a built-in review mechanism in section 7, which involves a review of the operation of the Act after a three-year period. This will provide an opportunity to examine the office of mayor and make any legislative enhancements necessary, including the assignment of further additional functions to the mayor.
Part 2 of the Bill includes sections 8 to 20 and is one of the substantive Parts of the Bill. This Part deals with the establishment of the new office of the directly elected mayor. The office of directly elected mayor will be established by ministerial order. The mayor of Limerick will be elected by the public and hold office on a full-time basis in line with the local electoral cycle, that is, for a five-year term. A mayor may hold office for two terms.
The mayor will be the executive head of the local authority, with responsibility for mayoral executive functions, which will be most of the executive functions previously carried out by the chief executive, including, at a strategic and policy level, matters such as housing, planning, environmental services, climate and enterprise. When the mayor takes up office, the majority of the functions of the chief executive will be vested in or transferred to the mayor, along with functions, including the representational and civic functions, of the cathaoirleach outside of the council chamber.
The functions in the Local Government Act 2001 set out in Part 1 of Schedule 1 are those that will remain with the príomh-chomhairleoir, formerly the cathaoirleach, who will be the chair of the council or, in international terms, the speaker of the house. Part 2 of Schedule 1 contains those functions that will remain with the director general, formerly the chief executive. Executive functions that will not transfer include those relating to staffing and human resources, the role of Accounting Officer and the administration of schemes and grants as they relate to the individual as well as enforcement.
This Part provides that the mayor shall be an ex officio member of the council with voting rights, and may be questioned by the council in relation to the performance of his or her functions. The mayor will chair the corporate policy group. The mayor may attend and participate at meetings of the municipal district members, but is not a member and does not have voting rights. This Bill provides for the necessary oversight of the mayor by the elected council. It also provides for such matters as eligibility to run for and disqualifications from the office, the resignation of the mayor and the procedure to deal with a vacancy or a temporary absence.
In the case of a vacancy arising, for the period of time until a new mayor is elected at a by-election or at the normal cyclical election, the functions of mayor will be performable by the príomh-chomhairleoir, and the leas-phríomh-chomhairleoir, which is the deputy speaker, shall assume the responsibilities of the office of príomh-chomhairleoir for the duration of that period. Basically, the príomh-chomhairleoir will step into the position of mayor and the leas-phríomh-chomhairleoir will step into the position of príomh-chomhairleoir. This will ensure the roles of chair within the chamber and elected head of the executive are not vested in one individual. In relation to temporary absences in the office of mayor due to maternity leave, illness or a good-faith other reason, the príomh-chomhairleoir, again, will undertake the functions of the mayor during such a temporary absence, with the leas-phríomh-chomhairleoir deputising for the príomh-chomhairleoir.
Programme for Government: Our Shared Future commits to supporting the first directly elected mayor with a financial package to deliver upon his or her mandate. Therefore, importantly, this Part makes legislative provision for the mayor to receive a mayoral budget to support him or her in the performance of his or her functions as set out in the legislation, in particular his or her mayoral programme. The Bill provides legislative underpinning for the mayoral position and salary, which will be equivalent to that of a Minister of State, and for the staffing arrangements for the mayoral office, including the appointment of a special adviser.
Part 3 of the Bill includes sections 21 to 28 and provides for the other structural changes relating to key positions and roles in Limerick City and County Council. The offices of cathaoirleach and leas-chathaoirleach will be abolished and the new offices of príomh-chomhairleoir and leas-phríomh-chomhairleoir, speaker and deputy speaker, will be established as the chairperson and vice-chairperson of the council. The príomh-chomhairleoir and leas-phríomh-chomhairleoir will continue to be elected by the council annually, or when a vacancy occurs in the same way that the cathaoirleach and leas-chathaoirleach are elected at present, as set out in the Local Government Act.
The roles of chief executive and deputy chief executive will become director general and deputy director general. The primary role of the director general will be one of supporting the mayor in his or her role in the effective administration and the general day-to-day operational running of the authority. As mentioned, there are specific executive functions that will remain with the director general, which are set out in Part 2 of Schedule 1 and for which they are accountable to the council. These can be summarised as the administration of schemes, grants and loans, including decisions on applications under enactments for the grant of a permission approval, permit, consent, certificate, licences or other form of statutory authorisation; executive functions relating to staffing matters, including the appointment of staff and the preparation of HR strategies; functions arising from the Accounting Officer role; functions relating to the holding of polls and the management of elections; functions arising from the operation of key schemes and service level agreements, for example, housing assistance payment, HAP, shared services; and compliance and enforcement matters and the taking of legal proceedings arising from these functions.
The Bill also provides that the mayor may delegate any of the executive mayoral functions to the director general, who is accountable to the mayor when performing those functions under the superintendence and control of the mayor. Delegated functions are performable by both the mayor and director general. The mayor may also revoke such a delegation.
Part 4 of the Bill, covering sections 29 to 35, inclusive, contains provisions for new structures at central level and in Limerick City and County Council to support the development of the role of the directly elected mayor. It sets out the new structures and functions of the mayor, separate to those executive functions transferring from the chief executive. These include the establishment of a Limerick mayoral and government consultative forum at ministerial level to facilitate engagement between the mayor and national government, in particular on proposed legislation and Government policy initiatives and the impacts on Limerick. It will be chaired by the Minister and will meet at least twice a year, with attendance from Ministers according to the agenda. The forum can meet as often as necessary in the performance of its functions as agreed by the members. The forum will consider and make recommendations on the future development of the role, including new and additional functions, and funding, for assignment to the mayor. It will also review and advise on how the new structure is operating. This will feed into the review of the legislation mentioned earlier, which is within a three-year period. The new structures and functions of the mayor also include preparation of a mayoral programme for local government in Limerick which sets out the key priority and objectives for the term of office.
The mayor will set up a Limerick mayoral advisory and implementation committee which will assist in the preparation, and support the implementation, of the mayoral programme. The committee will enable the mayor to convene all key stakeholders in Limerick to examine and discuss key issues affecting Limerick City and County Council, including economic, tourism, social and cultural matters, employment, co-ordinating initiatives, services and funding to support rural areas and measures concerning the regeneration of towns. I include agricultural matters in that.
The new structures and functions of the mayor also include the establishment of the Limerick Project Ireland 2040 delivery board, which will focus on implementation of the national planning framework and the national development plan in the Limerick area. The board, led and chaired by the mayor, will support, co-ordinate and monitor the development and regeneration of Limerick under the national planning framework, the national development plan, the county development plan and the Limerick-Shannon metropolitan area strategic plan. The delivery board may establish subgroups as required. One of these subgroups is the Limerick delivery board transport subgroup, which has a specific section in the Bill. It will also be chaired by the mayor and it will have particular focus on transport infrastructure and services in Limerick, collaborating with existing key strategies for the sector, such as the Limerick-Shannon metropolitan area transport strategy.
Government Departments and public bodies will be required under statute to consult the mayor, on request, in relation to national policy or legislation that may impact on Limerick or Limerick City and County Council, as a complement to the consultative forum engagement. In addition to this, the mayor will be a member of the local community development committee, LCDC, and will also be an ex officio member of the Southern Regional Assembly.
Part 5 of the Bill covers sections 36 to 41, inclusive. This Part deals with legislative amendments relating to holding elections for a democratically elected mayor.
It provides for necessary minor consequential amendments to the Electoral Act 1992, which are primarily concerned with making provision for a mayor of Limerick election plebiscites. It also provides for necessary minor consequential amendments to the Electoral Act 1997. It inserts a new Part, comprising 21 sections, into that Act to provide for the limitation of expenditure at a Limerick mayoral election, the reimbursement of election expenditure and the disclosure of both donations and electoral expenses.
Part 6 of the Bill, which includes sections 42 to 50, makes provision to allow a local authority to hold a plebiscite on the topic of directly elected mayor with executive functions for its administrative area. A plebiscite of the electors of an administrative area may be proposed in circumstances where a local authority corporate policy group recommends it and the elected council approves it, a petition is signed by more than 20% of the electorate and the chief executive certifies it, or the Minister directs it. A plebiscite must then be held within 12 months.
Where the outcome of a plebiscite is in favour of a directly elected mayor, the Bill requires the Minister, within two years, to submit a report to the Oireachtas containing proposals for legislative measures to provide for a directly elected mayor of that administrative area. It also provides that prior to the holding of a plebiscite, the Electoral Commission shall arrange to publish and distribute information in relation to the plebiscite proposal for the attention of the electorate.
Sections 51 to 60 contain provisions for a legal mechanism to remove a directly elected mayor. If it is okay with Members, I will use the limited time I have to summarise these sections. First, the council may adopt a proposal to remove the mayor from office, but only on the grounds of misbehaviour or failure to perform functions. This must be signed by at least two thirds of the total number of members and specify the grounds and reasons. To ensure that due consideration is given before initiating this process, an unsuccessful attempt cannot be repeated for a minimum of 12 months. In addition, such a process cannot be initiated within a 12-month period of a new mayor taking office. Furthermore, it is appropriate that the removal meeting is held in public. In order to ensure the removal is the democratic will of the elected council, it is required that at least three quarters of the council support the motion for it to be passed. Two thirds of members must sign to bring a motion, and three quarters of members must approve that motion for removal.
Second, when a removal resolution is passed, the Minister is informed and establishes a three-person independent expert panel to consider the matter. An order for removing the mayor from office may only be made by the Minister if recommended by the panel. If the panel makes a recommendation to remove the mayor, the Minister must consider the matter and decide whether to accept the recommendation. If a Minister decides not to accept the recommendation for removal of the mayor, the Minister must give notice to that effect to the mayor and the council. If the Minister accepts the recommendation and decides to make an order to remove the mayor, this order must be placed before the Houses of the Oireachtas and receive a positive resolution from both Houses before it can be signed into effect.
Schedule 1 to the Bill sets out the provisions which will not transfer to the mayor. It has two Parts. Part 1 lists the sections in the Local Government Act that contain functions currently applicable to local government cathaoirligh that will remain with the príomh-chomhairleoir of Limerick City and County Council. Part 2 lists sections in various Acts, including the Local Government Act, that relate to functions currently applicable to local authority chief executives that will remain with the director general of Limerick City and County Council. As mentioned earlier, executive functions that will not transfer include those relating to staffing and human resources, the role of Accounting Officer and the administration of schemes and grants as they relate to individuals as well as enforcement.
Schedule 2 to the Bill consists of 106 paragraphs and provides for an electoral code for the holding of an election for the position of mayor.
Schedule 3 to the Bill relates to section 5 and provides for the necessary modifications to how certain provisions in the Local Government Act are to be read in relation to Limerick City and County Council following the mayor taking up office. As well as catering for the existence of the mayor and for functions in which both the mayor and director general will have a role, some of the modifications also cater for the change in titles provided.
I will briefly touch on amendments to the Bill, and take the opportunity to outline a number of the amendments. These primarily relate to amendments to give full or further effect to the general scheme of the Bill and to address a number of matters that have arisen in the drafting process.
As outlined already on executive functions and responsibilities, the structure of the Bill provides that when the mayor takes up office they will be responsible for the executive functions. However, there are a range of functions that will be the responsibility of the director general. These functions relate to staffing and human resources, as I have already mentioned. These functions will be listed in Schedule 2 to the Bill. Given the complex and wide-ranging nature of the work involved on a cross-departmental basis to examine the full range of those functions not yet fully reflected in Schedule 1, it will be necessary to bring forward amendments.
Under the Bill, certain persons are not eligible to qualify, such as a member of the Commission of the European Union or a member of An Garda Síochána. Members of the Oireachtas and the European Parliament will be eligible to run for election provided that any such candidate would cease such membership if elected mayor. The necessary amendments to enable persons already involved in political life to run for election will be brought forward.
As mentioned, Part 6 of the Bill contains the provisions necessary to allow any local authority to hold a plebiscite on the topic of directly elected mayor with executive functions for their administrative area.
I look forward to working with Oireachtas colleagues in the coming months to pass this legislation and pave the way for the Limerick mayoral election at the same time as the European and local elections next year. Limerick City and County Council will be unique compared to the other 30 local authorities. Working with councillors and all stakeholders, a directly elected mayor will be a champion for Limerick City and County Council, and will have a place-making role for the county and region. I thank the implementation advisory group, chaired by Tim O’Connor, for its work in producing its comprehensive report. I also thank the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage on their pre-legislative scrutiny report on the legislation. I thank the officials in the Department who have done an incredible amount of work over a sustained period. I want to acknowledge that. I recognise the valuable input of my fellow Members of the Oireachtas, and more particularly the valuable input of the councillors and officials in Limerick City and County Council in developing these provisions. I will continue to engage with them as we move closer to creating the historic office of a directly elected mayor for Limerick. It will be the first in Ireland, with Limerick leading the way as we are doing in hurling at present. I commend the Bill to the House. Go raibh maith agaibh.
I call Deputy Mitchell who is sharing her time with Deputy Quinlivan. Does she have good Limerick connections?
She knows me.
I know Deputy Quinlivan, if that is any use.
This Bill has been a long time in the making. I am happy to see it come to this House four years on from the people of Limerick casting their vote in favour of a directly elected mayor. It is worth noting that even though it passed a plebiscite, many people are still not in favour. They need to be convinced of the merits of the office. I am not sure if this Bill is in line with what people had in mind when they voted for a directly elected mayor, but it is a start. I am not a representative from Limerick, so I will speak to the Bill. My colleague Deputy Quinlivan will speak to the views of the people of Limerick. The office of the mayor for Limerick is the first of its kind, and I hope it is a success. It is an opportunity for us to address the issue of overly centralised governance. I believe that if this is done right, it will only be of benefit to local democracy in Limerick. I welcome that this Bill allows for other local authorities to pursue a directly elected mayor, if the people they represent vote to do so in the future.
People will be watching closely to see if this Bill gives more of a say to the people of Limerick in how their county is run. They will make a call on whether a directly elected mayor is worth pursuing based on the effectiveness of Limerick. I know this is something that has been discussed here in Dublin for more than a decade. That debate resulted in a citizens' assembly for Dublin to look at a directly elected mayor, with local government structures within the four local authorities, and how it might look. We got a detailed report and it gave a good indication of how people feel about local democracy and how it is working for them.
I turn now to the Bill. I welcome that Part 6 paves the way for all local authorities to take this route if the electorate wants it and they vote for it. This Bill has been future-proofed in case another plebiscite passes elsewhere. This is a quite lengthy Bill, but a lot of it seems straightforward. Section 7 is something we see in all Bills passed through this House. It is important that it is in this legislation.
Section 7 provides that the Minister will review how the office of the mayor of Limerick is operating after three years. This is welcome. We would all be naive not to expect that this legislation will have teething problems which will only become clear when it is operational. There are unknowns here because this is the first of its kind. I am not sure two years will be enough time to then implement the review's recommendation. I am not sure if it is even worth tabling an amendment to this section but it might be worth conducting a review after two years in the first term. This can all be teased out on Committee Stage. I would be shocked if any review did not come back with a number of recommendations looking for changes. This could cause a problem in that it might not give us enough time in the subsequent two years to make sure the recommendations are implemented before the next election, which will be in 2029. Maybe it is not really a valid concern but I would welcome the Minister of State's view.
Parts 2 and 3 of the Bill establish the office of the mayor and deal with the knock-on effects on the executive and council. The introduction of a director general, the príomh-chomhairleoir, and the leas-phríomh-chomhairleoir, replaces the old offices of chief executive, cathaoirleach and leas-chathaoirleach. A number of powers will be transferred from the new director general to the mayor, as detailed in the Schedule. The new príomh-chomhairleoir and the leas-phríomh-chomhairleoir are there to address any concerns around vacancies and temporary absences within the office of mayor, with power referring to the príomh-chomhairleoir, unless a by-election is required. I am not sure if the príomh-chomhairleoir will retain the full powers of the office of the mayor or if it would be more of a caretaker role if a vacancy came up. I would appreciate if we could address that as well.
Sections 18 and 19 deal with the staffing of the mayor's office. While it is probably right that the director general has some say here, I believe that the final say must rest with the directly elected mayor. I know these sections allow for the appointment of five council staff but in reality, any incoming mayor is going to opt for a special adviser. This is a point we could tease out further down the line. There are various sections dealing with the multiple forums that the mayor will now have a role on. These forums can only be a good thing, provided that they function properly and they meet regularly with the relevant stakeholders always attending. It is good for Limerick to have a good, strong democratically elected voice at the table. I wonder how much weight that voice will carry. That remains to be seen. I hope the office of mayor will have a significant influence on these forums. We have seen time and time again across various sectors that people are given a place at the top table and still their voices are ignored. I think this aspect of the Bill will need to function well if the office is to become a successful model for other local authorities to follow.
The Minister has been briefing elected representatives from Limerick that the office of the mayor will have an annual budget of approximately €8 million, which will be allocated through a public estimate process. Unfortunately we have yet to receive any more detail on what that breakdown is going to look like. Is it a first-year commitment or an annual commitment? Is it going to be from current spending, capital spending or a combination of the two? I know that is getting into the finer details but any candidates who are considering running for office next June will need to know exactly how much money is available. They need to be able to produce manifestos and campaign on them.
The Bill is a step in the right direction. The first five years of this office will probably determine the success of this model and shape the opinion of other local authorities considering a change in how democracy is delivered. Some people will see this as a radical reform of local government. Others will probably see it as tinkering around the edges. I believe it is a worthwhile attempt to make politics more local and relevant, especially to the people of Limerick and in other authorities that may go down this road in the future.
Whatever way we look at this, it is a historic day for Limerick as this Bill is progressing. At the start, the Minister of State rightly thanked Tim O'Connor and the implementation advisory group for their report as well as the Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage for its report. I wish a lot of the recommendations in both of those reports were included in this Bill but unfortunately they have not been.
I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. For myself and the people of Limerick it is an extremely important matter that has for far too long been put on the long finger by the Government. Unfortunately, as the Bill stands it falls short of a meaningful change of local government. As I see it, it offers us a ceremonial mayoral role as opposed to a position with meaningful powers and influence. It certainly is not a beacon of progress that other local authorities will wish to aspire to. It has the hallmarks of the County and City Management Association all over it and has destroyed the potential of a truly democratically elected local mayor of Limerick with devolved responsibilities, someone who would have made a change for the better. As we start, it is one-nil to the County and City Management Association.
In January 2022, the then Minister of State, Deputy Peter Burke, said that this is about giving the role a lot of powers and creating the best possible template for other local authorities if they want to replicate it. He said that if we are serious about devolving power, this is the way. In fairness, who will rush to replicate this version of a democratically elected mayor? An Taoiseach, Deputy Varadkar, in a response to myself, noted that there is some bureaucratic resistance from certain departments when it comes to the delegation and devolution of functions and unfortunately we have seen that. The role does not seem to have a lot of power so it seems that those certain departments won out and an opportunity for a seismic shift from centralised power has been squandered.
The people of Limerick voted to establish a directly elected mayor for Limerick city council on 24 May 2019. Here we are in September 2023, four years later, discussing the Bill on Second Stage. This is far too long a gap and the continuous delay has dampened the original appetite for this legislation. Before the first mayor of this office has been elected, we face a challenge in ensuring the level of public interest in the establishment of the office and the election of someone to it. I remind the Minister of State that a similar plebiscite was held in Waterford and Cork and the proposition was defeated in both counties. In Limerick, it narrowly passed and I fear the Government's lethargic approach to this matter has further damaged the will needed to ensure there is a reasonable turn-out for the first election. I emphasise the need for public engagement on this issue.
Considering the timeline, the Government has moved at a glacial pace. The Government approved the general scheme on 20 April 2021. The then Minister of State, Deputy Peter Burke, said in early July 2022 that the drafting of the Bill was at an advanced stage and that publication had been identified as a priority. In March 2023 the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, said it would be ready for April and we saw the Bill introduced towards the end of summer. Who has been pushing back and where has the resistance come from?
As for the Bill itself, we welcome the legislation broadly but there are some critical points that the Bill has either failed to address or has fudged to such a degree that the role originally proposed to the people of Limerick is not reflected in what is contained in the Bill. Sinn Féin will be submitting amendments. In the time remaining to me, I will outline some of my and my party's concerns about this legislation.
First, I contend that there is no meaningful devolution of powers from central government to the office of a directly elected mayor of Limerick. Following the decision of Limerick voters, an implementation advisory group, IAG, which the Minister of State mentioned, was commissioned. Public consultation was greatly restricted by the onset of the Covid pandemic, as we all remember. However, they received 927 responses and produced a worthy report which considered proposals regarding the establishment of a directly elected mayor for Limerick. Sinn Féin was the only party to make a submission to this group. In its document, the IAG noted that international experience points to devolution going hand in hand with the creation of mayoral offices with increased State investment being provided as an incentive. The IAG made a number of suggestions around devolved functions from central government. Very few if any are contained in the Bill in its current form. The legislation in its current form definitively specifies only the powers of the current cathaoirleach and chief executive, saying a sensible few be transferred to the mayor. There is scant detail on the devolution of necessary powers from central government to the mayor in the realms of transport, waste management, the public realm or tourism. Having read the Bill closely a number of times, I struggle to see where any of these new devolved powers are. The IAG in its report recommended that the directly elected mayor should be empowered to commission a major programme of housing provision, building on the Housing for All proposals by the Government. This was dropped. The IAG also proposed that the directly elected mayor would have a right in law to be consulted on all matters relating to Garda resourcing in Limerick city and county, in particular on any special expert forum established in respect of antisocial behaviour.
This is absent from the Bill. I recognise the establishment of a Limerick mayor and the Government's consultative forum as a positive, but more power should have been devolved to the new mayoral role at the outset. I appreciate that the consultative forum has the potential to make recommendations to the Minister regarding the conferral of such additional functions on the mayor as it considers necessary, but there is no expectation set in the Bill that he or she will have to seriously consider any such recommendations.
More devolved powers should be specifically specified in the Bill. We want Limerick to be the reference point for other areas throughout the State where the establishment of a directly elected mayor is a feasible possibility. For instance, the power to acquire land is absent from the proposed powers. This would be an important function to give the mayor real power. Additionally, there is nothing to show the mayor as an advocate for workers' rights. Without additional powers, other areas will rightly see the role in Limerick as a fundamentally ceremonial one. Unfortunately, with such limited powers, I cannot see other areas looking for it, so perhaps the city and county managers did get their wish.
The Limerick regeneration projects were launched in 2008. The regeneration of certain areas of Limerick was long overdue. The ambitions of the 2008 plan were prompted by an horrific attack on two young children. It followed a particularly fraught time for Limerick when several murders occurred during an inter-gang feud across the city. There were three aspects to the regeneration of the areas: social, economic and physical. Thankfully, the worst of the violence is behind us and, in its absence, many of the areas impacted have flourished and now have thriving communities, but due to cuts in funding and a failure to deliver on the ambitions of the original plan, there remains a need for a continued focus on these areas.
The remit of the Limerick regeneration framework implementation plan that was developed expires this year. While the regeneration has failed in many aspects, there are other aspects we could count as success. The implementation plan is key to that. The decade-long remit concludes this year and the implementation group argue that any successive plan should have been established under the devolved power of a directly elected mayor. Unfortunately, there is no mention of the Limerick regeneration programme in the Bill or the establishment of a successor plan being devolved to an elected mayor. The authors of the Bill have missed a step here. A new plan and the devolution of control of it should have been included. While great progress has been made on many aspects, there remains marginalisation and despondency in some regeneration areas. The regeneration plan remains a key tool in improving these communities, providing resources to them, and ensuring that the progress made over the past 13 years is not stymied.
One of the items we highlighted in the Sinn Féin submission to the pre-legislative scrutiny was that the mayoral role should set a good example to employers in the region and have an ambassadorial role in respect of paying employees a living wage and introducing just transition initiatives. While paying employees will remain the remit of the council, it is disappointing that the Bill makes no mention of such an ambassadorial role and is entirely devoid of any reference to just transition initiatives.
One final area of the Bill that I would like to briefly touch on is the establishment of the Limerick mayoral advisory and implementation committee. The early establishment of such a committee is necessary and welcome. I am supportive of the eight functions of the committee as listed. However, I have some concerns regarding the make-up of the committee. In the proposal, the committee will consist of the mayor, members of the council appointed by the mayor, as the mayor considers appropriate, and other such persons nominated by nominating bodies appointed by the mayor, as the mayor considers appropriate. I have concerns about the powers of appointment to the committee vested in the mayor, as it has the potential to become a non-critical chamber that simply rubber-stamps the mayor's position on any matter. That cannot be good for anybody.
What we are discussing today falls short of the dynamic change and approach to local government that people in Limerick were expecting. We will table amendments to the Bill on Report Stage. It is disappointing that we have such a diluted version of what we had hoped for in empowering local government. However, I reiterate that we welcome the Bill. We believe it is an historic start. I think the Minister has got it wrong, but we can fix it. If the Bill goes ahead, we can amend it later and we can review it in two or three years as well.
We in the Labour Party welcome the opportunity to debate this Bill. In particular, I thank the local Labour Party organisation in Limerick for its input on the Bill, especially my colleagues in Limerick, councillors Conor Sheehan, Elena Secas and Joe Leddin, who have provided me with a very important input and observations on this topic. As the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, will be well aware, the Labour Party has a long history and a proud tradition in Limerick. I think of our wonderful former representatives such as Jan O'Sullivan, who remains very actively engaged in local politics, and the late Jim Kemmy, who had such a powerful influence on national and local politics.
I want to speak broadly in support of the principle of directly elected mayors and to welcome the fact that the Bill will finally bring that about, albeit very late in the day and just in respect of one city, namely, Limerick. What we should be seeing, which is long overdue, is a more comprehensive system of the reform of local government to ensure real and substantial devolution or decentralisation of power to local government. I think in particular of Dublin, our capital city. I know a great deal of work has been done in the citizens' assembly and so on, but we do need to see more swift movement towards a directly elected mayor for Dublin. My constituency colleague, Councillor Dermot Lacey, has long been a very powerful advocate for a directly elected mayor for Dublin. We are all aware that much of our system of local government remains largely unchanged from the 19th century. It remains very centralised and very much based on an outdated British model of governance. It is ironic, therefore, that in Britain we have seen cities such as London, Manchester and Liverpool move towards much greater devolution of power to a directly elected metropolitan mayor. This time last year I attended the British Labour Party conference in Liverpool. While there, I caught up with Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester. There is an example of a mayor who has really used the role of metropolitan mayor of Manchester to become a very influential advocate for regional development. His work has led to great improvements, not only in his own city, but is more generally seen as a model for other cities and urban areas. That system of devolved power, which includes mayors like Sadiq Khan in London, contrasts starkly with the very disempowered position of mayor here in Ireland. Currently, mayors such as the Dublin mayor, remain largely ceremonial roles, with only a one-year mandate, and they are not directly elected. That has led to a democratic deficit and a lack of co-ordinated thinking across our urban centres. Dynamic cities like Dublin, but also Cork, Galway, Waterford and Limerick, are hampered in competing on an international stage with other cities. We all acknowledge that the lack of a more substantial position of metropolitan mayor has contributed to that. We do need to see local government in Ireland brought more into line with local governments in other jurisdictions where we have got really meaningful systems of accountability across local authorities with elected representatives responsible for the implementation of policies that make a difference in people's lives such as on education, local healthcare and so on. It is unfortunate that currently councillors have such few and limited powers. We believe that this Bill should be the start of a process where we see wider reform of local government and proper rebalancing of powers between councillors and their executive, with expanded reserved powers for councillors. It would appear that there is still some reticence from the Custom House to accede to that rebalancing that is really so necessary to ensure proper accountability. This is not about placing power in the hands of councillors for its own sake; this is about democratic accountability and elected representatives who are accountable to residents in local areas who vote for them. It is about democracy at its most local level.
Before turning to the Bill itself, I want to speak about the current state of play as it relates to the balance of powers between the mayor and executive in local authorities. As we are all aware, at present responsibilities at council level are divided into two areas: reserved functions for elected councillors and executive functions that are essentially in the hands of the chief executive, who in reality has become an all-powerful figure in all local authorities. Broadly speaking, policy decisions are still made by resolutions of the elected councillors. Reserved functions include the passing of annual budgets, housing policy decisions, making development plans and policies on environmental protection. In reality, the duty of the chief executive to perform executive functions and to advise and assist the elected council has assumed much greater significance than it perhaps looks on paper. The chair of the council, the mayor or cathaoirleach, elected by councillors, has functions in relation to chairing plenary meetings and strategic policy committees but the primary function remains somewhat ceremonial in most councils. This Bill attempts to carve out a role for the mayor, which it seems will lie somewhere between the elected council and the chief executive. It is a new division of responsibility.
When the general scheme was first drafted, it was very much in general terms and it was not clear what territory between the elected council's policy function and the decision-making function of the chief executive, now to be the director general, would be marked out for the mayor to occupy. The Bill, while it differs from the general scheme, seems to attempt to achieve the same objective, but there is still a lack of clarity as to what precisely that territory will be for the directly elected mayor. That is the critical point. As Conor Sheehan, our councillor in Limerick, pointed out in an editorial on this topic last year the concern is that under legislation which does not provide a real and substantive role for a directly elected mayor, the directly elected mayor could amount to little more than a well-remunerated chauffeured lobbyist. That is the concern. The Minister will appreciate that.
The Bill replaces the mayor, CEO and cathaoirleach with a directly elected mayor, which is the biggest new change. We will also see the replacement of a CEO with the director general and a new chair, called a príomh chomhairleoir, to be elected by the council. Presumably, relations between this new first councillor and the mayor will depend on electoral outcomes and party political considerations. One could envisage somewhat of a power battle might go on in practice. The directly elected mayor would attend, speak and vote at council meetings, and attend and speak at district meetings. Questions to the mayor can be tabled in that way. The mayor would inherit some functions of what is currently the cathaoirleach, apart from presiding at plenary meetings and chairing the corporate policy group. The mayor will also inherit all functions of the previous CEO, apart from the Schedule list. Of course, that is critical.
The mayor could, it seems, delegate in writing the performance of some functions to the director general and delegated functions would then be performed by the director general, subject to the general superintendence and control of the mayor and any conditions or restrictions in writing. Instead of a broadly phrased exemption covering, for example, the administration of schemes, grants and loans, as in the general scheme, the Bill has a Schedule of specific sections of particular Acts where functions are confirmed that will remain with the director general. Broadly, it seems to us that the exclusions relate to housing, planning and waste.
Internal financial borrowing and banking functions, account keeping and responsibility for staffing matters will also be excluded from the mayor's remit. For example, it would remain the function of the director general to act as housing authority regarding all housing services, including social and affordable housing, shared ownership, grants, subsidies, loans, homelessness, management and the control of local authority housing. That is still a very broad range of functions for the director general.
It seems the council will continue to elect its own chair and the new mayor, as I have said, will attend, vote and be subject to the policy remit of the council. When we look at the detail of this, it seems that the council will, in effect, have two executive offices. The Minister of State may have a view and like to come back on that. The boundary between those two offices, just like the boundaries between the new directly elected mayor and the councillors, may depend on how things bed down in practice. Again, it is hard to see clarity on how this will roll out.
In particular, the boundary between the two executive officers will depend on a case-by-case scrutiny of the 200 or so references in the Schedule to functions that have not transferred and will, therefore, remain with the director general. In summary, it is difficult to see how this will work in practice. There is perhaps a lack of detail. I accept some detail will have to be worked out. This is the first directly elected mayor of its kind, but the territory for the directly elected mayor will be difficult to map out for that person, whoever is elected. The person will have two people snapping at their heels, namely the CEO, now to be the director general, and those staff on the one hand and on the other the directly elected councillors and their indirectly elected cathaoirleach or first counsellor, as the person will now be called. Our concerns, therefore, are first about how this new directly elected mayor will map out the territory between these two different entities. It will be difficult for that individual.
We are concerned that the Bill cannot be said to have taken on board the substance of much of the recommendations that were made in response to the general scheme. We accept that there are some measures, such as the establishment of a mayoral and government consultative forum and the provision for a mayoral programme that will be equivalent to a programme for Government, which are welcome. We welcome the advisory and implementation committee. Of course, Limerick will have its Project Ireland 2040 delivery board, including a transport subgroup. However, there is a lack of clarity on the terms of reference of the delivery board.
It seems that the Government has failed to incorporate the additional powers recommended by the implementation advisory group, IAG. It seems that the Bill is much more focused on running the election and more technical details around the election of the mayor, amendments to existing legislation to account for the mayor and other administrative changes in proposals. As I said, we would like to hear from the Minister of State about the substantive powers to be attributed to the new directly elected mayor and the reasons why recommendations from the IAG, councillors and civil society have not been implemented more fully.
I have been asked to seek clarification on the Government's thinking of the timing of the mayoral elections. Various local groups have sought information on the rationale for not holding the local and mayoral elections as a stand-alone separate events. What is the thinking around putting them together?
I am conscious that a lot of the detailed debate will have to take place on Committee and Report Stages because there is so little in the Bill on the mayor's powers that it is hard to give robust feedback. We would like to hear from the Minister of State about issues such as staffing. Will the new mayor be able to appoint his or her own staff, apart from the special adviser that is provided for, or will staff be assigned? That information would be very important in practice for the functioning of the mayor.
Does the Minister of State envisage problems where there is conflict, such as where the annual budget prepared by the director general will not reflect the priorities of the directly elected mayor? How will that be worked out? Again, the Minister of State might like to address that. Without greater powers over the budget, will we see the same lack of direction that already tends to exist at local authority level? What role will other organisations have, in addition to Limerick City and County Council, in making representations to the Limerick mayoral and government consultative forum?
Of course, it does not need to be said, but I should have said at the outset that Limerick is rich with wonderful civil society and business and workers' organisations. I thank Limerick Chamber of Commerce and the Limerick Council of Trade Unions, with which I have engaged, because there is a huge wealth of knowledge, expertise and experience among the members of those bodies and so many more. Given that we have waited so long for this Bill, why the silence on the powers? Why the significant divergence from what was recommended by the IAG? Limerick Chamber of Commerce and others have raised these concerns.
We will reserve the right to bring forward amendments to the Bill on Committee Stage, but we look forward to the response of the Minister of State on Second Stage. When people in Limerick voted to take back control and ensure a more closely democratically elected civic leader for their city, they did not vote for ambiguity or half measures. At the most basic level, they voted for a meaningful office and directly elected mayor who would have real power to implement change and an office that would take back power that national government has accumulated over many years, harking back to the old British model of centralised governance.
We are concerned that the Custom House appears unwilling to cede substantive power and influence to the directly elected mayor, yet the people of Limerick were promised the ability and resources to deliver their local services and infrastructure. We are concerned that the current proposals do not give the directly elected mayor sufficient power to do this. A failure to fulfil the expectation that people now have in Limerick would amount to a kind of disrespect to the people who voted in good faith to have a directly elected mayor.
Let us not forget that vote, and I know the Minister of State will not forget this, was in 2019 so people in Limerick might well have expected to see the implementation of that vote sooner. It is unfortunate that it has taken so long.
I reiterate that we would like to see a package of reforms so that this would only be the first step in a series of reforms to give directly elected councillors more meaningful power. I make a particular appeal for the city of Dublin in which my constituency lies. Our capital city should also have the sort of metropolitan mayor we have seen rolled out so successfully in our neighbouring jurisdiction of Great Britain. I hope we will see Limerick become a good litmus test and a good model for other cities in Ireland to follow.
I welcome the Bill and the Minister of State's contribution. It is an opportunity for fundamental and real change in local government not just in Limerick. If it is effective and works very well, it could transform communities around the country. The golden opportunity is for the mayoral programme. When a person stands for election, and I presume there will be lots of different candidates, each person will have his or her own programme, supporters and opposition. It will lead to a new dynamic. I presume it is the same in Limerick as it is in Drogheda in that there are lots of different views on what should and should not happen but at the moment, councillors in Drogheda do not have the power and influence to make the changes they want to make. For example, they need the Government to make changes such as making Drogheda a city, having a new metropolitan area in the Drogheda-east Meath area and having tangible change in their community. The Minister of State will meet with Drogheda City Status in the near future and we hope to establish changes there.
The mayoral programme is at the heart of this. I cannot think of a more democratic and exciting opportunity for the people of Limerick or any other town like Drogheda to make the changes they want, to pick the person they want and to have a lively debate not just in chamber but also have a constructive tension between the administrative professionals such as the chief executive and staff and elected representatives because there is an imbalance there. I will not personalise it but there are significant differences of opinion in my county between what the executive wants and what the councillors want and the problem is that what the councillors want is not happening. I believe this is a fundamental way to bring about this change.
I will provide a bit of history. The first county manager was the county manager of Cork under the Cork City Management Bill 1929. The Minister of State will be delighted to hear that the person who got that position was a seven-times mayor of Drogheda named Philip Monahan. He was a somewhat paternalistic administrator who made some very difficult decisions and he was a man of his time. He was also rare in politics at that time in being a friend of de Valera and Michael Collins. He took part in the 1916 Rising and was interned at Frongoch with them. The funny thing was that he had a row and stood his ground with de Valera and Collins. The Minister of State will be even more delighted to hear as a Fine Gael man that he threw some cold water on de Valera. That did not affect his future prospects. When de Valera took over, he continued in his place. I have said this because there have been some rather exciting people in local government. While Philip Monahan was a man for his season, it was very interesting because at that time, the councils were abusing their power, the Civil War was happening and there was lots of conflict and it needed a strong hand. Philip Monahan was so strong that he remained manager for 35 years so he ran his own ship.
Local government has run its own ship for too long. Notwithstanding the excellent professional administrators there, we need the councillors to be in charge and we need the mayor to have the mandate to bring about change and to have the confidence and power with consultation. The Bill is significant in that it involves an advisory and implementation committee to advise the mayor. The Minister of State very wisely said that the sub-committees may be dissolved at any time by the mayor if he or she does not like them. It is all about consultation. It will be a really exciting time that I look forward to.
We need checks and balances in local government. The reforms in the past were wrong. The abolition of a lot of councils was wrong and it is time to reverse that. It is time for a town such as Drogheda, which straddles Louth and Meath, to have its own city council, to be in charge of its own future and to have its own metropolitan area. The problem is that this metropolitan area includes counties Louth and Meath and this will require the consent of Meath and Louth county councils - something that will probably be very difficult to manage.
The Minister of State is in the right place, is from the right city and is doing the right job. He will have a really exciting time ahead of him. Perhaps he will reflect on what local government reform is now needed and how he makes sure that power is returned to elected members, which is at the heart of the legislation.
I agree with Deputy Bacik on the need for the city of Dublin to have its directly elected mayor. Why would it not have its own mayor elected by the people to speak for them? Let us remember that a county manager or CEO cannot be sacked but a mayor can be. That is accountability. Let us give them the power to make the decisions and give the people the power to kick them out if they are not happy with them. This is at the heart of democracy and this is where we are losing out in our local government administration. We go from crisis to crisis in local government. Much of the work of local government is about what edicts are coming from Government, the power the Minister has and the power the council and its elected members do not have. This can radically change that. I have no doubt that the people of Limerick will have lots of different choices to make, lots of exciting proposals and lots of people who will upset the political and administrative establishment and more power to them because that is what is needed not just in Limerick but in many other places. I am speaking in an administrative capacity. I am really hopeful for the future. This is an excellent Bill. It will no doubt be amended in committee but I am very supportive of it.
Most people here are in relative support of the idea of a directly elected mayor for Limerick. A number of my colleagues and others across the House have spoken about the fact that this Bill will require amendment. Everyone who has spoken about how when talking to councillors from their own party, other parties or none, particularly long-serving councillors, they will talk about their lack of power. We know the issue regarding the powers of the executive and the reserve powers of councillors and that this does not deliver for the people.
Others have spoken about the fact that we lost many borough and town councils in 2014. Up to then, we had at least governmental units of organisation and administration that could address specific needs of these towns but beyond that, we also had greater resources alongside powers for the executive and councillors. We must look at how we operate local government. I can come in here and give out when I disagree with something. As others have said, there can be significant disagreements between councillors and the executive. Usually the executive wins, which can be a significant problem. We will all go out and attempt to get as many councillors elected as possible. When I was a councillor, I used to think about how few powers I had. We all know the history of this State. We know there were particular issues around planning but at this stage, we all know when we deal with planning issues as elected representatives of any sort, we are operating on a wing and a prayer as to whether a planner will talk to us. We know how the rules and regulations operate.
As much as we want to see an elected mayor of Limerick, Dublin and other places, we need to make sure that the resourcing and the powers are in place and we need to address the democratic deficit across the board. There is nobody in here, particularly anyone who has ever sat on a council in later years, who is going to disagree with me on that. It is an issue that has to be addressed as soon as possible. I might have particular issues as to how housing adaptation grants are operated and I know that is being reviewed at a local council level. I have spoken to the Minister and am aware of the fact that it needs to be reviewed at a governmental level also in relation to delivery. However, it will also mean money is where the mouth is so that we can deliver for people, some in really bad circumstances. We all welcome the fact that joint policing committees are going to be subsumed into community safety partnerships. We like to think there would be greater powers there. We all know the multi-agency scenario that is needed. I put on record again, as I mentioned earlier, that in Louth it does not make any sense. The justice and policing committees, JPCs, will be writing to both the Minister and to the Garda Commissioner asking that Louth would be subsumed into a three-county model alongside Cavan and Monaghan. If it was not good enough for Donegal and the Sligo-Leitrim division, it is not good enough for Louth, particularly with the big towns and the huge crime stats that need to be dealt with.
I welcome this Bill and that we finally have it at this Stage. I know a lot of work has gone into it and there are improvements from the general scheme. I want to acknowledge that and say that it is moving in the right direction. With that said, it needs to go a lot further. Fundamentally, one of the reasons the Social Democrats and I are most interested in directly elected mayors is because of how that role can strengthen local democracy. Fundamentally, what this Bill does as it is currently written is to transfer a number of the existing powers in local government to a directly elected mayor in Limerick. In itself, some of that is worthwhile but this really should be an opportunity to strengthen local government. When we read the excellent report done on this by the Library and Research Service, the thing that stands out is the table it produced showing where Ireland sits among OECD countries in terms of the strength of local government, autonomy and local decision-making. We are the third lowest country in the OECD when it comes to local government autonomy and decision-making. Malta is the second lowest. Malta and Belarus are the only countries worse than us. Being just above Belarus in terms of local government decision-making and autonomy is an appalling situation for us to be in. There are countries on that list that in democratic terms are not as strong as Ireland at all, but which in decision-making and autonomy do much better. This should be an opportunity to strengthen and to devolve more powers to local government. I appreciate that can be done in time and we all hope this will evolve if it gets established. I appreciate these things do not happen straight away but I think the Bill could be much more ambitious. A directly elected mayor for Limerick needs to have significant power. The entire point of having a directly elected mayor is that the decisions of the person who is elected should mean something because he or she has the mandate to make changes in people's lives. If not, we are then effectively potentially adding what has been described by others as a highly paid lobbyist or advocate for Limerick to a system that already exists, rather than adequate powers. Budgetary powers are important as well. There are not sufficient additional budgetary powers in the Bill.
One of the areas in which we feel strongly there needs to be more power for a directly elected mayor is in transport policy. There is movement in that area from the general scheme. I recognise that. I do not think there is enough movement of course. We have the beginnings of the directly elected mayor having input in and implementation of national policy. That is tricky. Obviously, a directly elected mayor and local government has to interact with national policy and cannot be aloof from national policy. I acknowledge that getting the balance right on that is difficult but it is an area which needs to be strengthened.
There is an ultimate prize in terms of getting this right and getting powers in local government right. We in the Social Democrats do not want a stronger local government just for the sake of it. Why do we want it? We want it because if we look at different European countries that have really good public services and which are doing much better than us in areas like childcare and a range of different services, they are delivering those public services through strong local government. In fact, it is very hard to pick out an example in the world where there is really good strong public services that really impact on people's lives and which are not delivered through strong local government. Therefore, a directly elected mayor in Limerick and indeed in other parts of Ireland - this will be the model - should be part of a stronger local government delivering public services that make a difference in people's lives. That is the prize we should ultimately be after here. It is not more power for local government for the sake of it; it is because local government has been starved of resources, powers and ultimately relevancy in Ireland. That is part of the reason we are behind even though we are an economically well-off country. This is one of the reasons we are behind other countries in delivering the kind of public services that make a difference in people's lives.
Anyone who has direct experience of local government, especially as a locally elected councillor, will be very aware of how the chief executives, formerly the county managers, can be very dominant in the system. Often elected representatives do not challenge them or hold them to account enough. One of the features we need to be looking at very carefully in this Bill is what the ability of a directly elected mayor with a mandate from the people is vis-à-vis the chief executive. If the power balance there is not correct in favour of the democratic mandate, we will see directly elected mayors who still have the advantage of a direct mandate and a five-year term, which the current mayors or cathaoirligh do not have, but who will be at a disadvantage if they do not have that formal ability and roles in the legislation. One key area of the Bill states that the directly elected mayor can appoint five staff members, one of whom, the advisor, the mayor has control over. However, the other four are within the remit of the chief executive in terms of how they are allocated. I will not name any specifics around this but I have certainly seen in some local authorities when small numbers of staff are assigned to mayors or cathaoirligh, it is certainly seen as being within the gift of the chief executives to assign staff who would have a lot of clout and influence within the organisation or to do the exact opposite. Having that power with the director general is problematic. We are only talking about a small complement of that kind of direct staff in the directly elected mayor's office. I would not necessarily say that should be made bigger or anything but if they do not have control over that, it could be problematic. Some chief executives may well not exercise those powers in a way that undermines the office but the fact that some might, and some would have the ability to, is problematic.
I mentioned transport policy; there is obviously a huge role there. A directly elected mayor in Limerick could also play a greater role in promoting a safer city and county and in making public spaces safer and more accessible for everyone. There is also a lot that could be done on leadership, age-friendly strategies, promoting cultural diversity, youth programmes, public art programmes and cultural events. I do not see anything prohibiting that. Obviously, the mayor's programme can encompass all of these things but those are areas that perhaps could be strengthened in the Bill as well, as could the mayor's role in providing leadership and co-ordinating actions amongst agencies to meet climate targets and indeed climate adaptation. The whole role of the night-time economy and night-time mayors also needs to be considered in more detail in the Bill.
In terms of the key recommendations of the pre-legislative scrutiny report, I want to highlight a few that have not been properly incorporated into the Bill. Recommendation 2 concerns having specific powers around transport, planning, health, climate adaptation and mitigation measures, housing and regeneration strategies. It is fair enough if the Government did not want to go the full length on that recommendation but, at least, more serious consideration should be given to a number of those.
Recommendation 4 concerns the mayor having the power to convene meetings of the forum with central Government, which is dealt with at sections 30 and 35 of the Bill. I have a fear that this could lead to a situation where the mayor does not have the ability to convene-----
I will go through that. Within that section, there automatically will be two meetings a year and it is then up to any of the members, including the mayor. I was quite deliberate on that.
I thank the Minister of State for the clarification. It is important that people are not just going through the motions or that they are in just a few times a year. That is useful.
I have talked about recommendation 8, which concerns the mayor having the power to select and appoint members of staff to their office. Recommendation 9 refers to sanctions or removal of the director general in the event of underperformance or, indeed, inhibiting the role of the directly elected mayor. That is a very important recommendation. While it varies across the country, it is not unusual for chief executives in local authorities, in many situations, to refuse to do as councillors are requesting or directing. There can absolutely be legitimate reasons for that but there can also be times when it is not legitimate.
Recommendation 10 suggests a directly elected mayor will be able to reassign responsibilities of directors of services. This is a very important recommendation. In terms of what priorities a local authority has and what areas it prioritises, how the directors of services are aligned and what areas of responsibility they have will be very important to the direction of a local authority. A directly elected mayor may have a mandate from the people to make sure economic development is key in that local authority and if there is not a director of services for economic development, it will be very hard for the mayor to progress that. For example, another local authority recently switched to having a director of services in the specific area of active travel because the local authority wanted to make it a real priority. If someone runs for election and says he or she is going to be all about active travel and that is going to be his or her main priority, how do such people execute that if they are not able to say, “I want to have a director of services for active travel and I want to be able to work with them and with the Department on that area”? They can put it in the plan and all the rest but the directly elected mayor is going to have difficulties if the executive is not with him or her on this.
I also make the point that we need to beef up the executive authority of the mayor and make it closer to the 2019 report on the vision of the role. With regard to the mayor’s control over the director general in specific policy spaces, including powers to fire an underperforming director general, if necessary, so a director general cannot ignore a mayor and what the people have voted for, that area needs more work.
I want to highlight a few other areas on which I may bring forward amendments. With regard to the delegation of functions of the mayor to the director general under section 27, I think this could be questionable. Given the limited powers that a directly elected mayor has, except in very limited circumstances, why would a mayor be delegating those back to the director general? I wonder about that.
On the issue of the removal of the mayor, I question whether the thresholds are very high in practice. Part 5 of the Bill, under head 107, deals with reimbursement of election spend for candidates who receive 25% of a quota. Given this is a single-seat constituency, I would argue that is a very high threshold. It is the norm in multi-seat constituencies but the effect in a single-seat constituency is that it is very high. If it means reimbursement only for the most successful candidates with the biggest backing and excludes everyone else, that is problematic. It is certainly not the equivalent of what we have in multi-seat constituencies and the percentage would be much lower if we were to do it as an equivalent for multi-seat constituencies.
Part 6 deals with plebiscites for other local authorities to decide on whether they have a directly elected mayor. There are three methods for this, that is, through the Minister, through a petition or by having it initiated with a report from the corporate policy group. I question why the full council cannot initiate the process. One could read the legislation and say the full council is not prohibited from doing that. However, the fact that it states that the corporate policy group will prepare a report and bring it to the full council could also be interpreted as meaning that the full council cannot pass a resolution saying it wants the report to be brought. If a majority of the full council wants to initiate the process, it should be able to do so. That should be explicit in the legislation rather than a view arising that the full council cannot do that and that only the corporate policy group can do it. While the corporate policy group is broadly representative, it is not always fully representative of the full council.
On the petition, it is great that a petition method is included and I do not think the threshold should be low but a requirement of 20% of the electorate is almost impossible. If we think about how to gather that, you would need to knock on the door of every household in the entire local authority area. You would probably get an answer rate of about one in five and then, at every door that opens, all of them would want to say “Yes”. To actually get 20%, you would need to knock at every household in the local authority area twice to achieve it. We all know from our own experience in elections, in rural areas and all the rest, how difficult it is to get to some houses. That is probably an impossible task. While I am not asking for a low threshold and it should be high, when we think about the practicalities, 20% is probably impossible.
It says something that the very first debate of the new term of this Oireachtas is this Second Stage debate on the legislation for a directly elected mayor for Limerick. It says that this Government intends to get the legislation onto the statute books and hold an election for mayor of Limerick in June of next year, as the Minister of State, Deputy O’Donnell, confirmed in his opening statement. I thank the Minister of State for his efforts in bringing this draft Bill to this point. I have no doubt that as a Limerick man and as an elected representative of Limerick city, it is a matter of pride that he is the Minister of State entrusted with delivering what is, in my view, the most important reform of local government in Ireland since the foundation of the State. Notwithstanding his stellar career to date in public service, which I expect to continue long into the future, I expect that this legislation will have his name on it and will form no small part of his own political legacy.
I pay tribute to his predecessors as Minister of State, Deputy Peter Burke and, in particular, Deputy John Paul Phelan, who, perhaps more than any other, was the architect of this reform when he held that ministerial portfolio. There is a joke in there about a Kilkenny man spearheading this reform of local government in Limerick.
It is also important to acknowledge the great work of Tim O'Connor, the chair of the implementation advisory group, and to thank all members of the group. It was made up of a cross-section of politicians, other stakeholders and officials from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. I had the privilege of sitting on the IAG for a short time and I saw at first hand the calibre and dedication of those officials. They are also to be commended today.
Though the people of three Irish city regions were asked in 2019 if they wanted a directly elected mayor, Limerick alone answered that it did. We should ask ourselves why this was the answer. I would say that the campaign was stronger in Limerick than in Waterford or Cork and I should pay tribute to the leaders of that campaign. It is fair to say there was a lacklustre appetite for the reform from within established politics, not in Limerick but generally, and I would say that is still the case. The campaign was able to tap into a centuries-old tradition in our home city, a tradition of independence, autonomy, and I dare say, rebelliousness, that is in the DNA of Limerick. I was involved in the campaign, partly because as a Green Party candidate for the local elections at the time to support this was to be consistent with a fundamental tenet of green political philosophy across the world; that power should be strong at the local level, where the impact of decision-making is more acutely felt. It was not just for this reason that I supported the campaign in 2019. Were I not a Green Party local election candidate back then I would feel just as strongly that this was a critical step forward for our region.
Not too many will disagree that the unfortunate reality is that local government across Ireland, as much as in Limerick, is not working so well. The lopsided development of our country since we won independence a century ago is evidence of this. While we talk repeatedly of balanced regional development, our administrative system is so centralised that it ensures that balanced regional development is an aspiration, perhaps with an ever-widening gap between Dublin and the regional cities, which need not be the case. The Minister of State, as much as am I and as are all political representatives in Limerick, is ambitious for our city and county's future, and we see ourselves as a growing European city region. When we were offered a new way forward we said "Yes". The legislation is one of the best opportunities we will ever have to help Limerick chart its own course to recover from disinterest from central government and to become a leader in innovation, sustainability and quality of life. It is essential that we get it right. Is the Bill a step in the right direction? Yes, it is. Does it go far enough? No, and we will tease that out through the various Stages in the Oireachtas. We should not fool ourselves into thinking that it can be refined and revised in the years ahead, notwithstanding the proposed establishment of a consultative forum, which is a provision in the draft Bill.
There are fundamental questions at play here. Will the elected mayor of Limerick have the power and financial ability to pursue and implement the vision that he or she will have campaigned on? Does the draft Bill represent the level of devolution of power that one expects with this kind of office, which is a mainstay of the European political and administrative structure, or are we simply taking a gentle, hesitant or even grudgingly minimal step forward? These are fundamental questions that we have to ask ourselves. It seems to me that the proposed office is perhaps more about soft and consultative power than executive power.
The debate so far today has been good and it is worth listening to Members from the Opposition as much as from the Government. Some valid points have been made. What has not been mentioned so far is the ability of the mayor, whoever that may be, to raise revenue to pursue their vision. I have concerns there and I would see that notwithstanding the challenge of getting the balance of powers right - we are not looking for full autonomy for Limerick, not by a long shot - there needs to be real power for this office and that power needs to be supported by the financial ability of the new mayor, whosoever that may be. Can the new mayor raise taxes to implement his or her vision? For example, if the mayor identifies a gap in the provision of public transport, will he or she be able to fund the gaps that are there? I could say the same about waste policy or housing policy. A lot of these powers are only meaningful if they can be paid for. There is a question of the ability of the mayor to raise funds.
It is fundamental that Dublin lets go of Limerick's hand. Limerick is a grown-up region and we can and should go forward somewhat more autonomously than we have. We see a level of democratic accountability with this draft Bill but we see a lack of devolution and ability for the mayor to raise revenue.
I support this legislation and I am glad that the plebiscite was successful in Limerick because it provides the opportunity to progress with this. The idea of directly elected mayors is important.
The points I will raise have been raised by a lot of others but I will make two points: one on detail; and the other on power. On detail, the margin in the plebiscite in Cork was narrow. We supported the campaign in favour of it and we were active in that but it was narrow. I believe that the Government wanted it to go through, but if it had not wanted it to go through, then this would have been exactly the way to succeed in not letting it through. The only thing people in Cork knew about this proposal was how much the mayor of Cork was going to get and how much in expenses he or she was going to get. Right from the start that was all they knew about. If that is the entire discussion and if people are not able to talk about what the mayor can do in transport, housing or meaningful things for people's lives then you are on a loser straight away. That was a big part of the problem and it seems to me it is still a bit of a problem. There is a lot more clarity in respect of allowances and the budget attached to the mayor, which obviously is necessary, than on the executive powers of the mayor. That will be important.
The other point I will make is that we have a severe deficit when it comes local government in this State. That applies within councils, as well as between local government and local authorities. I remember my first year as a councillor, and the Minister of State was a councillor himself. In your first year, you get in there and you get your legs under the desk and you think you will make a difference when you are bright and green. I asked the chief executive when the capital budget would come forward and I was told that it would be in January, which was grand. The capital budget came forward and a sheet was provided to councillors. I asked if we would be able to vote on it and we were told we would not be able to do so and that it was just for noting. That is no complaint against Tim Lucey, who is finishing up in the coming weeks and who did a fine job. He was just explaining the way things work to me. I was amazed to learn that councillors have no role in respect of the capital budget. Councillors do not have a function regarding the kind of things that people out in the street imagine they are deciding, such as swimming pools, libraries and houses; the big stuff that matters to people in terms of public services.
That will be really important. If people are going to come back after a couple of years of a directly elected mayor, whatever about who the incumbent is, if they have any sense that the role is delivering, they will need to have a sense that this person can effect change in all those areas. That is crucially important. Some of that will involve examining the nature of funding streams that exist for capital projects and so on. Even aside from that capital point, an awful lot more can be done regarding executive and reserve functions that can assist any directly elected mayor. I do not want to call it an experiment but it is an important trial. It is potentially a model that can be applied elsewhere but for that to happen, the mayors need to have powers to make a difference and I hope that is the case.
I welcome the chance to speak on this Bill. Anyone would recognise that a shift to move powers from unelected individuals into a democratically elected office is a positive thing. However, that power then needs to be accountable to the people who put those people into the position to make decisions. We think this Bill is a missed opportunity to undo the effects of Ireland's weak and wanting local democracy. This Bill has been drafted in response to a plebiscite held in 2019 in which the people of Limerick narrowly agreed to a directly elected mayor, while Cork and Waterford rejected it.
If this Bill passes Second Stage, People Before Profit will submit amendments that will ensure the people who put a mayor into power also have the power to remove him or her, instead of this power being solely in the hands of elected councillors. That accountability is crucial and the people must be allowed it. They should be able to trigger a recall by means of a verified petition. People Before Profit will also pursue an amendment to link the mayor's salary to the average income of those who dwell in Limerick. As it stands, it is set at the same level as a Minister of State, namely, €135,000 per year. That is three times the median annual earnings of the people of Limerick, according to CSO statistics. The total cost of the office is currently at €300,000 and this includes special advisers and a dedicated chauffeur. We believe we need a mayor who is a city leader, understands how the people live, lives like them and does not live in an ivory tower. He or she must be driven by a desire to make Limerick a better and more equal place to live rather than being a celebrity or a political careerist on a bloated salary.
In 2019, a report published by the FÓRSA trade union highlighted how austerity, the centralisation of powers through services like Uisce Éireann, the privatisation of social housing through the housing assistance payment, HAP, and the rental accommodation scheme, RAS, the privatisation of refuse services, the outsourcing of crucial work like housing maintenance and the haemorrhaging of tradesmen and tradeswomen employed by the local authority has moved Ireland to the bottom of the European local democracy index. This report calls for the return and the expansion of the town council system, increased revenue and funding powers with parallel systems of accountability and transparency to move the relative level of local authority-managed public spending towards the European average, an immediate end to outsourcing of council housing maintenance and a shift to a new local authority public-led housing model. People Before Profit will be looking for amendments that call for real powers to be transferred to the office of mayor from the current unelected CEO position and with oversight from the council. As it stands, the proposal contained in the Bill keeps developments in the county within the constraints given by central government and these constraints lead to a model of service delivery that involve housing, waste collection and roads and transport relying on outsourcing to keep these services off balance sheet. These are the core services that should be developed as collective public goods.
Limerick has a proud tradition. During the 1919 general strike, the Limerick Soviet was established by the people for the people and the people ran the city in their interest. To give that sort of control back to people again we need much more than just this mayor Bill and a few statutory bodies. It means bringing the voice of workers, carers and families into the decision-making rooms and hearing not just the voices of the business community and its owners and representatives.
It would be remiss of me, having referenced the FÓRSA research, to not mention the current embargo FÓRSA has implemented on dealing with local and public representatives. I support the FÓRSA action. Some 85% of the workers across local authorities voted to take this industrial action out of utter frustration because a process that should have been dealt with long ago has ground to a halt. We are calling on the LGMA to sit down with FÓRSA and sort out why the grade drift that has happened to thousands and thousands of local authority workers during austerity has been allowed to continue. It has been sorted out in the HSE and in higher education. This work-to-rule, which is impacting on all of us, but mostly on the workers themselves, needs to be sorted. I call on the Minister of State's office to engage fully with that job evaluation and if necessary for the Minister to intervene in the process. That will at least begin some kind of democratic intervention by people in this House beyond what is the utter disgrace of these workers being left with a pay drift that has gone on for years.
I welcome the Bill. I welcome this change and reform to local democracy. It is, I hope, a real chance for change. Many improvements need to be made and we will get to that, but in reality local democracy in Ireland is rarely either local or democratic. Most of the power is held either by officials in the Custom House or by unelected officials. We are one of the worst countries in Europe when it comes to local democracy, local government subsidiarity and devolving power to local areas where it is needed.
This is not a new feature of Ireland. Since our independence we have been running down local government in big and small ways. There is a clear, consistent path downwards of removing powers from elected officials, removing powers even from local executive officials and centralising power and decision-making. All of this has led to a stasis in many of our local authorities. It has led to an inability of authorities to address their own ambitions and plans in any meaningful way. On Dublin City Council, where I had the pleasure to serve, many of the housing issues are a result of roadblocks from the Custom House, rather than by the officials or the local authorities. Therefore, if we want to be very serious about addressing the problems that bedevil our nation, we need to address the issue of local government.
The challenge when talking about local government is that it can be a very technical thing, is not necessarily the most alluring of topics and people often disengage, but it is absolutely fundamental and we need to get it right. We need to ensure there is control at the lowest effective level to ensure the powers are there to address issues like climate change and housing and so we do not have to see local authorities stuck with multi-phase, multi-level approval systems in the Custom House that are just slowing down their own ability to respond to housing, build active travel and respond to climate change.
Something I find beyond frustrating is the fact Dublin has four councils that are artificially forced to compete against each other when they should really be co-operating to address these pressing issues. When Cork, Limerick and Waterford got to vote on whether they wanted a directly elected mayor, Dublin was not included. In previous setups to consult about whether Dublin should have a directly elected mayor the people were clamouring for it and whatever method was set up was designed to fail. Here we are passing legislation about Limerick, yet when it comes to Dublin it is about delay, review, consider and discuss. All these things ultimately delay and delay the reality of this important political reform we need for Dublin. As I said, there are huge housing issues in Dublin. We spend a lot of time in here talking about that, as we should, but the ability of Dublin councils to be creative, to push ahead and to address this issue head-on is hampered by the fact they are split into four councils instead of being one and that they have to go cap in hand to the Department constantly.
We need to get off the backs of local authorities. We need to give them proper powers that have democratic accountability. We need to give them revenue-raising powers so they can fund their own decisions. Without any of these moves the reform we need to see will not happen. As I said, Dublin seems to be once again the poor cousin and is being left behind. We have delays, promises of reviews and consideration. We need proper, effective local government in all four councils, not just the city, and for them to work together. Otherwise, the problems this city faces will never be addressed properly.
As the Minister of State knows, a plebiscite was held in 2019 in three city areas to decide whether to have a directly elected mayor.
Waterford was one of those and I voted in that. I actually voted against the proposal at the time. I could not understand exactly what this person was going to be doing in terms of the way the job was being framed. What I saw in essence was a job in which people were being given accountability but not the authority to get things done. I am not sure that is not still the position at the moment.
I will not speak at length on this Bill because others have highlighted many of its inadequacies. However, I am quite happy as a Waterford man to sit back now and let Limerick implement this policy and see how it goes. That is what I think we should do. I understand there are a number of amendments to be tabled possibly on Report Stage. It will be interesting to see how this goes.
If I take as an example my local authority in Waterford, I think people would know this in the House that we have a very dynamic chief executive. The idea is that we go out and pluck somebody possibly from the council body, and we have very able-bodied people there, but would they have that skill set? That is a question I would ask of any local authority that is taking this on. To me, it appears that anybody can stand for election. They can nominate themselves and potentially get elected. Ultimately, the Government is now giving them the responsibility for framing the strategic management policy of the authority going forward. Certainly, there is accountability because they can be voted out unlike some of the chief executives and some of the other officers of the local authority. It does speak to me, however. These are very serious positions. That has been recognised in terms of the remuneration on offer, which is equivalent to a Minister of State. Certainly, the mayor can take on programme managers and advisers and that is all very helpful. There has to be more head scratching done regarding this legislation, however. It is more that the spirit of the legislation is possibly fine but in actual fact, when we get down to the reality in terms of the quality of the people who may be thrown into this position, there is a significant cause for concern.
The other thing I noticed is the election expenses that are allowable to this office. It seems that anybody who is going for the mayoral programme can spend up to €72,000 in recoupable expenses unlike a Teachta Dála. That seems to be an awful lot of money, by the way, to put into this programme.
It on the basis of two constituencies.
Okay, it is based on two constituencies but just the same, it seems like a lot of money to put into an election of this sort. It does beg the question of whether a person who can raise more money is in a better position to be potentially elected than somebody who cannot. That again speaks to the ability of people to do this job. I wonder as well how the division of labour, if you want to call it that, within the local authority is really going to work. On the one hand, we have somebody who is essentially describing the strategic ambition they have come up with and on the other hand, we go to another officer who potentially may not buy into that at all but whose job is to execute it. I fail to see how that will work in terms of management structure in theory. I know from my own time on a council that there would often be very different aspirations between the council body and the executive body. There is work to be done in this regard.
As I said, I am in the enviable position, as we in Waterford are, that we can sit back now and let Limerick, which voted for this, implement it. Cork did not vote for it by the way, as the Minister of State is well aware. I have heard other Deputies describe how Dublin should have this, and maybe Dublin should have it. However, I am quite happy with the position we have at the moment. What we need to do is stop devolving powers from our councillors. That is just as important. The councillors are getting less and less power. I know people around the country ask about the function of councillors. They do not actually spend enough time talking to them, however. Certainly, the councillors who I know in Waterford are extremely busy and extremely diligent in their tasks. That is an area that needs to be looked at. As I said, I am happy to let Limerick off with this one and see where we get to. It will be interesting to see the amendments and if it is successful, I will certainly in the future promote the idea.
Ireland has a very centralised political system, as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle well knows. When we look at it, a huge amount of political power in this country is vested in Dáil Éireann. Dáil Éireann makes the decision, through the election of a Taoiseach and a government, to transfer very many powers executively to the government and to Ministers. Then, when Ministers go into Departments, to a large extent they are very much circumscribed by what parameters are set for them by senior civil servants. Therefore, although the Irish democratic process has worked very well for the country in the 100 years the State has been going, we need to look at how we can improve it and where the deficiencies are. The one area in which there are deficiencies, which has been repeatedly mentioned and of which I know the Minister of State will also be aware, is that local government in Ireland is considerably different from how local government operates in other parts of Europe or, indeed, other parts of the world. Maybe there are arguments to be made that there are reasons we do not and did not transfer too much power to councillors in local authorities in Ireland. We are now getting to a stage where we have to look at our large cities such as Limerick and Dublin and ask ourselves whether they are really being served by the political system that operates in this country in order to serve the best interests of the citizens of those cities.
We are very well served in this country by having Deputies who will always advocate on behalf of their own constituencies and cities. One of the criticisms of Irish politics is that it can be quite parochial. Part of the reason Deputies are advocating for their cities and advocating parochially is that there is an absence of real leadership and political power at local level. That is why it is so effective when we have Deputies in this House from cities, parishes or constituencies who can stand up in this Chamber and hold the Taoiseach, Tánaiste or members of the Government to account and ask them questions in respect of their locality. That is a strength, but we need to recognise that the reason it happens is that there is an absence of power locally and that is why Deputies have to fulfil that role. In fairness to Deputies in this House, although we do it effectively, it probably does take away from the primary responsibility of a Teachta Dála, which is to make laws since the Oireachtas is the only law-making body that exists in the State.
When we look at other European cities, we see that very many of the great European cities have very strong municipal and local government. At the basis of most of them is that they have a mayor who is elected. That exists in the large cities, including capital cities such as Amsterdam or Berlin, but it also exists throughout Europe in respect of smaller cities. There would be a benefit to it operating for Ireland's larger cities. That is the reason I am supportive of this legislation.
During the summer, there was much controversy about the fact that tourists in Dublin were being attacked. That was a very serious issue. One of the notable things that arose during those controversies was that there is no person who is really directly responsible for the safety of citizens in Dublin. I know it can be said that the Government and Minister for Justice are generally responsible for the safety of all persons on the island but if that had happened in another city such as London, Amsterdam or Berlin, there would have been a mayor with responsibility. If we look at other cities, we see that the Mayor of London and the Mayor of Amsterdam, for example, have a responsibility when it comes to setting policing strategy in London and protecting and ensuring safety in public places in Amsterdam.
We need to look again at establishing proper political officeholders in order that we can be responsible for what is happening in our larger cities. I am not talking about this happening in every town in the country but certainly in the large cities - I know the people of Cork have rejected it - like Dublin, Limerick and Galway, we should be considering this and proceeding with it. As I said, the benefit of doing so is that persons can be held to account and members of the public can say they are not happy with the way a city is being run and can ask who they can hold responsible for it. There would be a mayor who has powers and that is the person who should be held accountable.
I had an opportunity to look at the legislation. Obviously, the functions of the new mayor under this legislation are to be functions that are already held by the chief executive of Limerick council and also those powers that are held by the cathaoirleach or current mayor of Limerick, and they are being merged together. I would have liked to have seen more powers given to the new officeholder of the mayor of Limerick. If we look at what people really expect from their city, what they expect predominantly is first of all public safety. Second, they expect a proper transport system. Third, and I do not know whether it is an issue in Limerick, but there is a huge issue in Dublin in respect of planning permission, applications for housing and other planning applications that are submitted.
At present when people see there are State failings in respect of those issues they can blame the planning authority, a faceless entity, or An Bord Pleanála. They do not know who to blame when it comes to transport. Again, the Government generally gets the blame in respect of policing if public safety in the city is incorrect. I would have liked to have seen further powers being given to this new office holder. I am concerned that if we just set up a new office that has the powers of the former chief executive and the powers of the cathaoirleach, in many respects it will not be the dynamic office that I believe the people of Limerick want to see. Indeed, the people of Dublin would like to see that in respect of Dublin. Maybe that could be considered when the Bill is on Committee Stage. It is worth trying out.
The criticism of this initiative that I can already hear is that we are just creating another job for a politician and what is the point of doing that. It is not about that. It is about trying to improve service for the people of Limerick and for the people of other cities. It is about trying to give them a greater say in how their cities are run. The great benefit of an elected mayor who would be responsible for public safety, transport or planning is that if there were failings in those areas, this person could be held to account and thrown out of office. Any individual wishing to run for that office would have to put forward proposals in respect of planning, public safety or transportation and those matters would have to be taken seriously. If they did not take them seriously, the electorate would not support them. I support the Bill and thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
A directive decision of the people of Limerick in May 2019 opted for a directly elected mayor with executive powers. The people of Limerick voted for a directly elected mayor with executive powers. In this Bill we have a diluted version of what they were expecting. If we look at it on the basis of Limerick - people have spoken in the Chamber today about Limerick being the first city to have a directly elected mayor - we will see that of course it has to be Limerick because we are the first in everything. When we go about something, we can do it right. To do this right, we will have to make amendments to it to make sure it is right because people do not want a diluted version.
We looked at the staffing of the directly elected mayor. He or she can choose one member of staff. Four will be chosen on his or her behalf. We have to look at that. He or she can look for a special adviser. That again is up to the directly elected mayor. The cost of having a directly elected mayor is being covered by the Government, but for how long? After four or five years, will this money come out of the budget for the local authority in Limerick? That has not yet been finalised. It was talked about. When we spoke about it earlier, it was to be looked after for the first two years. I want the timeline. If this comes out of the budget for Limerick, our budget will need to increase.
The directly elected mayor will have €8 million in funding. That is a pittance for the first directly elected mayor. To get water from Limerick to Croom is costing €4 million. Yet the directly elected mayor for Limerick city and county is being given a budget of €8 million. We have 40 elected councillors in Limerick city and county. There are 21 in the city and 19 in the county. All their powers are being depleted even though they are directly elected by the people of Limerick from the areas they represent. All of these people - from the Minister of State's party, Fine Gael, from Fianna Fáil, from Independents and across the board - are directly elected. Yet their powers are being allowed to be depleted year on year. They say what they have for their counties.
Why is the Limerick team so good at hurling? They invested in the infrastructure for the players to make them what they are today. They put in the proper management team and put all the other services around them. That built into what we have today - our four-in-a-row. Hopefully we will have five. That is because of the infrastructure put into the team and the proper management. That is why we can build things in Limerick, with the proper infrastructure.
The Taoiseach was in Foynes during the week at the Foynes Flying Boat and Maritime Museum. I welcome his visit and the investment that has been done in Foynes. Then we were in Newcastle West at the running track. The Minister, Deputy Humphreys, was in Broadford. I have never heard so many Ministers say "rural Ireland". They kept saying that. Every second word out of their mouths was "rural Ireland". The first place they heard the term was here, from the Independents. Now they realise that rural Ireland will take it no more. When they announced the funding in Limerick, which I welcome and I would welcome much more of it, the one thing that they forgot about was the infrastructure. They talked about the next generation of people in Limerick. Fixing up our local halls, which is great and I welcome it, does not provide houses in the area to enable my children and grandchildren and all the children and grandchildren of all the people in County Limerick to come home. We have no infrastructure in Oola, in Hospital or in Foynes. This is why we build. With an €8 million budget for a directly elected mayor, I am not going to get much done in Limerick. If they said €80 million, I would say that is going somewhere along the lines where I can spend it.
The Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, is a Limerick man. We need powers for our councillors to make sure we can get our infrastructure going. We need powers for the directly elected mayor. The executive cannot just go into one area. It has to cover Limerick city and county, with the funding we need to make sure that Limerick can grow into the place I know it will become. Unless the basic funding is provided through the models for infrastructure, sewerage and water, I cannot rebuild Limerick. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Donovan, said to me the other day that I was saying that nothing is being built in rural Ireland. I said to the Minister of State, as I will say now on the record, that he is here to deliver because I am going to make him deliver. That is my job. No matter what he delivers, I am going to make him deliver it and more. He was elected in 2003, but it is only now that he is delivering because he is being made to deliver. For the people of Limerick, I will make every Deputy and Minister deliver for us. For the mayor in Limerick, I want more powers so that he or she can deliver for the people he or she represents. I want more of a budget for the people of Limerick so that we can make sure for the whole of Ireland that we have a model such that if they want to have a mayor in Dublin, they can have a mayor in Dublin. It will be built on the excellence that Limerick will have when we have a directly elected mayor. What we want is more money and more powers for our local councillors.
Limerick people voted for this in good faith in 2019. Waterford and Cork did not. I heard a Deputy for Waterford say they were going to watch what happens in Limerick. That is a poor enough way to have your aspirations delivered or achieved. There is a total imbalance of power. The power in this country rests here in central government. I am good friends with Deputy O'Callaghan, who said a minute ago that we can ask questions of the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste here. However, neither of them bothered to turn up today, on the first day of the session. It is an ungracious insult to the people of this country that one of them could not be here, if not both. We had our break. It is the first time in the history of the State that this happened. It just goes to show what they think of this House and the elected people.
To get back to the local authorities, the powers of the councillors have been stripped away. Under this half-baked plan, the mayor, whoever he or she might be, will be allowed to spend €68,000 or €70,000 in expenses to get elected. There is no point in electing a mayor and not letting him or her have powers. The simple reason is that the Local Government Management Agency, LGMA, which has a place here in Dublin on the Luas line, is the power base. We see it with the retained firefighters whom I met with last night in Bray. They are still fighting to get recognition. The Minister tells us he wants it sorted out. The LGMA will not sort it out. The LGMA is the powerhouse in this country. It has stripped away the powers that the councils had. Many of them are good people but they stripped away the powers the councils had and they treat councillors as whipping boys and girls. It is shocking.
That needs to change and we need to get back to regional development and regional government and elect a mayor with proper, functional powers. A mayor is accountable to the people. He or she can be kicked out, but the managers cannot be.
A sad day under a Government the Minister of State supported was in 2014, when we took away borough district councils. It was a lamentable day for local government. It was done by the then Minister, Phil Hogan, and supported by all the Government backbenchers at the time. We forced Tipperary to be amalgamated. The Electoral Commission has now decided to divide it in two because it is too big and cannot function properly. We forced the county together and there are now 40 councils, which is just not functional. We gave away powers to Irish Water, a most untransparent body that left Clonmel and 40,000 people without water for 40 days this summer. It was the wettest summer we have had, yet we could not keep water in the pipes. Irish Water is not accountable. It will not meet or talk to people and it does not know where the pipes are. It rarely knows where the reservoirs are. It told us a reservoir was closed, that it was dysfunctional and that there was something wrong with it but there was no report backing up that. That was a sad day for democracy in this country. Someone mentioned earlier the 100th anniversary of our democracy. The powers are being stripped away. We will put down amendments to the Bill seeking to have proper powers given to this mayor with, I hope, leadership whereby mayors will be directly elected in every county. They should be able to look after the counties and have powers, without councils having to go cap in hand.
Since the councils in Tipperary were amalgamated, every meeting is preceded by a workshop. It is workshop, workshop, workshop. When I was a councillor, we had one workshop a year and it was not even called a "workshop" but a "budget meeting". These workshops are held behind closed doors. Why is the press locked out? Why will Irish Water not meet us? It had a workshop with councillors but it never discusses anything in front of the press. What is it hiding? We have a lot to make up here in regard to our situation in our country. People are clamouring to get power back to the people. It is our job here to demand that, but the Government and LGMA are guarding the power.
The public is yearning for this. Why do we have such poor turnouts in local elections in some parts of our country? I salute the councils for the work they do, despite the big areas they cover and the workload they have, but they cannot deal with Irish Water, the HSE or the agencies that have been set up as a buffer between elected representatives and the people. It is lamentable and sad that, when there is an opportunity such as in this Bill, which the Government was forced to produce because the public in Limerick demanded it, that the Bill is no good, even though it has taken four years to get this far, and it will be five or six before it is implemented. It is not worth the pain and effort if, as Deputy O'Donoghue said, he or she will not have the budget or, above all, the powers to make decisions and take power out of the powerhouse off O'Connell Street, namely, the LGMA. It is running this country, not governments.
It is the same as when Ministers come in and are ambitious. The Minister of State's successor is going to have several officials in this office to steer this new mayor. It is the same with civil servants when Ministers enter office. Two more civil servants got massive pay increases this week, including one in the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage when the Government has failed to meet any housing targets in the past 12 years. They have the arrogance to look for a rise and the Minister with responsibility has the petulance and the audacity to give them that rise. That is where our power has gone completely wrong.
It is no wonder our people are despondent. They can see people who are barely able to survive, to put food on the table, to clothe their families or to aspire to own a house. The Government first gave bankers their bonuses back and now it is giving these pay increases to these people. Who do they think they are? They are good people in their own right - I am not knocking them in that way - but they are not worth that kind of money. If they are delivering, there should a barometer measuring what they have achieved, and maybe there should be pay cuts when they do not achieve. Otherwise, we are not going to have any change. We are going to carry on in our merry-go-round and 100 years into our freedom, we are back with these people with their hands on the handlebars of power and a jackhammer would not get them off them. That is the way with both senior civil servants and the LGMA.
I was down at the LGMA's office. I was one of three charged with appointing a communications committee as part of the Government of 2007 to 2011. When we arrived for the interviews, everything had been sorted out for us. I happened to be the chairman of the interviews but they told me they had a shortlist of the top 20 candidates. I thanked them very much and asked them what we were there for. They were all retired senior public servants. We turned the box upside down, we started from the bottom and we did the job we were supposed to do, but that does not happen too often. We never got the opportunity again. That is where the power is.
I appreciate the opportunity to speak about the position of mayor of Limerick city and county and I acknowledge my learned colleague Deputy O'Donoghue, whose area we are talking about. I have serious reservations as to the costing of the mayor for the county. From where will the money come? Will the Government put up its hands and say it will fully fund the mayor for the five years of the term or will the local council have to pay? Obviously, the money is coming from taxpayers, so it has to be fierce accountable. Given that the previous Government - the same crowd - got rid of local town councils, it is a little rich to think the Government is now trying to set up a bit of democracy in one county. I have serious concerns about how this is going to be rolled out but I have to respect the democratic decision of the people of Limerick. They made that democratic decision and I have to accept anything that has been made in democracy, even though I may not always agree with it. What are the exact powers this mayor will have? Is he or she going to be kissing, hugging and waving out of the back windows of a car? Is that what there will be in Limerick, or will there be someone with a bit of bite in them who will deliver for the people of Limerick county and city?
My worry is that this will become a political football and Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil will be kicking it to see whether they can have a mayor with their tag on him or her. If that is the case, are we going to be in the same situation we are in at this time, where Ministers are more or less feeding information to their own politicians in constituencies, saying Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil got the money for them? Even if this mayor ends up being a Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil mayor, although we do not know that becuase this is a great country and the people will be able to make that decision, will he or she be elected as a mayor for the people?
That is what we need and it is an example that needs to be led from Leinster House, but it has not been led from here for many years. I have seen how Ministers work. It can be quite poor, to be honest. Maybe that is because I am in opposition and if I were in government, maybe I would think it was a great idea, but I do not think I would. I think I would play it as fair as I could if I were in a ministerial position, but when Ministers visit constituencies, I see the way they work. They call a couple of their own local politicians and that is it. They cannot help it. It is seldom that you will see openness and transparency, so I would be very worried about the constitution or the rules and regulations that will be laid out whereby whoever is elected, if this goes ahead as it seems it will, the mayor will represent everybody in Limerick, regardless of whether they share that person's politics. If that does not happen, we will be back in the same charade as we have in the case of a lot of Ministers. That does not apply to everyone but to quite a lot.
As I said, Phil Hogan did a hatchet job on town councils and the Government of the day, comprising Fine Gael and the Labour Party, patted him on the back and accepted it. Only one town did not lose its town council, namely, Clonakilty in west Cork, which stood up to him and still has a town council. I wish the mayor of Clonakilty, Paddy McCarthy, and those who serve the people of Clonakilty voluntarily - Anthony McDermott and many more - well. The Government should be concentrating its efforts on bringing back town councils. I think that is in the programme for Government somewhere, or has it been forgotten and has the Government decided to powerwash out that along with everything else? Town councils delivered for people in their local communities and I still hear that from some people, who say nothing has happened in their area since the town council has gone. They say they have no one to talk to. The Government needs to look at that.
The boundaries will have to be laid out as to where the mayoral position will stop and start.
We have been talking about boundaries and I was very disappointed at the way the Electoral Commission dealt with Cork South-West, a constituency that has grown hugely. We have an area that is, literally, one town, of Ballineen and Enniskeane. Ballineen is in Cork South-West and the town that is attached to it is in Cork North-West. They are totally lost to the political system out there. This includes places such as Newcestown and Castletownkenneigh, north of Dunmanway. These are in west Cork and they have been taken out of west Cork previously, prior to me bringing it here to the Dáil. I may have been the only one who put forward a submission months ago - I might be careful of that, but certainly on Cork - to the Electoral Commission. I had a reply and acknowledgement, but we got nowhere. Sadly, there were no changes. I believe that the commission said that Cork South-West on the map was a bit like Cuba. Cuba could be looked at too. West Cork should also have been looked at, and these areas should not have been excluded. It was a big blow to the democracy and for the people of those areas.
We have talked about doing away with town councils and the Government has taken away a lot of the powers. My big concern is the councils and will the councils lose powers here? They have lost so many powers. The county managers seem to be making the decisions. It would seem the councillors must just go along with it, with a nod and a wink. Are we going to be in a similar situation where the county manager and the mayor will make decisions for Limerick city and county? Will the council just hear about it afterwards? That is an astonishing situation they find themselves in if that is going to be the case. I would appreciate if maybe the Minister of State might get an opportunity to answer some of those questions later on.
Debate adjourned.