Local Government Bill, 1991: Second Stage (Resumed).

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

Mr. Costello

I welcome the Minister to the House. A man from the west is always welcome here, however I am afraid I cannot give the same categoric and absolute welcome to the legislation he brings to the House. I am sure he has heard that before so he will not be surprised.

The Minister says the Bill is one of the most important pieces of legislation to come before this House in recent years. There is no great humility in that statement, but time will tell if it is. It should be one of the most important pieces of legislation to come before this House because we have been waiting so long for the reform of local government. In the Fianna Fáil manifesto of 1985 there was a commitment to local government reform and the Minister has had four years in Government to ensure that that commitment was honoured. The Bill should have been introduced in a more coherent way. One would have expected a more generous timespan. It has been introduced in the last few days in order to meet the local elections deadline and if it is not passed by 17 May it will not be in place for the forthcoming local elections. That is not the way to go about introducing major legislation. This last minute timing is to be deplored. Effectively we have a guillotine on the debate and we have no choice but to rush it through without a proper opportunity to tease it out and explore its implications. This has enormous implications. The debate in this House ran from 6 p.m. yesterday until midnight and today it will conclude at 8 p.m. which is not enough time to tease out this very important Bill to any degree.

The Minister said reform and modernisation of the local government system has been one of the Government's highest priorities. It may very well have been, but this legislation has come into this House at such short notice that there is no sign of that. The Minister went on to say that this is also a task of considerable depth and complexity. Naturally we would have liked to have had the opportunity of addressing in equal depth what he proposes. He said, "We need only reflect briefly on the range of services, the extent of resources and the volume of employment involved in the local government sector to appreciate that any change in the system must be prudently formulated and implemented with the utmost care and thoroughness." I agree whole heartedly and that is why I must deplore so strongly the manner in which this Bill is going through this House, particularly at such short notice.

To put the Bill into context brings us back to the original Local Government Act, 1898. That was a major development. Local councils were established so that local people could, for the first time, have an input into Government and this meant Irish people could have a direct input into Government. It is strange that we have not had a reform of local government legislation for over 90 years. It is a sort of a déja vu situation — so much of our major legislation goes back to the beginning of this century or to the previous century and was formulated in different times, under a different jurisdiction — and we bring with us all that heavy handed colonial baggage that was established for a more bureaucratic system with a more bureaucratic Civil Service and a totally different ethos. I find it unacceptable that if I should look for a copy of the Local Government Act, 1898, the only way I can get it is to apply to Her Majesty's Government in Britain or in Northern Ireland because that Act is not published here. That is the position so far as other legislation is concerned. Our country is governed by some legislation that was introduced by those who governed us, but we still have not seen fit to reformulate the legislation in keeping with the character and ethos of our own country. Perhaps we might move towards very substantial law reform in this and a number of other areas.

In his speech the Minister said there have been changes in the functions of local authorities and developments have taken place over the years in this area. From time to time new areas have been covered, others have been neglected or have been allowed to fall away. The one thing that is common throughout is that there has been no substantial development in terms of organisation or structural developments in this area. The powers of local authorities have been eroded and nothing has been put in their place. City and county managers have taken over many of the essential functions of local authorities. This took place prior to the war, during the thirties and forties. As a result the power is no longer devolved to the people who have been elected by the public but rests with the managers. Therefore, it is bureaucratic power rather than a true democratic power.

The second major area where the powers of local authorities have been eroded is in financing. This more than anything else has emasculated local authorities in recent years. This was the direct consequence of the 1977 election when the Fianna Fáil Party swept home with a 20 seat majority on their promise to abolish local rates. They acknowledged that this would take away the funding of local authorities but said they would put in place substantial Exchequer funding which would equal what was taken away. This was a wonderful promise but it was never implemented in practice — local funding was taken from local authorities but no central Government funding was put in its place. Without funding from the Exchequer local authorities were not able to fulfil the range of functions they had exercised prior to 1977. This is evident from what has been happening in recent times. While the Governments of the early eighties, particularly the Fine Gael-Labour Coalition Government, managed to provide funding from the Exchequer, this funding has not been forthcoming since 1987. As a result local authorities have been starved of funding for the essential services they are duty bound to provide to the community.

The Government's housing policy has been bankrupt. In 1986, prior to Fianna Fáil coming into power, 1,556 houses were built in Dublin. In 1987 this was reduced to 460; in 1988 it was further reduced to 159 and in 1989 only six local authority houses were built in Dublin. How can anyone imagine from those statistics that the local authorities are providing a housing service? The local authorities are very anxious to provide housing but the necessary funding to do this is not forthcoming from the Government. In the space of four years the actual Government allocation for public housing fell from £250 million in 1985 to £21 million in 1989. This is certainly not the way to do business in terms of providing local authority housing. The level of maintenance carried out by local authorities is at an all time low. I see evidence of this every day in flat complexes——

An Cathaoirleach

I want to remind Senator Costello that while reasonable latitude can be allowed he has tended to wander quite a distance from the contents of the Local Government Bill, 1991.

Mr. Costello

I must insist that I am keeping to the point. I am talking about the functions of local authorities and why there is need for reform.

An Cathoirleach

It would take some stretch of the imagination to get me to agree with the Senator. However, I will see how the Senator goes from here.

Mr. Costello

Housing is essential. Maintenance is another essential area which must be financed by local authorities. We cannot allow the stock of local authority houses built in this city to be run down. We have now reached the stage where necessary repairs are not being carried out because local authorities do not have the personnel to do this work or the resources to provide the equipment. As a result the existing housing stock is falling into disrepair.

I want to refer to libraries, another essential service provided by the local authorities. Because of the a lack of staff libraries are being closed earlier during weekdays and are not opened at all at weekends. This service is of greater necessity now to people. For example, as a teacher I am aware of the tremendous amount of project work involved in the new junior certificate. Teachers are sending pupils to libraries to research projects. However, the necessary materials for this work are not being put in place in libraries. This area needs to be developed but, unfortunately, the opposite is happening.

I want to refer to the emergency services. If there is a fire at evening time or during the night, if a gas main bursts or there is flooding, there is no one in City Hall to answer an emergency call. Playgrounds have been closed down in the city centre and public amenities generally are at a very low ebb because of a lack of financing for local authorities. While the local authority in Dublin have plans to introduce major reforms such as road widening, road building, etc, and have purchased property over a long period of time, very often they are unable to implement these plans due to a lack of funding. As a result the local authority are a slum landlord. Unfortunately, the Derelict Sites Bill did not address this problem.

I want to refer to section 4 motions, the scandal of the century. Much of the Dublin area, particularly the green areas on the outskirts of the city, have been turned into a wasteland of unregulated and environmentally dangerous developments. I think we all agree on the need for root and branch reform of local government. By this I mean reform of the structures, organisation and means of resourcing local authorities so that there can be an underpinning of finance. If there is no root and branch reform we will be talking about something which will never be delivered. We must ensure that it is the local authorities, who are elected by the people and who represent their local communities, and not the Minister who are in charge of local government.

We must also ensure that we do not have an anomalous system of double taxation. At present people in Cork are being jailed because of their opposition to water charges while there are no such charges in Dublin city. This means we have a two-tier system where one tier is regarded as more unjust than the other. We need to have a standard system so that people will have respect for the manner in which local authorities are elected, administered and financed.

The Minister is seeking consensus on this Bill. Of course, this is the proper way of going about it. We need to have consensus on major reforming legislation. Unfortunately, some of the problems in this area were created by the Minister's party as a result of the steps they took in the late seventies. Therefore, there is a particular onus on the Minister to ensure that reform is introduced in this area. My party are aware of the need to have as much consensus as possible on the Bill. However, it will be very difficult to get consensus on the Bill because of the manner in which it has been introduced.

The suggestion has been made throughout the debate that this is an enabling Bill. The Bill provides a framework, but it will not implement reform. There is no reference to finance and the structures which will be put in place. Therefore, we are only talking about one-third of the major reforms required. The Minister in his speech said: "The first requirement is to get the structures, systems, functions and operations of local authorities right. To attempt any financial adjustments in advance of this would quite simply be a case of putting the cart before the horse". I could not possibly agree with that. It is a load of rubbish. There is no question of putting the cart before the horse. The introduction of the legislation and the provision of the finance should be done in tandem. One does not first put in place legislation that may or may not be followed by other legislation and not talk about finance because it will be dealt with later. That is not the way to proceed. Further legislation may or may not be forthcoming; the Government may not even be in power. Judging by recent developments one never knows what will happen. The proper and responsible way to proceed is to ensure that every structural change introduced, every new function given to local authorities is underpinned with the necessary finances to implement it.

The Minister says this is not a financial provisions measure. Why not? How can the Minister put it that way and expect reasonable people and seasoned legislators in this House to accept his word on it? Resources must be provided for in the legislation. Without the finance the legislation is powerless. Power is given through the resources. If the plans are not funded, if there is no provision for staff in the plans then the plans are not capable of being implemented.

The Minister also said:

The Oireachtas has seen fit to enact several important pieces of legislation conferring significant powers and responsibilities on local authorities. There have been, or are currently in preparation Bills dealing with air pollution, water pollution, housing, roads, planning, urban renewal and derelict sites, and regulations made to give effect to various EC directives have also added considerably to local functions.

There is a problem about all of these. We discussed the Derelict Sites Bill, and no money and no extra staff were put in place. We are discussing the Environmental Agency Bill and we have the same problems there. The major problem we have focussed on is that new agencies do not get the resources. That is the fatal flaw and that is the problem in relation to this legislation.

Mrs. Honan

There is £8 million put in place to implement the provisions of the Environmental Protection Agency Bill.

Mr. Costello

There is not one provision in the 52 sections of this Bill under which one penny will be made available to implement its proposals. I would be delighted to hear the Minister's response to that. He cannot but accept that there will be a degree of scepticism abroad when that is the position.

Sections 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 deal with the devolution of power. It seems that that is very much a mirage rather than a reality. It is imaginary that the powers and functions of the local authorities are going to be devolved, as it is put very finely in the opening lines in section 5 (1) which states that a local authority may represent the interests of the local community in such a manner as it thinks appropriate. The function of the local authority is to represent the interests of the local community, but Members should note the wording —"a local authority may represent". Surely it should be that a local authority must represent the interests of the local community. Is that not their only function? They do not have a discretion, or should not have a discretion in the matter. That is the reason we have the expensive business of electing councillors to local authorities, that we set up a structure, that we have buildings, committee meetings, expenses, chairpeople, mayors and the whole paraphernalia. Local authorities should represent the community, but in the Bill it is left as a discretionary matter. I hope the Minister will accept an amendment to that provision. No duty or liability is imposed on a local authority in any of the sections following. All the provisions carry the word "may"; that the local authority, subject to the provisions of a section, may do this or may do that.

The Minister used many fine words and eloquent phrases when he spoke of the need to democratise, to transfer power to the people, but immediately he is introducing a discretionary provision and does not impose an obligation or a liability.

Secondly, the legislation is very much hamstrung by the fact that in all of these areas, as well as leaving it as loose as that, the Minister is entitled to come back and may order what he will in relation to these functions supposedly being devolved to the local authority. There will be a second tier of imposition under which the local authority can be hamstrung by the Minister or, indeed, by the Government. According to section 6 the Minister has to get the consent of the Minister for Finance. The provision of finance should be part and parcel of the legislation but now we have the Minister for Finance as a further broker in this matter. The Minister for the Environment may, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, prescribe matters in respect of which a local authority shall not exercise the powers conferred by this section.

The section states:

A local authority shall not, by virtue of this section, undertake or provide assistance for the undertaking of any activity that would prejudice or duplicate activity arising from the performance of a statutory function by any person in the functional area of the authority or that would, having regard to the activities or proposed activities of that person in relation to the area, involve wasteful or unnecessary expenditure by the local authority.

Surely it is the function of the local authority to decide what is important in terms of functional development in their area? Does that provision mean that the Minister, or the Minister for Finance, can decide if a proposed development of an industrial nature, of a tourism nature, or any nature is the best value for the community? Surely the powers should rest with the local authority. That is what they are there for and that is what we mean by devolving power to local authorities. Otherwise the Minister is saying one thing and doing another. The Minister cannot expect us to come in like sheep to this House and give a stamp of approval, an imprimatur, to legislation that is so constrictive and open to being used in a way that is contrary to what the Minister said in his introductory speech.

Section 7 states:

...a local authority, in performing the functions conferred on it by or under this or any other enactment shall have regard to—

Therefore everything a local authority may decide to do is subject to those conditions. What is the first condition? Subsection (1) (a) states: "the resources, wherever originating, that are available or likely to be available to it for the purpose of such performance..." Subsection (1) (e) refers to the policies and objectives of the Government or any Minister of the Government in so far as they may affect or relate to its functions. Surely the policies and objectives of the Government are not matters that should tie down a local authority. The Government may have all sorts of objectives, but a local authority has the objective of providing for and representing their local community. If they are to be bound by what any Government or Minister has as an objective at a particular time, does this mean that they will have to write to the Minister for Justice and say: "We were thinking about doing some work in relation to building a swimming pool, a sewerage system or something of that nature and the approval of the Minister for Justice has to be received because we do not know what the Minister for Justice thinks about it"? These are unnecessary curtailments on the exercise of the local authorities' function.

While the Minister specified the general framework in the functions, he did not take on board the report of the Advisory Expert Committee which specified in greater detail the areas that the local authority should address and what functions would be devolved to the local authority. These were: individual housing grants, group water schemes, driver testing, foreshore licences, non-national heritage parks, controls for safety at work, aspects of education, health, social welfare, tourism, transport and traffic, police and courts, consumer protection and social employment schemes. The report recommended that these be transferred in stages from central Government to local government. The Minister makes a general reference to areas that maybe the function of a local authority — social, economic, environmental, recreational, cultural, community and general development — but he does not specify in any great detail. That type of detail would contribute to ensuring that local authorities operate more coherently. Interpretation within that context may vary enormously from area to area.

Let me talk about education, for example. The Vocational Education Committee are neither very standardised nor very representational; there are no parents nor teachers represented on the VECs and the VECs vary enormously from one county to another. For example, in Sligo there is a VEC representing only a single vocational school. In the other area, the secondary sector there is no element of local authority because traditionally that was developed by the nuns, priests and brothers. Now the brothers have almost gone from the system, the nuns are in short supply and so are the priests. We are left with individual stand alone schools throughout the country with good, representative boards of management, teachers, parents and trusty representatives, but they are not co-ordinated; there is no structure to coordinate them. They are standing alone, in isolation, little islands, and as this decade goes by the situation will worsen. Is this not an area that a local authority could address? It has been addressed in practically every other country in the world, but there is no provision for an extension of local authority co-ordination or structural involvement in the functions specified here. That needs careful consideration now when changes are being considered. I ask the Minister to examine this area. It may not be possible to do anything about it under this legislation — although proper to it — but it could be taken account of in the preparation of the promised Bills.

We spoke yesterday about the prisons, the Garda and the courts. Is there any reason these could not be brought under the control of the local authority? The system at present is very badly administered and perhaps if these functions were devolved to the local authority an improvement would be effected.

The Fianna Fáil election manifesto said in relation to local authorities that Fianna Fáil would ensure that each local authority would gain the maximum benefit from EC regional funding and would introduce procedures whereby local authorities could make direct applications for regional funding and receive such funds directly from the Community. As the Minister knows, the opposite position was adopted by the Government. When the EC offered funding it was not accepted because it was to be made available in the context of being administered by the local communities and that was not acceptable to the Government. This is the contradition between what is proposed here and the reality. The proposal is in vague terms and really there is no desire to implement local authority reform.

Fianna Fáil in their election manifesto, stated that they would raise the annual housing output to 30,000 including 6,000 local authority houses per year; that the 50,000 unemployed building workers and their families and the 35,000 families waiting for homes could look with confidence to Fianna Fáil to meet their needs. I am afraid the figures I quoted in relation to local authority housing are a sad reflection on that declaration when only about 200 houses are to be built this year in the entire country. Approximately 25,000 people throughout the country are on the housing list and this is the Government's response. Where is the provision in this new Bill to ensure that local authorities have the powers and the funding to build new houses?

The Fianna Fáil election manifesto stated that Fianna Fáil viewed with concern the rapid deterioration of the county road system which represents 80 per cent of the public road network, that a special five year programme to assist local authorities to deal with the problem would be drawn up for the maintenance of county roads and that Fianna Fáil believed that the preservation of the investment of over 60 years in county roads was essential.

We were here last night until 12 o'clock and Senator O'Cuív agreed with Senator O'Foighil that the potholes in Galway were the worst in the country. That is a Senator from Senator Fallon's own party.

Mr. J. Ryan

They are not the worst.

Mr. Costello

Senator Ryan says they are not the worst potholes in the country. Obviously he has had some experience in North Tipperary. Occasionally when I manage to get down to Sligo these days I get experience too.

These were some of the promises and we are seeing what the delivery has been. I want to underline the dire need to ensure that local authorities can fulfil the functions for which they are established. They can do that only if the funding is put there to underpin them.

The advisory committee made a number of recommendations. I would like to see them incorporated in the Bill, for example, Ireland should ratify the European Charter of Local Self-Government. Why has that not been implemented? Is there some fear of having an international charter ratified in Ireland? If constitutional recognition were given to local government then there would be an implied responsibility to ensure that they were properly resourced and that local elections would not be capable of being postponed except in an emergency. The local elections have been postponed for a year to allow the introduction of this legislation which is very much a damp squib. We had expected substantial legislation because of the postponement. I would like to quote the view of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce regarding the resourcing of this legislation:

When the reorganisation report has been submitted to the Minister, he may, having considered it, direct that another report be jointly prepared by any one or more of the area managers in respect of or taking account of specified matters.

In relation to preparing for the establishment of the proposed councils by the Minister the work may be done by the council but the Minister will inspect it and he may order another report. Even that extra stage is so restricted by ministerial prerogative that nobody ever knows if we will ever reach it. Section 24 (2) states:

The Minister, having considered the reorganisation report and any reports under this section may, after consultation with the Minister for Finance, by regulations make such provision as appears to him to be necessary or expedient for the purposes of or to give full effect to or to facilitate —

During my time as a member of the UDC and Westmeath County Council many changes have taken place and many new activities have been taken on board by the various county councils, urban councils and local authorities. Going back a number of years we had a Minister known as the Minister for Local Government but that title has changed and he is now Minister for the Environment. We now talk about environment matters as if they have been part and parcel of the scene for a long time. That is not the case because it has only been in the last ten or 12 years, or thereabouts, that environment matters have surfaced as being important. We have to think about the water we drink and the air we breathe. We have legislation on air and water pollution and so on. Environment matters have become enormously important.

On the other side of the coin, responsibility for the health services has been removed from local authorities, for good reason. Health services are vital to this nation. I can recall my early days on the council going through the estimates for the county hospital in Mullingar and for the district hospital in Athlone. Responsibility for hospitals now lies with the eight health boards. Responsibility for the maintenance of courthouses has also been taken from local authorities. I cannot understand Senator Costello's rationale in this regard. For years local authority members of all parties have been asking what the maintenance of courthouses had to do with local authorities. Why should the ratepayers of Westmeath, Sligo, Dublin or wherever, have to pay for what is a Department of Justice function, the maintenance of courthouses? This Minister has now made a decision to take responsibility for this area from local authorities; about time. I cannot understand why Senator Costello is trying, even at this late stage, to have that decision reversed. It baffles me but it highlights the Senator's ignorance of the local government system.

Mr. Costello

The function of local authorities is to deal with local matters, and local courts and prisons are in the local area.

Mr. Fallon

Anyone who looks at all the local government legislation introduced over the past number of years will see they have had a major impact on our lives. Extra powers have been given to the local authorities in the areas of urban renewal, water pollution, planning, derelict sites and so on. The list is endless. Huge changes have taken place in the whole area of local government. Local authorities are doing an effective job and are working well. Reform is needed but not because the local authorities are doing a bad job. They are providing a huge range of services and they play a valuable social and community role which at the same time greatly enhancing the quality of our lives. It is a fact of life that we take the services provided by local authorities for granted. People never stop to think where the water in the taps comes from. They never stop to think of all the facilities and services provided by local authorities.

The infrastructure essential to economic development is provided by the local authority in many cases. They help to improve the economy and create jobs. They have contributed greatly providing land for development. Were it not for local authorities many industrial estates would not have been built and many thousands of jobs would not have been created. Local authorities have helped in a very positive and practical way by providing land and helping to build industrial estates. Most authorities now have their own county development team who play a role providing jobs.

Senator Costello seemed to suggest, as did other Senators, that to hand over millions of pounds is the answer to all our problems. Many people argue that more finance would be needed for local government reform and somewhere along the line money will be provided but local authorities should be given an opportunity to acquire their own resources. The Minister is handling this matter the right way. You have to put down a foundation, or improve your foundation as in this case, before you start to build. The first requirement surely must be to get the structures, functions and operations of the local authorities right. To concentrate on the finances at this stage would be wrong. As I said, you must first put down a proper foundation for the structures, functions and so on and move on from there.

The Government have indicated that this process has started. They have asked councils to streamline their estimates, which they are doing, they want to ensure the restoration of finances, at local and national level, in a more disciplined way, and again there is evidence that this is happening not just in local authorities but in health boards. We want better value for money. With the reorganisation of structures and the proper operation of local authorities, money can be saved.

There is no simple formula for complete local government reform. The Minister has indicated that complete reform would take a lot of time, dialogue, energy and effort. At the end of the day the local authority must have the capacity to promote the best interests and development of their own area. Local government must clearly be made relevant and close to the people. Community participation in the work of local authorities must be fostered and encouraged at every opportunity. Local government more than any Government Department relates most closely to the daily lives of our people. The Minister has indicated that additional legislation will be needed to complete the reform programme and I accept that. It will take time. Obviously we must wait for the results of the fiscal study, the consolidation and modernisation of the general code of local government law and the setting up of local government structures at sub-county level. I certainly welcome these proposals.

I am pleased that all the reports confirm that the county borough will continue to be the primary unit of local government. Eight regional authorities will be established, and I have no difficulty with that. I am a member of a health board comprising three counties: Offaly, Laois and Longford. We get on well as a team and the system works very well. We work with other counties and they help us. There is no reason that this system cannot be set up in the area of local government. I know the regional authorities will be different from the health boards because they will not have a budget of their own, but nonetheless the need for regional structures becomes apparent when one considers the range of services which are organised regionally.

Recently a major development in Athlone was completed, including the provision of a relief road and a bridge, at a cost of £37 million, and both West-meath County Council and Roscommon County Council were involved. There was a good co-operative spirit and both councils worked well as a team. We now have an excellent example of what many people would say is the finest engineering feat in the country in recent years. I was interested to hear Senator Ó Foighil say a fortnight ago that we should not have spent money on this road but that we should have used it to fill potholes. I do not accept that for a moment. That bridge and that road in Athlone will be very beneficial to the industries of Roscommon, to his own county of Galway and possibly, to a lesser extent, Mayo. It now takes only six minutes to go through Athlone where previously on a wet Friday or Saturday afternoon it would have taken an hour or more. Surely this is beneficial to the people and the industries of County Galway. He should remember this. It is more important to them than it is to me, a citizen of Athlone. Regional structures can be important. I gave the example of what two counties can do by acting together and getting important work done well. I note and indeed regret that Ministers and Ministers of State will be excluded from membership of local authorities. Many Ministers of State will be sorry about this, because they have always been totally committed to and had a great love for the local government system.

Section 28 provides for the establishment of an independent boundary advisory committee to review local authority boundaries and also, I understand, local electoral boundaries or other local government matters that might be referred to them. This is very important and I support that.

The role and the status of the elected members of local authorities is basic to the democratic system of local government. The Minister touched on this and suggested that the powers of the elected members are, in law, founded primarily on the concept of reserved functions. The Minister then went on to talk about the exclusive prerogatives of elected members as distinct from the executive functions exercised by the county managers. I share the Minister's view that councillors have a lot of power. The Minister talked about all the extra powers available to him and he specified a considerable number of important powers and functions that are being reserved to the elected members. Section 5 refers to representational functions of local authorities. Section 6 refers to activities to promote the interests of local communities. Section 29 refers to decisions in relation to the alterations of boundaries and the establishment of committees, which is very important. The local authorities are comprised of responsible people who will know where and when a committee should be established, and they will act wisely. I have no doubt about that.

Section 41 (2) provides a new general power for the Minister to declare official reserved functions by order. That is very important. The explanatory memorandum states that section 41 gives statutory recognition to the general policy-making role of local authority members and empowers the Minister to declare by order that specified additional functions of local authorities will be reserved functions for the purposes of the City and County Management Acts.

Local county councillors and local public representatives generally, are the unpaid servants of local communities. They do not object to that. By seeking election that is exactly what they seek to be. During my time in the local authority the role of county councillors, the town commissioners and urban councillors has changed. The problems of roads, housing, health and other issues like that preoccupied the minds of councillors and representations came fast and furious in those areas. In recent years there have been different types of problems, so that one would almost need to be a social worker, or a local ombudsman, as many of them are to deal with so many different problems. The reserved functions already tend to correspond with the policy making aspects of the Bill and there are specific powers to impose various requirements on the manager.

The Minister touched on the fact that the policy-making role of members not being spelt out clearly and succinctly in law has caused the role and status of the elected members to be understated. I agree totally with that. From time to time the elected members have given away some of their powers and many of them are not sufficiently aware of the full extent of the powers vested in them. I hope this Bill will help to further educate members as to their powers.

Section 42 provides for the payment of an allowance for reasonable expenses to the chairman of a local authority. The decision to pay an allowance will be a reserved function and the chairman is deemed to include the mayor or lord mayor. I agree with this. There is a view held that elected members should be paid. I was a councillor for 14 years before I became a Senator, but I disagree with this view. To pay an elected councillor could be the start of the destruction of the local democratic system as we know it. If we eliminate the voluntary role of the elected member of a local authority, we destroy the system. That must not be allowed happen. The voluntary role must never be diminished and it would be——

Mr. MacDonald

It might be a better idea to have the managers up for election.

Mrs. Honan

Even more often than seven years.

Mr. Fallon

——very serious for local democracy if that happened. That does not mean our members should not be allowed travel to conferences, seminars and so on. I totally and passionately believe that they are entitled to that. Expenses paid to elected members have often been criticised, but the elected members are as much a board of directors as the board of directors of a company. The expenses paid to councillors is usually less than one quarter of 1 per cent of the total budget for the county. It is a miniscule amount, yet the media are forever trying to make a mountain out of a molehill as far as expenses are concerned. If members of the council go on a seminar or to a conference in Ireland, the UK or elsewhere, I say why not? It is no longer a story for the national or local papers. Officials travel to these seminars and there is never a word about it. They are entitled to go, and they are entitled to be paid.

We, as local authority members, pride ourselves in spelling out our business to the nation, to the world. We invite the press to our meetings and they report as they like. The local press might find it very hard to fill their columns but for the county councils, urban councils, town commissioners and borough councils. They have given them a lot of stories over the years. Yet, the papers are all too willing to unfairly criticise us when anything goes wrong. Councils and their business are open and democratic, and long may they be that way. I passionately believe councillors are entitled to expenses but the system should not be abused. If it is abused by a small number of councillors, it is something I would not condone.

This Bill is phase 1 of an ongoing process. I regret very much that all the other parties did not take part in this exercise. We have been talking about local government reform for so long and they had an opportunity to have an input into this Bill. That they did not do so is regrettable. The Bill will enable the implementation of various reforms on an ongoing basis and it will provide for immediate implementation of some measures. The Bill constitutes the initial legislative segment of the local government reform programme. I look forward to seeing further legislation which will be required to bring it to completion.

Mr. McDonald

I welcome the idea of reform of local government but I must express regret that the debate on this legislation is a little restricted. This kind of legislation should really have been introduced in this Chamber because it is ideally suited to take a long and steady look at the kind of local administration and local government which would be desirable. Senator Fallon said that he spent 24 odd years a member of a local authority. I served for 34 interesting and fruitful years in seeing the infrastructures and the facilities in my own county built up from the fifties to a few years ago. Unfortunately local authorities have gone sharply into decline because of being starved of cash by the Department of the Environment. This stems from the Fianna Fáil Government election programme in 1977 when as part of stroke politics for the general election that year, they decided to drop the rating system and car taxation without putting anything in their place.

Mrs. Honan

Do not remind us.

Mr. McDonald

In retrospect that was a mistake and it gives me no pleasure to go back to its roots; I hope we will not have a recurrence of that problem because it has been very frustrating. When a member of a local authority makes a representation to the secretary or manager of an engineering department, he or she gets a sterotype reply to the effect that because of cutbacks, finance is not available to provide the service in question or to carry out repairs.

Does the introduction of this Bill herald an end to that glib answer, the great excuse that local authority officials have used for the past five or six years? Have we come to the end of this charade? Can we administer local services, serve the local communities and build up the infrastructures and the services especially to facilitate the evolvement of industry and commerce? We must do that to survive and to maintain, after 1 January 1993, an atmosphere of open competition.

I regret that we do not have time to go into detail on this very important legislation, the reform of local government, or perhaps more aptly, local administration, because for a long number of years we have not had genuine local government in the counties. Most of the worthwhile functions and inputs have been hijacked by management and by the administration, which is a pity, because the Minister must surely be aware from his long experience that local knowledge and input are important. I hope that the Minister will provide the necessary facilities for members of local authorities to make a genuine input to infrastructural development in relation to savings and other matters. It is frustrating to be a member of a local authority or any other body and to have a feeling that the time one spends in concentrating on the problems or the development of an area is not appreciated. There must be a response and I hope that there will be greater respect for members of local authorities.

Senator Fallon said he was not in favour of paying members of local authorities and I concur with that view. When I first became a member of Laois County Council in the mid-fifties the travel expenses amounted to 19s 6d per meeting and after 30 years that has gone up to £21 or £22 for seven hours. It is not over generous, nevertheless a small percentage of the community is prepared to serve. It is quite clear that the central coffers do not have the wherewithal to pay for the services, we must be prepared to share the care. There must be a sufficient number of people within every community prepared to share voluntarily the care, and to have a perception of the kind of society and environment in which we would like to live and to pass their philosopy on to the next generation, which is also important.

Through this Bill I hope the Minister will spearhead an era as far as local administration is concerned, in which councillors will be expected to have a greater input, in which their local knowledge will be utilised and in which the wishes and the experience of members of local authorities will be utilised so that the councils will be given an opportunity to identify their priorities for development or improvement. The administration now take it on themselves and sometimes reinforce their own views by saying the Department of the Environment insist on A, B and C and that there is no use looking for sanction for a project. That is wrong because individual members opt voluntarily to serve on local authorities as councillors, and their views should be respected; we must accept that since they live in the community they are most sensitive to the demands and the aspirations of that community. We must be conscious of their needs if we are to survive and to progress in an environment which will change next January.

It is regrettable, a Leas-Chathaoirligh, that there is no section dealing in this comprehensive legislation with the financing of local authorities. Since the change in the financing in 1977 nothing significant has replaced them. We were promised that the service charges which were the main issue in fighting the last local elections would be abolished although in my county they have been increased each year. On the other hand the greatest segment of the population, in the greater Dublin area, are not asked to pay service charges; there is inequality there.

The local authority of which I am a member only had sufficient finance last year to build six rural cottages and they are finding it difficult to ensure that roads, particularly county roads, are passable. On the other hand, one gets the impression as they drive through the city and county of Dublin that they have money for everything, including the planting of trees. We cannot afford to buy a shovel of gravel or sand to fill a pothole let alone plant a tree.

People are not treated equally when finance is being made available. I am also of the view that rural local authorities are being neglected and abandoned. We are not in a position to build houses as the vote for housing has been almost done away with. As I said, we are also finding it difficult to maintain the roads to ensure they are passable. I hope the Minister will give the House an assurance that the cutbacks have come to an end and that we can look forward to making progress from now on.

I had hoped that under this Bill the Minister would have entrusted greater responsibilities to local authorities. I am of the view that public representatives must be prepared to accept extra powers and responsibilities and, above all else, they must be prepared to say no. That has been one of the deficiencies of the system down through the years.

With regard to section 4 motions I have only signed four or five such motions in my career in Laois County Council as I do not believe in them. Section 4 motions should only be used to protect the rights of the public and not to give to some individuals an advantage. Legislation should only be introduced for the common good and in a democracy like ours there should be no question of legislating for an individual. Perhaps many cogent arguments could be made against that view but that is a view I have held for many years. This problem needs to be addressed and we should consider introducing a system to ensure that members of local authorities who are voluntary agents, are not subjected to pressure from individual or small sections of the community. Local government of necessity must work to the benefit of the population as a whole.

With regard to the travelling community, we should compliment the Department of the Environment who have made available more money than was called down by any local council for the provision of halting sites and housing. It is a scandal and a matter of regret that there are still over 1,100 travelling families living on the side of the road. I support the provision of halting sites as a first step in moving travelling families towards normal housing. That was a good policy decision. Some people who mean well have adopted an xenophobic attitude and do not want itinerant encampments, halting sites or hard stands near their homes. There is a need to educate people and, as a Christian society, we should tackle this problem and try to resolve it once and for all.

I would now like to refer to the plan for social housing which I welcome and note that the local authorities will have an input. I had the pleasure of listening to the Minister when he launched the scheme some months ago. As a person who has devoted considerable time to this issue, I have one reservation. The Department have increased the limit from £20,000 to £22,000 this year, even though I had expected them to increase it to £22,500 last year. The problem, however, is that it costs in excess of £32,500, excluding the cost of the site, to provide a house. Some years ago it would have been quite easy to raise 10 per cent or 20 per cent of the cost of a project such as this but voluntary fund raisers are now finding it extremely difficult to compete with the national lottery, the National Rehabilitation Board and some of the other better and well organised fund raisers.

I hope the Minister bears this in mind when preparing the Estimates because some of the health boards are not in a position to offer capitation grants. It is unfair, therefore, to expect voluntary organisations to collect substantial sums of money to cover the acquisition costs as well as the cost of maintenance work on an ongoing basis. There is a duty on every person who claims to be Irish and Christian to share the burden.

I subscribe to the Minister's policy on voluntary housing, but with one reservation. Leaving housing for the disadvantaged or disabled aside, it is going too far to expect the local community to raise funds for ordinary housing. I think the Minister is being too optimistic and believe that we will find it very difficult to provide adequate housing if we have to depend on voluntary bodies to raise finance. There is an increasing demand for housing. As I said, unfortunately, we had only sufficient funding to build six rural cottages last year. Furthermore, due to the cutbacks the number of our road staff has been reduced from 300 to fewer than 100.

Section 5 contains some reforms but I hope the Minister will explain the principle on which the section is based. Can we expect to receive extra funds to carry out the activities envisaged? Subsection (2) (c) states that local authorities may "promote, organise or assist the carrying out of research, surveys or studies with respect to the local community" to seek to promote, organise or assist in carrying out research, surveys or studies with respect to the local community.

Last year we had a problem with a dump. In our estimates for the previous year we provided about £7,000 for surveys and consultants' fees. At the end of the year the council had spent over £100,000 on consultants' fees on this one problem; and it was not solved. I would like to ask the Minister if there will be an extra allocation to implement the very desirable projects a local authority could do, on the advice of an active and imaginative development officer within the scope of sections 5 and 6. Will there be a special allocation to facilitate that, or is it just an enabling provision for local authorities to follow up themselves?

I would like to ask the Minister a question in relation to section 40. We have set up an ad hoc committee with members from counties Kilkenny, Carlow and Laois to deal specifically with mining. We have never discussed anything other than coal mining and trying to revive the coal mining industry. Nevertheless there is scope for greater expansion. From reading this Bill it would appear that the Minister envisages only two authorities cooperating, perhaps an urban council and a county council in the same administrative area. The occasional large development and complicated planning application call for the professional and scientific expertise that one would not need to have readily available on a county council. From that point of view, it would be of tremendous advantage to have an arrangement to co-operate. I compliment the Minister on section 40. I do not know what exactly the Minister envisages. I am not altogether in support of regionalisation. I do not think regional bodies are doing anything that the ordinary councils are not capable of doing. In my experience the nearer the ordinary individual is to the decision makers the better chance he has of getting a good hearing. For many years we have had joint burial boards, joint drainage boards and the mining committee. Can we now set up permanent boards? The existing boards, I presume, will stay but can we set up a board specifically to deal with mining and planning applications, and what great effect will it have on the administration? I must admit there has always been very close co-operation on the committee between councillors and the management especially where there are joint problems. Will the Minister deal with that issue in his reply?

Does the Minister propose to issue the regulations or will it be necessary for a council to ask that regulations be issued to enable them proceed under some of those sections? What will be the modus operandi?

I am in favour of section 42. It would appear the Minister is going to set the scale of remuneration for the council chairman or the mayors. That may not be a bad thing but again, I do not see autonomy being devolved to the local authorities because they must act under ministerial directions. According to section 51 (6), the Minister will publish the travelling expenses of members.

Mr. Flynn

No.

Mr. McDonald

Am I reading it incorrectly?

Mr. Flynn

It does not refer to the expenses of the individual.

Mr. McDonald

I am glad of that. I do not think it is of great interest other than the press are inclined to describe our attendance at public conferences as junkets. There should be greater participation by local authority members. I would like local authority members divided into subcommittees and members concentrating on specialising on particular sectors of administration. It is always useful to look over the hedge into the neighbouring county and see how the administration are dealing with such mundane problems as the management and control of central dumps. There is always a difference between the administration and management of one place and another. It is good to be able to pick up a good idea and pass it on.

Since the last local government Bill we have seen the demise of the county committees of agriculture, the General Council of Committees of Agriculture and, indeed, the demise of the county health advisory committees. They were a loss. We need a very active local administrative structure if counties are to progress and maintain the services for the people in their area.

This Bill is something like the curate's egg; good and bad. There are points in the Bill that I am not clear about perhaps because I have not had the opportunity of hearing the Minister's explanation. I look forward to hearing his reply on Committee Stage. In my experience what was most in need of reform and improvement from a local democratic point of view has in the main not been tackled. That is a great pity. Local democracy is a delicate flower; we need to work to ensure it continues to serve the public and the country. There is much in the Bill I hope we will be able to put to good use. The main need of local administration at present is greater financial resources and councillors need to take greater responsibility not just to raise the finance but to spend. If we expect to have the power to spend the money, we must have an input on how to raise the money as well.

Seanad Éireann debate - Friday, 17 May 1991

Local Government Bill, 1991: Second Stage (Resumed).

Acting Chairman

Acting Chairman

Acting Chairman

Mr. Farrell

Mr. Farrell

Tá

Níl

Seanad Éireann debate -
Friday, 17 May 1991