I move:
That Seanad Éireann condemns the Government:
(a)for its failure to implement a strategy for better local government,
(b)reneging on its commitment to introduce on behalf of local government elected members, a salary-pension scheme commensurate with their contribution to society, and
(c)further condemns this Government for its failure to devolve authority and responsibilities to elected members.
This motion has been moved out of pure frustration which has been created by the Minister, who unfortunately is not here. Let me welcome Deputy Dan Wallace, Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government, to the House tonight. In the unfortunate absence of the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, he is going to bear the brunt of my tongue. The Minister for the Environment and Local Government has made commitments and promises to local authority members in the last few years and has failed to deliver on them. I previously accused him of avoiding coming into the Seanad and he denied it, saying that he had not been invited. He was invited here tonight and he is not here.
This motion relates to something very simple, the commitment to reform local government. This requires first of all reforming it so that it becomes meaningful to the people outside, but it also needs reform so that it becomes meaningful to the elected members. These elected members have made a commitment over the years to this country. They are the ones who underpin local democracy which the Minister himself says he supports as the central pivot of democracy, yet nonetheless he is not supporting it in this House. He brought forward a local government Bill which I believe is gathering dust in the Lower House.
Can I ask the Minister of State, since unfortunately the Minister himself is not here, to remind him of something? At the annual Christmas lunch in the Burlington Hotel of the local authority representative associations, LAMA, the General Council of County Councils and the AMAI the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, said:
Our reform of local government is dealing with the fundamental issues. We are putting you the elected members back at the centre of the local government system and at the cutting edge of policy and decision making.
Let us look at the history of what he has done with regard to policy and decision making. He is handing over the responsibility for the waste management programme from councillors to managers. That is not enhancing democracy but is reducing it, and is a step in the wrong direction. It is the very opposite to the commitment that he made then. It is worth remembering that in December 1999 he said, "The Bill is taking a little longer than I anticipated." This is 2001. If it was taking longer than he had anticipated then, what would he call it now that he has not even got it past Second Stage?
The provisions in the Bill are to deal with a number of issues, one of which is the dual mandate, and I believe that this is the one on which the Minister is getting stuck. I know that the Minister has enough support in the Lower House to get the Bill through, including this aspect of it, if he wishes to push it. I think his inaction is due to fear of the four Independents rather than a fear of losing the vote. If he had the guts to do what he is supposed to have done then he would put it through, something he has failed to do.
Another major aspect relates to that of direct election of cathaoirligh and mayors. The truth is that it is only there because it suits the Government. It suits Fianna Fáil because of the numbers game. It is not there to revolutionise local government, and does not give any more responsibility to a mayor or chairman vis-à-vis the manager. He has no more responsibility than if he was elected from among the councillors themselves, as is the case under the present scheme which has worked adequately in the past, and if it was not tampered with would work well in the future. It is democracy at work and the proposal is a ploy.
The third aspect is the payment of local authority members, who are rightly sick and fed up watching what is happening in this House. A salary increase was given to us in the Seanad, and also to Members of the Dáil, while they only got a promise that salaries would be paid to them and that was over two years ago. The Government amendment welcomes us belatedly on board into the salary and pension scheme. I was speaking in favour of this a long time before the Minister ever thought about it, and he does not have the right to claim it as his own.
Some time ago a survey was carried out by the General Council of County Councils where they asked local government members to keep a record of an average week's work. The results averaged out at 19 hours a week, which in anybody's lexicon is two and a half working days. That is not just during the daytime because most of the business that people do in local authorities is carried out in the evenings, on weekends and at night. This is not to say that they themselves are the only ones working because, as Senator Walsh will say, when he is not at home somebody else is taking the calls for him. Local authority members are supplying a service to the community and if something goes wrong they are the first people to be phoned. If there is a leaking water pipe they are the first to be approached. If a light fails somewhere they are the first to be approached. At the same time, we are refusing to pay them, refusing to give them something which I believe is their right, and I am sure Senator Walsh also believes it.
All we are asking is that this right be recognised and that they are paid as soon as possible. Payment should be backdated not just to last May or to when the Bill was introduced a year ago but to when they were elected, which was the previous June. It is only right that as they are carrying out the work that they should be paid for it. One of the factors we should take into account is the amount of additional work that local authority members are being asked to carry out. The tabulation of hours worked by local authority members does not convey the full picture as these hours are unsocial. Since the survey was carried out a new generation of committees and quangos has been spawned, namely the corporate policy groups and the SPCs which multiply the time involved for members. There are committee meetings, housing committee meetings, ADMs and all of those require members to do more work rather than less. When I put it to the Minister that the SPCs would involve more work, he replied that it would actually mean less, which is not true. Any measurement of the workload of local authority members would show that it has increased by at least 50%, yet the Government refuses to recognise it.
I do not understand why the Government will not move on its own Bill. It is a simple matter. The Minister has the numbers and he is in Government. An attempt is being made to blame the Opposition for the delay in passing the Bill. The Opposition has nothing to do with it. It is a Government Bill. The Government has the numbers to put other Bills through the Oireachtas, so why can it not put this one through? It is a simple request.
I cannot believe the Government amendment before us. Senator Walsh is laughing because he cannot believe it either. I do not know who dreamt up the amendment but it is ridiculous. It must have been churned out by someone in a back room. It was stupid to bring it into the House. I await with curiosity the Minister's defence of this amendment.
I had hoped that the Minister would inform us of a date for Second Stage. The Bill is stuck on Second Stage in the Lower House. I want to know when it will be moved on to Committee Stage. We on this side offered to take it in this House first if that would help. We even offered to move the Bill but, unfortunately, we were prevented from doing so because it contains a financial provision. We have tried to be helpful to ensure that the Bill is passed. We have adhered to our line on the dual mandate, yet there are people outside accusing the Opposition of holding up the Bill.
I have spoken to several Senators from the opposite side of the Chamber who are embarrassed and feel that it is right to put down this motion to try to ensure that this Bill progresses. If the Minister has to make some modifications to keep his Independents happy, let him do so. There will be other opportunities to introduce legislation. It probably boils down to intransigence on his part. There must be disputes between the Minister and the Whip in the Lower House. We simply request that he recognises the contribution made by members of local government and the commitment they have shown in the past and will show in the future by acknowledging that their role deserves compensation and providing for that compensation.
I appeal to the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Wallace, to go back to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, and tell him that local authority members, even his own people, will not support the Government if he fails to get this Bill through. Even now, many of them are bitter at the Government and I do not blame them. When Deputy Dempsey goes knocking on doors seeking support he will not find his own people behind him unless he adheres to the commitment he made. He made it, let him keep it.