Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs debate -
Thursday, 13 Feb 1997

SECTION 14.

Mr. Howlin

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 11, subsection (2), between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following:

"(b) Subject to section 16(3)(b)(ii), no person, apart from the Chairperson, shall be entitled to be a member of both the Council and the Executive Board at the same time.".

The Bill provides for the Dublin Docklands Development Authority to have both a council and an executive board. There will need to be close contact between these two arms of the authority. This has been provided for through the chairperson's role and through the membership of the council and the board. Apart from the chairperson, it is intended that the membership of the council and the executive board will be separate, an intention which is implicit in section 16(4) of the Bill which, while providing for ordinary members of the executive board to attend meetings of the council, prohibits them from voting at such meetings. Amendment No. 5 will give explicit expression to the implication that I have just underscored in section 16(4).

Mr. E. Ryan

The presentation which the Minister has made about the lack of input from local working groups to the executive board concerns me. I would go along with the Minister in keeping the membership of the Docklands Authority group to a minimum, otherwise it would be very difficult to get the work done. Much of this will be very difficult and technical work. Perhaps the council could appoint some of their own people to the executive board. The inner city partnership feels that it is not going to be involved in the real decision making.

Mr. Howlin

The membership of the executive board will be seven. It is open to the Minister to appoint suitable people to that board and such people might include an appropriate community representative. Their inclusion is not prohibited. We do not specify the groups or individuals who would be appropriate for membership of the executive board. I have an open mind on that and it is something I will consider when I come to making those appointments.

It is even more important that the council would be representative of the broad range of groups you talked about. That is expressly provided for and that is the reason for having a separate council and executive. The council can be as broadly representative as possible rather than trying to squeeze all representational functions into one individual on a small executive. It is envisaged, under the provisions for electing or appointing the council, that up to eight of the 25 representatives would be appointed from specified panels, which include those involved in social development and so on.

Mr. McCormack

We have two different areas — south and north of the Liffey — and many different community groups. Is there room to incorporate both on the executive as the Dublin Inner City Partnership suggested?

Chairman

The case was made that, as the executive board would be very important, the Dublin Inner City Partnership would have one representative and the south-east and inner city network would also be represented; that would be three representatives on the executive board. Do you think there is any scope for considering that? In other words, would it be possible to increase the membership of the executive to nine, including the chairman?

Mr. Howlin

I am anxious to keep the membership of the executive small. The function that the groups you mentioned want can be very well met on the council where they can have a voice. Quite often where a number of groups are active in an area and they are required to select one representative, there may be subsequent unease that that person is not representing all shades of opinion. That is why we envisage a large council with 25 members and a chairperson. This will give scope for a broader representation from the community including those involved in economic and social development, partnership building and so forth. All these areas will be represented on the council.

Mr. McCormack

I have no problem with the council. It is a good idea. However, I do not think a membership of nine is too big for any executive and, while what the Minister is saying here today is logical, it is contrary to the case that was put to us only a half an hour ago by the Dublin Inner City Partnership that representation from the communities on the executive must be in a structured manner. That is the case which was put to the committee this morning and we would be failing in our duty if we did not put that case now.

Mr. E. Ryan

I do not go along with the idea that huge boards or councils are good. I think nothing gets done, no decisions are made and the board or council loses its focus and becomes nothing more than a talking shop. It is important that the council's decisions and opinions are conveyed to the executive board and taken into account. Many people would be concerned that the council would be doing one thing, making proposals and so on, while the board would be doing something completely different. I do not know how this issue could be addressed but if it was achieved and people were satisfied with the arrangement, it would work better. I agree with the Minister that the idea of having a huge membership would be crazy in the long term.

Mr. McCormack

Nine is not a big number.

Chairman

I agree that small can be beautiful but I also know, from experience, that imposed statutory groups, which have no local representation, can become very detached from the community. The Custom House Docks Authority is detached from the community. We would not want this new authority to be equally detached. It is evident from the written and oral presentations made by the Dublin Inner City Partnership that there is great expertise and experience available in the area and I think the Minister would do well to consider the point that there should be adequate local representation on the executive authority.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 14, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 15.

Amendment No. 6 not moved.

Mr. E. Ryan

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 12, subsection (4), between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"(c) the Minister shall appoint, in the nomination of the Board, a person to be the Educational Officer of the Authority whose remit shall be the promotion within the local community of the educational and employment opportunities within the area.".

Urban renewal is very positive but, as a representative of the south inner city, I know from talking to local groups and principals in national schools that there is no connection between the jobs being created and the local communities. If there is a specified person who will work with the board, the council, local schools and potential employers they can tell the schools and the parents the kinds of jobs which will be coming on stream and the training required. This will put education and job opportunities on the authority's agenda.

Mr. Howlin

Deputy Ryan made a strong case on Second Stage for a focus on education and training in the remit of the authority. I have given careful thought on how this could be achieved and have tabled amendments Nos. 10, 14, 22 and 28 which meet the Deputy's concerns.

The best way of providing for this objective is not to specify a single staff post but to ensure that the authority is given a statutory function in relation to these matters. Once the authority is established with specific educational and training responsibilities it will have to ensure that there is adequate staffing to carry out these functions.

Mr. E. Ryan

I agree that the Minister has tabled important amendments but will he look at this again? If there is no specified person reminding the board of its responsibilities an opportunity may be lost as has happened in the past. As there are other public representatives from the area who are members of the Minister's party who agree with my amendment, will he look at this again?

Mr. Howlin

I think the Deputy's objectives are being met but I will look at this again.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section 15 agreed to.