I move:
That Dáil Éireann confirms the following Order:
Local Elections (Specification of Local Election Year) Order, 1990,
a copy of which Order was laid before Dáil Éireann on the 30th day of April, 1990.
The purpose of this order is to postpone for one year the local elections which would otherwise fall to be held in June of this year. The statutory provision for altering the period for holding local elections is contained in section 2 of the Local Elections Act, 1973. This section provides that where the Minister is satisfied that local elections should be postponed he may, by order, provide that the elections shall be held in a year specified in the order. Such an order shall not come into effect unless and until a copy thereof has been laid before each House of the Oireachtas and the order has been confirmed by resolution of each House.
The instrument which this House is now being asked to confirm was made for one specific and very important reason, to facilitate an urgent and thorough review of the local government system so that a programme of local government reform and reorganisation can be implemented as soon as possible. Deputies will be aware of the statement issued by me a few weeks ago in which I outlined the aims, format and timescale of this review. I will be dealing with these aspects in more detail presently.
Firstly, however, I want to put it as emphatically as possible to the House that it would be utterly pointless to proceed with local elections at the very time when a major review of the structures and system of local government is being undertaken. Common sense alone would suggest the folly of electing some 1,600 councillors for a further five year term to old structures which are about to be subjected to a fundamental and comprehensive overhaul.
The issue, therefore, which this motion brings before the House for decision — and the only real issue — is to proceed now with the reform and reorganisation of local government. What do I need to say about local government reform? There is little to be said that has not been said many times already. If talk alone could achieve results, the local government system would have been reorganised several times over during the past 20 years.
Everyone seems to be aware of the need for reorganisation, for the introduction of change, but very little has happened. It is a matter which, to one extent or another, has been on the agenda of successive Governments. At times it has taken centre stage, but more usually it has been sidelined as energy was devoted to other urgent and pressing issues. Yet it has stubbornly refused to go away. The need for fundamental overhaul has remained and the local government issue remains.
In an endeavour to tackle the problem once and for all, the Government had proposed to establish an Oireachtas committee — an all-party commiteee — to examine and report on the whole question of local government reorganisation. There was much merit in this proposal. It was a means of seeking a general consensus about the way forward for local government, to plot the changes necessary for improvement and to establish a general basis as to the measures necessary. Unfortunately, not all political parties were willing to contribute to the proposed committee. In this context I would like to place on record that this approach was proposed by this Government to achieve a consensus and was rejected by those who are regularly to the fore in proclaiming the advantages of operating a parliamentary committee system.
With effective rejection of the proposed Oireachtas committee the Government had two options. Firstly, it could, as so often happened in the past, have backed away from the problem, abandoned the reorganisation question and allowed the local government system to drift on without the changes necessary to face into the future. The alternative was take action now — action that was so often avoided in the past — to strengthen our system of local government. We have chosen the latter course. It is for this reason that local elections due this year are being postponed — to allow for necessary changes to be made so that the electorate are fully aware of the reorganised system, its role, responsibilities, functions, structures and potential, and so that elections can be held on this basis.
I would like to reflect briefly on our existing local authority system. There is no denying that in many ways it has served us well. It has ensured that such basic services as water and sanitation are now enjoyed by almost every home, that an adequate road network has extended throughout the State, that housing has been provided for those in need, that recreational and amenity facilities — swimming pools, sports centres, parks, libraries, picnic sites and so on — are available and that there is capacity to respond effectively to fire and other emergencies. In general the supporting infrastructure to underpin viable economic growth is in place; action is taken to ensure that our environment is protected and that development proceeds on a properly planned basis. This gives an idea of the scope and range of local government activity.
Yet all of these efforts have had to take place in the context of an antiquated system. Local authorities have had to face the problems of the modern era from within a framework which in many ways remains as it was originally established over a century ago and which had its origins in 19th century British legislation. The structures which are still in place today were established by Acts of 1840, 1854, 1878 and 1898 — an age when roads were the preserve of the horse and the idea of democratic government was still regarded as a new-fangled and slightly dangerous motion. There is a clear need to consider how these structures are adapted to the demands of today. There is a clear need to ensure that the system can respond to modern needs and concerns and that the taxpayer obtains the best value for his or her investment in local government for the very sizeable share of public expenditures that local authorities put through their hands.
I could dwell at length on the particular needs of the Dublin area. Its sheer size, scale and the pace of development, the need for meaningful interaction with local communities, the need to enhance the sense of identity between communities and local government and the necessity to plan and operate services on an effective basis all point to the need for special arrangements to take account of these realities.
The last three decades in particular have seen a social transformation in Ireland. Changes such as urbanisation, population growth and dispersal, new economic factors, the move towards a car based society with new travel patterns, new recreational needs and increased public expectations that a local government system should impact on areas outside its traditional local authority domain and be free to take the required initiatives are developments that more and more point to the need for change. No system, public sector or private sector, can hope to remain forever unchanged. If it does it will eventually wither and die. It must be free to grow and develop.
There must be a new emphasis on dealing with problems, not to be hidebound by out of date procedures or frozen by institutional inertia. The system must be flexible. It must be capable of facilitating and supporting community and private enterprise and of undertaking action in its own right where this is needed for the benefit of its area.
The Government's aim is, first and foremost, to strengthen local democracy in Ireland. Modern communications and technology have greatly increased the opportunities for a move in this direction and the legislative framework should leave the way clear for local authorities to become progressively more involved. Side by side with this there is a need for a review of central controls and a removal of unnecessary procedures.
The powers available to local authorities will be looked at as will the question of reserved-managerial functions and the implications of "section 4" for the planning system. Much of the existing general legislation relating to local government is inflexible, antiquated and outdated and in need of consolidation and reform. Authorities must be freed from unnecessary constraints, made free to operate efficiently and effectively and internal procedures must support this. The system itself must not be an obstacle to progress.
Radical changes here will not happen overnight but we must begin a move to improve the existing situation. People who talk in broad generalisations must face up to the real problems and examine each service and its possibility for better integration.
The cost implications and the individual service requirements cannot be ignored. It is only in such a manner that we can move forward. Change along these lines is a major undertaking involving several Government Departments and many other public agencies. Legislation is obviously required. We will not be able to deal simultaneously with all the issues to which I have referred.
We propose, however, to deal with the immediate issues now and to map out our plan for the future and the arrangements to see through reforms which of necessity will take time to implement. Unlike what has happened in the past these are not mere pious aspirations. The Government have established a mechanism to see through the reform programme. A special Government committee have been set up to come up with proposals and have been asked to report by 30 September 1990. A committee of experts have also been established to assist in this task. The intention is that the necessary legislation will be brought forward this year and enacted by the end of February 1991. Any subsequent legislation which is required to cover related matters beyond the more immediate elements and any other administrative arrangements which may be required, will follow closely.
In setting out the immediate issues to be tackled by the special Government committee, the main emphasis must be on getting the structures and functions settled, but the committee are also being asked to make recommendations on the criteria on which the contribution from central funds to local authorities should be made on a statutory basis. It is appropriate that this question of funding should now be examined in conjunction with the question of structures and functions. While I cannot, and certainly have no desire to pre-empt in any way the special committee's consideration of the issues involved, it may well be that any recommendations they may make in relation to structures and functions could, of themselves, have direct consequences for the distribution of the central contribution. It is patently desirable that the special committee should address that issue. But quite apart from that, there have been developments in relation to local finances in recent years which, of themselves, require that special attention should now be given to this aspect.
I have implemented a number of significant reforms in relation to local finance over the past three years. The most significant of these perhaps was the introduction of straightforward capital grants to replace the outmoded and bureaucratic loans and subsidies system. This reform alone eliminated circular transfers of large sums between the Exchequer and local authorities and has produced a more streamlined financial arrangement both for central administration and for the local authorities. The merits of this change have been widely recognised. I am happy to say, too, that almost all statutory demands and extraneous financial burdens which bedevilled the efforts of local authorities to improve their own financial control and management over the years have now been eliminated. This streamlining process continued this year with the termination, which I announced recently, of local authority financial responsibility for the provision and maintenance of courthouses. The net effect on local finances is that local authorities will be recouped the cost of this work by the Department of Justice. This particular reform had long been sought by many local authorities over a long period.
Each of these reforms has been widely welcomed for its own sake. This is readily understandable when it is considered that each represented a direct financial burden on local authorities and related to services over which they had little real local control. The cumulative effect, however, has been to alter various aspects of the central-local financial "equation", if I may so describe it. It is timely that these aspects should be specially considered now.
What is now under way, therefore, is a programme supported by Government for the reform and reorganisation of local government which should see a system which is more meaningful and relevant to the public, which will meet the needs of local communities, which will give an efficient service in operating major expenditure programmes and which will maximise the return to the taxpayer for his investment. It is a system which will operate within a new legislative framework with the freedom to develop, which is alive and innovative with a substantial change in the scope of its activity and with an increased relevance for people going about their daily lives.
If the present order is confirmed by both Houses, the next local elections will fall due in June 1991. In accordance with the provisions of the Local Elections Act, 1973, the present members of local authorities will continue to hold office until the new elections are held. The 1973 Act also contains consequential arrangements in relation to the appointment of school attendance committees and the meetings of vocational education committees.
I do not believe that there is a single Member of this House who is not convinced of the urgent need for local government reform. The announcement of the Government intention has been well received inside and outside the House. I would ask you to remember in the final analysis that what is at issue here is not just the confirmation of a statutory instrument. It is an opportunity for this House to demonstrate its commitment to local government and to provide a clear mandate to the reform and reorganisation which we all know to be essential.
I, therefore, commend the order to the House.