Local Government (Mayor of Limerick) and Miscellaneous Provisions Bill 2023: Report and Final Stages
For the information of Members, please note that the House by agreeing to the motion to recommit allows a Committee Stage-style discussion on amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, and amendment No. 32, and those amendments only. That is, Members may speak more than once on each of those amendments. In respect of other amendments, I remind Senators that a Senator may speak only once on Report Stage except the proposer of an amendment who may reply to the discussion on the amendment. Also on Report Stage each non-Government amendment must be seconded.
Amendment No. 1 arises out of recommittal proceedings. Amendments No. 1 to 3, inclusive, and amendment No. 32 are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Bill recommitted in respect of amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive.
Government amendment No. 1:
In page 9, line 32, after "2014;" to insert "to provide for the raising of certain funds by the Land Development Agency and for that purpose to amend the Land Development Agency Act 2021;".
I will speak on amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, and amendment No. 32, which have been grouped for discussion. These amendments dealing with a miscellaneous amendment and consequential amendments to the Long Title, collective citation and commencement provisions. The miscellaneous amendment inserts a new provision into Part 8 of the Bill. It will amend the Land Development Agency Act 2021 to make provision for the Land Development Agency to raise funds through the performance of certain functions and through measures outlined in the Affordable Housing Act.
Amendment No. 1 is an amendment to the Long Title of the Bill to ensure it reflects the amendment to the Land Development Agency Act 2021. Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 amend the collective citation and commencement provisions in section 1 to take account of the miscellaneous provisions being added and the various Acts being amended by the Bill.
Amendment No. 32 inserts a new section 32A into Part 3 of the Land Development Agency Act 2021. It provides for the LDA to raise up to €1.25 billion in additional funding through the performance of certain functions outlined in the Act and through measures outlined in the Affordable Housing Act 2021. It is a housing activation measure. The amendment is necessary to ensure the LDA has adequate access to funds to deliver the 14,000 homes projected in its 2024 to 2028 business plan. In light of the change regarding the market rate and the social and affordable housing requirements of the agency, additional funds will complement the investment of a further €1.25 billion in ISIF funding provided for in an earlier amendment to the Bill. The amendment requires the consent of the Minister and the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform for funds to be raised in this manner. Given the critical role of the LDA and the importance of providing more social and affordable homes, I ask Senators to support the amendments.
I thank the Minister of State. These are very important amendments. The decision was made by the Cabinet prior to Christmas to increase the capital allocation to the Land Development Agency to enable it to be able to enhance its capacity to be able to deliver houses throughout the country, be they affordable purchase, cost rental or private houses in regional cities outside Dublin and Cork.
I have a point to make on this, which is more of a comment for the Minister of State to take away. When the CEO of the LDA came before the committee a few weeks ago we teased out the cost-rental model and how the LDA arrived at the figure of 25% below market rent, as is provided for in the legislation and regulation. It is making provision through direct capital subvention and there is very little borrowing. If we look at the approved housing bodies there is the CREL scheme and the other private sector borrowing they can get on the open market. Over time these units will become even more affordable because of the 25% discount. As the LDA is not borrowing for these units, it probably has the capacity to be able to deliver them at a further discount on market rent. I am not saying they could be discounted to nothing, absolutely not.
The argument relating to the Vienna model is that Vienna delivered and built its units after the Second World War and, in time, the city owned those units after 30 or 40 years when they were paid for. The reality is that as the model the LDA has chosen, through not highly gearing in terms of borrowing, means these units are paid for up front, its ability to deliver rents that are more competitive is probably there. That is more of a comment. I am not sure whether the Minister wishes to address the issue. I understand how rents are arrived at in the context of AHBs. It is a calculation based on the repayments over 30 or 40 years. That is not the case with the LDA, as confirmed by its CEO at the committee meeting a few weeks ago.
I support the Minister in respect of these three amendments. What he is trying to do with regard to the LDA is significant, particularly in Limerick, but also everywhere else. The Bill is about Limerick, however, and I wish to focus on that. It is clear the LDA has a significant amount of work to do. We need to support and assist it. There will come a time when we have to make a judgment on the LDA. It has been slower to get off the ground than many, including the Minister, had hoped, but I see where the Minister is coming from and I support the amendment.
I, too, support the amendment. It is important that the LDA is adequately resourced. It is a unique and unprecedented intervention this Government has taken to establish the LDA on a statutory basis and use State-owned lands to deliver public homes. It is using public lands to deliver social and affordable homes. The LDA has appeared before the Oireachtas committee, as Senator Cummins stated. We meet with it regularly. We visited its site in Shanganagh, where more than 600 homes are being built. They are top-quality homes. It is a fabulous development where local authority lands are being used by the LDA to deliver social and affordable homes. It is a great project. The LDA has shared with us its plans to deliver another 14,000 homes. If I have one ask in the context of providing this extra support to the LDA, it is for the LDA to increase its activity, particularly in urban areas, such as Dublin city and its surrounding areas. The LDA has got off to a good start but it needs to accelerate and ramp up and be very ambitious. We all have a shared ambition to increase housing delivery and affordability. The LDA can play a significant part in achieving that. We need it to do so.
I thank Senators Cummins, Boyhan and Fitzpatrick for their contributions and support. I make the point to Senator Cummins that although the LDA has the capacity to borrow under the LDA Act, with prevailing rates, that is not possible. What we are doing here is putting a measure in place. We have already increased the equity stake from €1.25 billion to €2.5 billion in terms of investment by the State through ISIF. Now we are allowing it to look at alternative areas of funding up to €1.2 billion of a cap. In effect, the LDA is seeking to deliver 14,000 homes. It is not just about the model; it is also about access to finance. This relates to a point raised by Senator Fitzpatrick. What we are doing here is ensuring the LDA, which is very much functioning and up and running, can effectively progress with its plans and the building of houses. As a Government, we are providing the LDA with additional State funding of €1.25 billion, but also ensuring it can access alternative sources of funding We are putting that in the LDA Act to ensure it can progress. I thank Senators for their support.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 2:
In page 10, line 7, to delete “sections 65, 66 and 67” and substitute “sections 65, 66, 67 and 69”.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 3:
In page 10, line 18, to delete “sections 66 and 67” and substitute “sections 66, 67 and 69”.
Amendment agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 13, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:
“(3) In conducting a review under this section, the Minister shall examine the manner in which the powers afforded to the elected council intersect with those of the Mayor and shall look to ways in which additional reserved powers of the elected council could be designated.”.
I have been asked by Senator Higgins to move her amendments. I have notified the Clerk of the Seanad and the Acting Chairperson, Senator Kyne, of that request. I will keep my remarks tight because I am conscious everyone wants to get moving on it. Amendment No. 4 seeks to address an issue of long-standing concern, namely, the power afforded to local councillors. It is well documented that executive decision-making in local government has, for far too long, been extremely undemocratic. The current model needs reform to foster community empowerment or strengthen local democracy. This amendment asks that a review of the Act look at enhancing and adding to the reserved powers of councillors.
The amendment seeks to expand the focus of the review of the Act. This will include identifying potential additional reserved functions for the elected council by assessing where powers of the mayor and the elected members intersect. I highlight that the purpose of this section is to allow for review of the operational effectiveness of this historic legislation. As the focus of the review will be on the new roles and structures in place in Limerick, it would not be an appropriate avenue for considering the powers of elected members. This issue came up on Committee Stage and my position remains unchanged. As I noted on that Stage, a key principle in the development of the Bill is that it does not remove any reserved functions and does not provide any new reserved functions. Reserved functions are consistent across all local authorities. This is about the mayor. I have been at pains to point out that a core principle of the legislation is that the reserved powers of the existing councillors within Limerick City and County Council remain unchanged. That is the case. It is consistent across all local authorities. The Bill is specifically about the mayor of Limerick. On that basis, I cannot accept the amendment, though I am aware of its intent. It is probably for another area of legislation.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendments Nos. 5 and 6 are related and may be discussed together, by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 5:
In page 14, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following:
“(3) Functions conferred by or under any enactment specified in Part 2 of Schedule 1 may be removed from that Part and thus conferred on the Mayor by resolution of the elected council, with such a resolution requiring a two-thirds majority.”.
Amendments Nos. 5 and 6 relate to executive functions of the mayor and were both discussed on Committee Stage. Amendment No. 5 proposes that the function of a director general in Schedule 1, Part 2 may be conferred on the mayor by resolution of the elected council. Again, I emphasise that the mayor would be responsible for many of the executive functions of Limerick City and County Council. Only certain categories of executive functions remain with the director general, as we have discussed. The plebiscite should be put to the people. As I am satisfied that the schedule correctly assigns in the existing Bill appropriate functions to the director general, I cannot accept the amendment. My position is consistent with what I set out on Committee Stage.
Separately, I make the point that the legislation will be subject to review after three years, as set out in section 7. Amendment No. 6 will require the director general to submit a list of executive functions to the mayor. I spoke to the amendment at length on Committee Stage. My position remains the same. As previously stated, the scale of compiling the proposed list means this is a particularly detailed piece of work. That said, this is an area I would like to see develop in future, with something similar to the Local Government Management Agency, LGMA, catalogue of service being produced for statutory functions. In the meantime, the proposal I made on Committee Stage to make a copy of this catalogue and an explanatory table for all enactments in the schedule of this Act available for the mayor and elected members may offer a reasonable and sufficient insight.
For these reasons, I do not propose to accept this amendment, as on Committee Stage. I recognise the importance of this issue to Members and hope they see the value of my proposal.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendment No. 6 not moved.
I move amendment No. 7:
In page 17, between lines 32 and 33, to insert the following:
“(3) The Mayor shall be accountable to the elected members of Limerick City and County Council in the performance of his or her functions, unless otherwise specified in this or another enactment.”
This amendment, tabled by the Civil Engagement Group, was discussed on Committee Stage. It seeks to clarify that the mayor is accountable to the elected members for performance of his or her functions. I appreciate the Senators' intentions but reiterate the elected council will retain its primacy and the Bill does not change that. The elected members will have an important oversight role and the mayor will be accountable to the elected council under mayoral executive functions. Several formal structures underpin this governance role, including the mayor's report and the mayor's questions at plenary council meetings.
The existing provisions of the Local Government Act 2001 for the council's oversight of the chief executive will also be applicable to the mayor, as set out in the Bill. The modifications to section 149 of the 2001 Act in Schedule 3 clarifies that, similar to a chief executive, the mayor is generally accountable to the council and must perform his or her respective functions in accordance with the policy of the local authority as determined by the elected council and must report to the council as requested.
Part 7 of the Bill sets out provisions for legal mechanisms to remove the mayor through a robust and fair three-tiered process. The process is initiated and advanced through resolutions by elected members representing the democratic will of the council. I cannot accept the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 8 not moved.
Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Government amendment No. 9:
In page 22, between lines 24 and 25, to insert the following:
“(6) Notification of a delegation under this section or of its subsequent revocation shall be given to the members of Limerick City and County Council as soon as may be after the delegation or revocation of delegation concerned.”.
Section 27 proposes the mayor may delegate in writing certain functions to the director general. This applies only to functions that transfer from the chief executive to the mayor when the latter assumes office. The amendment requires the elected members of Limerick City and County Council are notified when a function is being delegated to the director general or when a delegation is being revoked. The amendment was the subject of lengthy discussion on Committee Stage with Senators Higgins and Cummins. It is a positive addition to the Bill and aligns well with similar provisions in section 154 of the Local Government Act 2001 regarding delegations made by the chief executive. I am happy to table this amendment and ask Members to support it.
Amendment No. 10 proposes to amend section 27 to revoke any delegations made by the mayor at the end of his or her term. This amendment was also tabled on Committee Stage. As I said then, the Bill is clear on this point. An individual mayor may decide to delegate functions or revoke any delegations he or she makes. Even when delegated, that power or function continues to vest in and be performed by the mayor. In performing a delegated function, the director general does so under the mayor’s supervision and control. When a new mayor takes office, the delegation orders made previously fall. The objective of the amendment is already implicit and catered for in the Bill. This amendment is unnecessary. I thank the Senators but I cannot accept it, as I outlined on Committee Stage.
I thank the Minister of State for taking on board the suggestions made on Committee Stage. It is important, as he said, that the members of Limerick City and County Council would be informed should a decision be made by the elected mayor to delegate a statutory power to the chief executive officer.
As he also said, the need for amendment No. 10 does not arise, as we discussed on Committee Stage.
Amendment No. 9 would provide for notification of both delegations and revocations of delegations from the mayor to the director general to be given to the elected council. This reflects the engagement the Minister of State had on Committee Stage and I thank him for reflecting on those concerns for his good colleague, Senator Cummins, and for Senator Higgins. I am happy to support that.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 10 not moved.
Amendments Nos. 11 and 20 to 25, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Government amendment No. 11:
In page 23, between lines 4 and 5, to insert the following:
“ “Act of 2015” means the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015;”.
Within this grouping, the Civil Engagement Group tabled a number of amendments to section 32, related to the delivery board, which I would like to address first. Amendments Nos. 20 to 22, inclusive, propose to increase the ex officio members of the board to include members of An Taisce, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Irish Wildlife Trust. As I outlined on Committee Stage, the composition of the board as set out in the Bill is designed to align with its intended primary functions, which involve the chair working with key public bodies and supporting implementation of a number of core planning frameworks and strategic plans for the city and county. As chair of the board, the mayor has significant additional powers and is in a unique position to bring added value to Limerick, particularly in the delivery of infrastructure. I recognise the importance of having climate expertise on the board and have brought forward an amendment to that effect. Otherwise, I am satisfied the proposed membership structure of the board is appropriate to achieve its aims and, therefore, I do not propose to accept these amendments. I acknowledge they are well-intentioned but I believe we have catered for that area.
Senators will recall discussion on Committee Stage regarding the delivery board transport subgroup and the importance of ensuring membership included a person with relevant climate expertise. Senator Garvey tabled an amendment to that end and I indicated I would consider the issue in the round and table amendments on Report Stage to fully address the matter. Amendments Nos. 11 and 23 to 25, inclusive, propose changes to section 33 in this regard. Amendment No. 23 proposes that when the mayor appoints persons to the delivery board, he or she will consult with the EPA to ensure a person with relevant expertise is on the board. Amendment No. 25 proposes the delivery board, as chaired by the mayor, will have a role in supporting implementation of any climate action plan for Limerick.
I am proposing similar amendments to section 34 regarding the transport subgroup. As that is a sub-committee of the delivery board, it is appropriate these apply to both. Those amendments will be discussed in a later grouping.
Amendment No. 11 proposes a definition in section 29 for the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015, which is referred to in a number of the amendments I propose today. Amendment No. 24 is a minor technical drafting amendment consequent on substantive amendments. I trust Members will support these amendments.
I welcome to the Chamber Mr. Etienne Rapacki, who is the guest of Senator Horkan. I hope he enjoys proceedings.
What is being tabled by Government on Report Stage is a reasonable compromise on the Committee Stage debate. The engagement with the EPA on that representative should give confidence to people looking at this legislation that the appropriate personnel would be appointed to the delivery board following consultation with a highly regarded statutory agency.
I will speak to amendment No. 11. This is a Government amendment inserting the definition of climate action into the Bill, about which the Minister of State had much discussion with Senator Higgins. I thank him and Senator Higgins also wants to thank him for engaging with her in the House on this matter. She is pleased with his response and she asked me to convey that.
I propose to withdraw amendment No. 20. Amendment No. 25 reflects concerns again raised by Senator Higgins in the mandate for the Limerick Project Ireland 2040 delivery board. The Minister of State will recall that we had extensive discussions on this matter. Her concerns about the delivery board related to the lack of reference to climate action and biodiversity but, as I said, that has been taken on. Senator Higgins asked me to convey to the Minister of State that she is glad he listened. Is that not lovely of her to say of him? I do not doubt it. That is what she asked me to convey. She feels this is a progressive amendment and welcomes it.
I welcome the contribution from Senator Boyhan. I also acknowledge the contribution to the debate by Senator Higgins in this regard. The amendments we are putting forward in this area will add constructively to the overall tenet of the Bill.
Amendment agreed to.
Acting Chairperson
Amendment Nos. 12 and 14 to 19, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 12
In page 23, line 30, to delete “section 34.” and substitute the following:
“section 34;
“United Nations Sustainable Development Goals” means the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 1 to 17 set out in the document entitled “Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, published by the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2015” or any document which amends or replaces that document.”.
Amendment No. 12 seeks to insert a definition of sustainable development goals. We had a lot of discussion on this with the Minister of State during the previous session. On the basis of amendment No. 11 being inserted and subsequent amendments that will be added to address the issue, Senator Higgins is happy for this amendment to be withdrawn, with the consent of the House.
I will speak to amendments Nos. 12 and 14 to 18, inclusive, from the Civil Engagement Group and Government amendment No. 19 as they relate to the mayoral advisory and implementation committee and have been grouped for discussion. Amendment Nos. 14 to 16, inclusive, relate to membership of the committee and seek to mandate representatives of An Taisce, the environmental pillar and the Irish Wildlife Trust as members of the committee. A key role of the committee, which the mayor will chair, will be to support the mayor in preparing the implementation of the mayoral programme. It will support the mayor in driving progress in economic, touristic, social and cultural matters in the interests of sustaining employment, co-ordinating initiatives and services, funding to support rural areas and measures concerning town regeneration. It is entirely fitting that the mayor should be the person to appoint committee members, including elected members and representatives of nominating bodies, as appropriate. In this regard, it is clearly in the mayor's own interest to have a broad representation in this committee. It is key to the success of his or her term as mayor. I do not believe that amendments that constrain the mayor in this regard would be beneficial to the overall function of the office of mayor. For that reason, I cannot accept them.
Amendments Nos. 17 and 18 revisit, combine and rephrase some of the Civil Engagement Group's proposals for section 32 on Committee Stage. Current proposals seek to expand the function of the advisory and implementation committee by adding climate action, biodiversity and sustainable development goals. Amendment No. 12 proposes to include a definition for the term "United Nations Sustainable Development Goals". Several amendments on Report Stage have the same core objective on these important issues. I have been wary of being overly prescriptive but the emphasis that might have placed on the issue is something I fully agree with. Amendment No. 19, to the same subsection, which I will speak to shortly, reflects this. By merging the topics of nature, biodiversity and sustainable development into a single subsection, I have also ensured that the list of issues the committee should address is not excessive. The proposed amendments from Senator Higgins to section 33 also touch on climate action. I am proposing in further amendments to the Bill that they integrate a role for the mayor's delivery board transport subgroup, supporting the implementation of the Limerick climate action plan requirement under the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the Civil Engagement Group, with Senator Higgins bringing forward amendments on its behalf, for its commitment to climate action, biodiversity and sustainability. In my proposed amendments to section 32 and other areas of the Bill, I believe I have catered for much of the intent of these amendments and so I believe I have adequately provided for them
Amendment No. 19 adds to new sections to the mayor advisory implementation committee regarding subsections (d) and (g). These are the areas of nature and biodiversity and the regeneration project in Limerick. There is also some reordering of paragraphs. Senator Boyhan has an amendment on the regeneration projects. The importance of having regard to nature, biodiversity and sustainability was a recurring team during Committee Stage. I undertook to consider whether these would give effect to the concerns raised. I am satisfied that clear reference to promoting, fostering and supporting conservation and restoration of nature, protecting and enhancing biodiversity and sustainability and developing Limerick adds a valuable statement of intent to the role of mayor.
Regeneration was another theme on Committee Stage. Senator Boyhan tabled an amendment in this regard. The regeneration of Limerick has been high on the agenda for many years. While there are a number of references to regeneration in the Bill, I am pleased to make further explicit provision for the mayor's role in the co-ordination of other regeneration projects in Limerick. This provision will encompass redevelopments in Limerick city through the reporting requirements of Limerick 2030 DAC, which will also allow the mayor to drive the Limerick regeneration framework implementation plan and any successors it may have. In addition, the provision will clarify the role of mayor in the regeneration of Limerick city beyond what is already provided for. Effectively, within page 26, I inserted two new sections that deal with the functions of the committee. I added two new functions:
(d) to promote, foster and support conservation and restoration of nature, protection and enhancement of biodiversity, and sustainable development in Limerick [and]
(g) the coordination of other regeneration ...
Subsection (f) stated, "the coordination in Limerick of measures giving effect to Government policy concerning the regeneration of towns,", to which, "the co-ordination of other regeneration projects in Limerick", was added, which will encompass all regeneration including Limerick city regeneration projects, which are important and key to the people living there and the city, which I am proud to represent in Dáil Éireann. I am happy to make this amendment and I ask Senators to support it.
Regeneration is of the utmost importance. On Committee Stage, the Minister of State indicated that there was capacity in the Bill to do this. It was obviously his desire to ensure that regeneration was covered. Those two additional functions add to that. I spent four great years in college in Limerick. At that time, the regeneration work was starting. I have been back there many times since and it is clear the work being done is having the desired impact on the city centre and suburbs. I compliment the Minister of State for listening and knowing his constituency best in ensuring the mayor who will be an advocate for the city and county will have important responsibility in this area.
I thank the Minister of State. He said he would listen and reflect. I did not quite know to what extent but I see in amendment No. 19 much of what we debated about regeneration.
It seemed to take a long time to hammer out something there. We will come to amendment No. 36 later. Nevertheless, I will indicate now that I think amendment No. 19 addresses it.
I work with people and I think doing so is important. There was some resistance to what I thought was a very simple proposal, namely, that the mayor shall be responsible for the implementation and management of regeneration projects in Limerick city and county. The other amendment sought to ensure the mayor will provide a report on same. That was an obstacle the other day but it is not an obstacle today, so let us move forward. It will now be embedded in the Bill, where I can see the exact wording.
It is about getting things done and working with people. Sometimes, when there is a bit of air between sessions, we can suddenly see the light. I thank the Minister of State and will support him in regard to the amendment.
That is healthy. We will take the amendment very much in the spirit in which it was tabled. I thank the Senator.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Government amendment No. 13:
In page 25, line 12, to delete “7 days” and substitute “14 days”.
It is proposed to amend section 31 (4) regarding the mayoral programme. The mayor must present a draft of their mayoral programme for consideration by elected members of the council meeting. As drafted, the members would have to receive a copy of the draft seven days before the meeting, but the amendment will extend that period to 14 days. The Civil Engagement Group proposed a similar amendment on Committee Stage and I said I would reflect on that and come back to it on Report Stage. I have done so and believe a longer period for elected members to consider progress is appropriate. I trust Senators can support the amendment.
The amendment will give councillors more time to consider the mayoral programme before it is discussed at a meeting. Increasing the period for consideration from seven to 14 days is more than reasonable and the Minister of State is accepting the substantive issue relating to the amendment. Again, that is positive and we have made progress on the previous debate, so I am very supportive.
I thank the Senator and the other Members for their support and co-operation. Obviously, it is healthy for legislation to be debated.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 14 to 18, inclusive, not moved.
Government amendment No. 19:
In page 26, to delete lines 14 to 23 and substitute the following:
“(d) to promote, foster and support conservation and restoration of nature, protection and enhancement of biodiversity, and sustainable development in Limerick,
(e) the coordination in Limerick of initiatives, services and funding giving effect to Government policy to support rural areas,
(f) the coordination in Limerick of measures giving effect to Government policy concerning the regeneration of towns,
(g) the coordination of other regeneration projects in Limerick,
(h) the discussion and consideration of initiatives to sustain employment in Limerick, in particular the rural areas thereof,
(i) the discussion and consideration of measures to enhance cooperation between nominating bodies, and
(j) the consideration of any matter that may affect Limerick or Limerick City and County Council.”.
Amendments Nos. 20 to 22, inclusive, not moved.
Government amendment No. 23:
In page 27, between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following:
“(4) The Mayor shall, after consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency, appoint a person who has knowledge of, or expertise in, matters relating to climate and at least one of the areas referred to in subparagraphs (i) to (x) of section 9(4)(a) of the Act of 2015 to be a member of the delivery board.”.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 24:
In page 28, line 12, to delete “and”.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 25:
In page 28, between lines 12 and 13, to insert the following:
“(c) to support the implementation, in accordance with guidelines issued under section 14B(8) of the Act of 2015, of any local authority climate action plan (within the meaning of that section) prepared by Limerick City and County Council, and”.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 26 to 30, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Government amendment No. 26:
In page 29, between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following:
“(4) The Mayor shall, after consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency, appoint a person who has knowledge of, or expertise in, matters relating to climate and transport policy to be a member of the transport sub-group.”.
As mentioned, following discussion on Committee Stage about the importance of including on the transport subgroup a person who has relevant climate expertise, I have proposed a number of amendments to section 34 that I believe fully address the matter. Amendment No. 26 proposes that where the mayor is appointing a person to the transport subgroup, they will consult the EPA to ensure someone with the relevant climate expertise is a member.
Amendment No. 28 proposes that the transport subgroup chaired by the mayor will have a role in supporting the implementation of the climate action plan for Limerick. These amendments are similar to the amendments proposed to section 33, on the delivery board. As I outlined, given the transport subgroup will be a subcommittee of the delivery board, it is appropriate that the provisions apply to both committees.
Amendment No. 27 is simply a minor technical drafting amendment consequential to the substantive amendments. I trust Senators to support these important amendments.
Separately, the Civil Engagement Group has two amendments in this grouping, which I would like to speak to. Amendment No. 29 is a retabling of a Committee Stage amendment that would oblige the transport subgroup to act in accordance with the Paris Agreement, the United Nations sustainable development goals, the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. We discussed these matters in depth on Committee Stage last week and touched on some of these issues with earlier amendments. As I outlined on Committee Stage, sustainability is a central element of the State's long-term strategy. The main function of the transport subgroup, like the delivery board, is to support the implementation of Limerick city and county plans. These national, regional and county plans and strategies will specifically inform transport infrastructural services. As these frameworks are already aligned with, or incorporated in, the UN sustainable development goals, it is not necessary to reinstate our obligations in this regard.
On a technical point, amendment No. 12, which was discussed earlier and was tabled by the Civil Engagement Group, provides a definition for the UN sustainable development goals but no definition for the Paris Agreement, of which there is no reference in the Statute Book. In respect of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Ireland has signed up to and ratified the convention and, as such, all arms of the State are bound to the obligations contained therein. Again, therefore, I believe that amendment is unnecessary.
One element of amendment No. 29 proposes that the transport subgroup shall act in a manner consistent with the climate Act 2015. I believe this matter will be well addressed by the amendments I have proposed for the section, which I have just outlined. We recognise local government has a key role to play in implementing adaptation and mitigation measures to support Ireland’s climate targets. Under the 2015 Act, each local authority must prepare climate action plans and implement measures to be adopted in this regard. While the plans must be aligned with national climate policy, local authorities can take their own approach to the design and structure of their plans, thus providing them with the opportunity to take a more place-based approach. I believe that is supporting the implementation of the Limerick climate action plan, which will shortly be delivered. I can confidently say the Bill deals effectively with the matters addressed by the amendment, and the amendments I have tabled today will give further effect to them. For these reasons, I believe amendment No. 29 is unnecessary.
Amendment No. 30 is an amendment consequential to amendment No. 29. It proposes that a report be prepared on the performance of the subgroup's functions to include the new functions proposed. On a technical point, these provisions do not appear to be especially well aligned with certain functional issues that are not in the reporting requirement and vice versa. In any event, for the reasons I have outlined, the first amendment is not needed and, therefore, the requirement for the second amendment falls. More generally, the Bill already provides that the transport subgroup may prepare reports in respect of the functions it considers necessary. It will be a matter for the subgroup chairperson to decide, if and when such a report is prepared, whether it will be provided to the Minister for Transport, given the primary focus of his role is transport matters separately.
In respect of climate action plans, given the planned process has a built-in mechanism for reporting on the implementation, I do not see the need for further reporting mechanisms or duplication of that which is provided for in the proposed Government amendment. Therefore, I believe amendments Nos. 29 and 30 are not required.
I will speak to amendment No. 29 and 30. I am representing Senator Higgins, so I will outline her response, which is very much in line with the Minister of State's thinking. On amendment No. 29, on the basis of the inclusion of the Minister of State's amendments and considering all the facts at this stage of the process, Senator Higgins has asked me to convey that she is happy to withdraw amendment No. 29. Similarly, given that the Minister of State has tabled amendments, Senator Higgins is happy to withdraw amendment No. 30.
She has reflected. The Minister of State has clearly thought about it and I am going to deliver the message, short and sweet. With the consent of the House, we propose to withdraw those two amendments.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I thank Senator Higgins for her contribution and co-operation. I also thank Senator Boyhan for delivering that key message.
That is the most important decision the Minister of State has made today.
-----acknowledge the presence and contribution of Senator Craughwell, which is hugely important.
He is here just in case I fall asleep.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 27:
In page 29, line 24, to delete “and”.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 28:
In page 29, between lines 24 and 25, to insert the following:
“(b) to support the implementation, in accordance with guidelines issued under section 14B(8) of the Act of 2015, of any local authority climate action plan(within the meaning of that section) prepared by Limerick City and County Council, and”.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 29 and 30 not moved.
I move amendment no. 31:
In page 30, between lines 20 and 21, to insert the following:
“Implementation of regeneration projects
36. (1) The Mayor shall be responsible for the implementation and management of regeneration projects in the Limerick City and County Council area.
(2) The Mayor shall be required to submit an annual report that will be reviewed by members of the Local Authority before it is submitted to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage.”.
We had a lot of discussion about this key issue. The Minister of State dealt with it earlier in his amendment. I thank him for that. We have had some discussion outside the Chamber between our previous meeting in the Seanad and this one. I was trying to drive home the importance of the regeneration. The Minister of State had a difficulty with the wording of the amendment. He wanted to reflect on it, which I understand. He clearly did have an issue with it. That makes sense. He is from Limerick and the mayor is for Limerick city and county. Sometimes people forget that. It is a very successful city and county council. It is important that the mayor is at the engine, or the front, driving innovation and new investment and driving the agenda. If mayors are going to be successful they must have real teeth. They must be more than just a figurehead. They are not just cutting ribbons, they have got to be driving the vision and the strategy. They need to seek renewal. They want to make Limerick city and county a more attractive place to live, work, play, study and do all the other things. Limerick is a fantastic city. The county is a fantastic place. The city and county councillors do an amazing job, sometimes with limited resources.
We are now talking about a new vision, plan, idea and concept for a mayor for the city and county of Limerick, our first under this new arrangement. It is not going to be easy. There will be many setbacks and challenges but I do believe it is about innovation. My colleagues on the right-hand side of me are fiercely committed to regeneration, the Land Development Agency, and new houses, whether public, private or affordable. We do not get hung up on ideology. We want to see more homes, schools, investment, jobs and greater opportunities with people living to their full capacity, expectation and ambition for themselves. I believe that is the case and I know everyone here wants people to be able to realise their ambition for their city and county. I genuinely wish this project well.
I am glad the Minister of State is fully supportive of the idea that the mayor would be the driver, in co-operation with all the others. It is not a single thing, but they would drive the ambition for the city, and drive the regeneration and rejuvenation of what is a wonderful town. It is not a town, it is a wonderful city. It is a very historic city and the people are very proud of it. It is about protecting its unique architectural fabric but also its culture, business, enterprise and educational opportunities. I see the mayor to the fore of this. It will make the mayor relevant. I am happy the Minister of State has taken that point on board. In light of that, I do not see it as necessary to proceed with this amendment. I again thank him for his very constructive engagement with me between these two sessions of the Seanad dealing with this Bill.
I just want to say a few brief words. The Minister of State is a proud Limerick man. I have known him for many years. This is a great day for him. He is driving home a Bill for an elected mayor in his city, one of the finest cities in Ireland. I know him from way back. His commitment to Limerick was never in question at any time. He has taken amendments on board and modified the Bill slightly from where it started. I believe he will have made a much better position for the mayor of Limerick.
I congratulate him. I am proud that I know him as a colleague and a friend going back many years, albeit he made a mistake and joined a political party. We will forgive him for that.
Senator Craughwell did too. Come on now.
I am so delighted I left. Seriously, this is a fantastic day's work for the Minister of State. I congratulate him on a great day's work. I am delighted that he was the Minister of State to drive this forward.
I thank both Senator Boyhan and Senator Craughwell. I assure Senator Boyhan that I am always looking to improve the Bill. I reflected on everything when we were having the debate. I was of the opinion that it was covered. I went back and looked at the Bill again. Putting in the amendment, which in substance is what he provided, further strengthens the Bill. It puts front and centre the fact that the mayor will be driving the regeneration projects in Limerick city and county.
This is what legislation is about. I have taken quite a number of Opposition amendments because I believe democracy is very important. This Bill has been debated at length and that has made for better legislation. None of us has a monopoly on wisdom. I certainly do not. I thank Senator Boyhan for his contribution. The amendment being put forward here will certainly strengthen the legislation, which is what we are all looking to do. I thank Senator Boyhan.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Bill recommitted in respect of amendment No. 32.
Government amendment No. 32:
In page 79, after line 11, to insert the following:
“Amendment of Land Development Agency Act 2021
69. The Land Development Agency Act 2021 is amended by the insertion of the following section after section 32:“Further provision relating to funding of Agency 32A.
(1)Notwithstanding sections 25 to 29, section 42B of the National Treasury Management Agency (Amendment) Act 2014 and section 5 of the Housing Finance Agency Act 1981, the Agency and any subsidiary DAC may from time to time also raise funds—
(a) by its or their performance of the functions of the Agency under paragraph (j), (n) or (o) of section 14(1), or
(b) through arrangements referred to in section 6(2)(c) or 42 of the Affordable Housing Act 2021 or as the owner of a dwelling which is designated as a cost rental dwelling within the meaning of Part 3 of that Act.
(2) Funds referred to in subsection (1)—
(a) shall not exceed an amount of €1,250,000,000,
(b) shall only be raised with the approval of both the Minister and the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, and
(c) may be used by the Agency and any subsidiary DAC in the performance of the functions of the Agency.
(3) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (2), funds referred to in subsection (1)(a)—
(a) may be raised in any currency, and
(b) shall in respect of any liabilities arising be the responsibility of the Agency to satisfy.”.”.
Amendment agreed to.
Bill reported with amendment.
Amendments Nos. 33 and 34 are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Government amendment No. 33:
In page 84, between lines 18 and 19, to insert the following:
"
|
No. 1 of 2024
|
Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024
|
Sections 117 and 118(4).
|
"
I wish to speak to amendments Nos. 33 and 34. Government amendment No. 33 adds sections 117 and 118(4) of the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024 to the Schedule 1, Part 2 functions of the director general. This Act has just recently come into being so the amendment was not possible at an earlier Stage. The functions under section 117 relate to appointing staff and the function under section 118(4) relates to data sharing, both of which are within the functions of the director general.
Government amendment No. 34 is a technical amendment to Schedule 3. It makes a minor edit to the modification of section 174(7)(e) which provides for the mandatory reporting of a breach of ethics by a member of Limerick City and County Council, which is not the príomh chomhairleoir or the mayor. In this circumstance, the ethics register brings the breach to the attention of the príomh chomhairleoir, the mayor of Limerick and the director general. Previously, this paragraph specified a breach of ethics by a member of Limerick City and County Council, excluding the príomh chomhairleoir and due to an error it did not also exclude the mayor.
Section 174(7)(bb) already deals with reporting requirements for breaches by the mayor. I hope that Members will support both amendments.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 34:
In page 159, to delete lines 9 to 19 and substitute the following:
“
|
|
|
(e) the Príomh Chomhairleoir of Limerick City and County Council, the director general of Limerick City and County Council and the Mayor of Limerick, in case the matter relates to a member of Limerick City and County Council (other than the Príomh Chomhairleoir of Limerick City and County Council or the Mayor of Limerick), and
|
"
Amendment agreed to.
Pursuant to Standing Order 154, it is reported especially to the Seanad that the Committee has amended the Title of the Bill. Is it agreed that the Bill, as amended, be received for final consideration? Agreed.
Bill, as amended, received for final consideration.
When is it proposed to take the next Stage?
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I wish to make a brief comment before we conclude. I compliment the Minister of State and his team of officials.
I thank the Minister of State and his officials for the work they did to bring the legislation through the House and for the constructive manner in which he did so. We were very fortunate to have a Limerick man in office while the Bill was being progressed. Waterford is one of the areas in which a plebiscite was carried out. It was narrowly defeated there, as it was in Cork. I look forward to seeing how the new mayor role in Limerick evolves and develops over the next five years. I thank the Minister of State for the Trojan work he has done. When he came into office, there was a huge amount of work to be done to get the legislation to this point. Well done to him. I wish the best to all those who run for the office of mayor of Limerick in June, regardless of party allegiance or none. Anyone who puts his or her name forward for office is to be complimented. I certainly hope it will be a keenly fought contest.
I thank the Minister of State and everyone in his Department for all their work to get this historic legislation passed. For the first time in modern history, we will have a directly elected mayor. It is a huge opportunity for the people of Limerick and for all those who contest the first election. I wish them well.
As a Dub, I have huge ambition for our capital city. I believe very strongly in the power of a political mandate and political office to deliver for people in ways that matter in their daily lives. Dublin city would greatly benefit from having an office of directly elected mayor. I hope that is the next step in the legislative work. The Oireachtas committee examined the issue and there was good engagement on it. The citizens' assembly did its work. Dubliners deserve the opportunity to have their say on creating an office of directly elected mayor to represent and champion our great city. I hope the Minister of State will put the same energy into delivering for Dublin as he has put into doing so for Limerick. Well done to him on a great job.
I will not repeat myself. Well done to the Minister of State on getting through this very large Bill. As a Limerick man, he must be very proud of doing so. I thank his officials for engaging with us. I thank the sitting city and county councillors of Limerick, who also fed into this whole process. They had a lot of views on the proposals. Indeed, many of the views expressed during the debates in this House - I cannot speak for the Dáil - were formed as a result of engagement with the councillors.
The staff of the Department are excellent at communicating but it is important that they continue to do so as the process continues. The Bill will go to the President to be signed and will then be enacted at some point. I ask that very soon, preferably within the next two weeks, there be communication with the city and county chief executive and the elected members. It is important that they fully understand the next phase of this process. They will be aware of it, of course, but it is important that they receive an official line of communication from the Minister of State and his Department.
Well done to all involved. The process will not be easy. We will learn from it and we will perfect the process in terms of the bigger vision for the election of mayors. It is a matter for another day but, as Senator Fitzpatrick said, we need to look again at establishing an office of directly elected mayor for Dublin. I have a sense it is being put on the back burner and I do not see it progressing as quickly as we would like. It is another matter of focus. The citizens' assembly did a lot of work on it and commitments were given in that regard. Let us not allow the proposal to wither on the vine.
Well done to the Minister of State and his officials on completing this long and arduous process. I thank him for his engagement with us. As a former Senator, he understands the importance of the work of this House and the frustrations we sometimes face. He engaged with us meaningfully and in a creative way. While not always accepting proposed amendments, he brought them back as his own amendments, as is his privilege and prerogative. At the end of the day, who got what into the Bill does not matter. It is about whether we have made the Bill better. As the Taoiseach and the Minister of State's party leader has said, this is a revising Chamber. Let us never forget that function. The Minister of State was very supportive and meaningful in his engagement with us in terms of adding a little extra to this Bill that came from Dáil Éireann.
I welcome the passing of the Bill in this House. It will be looked back at in time as a measure that was in itself a small step but which included foundation-shaking implications for the rest of the country. What happens in Limerick will provide a template for all the other cities around the country. More fundamentally, it is about reforming local democracy. As Senator Fitzpatrick said, the Bill will enable us to see somebody with a strong political mandate delivering for city and urban regions. We have forgotten about the importance of the different systems and layers of democracy as we move from being a primarily rural to a primarily urban country.
Nobody thinks the model for Limerick is perfect but it provides a strong foundation and template for our urban democracies to evolve over the next 50 to 100 years. When people look back, the signing of this Bill will prove to be very significant in the overall political development of our country. Well done to the Minister of State and to Members on both sides of the House for getting the Bill over the line. Let us see how the process works in Limerick. I wish the best of luck to all the candidates in what we hope will be an exciting contest in June.
I thank the Minister of State and his officials for their dedication to this Bill. A lot of work has been put into it. There are exciting times ahead for Limerick as it becomes the first city in the country to have a directly elected mayor. As colleagues said, other cities and counties will be looking at what happens and how the position evolves in Limerick city and county. It is very appropriate that people there will go the polls on the same say as the local elections. Local government is alive and well in Limerick. The Minister of State engaged with elected officials and councillors in Limerick City and County Council and also with business communities and leaders. Among them was Tim O'Connor and the members of his committee, to whom I pay tribute. They put a lot of work into the 40-plus recommendations in the report that are included in the legislation.
I wish all success to the Bill. It will put Limerick on a pedestal in that the new office will not only be the driver of Limerick city and county but also the driver of the mid-west. We need a strong city in terms of driving economic development, education and so on. Many different spheres will come under the remit of the directly elected mayor. It remains to be seen who the candidates will be. I wish whomever is the directly elected mayor of Limerick all the best.
Before I call the Minister of State to reply, as Cathaoirleach of the Seanad and, in my previous incarnation, director of elections for the plebiscite in Cork, I congratulate all Members of the House and the Minister of State on this historic occasion. This is transformative legislation that enables the appointment of a directly elected mayor. It is a monumental day. As a Cork person, I lament the fact the people of Cork and Waterford did not endorse the plebiscites in their cities due, in the main, to partisan politics. I very much regret that. However, today is a huge occasion. I really hope Cork will, in the future, follow Limerick in having a directly elected mayor and will not be left behind. We need a strong and vibrant Cork. At the moment, it does not have the leadership it needs to become a thriving metropolis as a counterbalance to Dublin and Belfast. I regret that.
I join Senator Boyhan in thanking the local authority members for their engagement on the legislation. They are a central part of what we do in politics and local government. They should never be forgotten, particularly in Limerick as we move to a new phase in the appointment of a directly elected mayor.
The Minister of State deserves huge credit. In my position as Cathaoirleach, I know at first hand the work he has done in ensuring we reached this day and in making the Bill better than it was when it was initiated. I thank him for his personal involvement and commitment, not as a Limerick person but as a member of the Government. I also thank his officials for their engagement.
This is a significant day. As Senator Moynihan said, it is about the evolution of local government and politics. In 50 years’ time, we will look at this day as being monumental. I hope that Cork will not be left behind. I congratulate the Minister of State. Does he wish to reply?
I wish to acknowledge the phenomenal work of the officials. There are two present but there is a larger team. They have done extraordinary work on this Bill. It is ground-breaking, historic and a new dawn for Limerick in terms of local politics. I acknowledge the major positive contribution from the elected members and the executive of Limerick City and County Council. Change is never easy. I refer to the business community and the wider community in Limerick. The people in Limerick voted for by plebiscite. Senator Maria Byrne was the director of elections for the Government when it was coming through. They voted 52:48 for it. I think it was 51:49 in Cork voting against it and the same in Waterford. I am always conscious that not everyone voted for this, so we have to bring people with us. The legislation received serious debate both in the Dáil and the Seanad. As a former Member of the Seanad, I am fully aware of the contribution it makes. Consequently, on Report Stage I tabled many of the amendments that were tabled here. We do listen.
I have always engaged with the elected members and the executive, and I will do it once again. The legislation will go back to the Dáil, hopefully next week, after which it will go to the President for signing.
There is no reason that other local authorities around the country, such as Cork and Waterford, cannot go to a plebiscite again. This is about giving a directly elected mayor the mandate, means and structures to deliver an enhancement for Limerick while, at the same time, recognising the major contribution of councillors. We have 40 excellent councillors in Limerick. I have no doubt it is the same around the country. I want to maintain the reserve powers they have and I want the mayor to bring added value.
This is ground-breaking legislation. It is subject to review within the first three years. I thank Senator Kyne for chairing this session effectively and Senator Horkan, who previously chaired. I think Senator Byrne was in the Chair as well. They and others worked to ensure the legislation passed and got the probity it needed in a democratic way.
I acknowledge the work of Tim O’Connor, who was chair of the implementation advisory group, IAG. The group brought a serious contribution to the directly elected mayor and the legislation. As Senator Byrne said, we accepted many of the group’s recommendations. I have accepted amendments to this Bill all along. We have looked to integrate them, getting back to Senator Boyhan’s point, to make better legislation. As I said, we all want to work collectively. I am proud of what we have done. It will go to the Dáil next week and then to the President.
Once again, it is on behalf of the people of Limerick. They voted for a directly elected mayor. My role as Minister of State with responsibility for local government was to bring forward the legislation and reflect what they voted on. Therefore, what they voted in the plebiscite is what is in the Bill. We are all on a journey together. I wish any candidates coming forward for the office of directly elected mayor the best. We will have a public awareness campaign when the legislation is passed. We will engage once again with the councillors and the executive to go through it. We have had serious engagement. When we published the Bill originally, before I did any media or forum, I went back to the council. I was a member of the old Limerick County Council myself. I am proud to have been a member of that chamber and I understand what it is about.
In conclusion, I thank Senators Cummins, Fitzpatrick, Boyhan, Moynihan, Byrne and, more particularly, the Cathaoirleach, Senator Buttimer, for his kind words on the conclusion of the Bill. I thank everyone for their constructive contributions. I look forward to this legislation passing in the Dáil next week, based on the amendments we tabled in the Seanad, after which it will go to the President to be signed. We are then in the countdown to the election, which will be on the same day as the local elections. I wish all the candidates well. I am proud to have been involved in this historic legislation, which I think will herald a new dawn of local politics in Limerick and promoting our city, and in terms of the region as well. The Bill provides not only a blueprint for how it can work in Limerick and elsewhere but it allows individual local authorities to hold plebiscites to have their own directly elected mayor. Limerick is leading the way on this occasion in respect of directly elected mayors.
Question put and agreed to.
I welcome to the Public Gallery guests of Senator Sharon Keogan, our friend and colleague. She is joined by her sister, Councillor Geraldine Keogan, and guests from the Donore Solas 21 Tidy Towns group from County Meath. They are very welcome. Céad míle fáilte. I thank them for being here.
Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ar 3.46 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 7 p.m.
Sitting suspended at 3.46 p.m. and resumed at 7 p.m.
