DRAFT Proper Local Government for Ireland The argument for radical reform of our Local Government structures Catherine Murphy TD
Foreword
Ireland’s Economic Crisis: A Unique Opportunity for Genuine Reform
Since the advent of the economic crisis four years ago, Ireland has gone through a period of economic, social and political upheaval which will be remembered as much for just how sudden and steep the decline was as for the lasting, lingering effects being felt by many; especially people on low incomes, those who have lost jobs, many thousands of homeowners who entered negative equity, and vulnerable people whose quality of life was tied to the range of state support made available to them, support which has been reduced or eliminated in many cases. There are of course other consequences of the economic contraction which are less widely discussed than the immediate ill-effects on society. For the first time in many, many years it is apparent that the Irish electorate is motivated to vote for a reform ideal in government. There is a palpable sense of a reaction to the excessive materialism of the boom era. While the 1995-2008 period undoubtedly made the population more outward looking and confident, the contraction of the past few years has seen a profound awareness of an inadequacy and dysfunction at the heart of many Irish institutions when compared to other jurisdictions; the crisis having exposed some deep flaws in how we structure our systems of government. This discussion paper takes the view that one of the most flawed of these structures, requiring radical reform, is that of Local Government. While many, rightly, search for clues to the failure of economic governance in the Department of Finance, the Taoiseach’s office, the Financial Regulator and senior management at our banks – we must also look just as intensely at Local Authorities,
Planning Authorities and the Department of the Environment for clues to roots of the crisis. The main problems in this case hardly need restating – rampant land overzoning, poorly thought-out development, insufficient enforcement mechanisms and several cases of proven corruption amongst elected members and council officials. Our weak Local Government system was easily overpowered by a construction-led growth ideal, enthusiastically supported from central Government and financed from our major banks’ international borrowings. For examples, one need only look at Bettystown, Co Meath – 113 hectares of zoned development land where 4 hectares are required; or the number of one-off houses in Co. Mayo; or to Co. Donegal, where despite the zoning of approximately 2,250 hectares of land as residential (catering for a population increase of 180,000), more than 50% of new planning permissions were granted for homes on unzoned land in the decade to 2010. These are astonishing statistics, and they by no means stand in isolation. This paper argues unequivocally that there has been a colossal failure of proper governance at the local level in this country which can be directly linked to the economic crisis of 2008 – present. There are also important lessons to be drawn, particularly for the proper functioning of governance at a community level, from the historical development of Ireland’s political geography beginning with the Norman invasion, through the period of Tudor plantation and right up to the development of a recognizable county-based structure in the late nineteenth century. Furthermore, many of the weaknesses of our present institutional arrangements can be traced directly back to mistakes made primarily in the various Local Government reforms of the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s following the inheritance by the State of an extremely undemocratic and unresponsive system.
These repeated failures of governance can only be addressed by engaging, as a priority, in a process of radical and fundamental reform of Irish Local Government which is not merely designed to address just the specific failures of the present structure places the long-term interests of the citizen community at its core.
Key proposals for change The identification of the appropriate level – national, regional, or municipal to deliver the various key competencies of Local Government. The gradual phase-out of the county manager-elected council system and its replacement with a new structure of enhanced local governance.
The creation of large, similarly sized Regional Authorities centred on the major population centres, tasked with policy development, budgetary oversight, service provision in a number of key areas and a duty to adequately resource Municipal Council level to provide services in other areas. In addition efficiencies should be targeted through economies of scale in both procurement, human resources, IT, service delivery and other areas where the per-capita cost of delivery can be reduced.
The development of community-focused Municipal Councils charged with a specific remit of ‘place shaping’, leading to a new kind of local representative with a broader remit and greater accountability. The reorganisation of our planning authorities to mirror the Regional and Municipal structure.
1
Historical Background: The Development of Local Government in Ireland
The historical development of the political geography of Ireland has been marked by two dominant and concurrent trends - the prevailing need for centralised authority to exercise control and a haphazard, reactive approach to the reform of local governance. Both of these prevailing trends have been characterised by a chronic lack of vision for the citizen, the community and the built & natural environments Central to the durability of this dysfunction has been the county system, and its precursors over the centuries, which remain the central unit of local administration today. While many other European states developed by following a core-outwards growth model, like the United Kingdom from southeast England and France from the Ile-deFrance; and others developed through the formation of unions and confederations of similarly sized powers and so on, Ireland, having been colonised by external forces from the 1100s, and more especially from the 1500s, experienced the development of local administration as much as a means by which an external authority could more easily exercise control as it did the peaceful exercise of local public administration.
While it is clear that some countries, most notably France, also developed heavily centralised bureaucracies as a means of exercising control over defiant populations, Ireland’s case differs in that the early local government structures were developed primarily as a means of administering justice from the very outset by an external force. This can be seen from the introduction of the county-barony system after the 1169 Norman Conquest to the subsequent Tudor plantations in Queens County and Kings County, and beyond. Despite the obvious historical trend of assimilation with the native populations, external powers nevertheless were at all stages the instigators, designers and executors of domestic local administration right up to the nineteenth century, and frequently power was exercised out of a desire to control the native population, howsoever assimilated they may have been. After the Act of Union, the nineteenth century saw the expansion of the competencies of local authorities, both in the council-type bodies known as Grand Juries and later Boards of Guardians of the Poor Law Unions, and in the Municipal Corporations which also sprang up in large numbers. These basic structures, having grown out of the initial security and justice impetus, began to acquire through a chaotic process, more powers of civil administration, although in many cases their geographical ranges overlapped and they often functioned entirely separately to one another. As the century progressed the problems of providing adequate public administration for a rapidly growing and largely impoverished population was met with several attempts at legislative reform such as the Grand Jury Act of 1836, the Poor Relief Act of 1838, the Municipal Corporations Act of 1840, the Clauses Acts of 1847, the Towns Improvement Act of 1854, the Public Health Act of 1874 and of course, the major reform of the nineteenth century, the Local Government (Ireland) Act of 1898. While many of the reforms introduced were positive for the time, most measures were deeply reactive in nature – chiefly to the problems of large scale poverty and public health concerns in Ireland – and contained scant representative
elements. Again, the same lack of forward planning for Ireland is apparent – many of the new structures introduced, such the Poor Law Unions, were subject to external English supervision; and for virtually the entire century wealthy landlords held very significant local power through the Grand Juries. This, of course, which fed very heavily into the nationalist movement. .1 It’s clear that for much of the nineteenth century there was a consistent failure on the part of the authorities in London and Dublin to respond appropriately to the deep problems of nineteenth century Ireland – problems such as poverty, lack of appropriate self-determination, and land reform. Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898 How modern Irish local administration is structured can be traced directly to the Local Government (Ireland) Act of 1898, which represented the first major consolidation of the haphazard transfer of powers from London to the disorganised local authority structures in Ireland intermittently over the preceding century. The Act essentially created the county system which has largely endured to this day, notwithstanding the reforms of the 1930s. The popularly-elected county council was introduced to Ireland for the first time on the same mandate as for parliamentary elections – which was the major benefit of the changes. Up to then, only certain male ratepayers who owned their property could vote at local elections. For some authorities, the more rates paid, the more votes a person could cast. The administrative county boundaries were largely defined as the historical county boundaries and have continued mostly intact aside from the changes made in Dublin in 1994. Below the county-level authority, urban district councils and rural district councils matched the boundaries of rural and urban sanitary districts that had previously existed. Although the new structures did not entirely replace the myriad of existing, overlapping authorities, the reforms did lay the foundation for the
1
Callinan & Keogan,(2003), eds, Local Government in Ireland: Inside Out, Chapter 2, Dublin:IPA
eventual expansion of the competencies of the elected council. At the time, local government reform had taken something of a back seat to the question of Irish independence, and many nationalists viewed the reforms through the prism of an attempt to ‘dodge’ Home Rule by Westminster, although the widened franchise allowed the election of many more nationalist politicians. Several more reforms were made prior to eventual Irish independence in 1922 – certain women could stand for election to county councils from 1911 (although universal suffrage was not achieved until 1935) and Proportional Representation by means of the Single Transferable Vote was introduced in 1919 – but the system introduced in 1898 was essentially the same system Ireland inherited when it left the UK. Independent Ireland After independence, once the new Government had been established, it moved quickly to centralise and consolidate its authority over local administration. In the turbulent first few years, local administration ceased to function in many areas, and several county councils were abolished, as were rural district councils and the poor law system in favour of boards of health. The marked feature, however, to emerge from the early independence years was a move to adopting an American-influenced county manager system to administer the bureaucracy of the various county councils in conjunction with the elected councillors, all of which were established with haste beginning with Cork in 1929 and Dublin in 1930, and ultimately nationwide by 1942. From the 1950s to the present, precious few positive reforms have been attempted and quite a few of the obvious flaws in the system have gone unreformed for years.
The removal of domestic rates in 1977 created a system of local administration sorely dependent on central government funding. Several attempts were made to reintroduce direct taxation for local government (1983, 1986, 1997, 2012) on the false premise that funds raised went directly to local authorities. In each case, no serious attempts were made to try and reform local government to establish it as responsive and representative modern organisation that would not engender local opposition to direct funding. No effort was made to break the dual mandate, whereby serving TDs, Senators and Ministers could also serve as local councillors, until the 2000s. Only very cursory legislative attention was given in the early 1990s to establishing regional authorities, and reforming planning legislation. A chronic lack of investment, especially in infrastructure, marked the period from 1980 – 1995. The compromise of the Local Government Fund, established in 1999, created centralised system of ring-fenced funding which at its worst allowed for lobbying and Ministerial interference in where funds went. Several counties, notably those with high growth patterns requiring serious investment, become net contributors whereas counties where population profiles that had hardly changed benefitted greatly. Possibly worst of all, citizens gained virtually no say in where revenue paid by them for their local administration was directed by central government. In addition throughout this time, as now know, serious instances of corruption were occurring in some local authorities. This is the system which essentially operates to the present day. Although in the 1930s the new system which was introduced represented a level of organisation far superior to the chaotic and grossly undemocratic structures inherited from the nineteenth century, the failure to tackle the antiquated and ill-fitting county boundaries in the 1930s combined with the modern day shortcomings of the countymanager/council system to be able to adequately respond and plan for a growing population and expanding economy has left the entire structure inefficient, unresponsive and in urgent need of radical changes. The central role played by
rampant land zoning in the economic reversal of Ireland in the late 2000s has made this need for reform all the more pressing.
2
Regional Governance: Moving away from the County System
If we are to consider moving away from the county system, what is the most appropriate model of local governance for Ireland? Several proposals for reform have been made over the past number of years. The 2010 Government Green Paper Stronger Local Democracy made some concrete proposals by recognising the inherent problems in the current system, as did Local Government Reorganisation and Reform (The Barrington Report) of 1991 and the Better Local Government document of 1996. One frequently raised suggestion in much of what has been written about Local Government reform in Ireland has been that of a move towards a regional authority model. Indeed, this has been a recurring theme in the development of local public administration in other countries since the 1970s, not least in Northern Ireland, England and Wales, Scotland, Denmark, Sweden and parts of Germany. What benefits are there for Ireland in adopting, and what model of regionalism would work best? Constantin Gurdgieve (2006) suggests that, given the changes to the Irish landscape brought by rapid economic development, Ireland is best divided into three types of administrative area, based on economic and social factors: urban and suburban regions, adjacent to urban/hinterland regions, and rural areas. 2 Given that problems 2
Gurdgiev, C. (2006a) “An alternative vision of Ireland in contrast with the current spatial development mantra�, in SubUrban to SuperRural:Ireland at the Venice Biennale 10th International Architecture Exhibition, ed Shane O’Toole, Gandon Editions, pages 96-104.
arising from the current local government system stem from a failure to address the consequence of population growth on a wider scale than the county using economic and social factors as a basis to form boundaries has clear benefits. Gurdgieve suggests that using the urban and suburban regions as centres, with the adjacent to urban areas and rural areas as natural hinterlands to these centres, we can begin to look at regions as areas where “sectoral composition of services and employment is evenly distributed and broadly based” and “strong forms of infrastructure are based”, that is to say, the five major urban regions – Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford.3 It’s clear from looking at the development patterns across the country economic development particular over the past 15 years has seen natural boundaries form quite apart from county lines – what can be considered the greater Dublin area has encompassed large parts of surrounding counties, cities like Waterford and Limerick have significant satellite populations and large local infrastructure located in adjacent counties. Parts of North Kildare and Eastern Meath have more in common with areas like Lucan and Blanchardstown than they do with the opposite ends of their own counties.
The limitations and problems with the current system of local government have been well documented. If we focus on the impact of State exchequer funding to public services, it is clear that the current distribution pattern disproportionately favours with historically significant population levels rather than areas with current and projected high growth patterns. If we look at two practical examples – Garda numbers and national school class sizes – we can see that rapid population changes brought on by economic growth ensures that populations living in counties who have seen rapid population growth are left at a distinct disadvantage. Counties such as Kildare and Meath, which have seen rapid population growth as the greater Dublin area expands (12.7% and 13% respectively, between 2006 and 2011), have some of
3
Ibid.
the largest ratios of GardaĂ to population in the country, compared to counties who have faced a population decline, such as Sligo and Leitrim. If we consider class sizes, again Kildare and Meath suffer due to an increase in population, with class sizes 8.47% and 10.56% above the national average. In comparison, Leitrim and Roscommon, counties that haven't faced the same population growth, have class sizes that are 9.8% and 8.7% below the national average, respectively. 4
If the argument that the limited size and power of a county authority is a direct cause of problems regarding public service provision, the natural logical step is that larger regional authorities might be better suited. Building on Gurdgieve's breakdown as a basis for a model, I would suggest dividing Ireland into three regions – the East, South and West – to allow us the best possible scope to address the needs of the wider population (Figure 1). Under this model, three regional authorities emerge centred on Dublin, Cork and Galway. The model shown here is broken down based upon amalgamations of the present counties to achieve a relative balance in the population of each using available statistics, and is intended to give a general impression of what a proposed balance might look like (Table 1).
Proposed Region
Population (2011)
East
1,927,053
South
1,504,802
West
1,156,397 Source: CSO
Table 1 In order to achieve an effective balance fitted to the pattern of population around the country, county boundaries would have to be disregarded entirely and a new 4
Murphy, Catherine, (2011), How Kildare Compares
model based loosely on the three areas suggested in Figure 1 developed, taking into account questions such as like the development of the Limerick urban area; deciding which towns in the midlands would be better served in the Eastern Region; whether the town of Wexford and port of Rosslare should form part of the Eastern or Southern Regions and so on.
WEST EAST
SOUTH
Figure 1
My Proposal Establish an over-arching Regional Administration by merging the existing county bureaucracies into a single authority, headed by a directly elected
Regional Executive. In essence, I am advocating the raising of the managerial portion of our current system to an overarching regional level. I believe there are a number of distinct advantages are to be had by
moving in this direction.
1. Enhanced Democratic Accountability One of the drawbacks of the present managerial system mentioned above is that it can be severely undemocratic in many cases. Although in recent years reforms have been made to make the County Manager post more accountable, significant power remains with the 34 County and City Mangers around the country. By moving to establish just three directly elected executives with specific competencies we would eliminate a vast amount of competing voices at local government management level and create an executive mandated to act in the regional interest which is not wedded to any particular county.
2. Economies of Scale – Procurement & Service Provision There may be significant advantages to adopting a regional approach to public procurement. Larger populated regions could achieve lower per-capita costs on expenditure on essential services such as waste, water, road maintenance and construction, housing etc., than the existing counties.
Bigger regions could also eliminate the duplication of services provided across the present counties by amalgamating/centralising offices and staff for specific services such as licensing, human resources and payroll, IT services and so on. Regions would also have bigger purchasing power and so be able to demand lower prices in the provision of specialised services. Although there is some evidence to suggest moderate savings have been achieved in other countries which have engaged in reform processes, any move towards a regional model must contain the caveat that savings may not be immediate, especially during a transition phase, although the potential for savings into the long term is much greater.
3. Spatial and Environmental Planning At time of writing there were 88 distinct planning authorities in Ireland. Moving to a regional system would afford us the opportunity to greatly reform planning structures in Ireland, particularly if they are constructed to mirror the reforms posed in this paper. Regional planning authorities would be best placed to develop regional spatial strategies which in turn would feed into a national strategy, as opposed to a top-down approach at present. It would also remove the planning process enough to ensure that rampant over-zoning could not take place locally owing to direct supervision of the regional authority.
4. Enhanced role Internationally, Branding and Sourcing of Foreign Direct Investment The creation of regional authorities which individually represent major portions of the Irish population would afford the regional executives opportunities to directly lobby for foreign direct investment much in the same way members of the current Government do. Such opportunities are rare for county managers at present.
Developing a regional ‘brand’ to market overseas, and the election of an advocate for that brand in the form of the regional executive, would hopefully rebalance foreign investment around the country.
While it could be considered a drastic measure, the amalgamation of local authorities so as to better provide for the needs of the citizens has been used as an effective tool across other EU countries. Most recently, Denmark replaced 13 counties with five regions and amalgamated many municipal councils, as part of the wider Municipal Reform of 2007. The programme of adjustment was undertaken after similar issues related to local authority size versus population spread were identified. For example, issues related to class-size numbers meant that quite often neighbouring municipalities would have to pool resources and operate in tandem so as to accurately and appropriately serve the local population. Denmark also undertook a change in policing districts and electoral wards as part of this process, given that they were both also based on the municipal system. While any similar change to the Irish local government system would present significant obstacles, a shift to a two-tier model would have clear benefits, both in service provision and the further reform it would engender. Drastic reform, similar to the Danish model gives us the opportunity to address some of the issues outlined above.5
5
“The Local Government Reform – in brief”, Ministry of the Interior and Health (2006) http://www.im.dk/publikationer/government_reform_in_brief/ren.htm accessed 10/09/12.
3
Citizen-Centred Reform: Place-Shaping at the Municipality Level
While the need for a regional tier of local government has been argued by many contributors on local government reform, emphasis has sometimes been less focussed on the foundation of all local government: the community. I believe the crucial reforms which can finally ensure successful local government is established in Ireland are to be made at this level. Engaging in a process of reform at municipal
Place Shaping: Empowering Communities to respond collectively to local needs in a sustainable way to enhance the democratic, economic, social and environmental life of the Community.
level provides opportunity to foster and utilise community engagement to enrich the development of the district, and engage members of the community in the exercise of self-government in a manner not yet experienced. In an Irish context this would mean encouraging communities to break with decades of misgovernment and overcome the fatal dependence on the ‘intermediary’ in Irish politics mentioned previously. The connection between residential proximity and an automatic sense of community was in the past far more frequent. Today ‘where you live’ has, to a certain extent, lost its primary automatic role in social integration. Many residential areas,
particularly in the past decade, were appallingly developed with little thought given to community amenities. Development contributions were poorly spent in many cases and planning violations were all too frequent. Many of today’s housing estates, especially unfinished estates, have captured a modern-day alienation that we normally associate with mistakes made in the development of high-density social housing in the 1960s around Europe.
Thankfully the worst excesses of this era have passed, although the legacy issues remain. Nevertheless, community issues (including these legacy issues from the boomtime construction era) still need to be tackled through co-ordinated action – it is through this co-ordinated action that a natural affinity, a natural sense of belonging to a community, is produced. Social capital, that is the value derived from social networks, is key to the success of any community. Neighbours, friends, likeminded people all engaging on a voluntary level for the betterment of their local community is feature which has always been a key part of Irish society. It's the individual benefit of social engagement, of social capital building, that is key to understanding its importance in terms of engagement with local government and public bodies. Robert Putnam noted the link between social capital and political engagement.6 Looking to voting as the most important part of political engagement, the most basic level, he saw that compared to non-voters, voters are more likely to be interested in politics, to give to charity, to volunteer, to co-operate with their fellow citizens on community affairs. The reverse is also true; engagement within your community is a key indicator as to a person's likelihood that they'll vote. It's a clear logical step therefore, that to foster an engagement with local politics, not only does one have to provide a service that reflects the needs of a population, but also to foster a greater level of social capital within a community. 6
Putnam, Robert D., (2000), Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Simon & Schuster:New York
My Proposal Establish directly elected Municipal Councils with defined local
competencies; with boundaries developed to match as closely as possible the full extent geographically of a given natural community; subject to the authority and oversight of the overarching Regional Authority.
In adopting this approach, the overriding goal of re-enfranchising Irish people into participating in the development of their local communities can be achieved. Municipal Councils would provide a democratic forum at the appropriate level to deal with the problems routinely faced by communities. Citizens would gain dedicated petition rights to raise important issues locally, the chance to hold more surveys and more meetings about the issues that matter and have their concerns expressed to Regional and National government.
The model proposed would also allow for differences in the scale of the community involved. Defining a given community geographically can sometimes be difficult, as previously mentioned. Presently, many town councils have boundaries that exclude whole swathes the their communities due to population growth – 85% of the population of Navan resides outside the legal boundary of Navan Town Council, 60% of Kilkenny and 42% of Limerick City residents are in the same bout. 7 Under the new proposals, citizens would gain the chance to participate in the decision of what exactly defines their community. Residents in areas large in size, such as the Inishowen Peninsula or Connemara, might find that the most effective 7
“Is Bigger Better? The Question of Geographical Scale in the Local Government System� presented at Regional Studies Association and Political Studies Association of Ireland Symposium on Local Government Reform: Myth th or Reality?; NUIM, 8 March 2012
level of municipal governance for them would cover their entire geographical region. Similarly, smaller areas like RĂĄth Cairn in Co. Meath or Ring in Co. Waterford might choose to form their own municipal council owing to their unique use of Irish in those parts of Ireland.
If we consider the desired outcome of any district council or municipal authority is to encourage an integrated, strong community, we can draw on the function of town councils to inform what tasks should be in the remit of a district. The Local Government Act (2001) says that a town council should act to provide a forum for the democratic representation of the local community and to take such actions as it consider necessary or desirable to promote the community interest [‌]; to promote the social, economic, environmental, recreational, cultural, community or general development of the administrative area of the local authority; [to] Provide assistance in money or kind (including the provision of prizes and other incentives) in respect of the organisation or promotion of competitions, seminars, exhibitions, displays, festivals or other events, or organise or promote such events. To provide assistance in money or in kind to persons engaging in any activity that, in the opinion of the authority, benefits the local community.
Taking Leixlip as a case study – in 1988 it was the fourth Irish community to form an elected Town Council following Tramore in 1948, Shannon in 1982, Greystones in 1984 - the town council there has worked towards community building (through the provision of grants to residents associations, actively engaging in forming links and twinning with other towns, funding youth amenities, promoting community employment schemes and supporting the local Tidy Towns committee); urban renewal (actively improving the town centre); improving transportation links; working towards improving town safety; working towards keeping the town tidy; and working towards ensuring that the community are accurately and fairly represented.
This work, aligned clearly towards the idea of 'place shaping', is similar to the work a Municipal Council might undertake.
The Municipal Council will also act as an interface between the people and the regional council. Municipal Councillors, directly elected by the district population, will use their local expertise to advise the regional council as to the particular needs of an area, on subjects including but not limited to planning, transportation, education provision, policing needs, etc. In turn, the Regional Authority will make funding available to district councils to work towards the improvement of their local area.
Building on existing success: Examples of Irish community-building Three organisations can be held up as key examples and leaders in the field of community engagement in Ireland: The Gaelic Athletic Association, the Co-Operative movement, and the Credit Union movement. All three typify the values that are key to building social capital. If we analyse the values that the GAA and co-operative movement share, we can note what aspects they hold in common and begin to build an idea of what it is that makes for an active citizenship and how those values can benefit any local government reform - this is not to say that either of these movements can be used as models for a reformed public sector. However, they do have values and promote a sense of attachment from which any political movement might learn a great deal.
The Gaelic Athletic Association The GAA is the largest and most successful sporting body in the country, and is the strongest representative of the voluntary community-based model of sporting organisations. Its sporting ethos sits alongside a broad range of social and cultural
objectives, deriving from a heavy community bias, volunteer ethos, and amateur status. The GAA's community bias can be attributed to its historical origins. The Association was set up in 1884 as part of the greater Gaelic revival movement. It allied itself closely with the Catholic Church and the Catholic parish became the unit upon which clubs were based. Allied to this firm anchoring in each local community was the Association's nationalist ethos, which informed the idea that its role was to help construct the Irish nation as well as to organise sports. While the GAA has moved away from this overtly nationalistic ethos (embracing a more open “civic nationalism ideal�), its commitment to the community is still clear. Through its system of acquiring and developing its own fields and facilities, the Association has a vibrant infrastructure; a club development scheme initiated in 1970 aimed to make clubs into community and social centres and these form a heart of the GAA's social engagement terms. By providing community facilities and amenities, as well as a social outlet (through playing, attending, or using the club facilities), the GAA provide a focal point for diverse populations to gather. The GAA has, since its inception, aimed to be at the heart of the community through active engagement in each parish that one of its clubs serves.
The volunteer ethos underpinning the GAA movement is based on practicality for the main part; while the idea of paying someone to play sports was considered in some quarters mercenary and was therefore discounted at the inception of the GAA, the fact that it was the cheaper option is a more important consideration. Either way, that the organisation both nationally and internationally is based on a huge army of volunteers is key to the success of the Association. Putnam suggests that volunteers, typically, have more of an emotional tie to the organisation, group or movement they are donating their time to. The altruistic aspect of volunteering, in the case of the GAA reflected in its close ties to the Catholic Church, while not of financial benefit, does have a return. Putnam puts it plainly – it's not what you know, it's who you know. Social networks, as built through the act of volunteering (more so than
through paid employment), offer “clout and companionship”. While the GAA mobilise local people to build communities through sport, they also provide members with friendships and connections that pay off personally.
The ongoing amateur status of GAA players is a third crucial factor in its success as a movement. Ignoring for the moment the current shift towards paid management teams on a county level, in general the amateur status of both players and coaching staff has lent itself to a unity that might not be present otherwise. This ongoing unity and egalitarianism has ensured that the GAA remains one of the most powerful modern movements in Irish history.
Co-Operatives and Credit Unions Both the cooperative movement and the credit union movement in Ireland managed to achieve significant levels of success which were rare for commercial enterprises at the time they originated. In fact, both movements were born of social disadvantage – many agricultural co-operatives were founded to give the small dairy farmer, of which there were many, a strong collective voice; today, some of the most profitable companies in the Irish dairy market are run as cooperatives or trace their roots to a co-op. The first Irish credit unions were founded in the bleakest part of the 1950s economic difficulties to try and provide financial security to working class Dubliners. Today Irish credit unions count 2.9 million members – one of the highest rates of membership in the world. The importance of democracy and mutuality underpin their successes; much like the amateur status of the GAA, it is the democratic nature of co-operatives that ensure unity, while the mutuality and drive to keep profits within the members ensures a community-bias similar to the GAA.
Some of the values that are crucial to the success of the GAA have parallels in the cooperative movement. The International Co-Operative Alliance Statement on Cooperative Identity states that all co-operatives, including credit unions, are based on the values of self-help, self-responsibility, democracy, equality, equity and solidarity. It is clear that these are similar values that underpin the ethos of the GAA. In looking at building communities and fostering social engagement and social capital through local government and public service reform, it is clear that these are the values we should be aiming to build directly into our local government structures. It can be argued that the current county / city council form that local government takes does not push these values to the fore, at the expense of local communities.
4
The Right Balance of Power
In engaging with any process of local government reform, one of the central questions which arises is that of subsidiarity – identifying the lowest, most effective level at which government competencies should be based. In proposing the move to a Regional/Municipal model, the question must be asked at which level should services be best delivered exclusively from, and at which cases should they be shared? The answer varies, of course, depending on the type of function and the policy area, but in general the model proposed in this paper allows for policy direction at the National level in certain defined areas, leaving it expressly up to the Regional Authority Executives to decide how best to proceed from there. In general, if a service can be adequately provided at a Municipal Council level then Regional Authorities will have a duty to ensure those Councils are adequately resourced to accomplish this, within budgetary constraints and provided the Municipal Council structures are in place to deliver the services. This pattern follows practice in other countries. For example, the national Education curricula and examination standards are clear examples of policy that should be defined at National level. At Regional level, attention can be given to school buildings, resources and equipment, with perhaps input into patronage models and staffing resources. Municipal level would afford parents the chance to have direct input into recreational and extra cuirricular activities organised on a municipal scale. In time, and if the municipality has been
matched correctly with the community, school districts could be developed along the same boundaries, providing more opportunities for efficiencies. A sample, non-exhaustive typology is laid out below.
Level
National
Currently Policy Direction: Effectively Absolute in all areas. Varying powers of direction over Regional Authorities.
Proposed Policy Direction: Absolute in all areas not specifically defined for the Regional Authorities and Municipal Councils. Limited powers of direction over Regional Authorities in exceptional circumstances. No direct relationship with Municipal Councils.
Policy Direction: Limited.
Regional/County
Service Delivery: Waste Management, Transport, Environmental, Regional Spatial Planning, Licensing, Consumer Protection, Water services, Road maintenance and non NRA construction, Community services, Housing, Fire Services, Leisure and Arts, Libraries, Water Services, Motor Taxation, Certain Educational responsibilities, Cemeteries & Crematoria.
Policy Direction: Greatly enhanced in designated areas such as: - Waste - Transport - Planning - Water - Roads - Housing - Education - Health - Community & Arts - Consumer Protection - Enterprise & Investment - Procurement Service Delivery: Where appropriate delivered at a Municipal Council Level, otherwise delivered at Regional Level.
Municipality/Town Council
Community and Civic programmes, Community building, Leisure activities, Planning, Environmental services, Libraries, voluntary activities, community policing, surveys, advocacy.
Greatly enhanced service delivery presently mostly handled by County Councils, appropriate to the needs of the community under the supervision of the new Regional Authorities.
Ensuring efficiencies are achieved As mentioned previously, much of the process of reform in other countries has been initiated out of a drive to achieve efficiencies and savings, particularly through the move to larger, regional based governance. However, there is some evidence to suggest that in many cases, the hoped-for goals were not realised. Callinan, Murphy and Quinlivan in particular have pointed out that more labourintensive person to person services tend to provide little opportunity for savings, whereas the capital-intensive services can see much greater economies of scale. In particular, they noted that in several countries –Australia, Denmark, Canada and the UK – there was a tendency to overestimate the savings and underestimate the transitional cost of mergers/restructuring. This is an important observation: if the public are to trust in a process of reform based on the promise of efficiencies, policymakers run the risk of losing consent from the outset. This would be disastrous for any attempt to build a genuine faith in a new system, especially with an electorate that is somewhat suspicious of reform generated from politicians and government. Instead, proposals for reform must be clear that savings may not be initially made in the transition from one system to another, however there remain opportunities to achieve much greater efficiencies in the longer term, particularly if, as advocated in this paper, Regional Authorities and Municipal Councils have the ability to determine between them the appropriate level of service delivery.
Conclusion
A durable recovery can only come from radical renewal.
This year's Constitutional Convention was clear opportunity to engage in a radical process of Local Government reform, however this opportunity has been missed. Instead, proposals to eliminate Town Councils and expand the competencies of County Councils, which have been mooted, would only serve to repeat the mistakes of the past. Any wider reform of Local Government must include the following, I believe: A recognition of the role that Regionalism could play in better planning, procurement, environmental management and service delivery can play. A recognition that for Ireland, the key level at which services must be provided is the municipal level – particularly as part of a system of Government which encourages and fosters social capital.
Local Government reform is, I believe, the key element in our national recovery. As I’ve said, we have never truly had a system of proper local government, we had a system of local administration that was concerned primarily with the preservation of power, firstly in London and then in Dublin. At most stages where reform was considered and implemented, the citizen lost out. Now we are presented with a
unique opportunity – having been so profoundly let down by our local government structures during the recent economic boom, a desire to accept reform has emerged in the electorate. This must not be squandered. The parish pump has long been held up as a symbol of the inherent problems with the Irish democratic system. However, it does serve to highlight the ongoing need to focus on the needs of smaller communities, rather than just the greater city, county or regional good. It is possible for a reform of local government to achieve two separate, but equally valuable outcomes. By shifting local government towards a two tier Regional/Municipal model, we can drastically improve the responsiveness to local needs, take the present pressure away from central government to allow it to focus more properly on national issues, and develop a new civic culture in Ireland at the community level.
Appendix I Population of Ireland by Province and County, 2002 - 2011
State Leinster Carlow Dublin Kildare Kilkenny Laois Longford Louth Meath Offaly Westmeath Wexford Wicklow Munster Clare Cork Kerry Limerick North Tipperary South Tipperary Waterford Connacht Galway Leitrim Mayo Roscommon Sligo Ulster (part of) Cavan Donegal Monaghan
2002 3,917,203 2,105,579 46,014 1,122,821 163,944 80,339 58,774 31,068 101,821 134,005 63,663 71,858 116,596 114,676 1,100,614 103,277 447,829 132,527 175,304
2006 4,239,848 2,295,123 50,349 1,187,176 186,335 87,558 67,059 34,391 111,267 162,831 70,868 79,346 131,749 126,194 1,173,340 110,950 481,295 139,835 184,055
2011 4,588,252 2,504,814 54,612 1,273,069 210,312 95,419 80,559 39,000 122,897 184,135 76,687 86,164 145,320 136,640 1,246,088 117,196 519,032 145,502 191,809
61,010
66,023
70,322
79,121 101,546 464,296 209,077 25,799 117,446 53,774 58,200 246,714 56,546 137,575 52,593
83,221 107,961 504,121 231,670 28,950 123,839 58,768 60,894 267,264 64,003 147,264 55,997
88,432 113,795 542,547 250,653 31,798 130,638 64,065 65,393 294,803 73,183 161,137 60,483
Appendix II The Case for Retaining Leixlip Town Council, 2010 (Catherine Murphy) (enclosed)