Delivering Integrated Rural and Local Development post 2014 in the Light of the Alignment Proposals.

Brendan O’KeeffeKillorglin, May 2013

Roinn na Tíreolaíochta

Department of Geography

Contents1. Local Government in Ireland2. Drawing on International Best Practice3. Lessons regarding Existing Structures4. The ILDN Position

Making Policy

• Look at the Evidence and Follow It.• Consult with those involved.• Include Financial Projections.

1. Local Government is a Good Thing.

Ireland needs•Local Government Reform•More decentralisation and devolution of power to local communities•A smaller bureaucracy•A more flexible system that allows for innovation and local input.

How Ireland Compares

State Systems in the ESPON 29 Space

The Role of Local Authorities

Functions Lost since 2002•Health•Vehicle Registration•School Attendance Monitoring•Waste Management •National Secondary Roads•Third Level Grants•Water•Driving Licences

Comparative Local Authority Size

Source: Callanan, M., Murphy, R and Quinlivan, A (2012)

Local Authority Size and Administrative Overheads, 2012

“Blind Up-scaling”

Charter on Local Self-GovernmentConsidering that the right of citizens to participate in the conduct of public affairs is one of the democratic principles … and that it is at local level that this right can be most directly exercised;Article 4 - Scope of local self-government•Powers given to local authorities shall normally be full and exclusive…local authorities shall, insofar as possible, be allowed discretion in adapting their exercise to local conditions. •Local authorities shall be consulted, insofar as possible, in due time and in an appropriate way in the planning and decision-making processes for all matters which concern them directly. Article 5 – Protection of local authority boundaries•Changes in local authority boundaries shall not be made without prior consultation of the local communities concerned, possibly by means of a referendum where this is permitted by statute.

The Democratic Input?• The Mahon Tribunal Report (page 2518) recommended

that regional authorities be “democratically elected.”• The Hogan Proposals abolish the eight regional

authorities (page ix) and realign the existing regional assemblies from two to three.

Hogan also proposes: • “to ensure that Councillors will no longer be allowed to

direct the executive in respect of planning functions” (page i) and

• to reduce the number of elected councillors by 46% - mainly affecting the West.

2. Rural Development and International Best Practice

• European Commission• European Court of Auditors• OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation

and Development)• ESPON (European Spatial Planning Observatory

Network)• All independent evaluations.favour decentralisation and the retention and further

development of the LEADER model independent of local government, working in partnership with local authorities.

Community-Led Local DevelopmentAccording to the European Commission: Over the past 20 years, the LEADER approach to community-led local development (CLLD) – designed to help rural actors consider the long-term potential of their local region, has proven an effective and efficient tool in the delivery of development policies.

CLLD can mobilise and involve local communities and organisations to contribute to achieving the Europe 2020 Strategy goals of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, fostering territorial cohesion and reaching specific policy objectives.

OECD (2006) The New Rural Paradigm

O.E.C.D. Recommendations

Competitiveness is a bottom-up process in which individuals, firms, and institutions take and share responsibility to address the specific barriers faced by their region and companies in a given market and not just the general challenges. In delivering the Europe 2020 strategy, local and regional governments and development agencies across rural Europe will need to look at their own specific situations and see how they might work with other partners to develop rural business clusters

(ESPON, 2009; 45).

Enabling Bottom-Up Participation

• The aims of Europe 2020 require that territorial diversity is acknowledged and that full advantage is taken of the distinctiveness of Europe’s regions and municipalities.*

• A territorial dimension is also needed to fully grasp the different types of challenges for regional development of the Europe 2020 strategy… and its richness also allows for better inclusion of the key public and private stakeholders at local and regional level (page 30).

* The SKDP Community Forum Areas are equivalent to municipalities.

ESPON Recommendations

The Scale of LEADER

Excludes The Netherlands and BelgiumSweden=2,760km2. Finland = 6,127km2

3. Lessons from and for Existing Structures

3.1: County Development Board3.2: LEADER

3.1: Evaluation of CDBsWe recommend that formalised mechanisms are put in place to ensure some weighting is given by national Department/statutory agencies to views of CDBs in relation to local measures. We believe this is particularly important in deciding on resource priorities. We believe it would be unrealistic to assume that because CDBs have endorsed measures that no other evaluation is needed (INDECON, 2008; viii).

Nevertheless we believe there is a need for a formalised mechanism to ensure a weighting is given to the views of CDBs. Where CDBs’ views are being sought by a Government Department or national agency regarding a particular issue, then their local representatives, as appropriate, on the Board should take a lead role in that matter (op. cit.; ix).

Radically Improve Availability of County / City Data

Increase Information on Best Practice Exchange between CDBs and Between CDBs and Statutory Agencies

• More autonomous LAGs show better results in awakening dormant skills and potentials, in strategic thinking and in monitoring the development of their area in a structured way

• Autonomy or the decision making power of Local Action Groups should be further developed. Decision making power makes sense if the LAG is willing to exert it, if it is capable to master it and if it is allowed to do so by the managing authority and the programme administration (page 20).

Ex-post evaluation of LEADER+(Metis GmbH with AEIDL and CEU)

3.2 Independent Evaluation of LEADER

Ex-post evaluation of LEADER+• The European Commission should maintain its

stance on the participation of >50% non-public partners in decision making bodies, knowing that the ‘shadow of hierarchy’, a normal functioning of the public sector (according to the principles of ‘good governance’) is a prerequisite for the LAG (essentially a public-private partnership) to function normally. Apart from these principal considerations, the EU Commission should, in its Regulation, put more emphasis on fostering local governance and according capacity development (page 175).

4. The ILDN Proposals for Stronger Local Democracy

Commission for Economic and Social Affairs

• Data Collection, Co-Ordination and Dissemination

• Monitoring Territorial Impacts of Agencies

• Inter-territorial collaboration• Promotion and Advocacy• Environmental Monitoring• Assessing territorial impacts of

National and EU Policy e.g. NSS

South Kerry Dev. Partnership

• Autonomous Delivery of Actions including LEADER and LCDP etc.

• Community Development• Social Economy• Local Employment and

Enterprise Functions• Local Agenda 21• Mainstreaming via

Localisation and Out-Sourcing

ImplementationDelivery and Ownership

S.E. COMMISSION

Formulation of City / County Community and Local Plan

Community Plans

County Spatial and Economic Plan

RegionalAssembly

Department of Environment , Other Government Departments,

PobalEUDG Regio

Plan

ning

and

O

vers

ight

SEC Roles and Functions in Respect of Community and Municipal Planning and Interfaces between Local Development and Local Government

Resources,Mainstreaming,

Outsourcing

LCDPLEADERRTPLESTÚSRSSJILocal Agenda 21etc.

City / County Authority

Representative Democracy

Participative Democracy

Resources and Expertise

Resources and ExpertisePlanning Policy ProposalsPolicy Direction

BrokeragePolicy DirectionResources

Reso

urce

s /

Initi

ative

s /

Prog

ram

mes

/Con

trac

ts

Municipal District

CommunityPlans

Election of Councillors

Municipal Plans

LIFEEQUAL

INTERREGCSP

SKILLSNETBTWEA

ChildcareWarmer Homes

Contract-HoldingAutonomous

Local DevelopmentCompanies

Citizen-Centred

Service DeliveryCommunity-Led Local Development

Data CaptureMonitoringProofingPromotion

AdvocacyFacilitation

DisseminationInformation

Policy

Commission Membership

Public Sector

Public Service

Municipal & LocalAuthorities

Regional Assemblies

Colleges/ Universities

Executives

SocialPartners

Financial

Institutions

Community

/Voluntary

Cultural

Geographical

Communities

Interest Communities

Social Economy

ThirdSector

Special Interest

Women

Youth

Local Development/ LEADER

Partnerships

EconomicDevelopment

GovernmentAgencies

Prefect

State and EU

SocialProgress

CouncillorsExecutives

DSP /Solus

HSE

Environmen

t

ProductiveSector

Trade Unions

Farmers

Employers

EnvironmentalForum

Forfás /Teagasc /

Commission Governance• Broadly-based• Key Role for Municipal Councillors• Equity between Members• Owned by Members• Independent Staffing• Monitoring ALL agencies and with tiered

ability to sanction using OMC method.

5. Conclusion• Autonomous and locally-based Partnerships outperform those

that are aligned to local authorities

• Collaboration between autonomous Partnerships and Local Authorities delivers projects and improves local competitiveness and quality of life.

• Current proposals represent a de-Europeanisation of Irish institutions, a dilution of partnership and the loss of potential European funding for rural development.

• Dismantling of structures may be populist in Dublin 4, but will be costly.

• The loss of key personnel and the institutionalisation of local development is a cause for concern among volunteers.

• Civil Society Leaders and Entrepreneurs have not been sufficiently consulted in the formulation of policy on local and rural development.

Putting People First needs to be revised to:

1. Strengthen Local Government by – devolving power from central government

bureaucracy (and NOT from local development and voluntary bodies),

– Giving the SPC oversight over all statutory bodies,2. Strengthen Local Development by

– Allowing for local innovation and tailored strategies – with less red tape.

– Ensure community ownership– Partnership between local government and local

development.