Proper Local Government

for Ireland The argument for radical reform of our Local

Government structures

Catherine Murphy TD

DRAFT

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,

Ireland’s Economic

Crisis: A Unique

Opportunity for

Genuine Reform

Foreword

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.

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-de-

France; 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.

Historical

Background: The

Development of

Local Government

in Ireland

1

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 county-

manager/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.

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.

Regional

Governance:

Moving away from

the County System

2

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 Gardaí 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.

Figure 1

EAST

SOUTH

WEST

My Proposal

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.

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.

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.

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

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,

Citizen-Centred

Reform:

Place-Shaping at

the Municipality

Level

3

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.

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, like-

minded 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

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 or Reality?; NUIM, 8

th March 2012

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.

level of municipal governance for them would cover their entire geographical region.

Similarly, smaller areas like Ráth 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 co-

operative 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.

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

The Right Balance

of Power

4

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

Currently

Proposed

National

Policy Direction: Effectively Absolute in all areas. Varying powers of direction over Regional Authorities.

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.

Regional/County

Policy Direction: Limited. 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 labour-

intensive 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.

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

A durable recovery

can only come from

radical renewal.

Conclusion

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

2002 2006 2011

State 3,917,203 4,239,848 4,588,252

Leinster 2,105,579 2,295,123 2,504,814

Carlow 46,014 50,349 54,612

Dublin 1,122,821 1,187,176 1,273,069

Kildare 163,944 186,335 210,312

Kilkenny 80,339 87,558 95,419

Laois 58,774 67,059 80,559

Longford 31,068 34,391 39,000

Louth 101,821 111,267 122,897

Meath 134,005 162,831 184,135

Offaly 63,663 70,868 76,687

Westmeath 71,858 79,346 86,164

Wexford 116,596 131,749 145,320

Wicklow 114,676 126,194 136,640

Munster 1,100,614 1,173,340 1,246,088

Clare 103,277 110,950 117,196

Cork 447,829 481,295 519,032

Kerry 132,527 139,835 145,502

Limerick 175,304 184,055 191,809

North Tipperary 61,010 66,023 70,322

South Tipperary 79,121 83,221 88,432

Waterford 101,546 107,961 113,795

Connacht 464,296 504,121 542,547

Galway 209,077 231,670 250,653

Leitrim 25,799 28,950 31,798

Mayo 117,446 123,839 130,638

Roscommon 53,774 58,768 64,065

Sligo 58,200 60,894 65,393

Ulster (part of) 246,714 267,264 294,803

Cavan 56,546 64,003 73,183

Donegal 137,575 147,264 161,137

Monaghan 52,593 55,997 60,483

Appendix II

The Case for Retaining Leixlip Town Council, 2010 (Catherine Murphy) (enclosed)