Addressing Local Government Reform in Ireland

Addressing Local Government Reform

Local government reform remains a perennial issue in Irish politics. To maintain effective governance it is necessary to review and reform our political structures on a regular basis. While on the whole the system has performed quiet well, there is now a general consensus that new reforms are required to deal with bottlenecks and underperformance. In the current climate there is now greater pressure on more cost-effective public sector performance. But beyond financial reforms, we also now have the opportunity to introduce a root and branch reform that can deliver a more efficient and also responsive public service. In this article is a brief exploration of a potential direction for reform in the hopes of stimulating a conversation.

The majority opinion emphasises three principles in order to achieve the best quality governance system. The first is democratic accountability, emphasising subsidiarity, a concept practised in EU decision-making that promotes maximum political input at the level closest to the people it effects. This principle allows for the delivery of both accountability and transparency, while at the same time facilitating a more effective delivery of public services. The second is financial self-sufficiency for local authorities. In order for an authority at any level to operate effectively it requires financial autonomy, i.e. an ability to fund its own policies. Finally, a clear delineation of the roles and powers of politicians and public servants is necessary in order to avoid overlapping jurisdictions and miscommunication in order to deliver the most productive service to the public. All of these objectives can be met within existing resource allocations and if adhered can deliver a more efficient use of said resources at no extra cost to the exchequer.

It is important to remember that the functions of local government have for the most part been determined by a historical legacy that does not reflect modern practical and political considerations. The changes that we have seen since the Celtic Tiger require a more flexible and adaptive system which our present Dublin-centric centralised approach does not facilitate. Population growth, urban development and the demands of our modern economy have put greater pressures on local government structures than ever before. If we are to maintain our competiveness in the global economy and meet the needs of the public we need to be willing to address the need for structural change.

The current three-tier system has performed well over the years and is the only viable system given the geographical nature of our country. The reforms therefore need to be focused on the particular tiers themselves and the role we give to our political representatives and public servants.

These need to start with the smallest unit of local government at Sub-County level. These are the town councils, which have become increasingly ineffective due to lack of resources and outdated demographic boundaries. The solution is to fold them into a new town and district council system that reflects modern population distributions and that are properly funded through the ability to raise their own revenues via a revised local rate system. This would be modelled on the successes of the last local government reforms introduced at a City and County level. Under this system Area Committees were set up by County Councils which were able to tailor services to the locality and which would then be distributed by a Director of Services. A similar system applied at a new town and district level would enable a more effective and democratic provision of service in a traditionally neglected tier of local government.

At the City and Council level there are a number of concerns around demographics. Currently there a number of towns which have populations which are too large to be effectively serviced by town councils. Similarly there are a number of borough councils which are inadequate to meet the demands of their urban communities. The current system has been in place since the 19th century and needs to be updated to properly represent today’s population distribution. An important step to achieving this is a national review of urban governance structures. This can allow overburdened town councils to be up-scaled into boroughs where necessary. However, in certain counties like Louth where there are two large urban centres with significant hinterlands, a more effective system may be to introduce Municipal Councils which would replace the county council delivering a more streamlined service that can be both more representative and effective. This model should be applied voluntarily in line with democratic principles wherein the county council would vote on it and can be adapted wherever demographics deem necessary.

The third tier should be the regional level. Currently there is little regional governance. This makes efficient infrastructural and economic development more difficult than it has to be. The benefits from a regional structure through which neighbouring county administrations can cooperate and forward plan are considerable. Water services, waste management, environmental policy, infrastructural development, tourism and rural development to mention but a few are all areas where greater regional cooperation would be of great benefit. By creating a structure within which city and county councils can coordinate policy development, greater cost efficiencies and democratic dividends can be actualised. The regional units would not be in the mould of city or county councils at regional level, but rather they would be forums wherein councils would appoint representatives to negotiate common positions with their neighbours. In effect power would remain in the hands of counties, the regional institutions acting as instruments of collective action. These institutions would be funded by both central and local government and involve both parties in the formation of region specific policy. They should reflect geographic and demographic realities and have representation in the Oireachtas.

A contingent part of the reform of structures is also a new approach to the role of local administrators. In Dublin within the next year we will see a directly elected Mayor. Ideally this could be rolled out to all the major cities in the state and be built upon. The OECD, as well as various academic investigations, suggest that there is a need for a comprehensive review of the local government in Ireland. It is currently one of the most limited in Western Europe. The Local Government Reforms of 2000 have gone some way to addressing perceptions of clientelism and under-performance, however beyond the aforementioned structural changes, a central element of better service provision is the delegation of greater powers to local authorities. This covers areas such as childcare, education and economic development amongst others. To meet the demands of such responsibility requires greater empowerment of local councillors, who currently have limited means and awareness of their roles.

A potential approach to this problem is to replace the haphazard Strategic Policy Boards with more permanent cabinets, which would give specific portfolios to councillors and are appointed by directly elected Mayors. Furthermore, the council structure should engage more with non-government agencies and lead the way when dealing with local problems. Finally the question of economic self-sufficency, this will ultimately require a review of the current revenue system looking at water, local sales and property rates in particular. It is vitally important that any new powers delegated to local government be financed at a local level if performance is to be optimised, moreover local politicians will also need to take responsibility for it, with scope for central government oversight on revenue plans. Additionally this will have the secondary effect of also reducing the financial burden on central government.

The benefit of such an approach is a more reflexive and ultimately more effective local service provision which delivers both greater cost efficiency and accountability. As the saying goes, every cloud has a silver-lining, and with the doom and gloom of the recession so too is there the potential for real progress. In this time of heightened sensitivity to issues of costs, we have an opportunity to make some significant changes which may not only help us reduce our national deficit but also make our government more responsive to its public. What has been covered is far from a detailed plan of action, but can be the basis for beginning to address a progressive and effective approach to reform.

End of the Dollar?

In the aftermath of the global recession, serious questions have arisen about the future of the world's financial order. The over-exposure of the US dollar was central to the rapid downturn that engulfed the economies of the world. The role of the dollar as the effectively the base currency of global trade, in concert with the never before seen level of globalisation combined to create a situation highly vulnerable to an asymmetric shock like was seen when US finance went to the wall last year. The extensive level of external debt, mainly with China and the instability of the global energy market and the endemic weaknesses of the US regulatory system as epitomised by events like the Enron collapse, set the stage for an inevitable economic catastrophe. When it did happen, the shock rippled outward through the intricate web of financial networks, touching firms and national economies across the world. When it came it came suddenly and dramatically, bringing GDP growth rates to a standstill.

But as we adapt to the fallout and struggle to plug hemorrhaging public finances and arrest free-falling employment and growth rates, attention is being given to how can this unprecedented economic crisis be avoided in future. The core issue here is how do you balance a deeply globalised world economy and the incongruous economic performances of national economies within said economic order. Considering how actions in one economy can have unforeseen consequences in another, there are inherent and credible risks around having one national currency underwriting international trade.

The US dollar as the base currency is subject to all the domestic factors of any other national currency as well as the exceptional factors that go with its role in international trade. This puts a high degree of dependence on one currency and one economy. In America's case this is a particularly acute issue with a high level of foreign indebtedness, and poor regulatory history. Thus for many today the dollars position is no longer viable. China and Russia along with several East Asian economies have been the loudest in their demands for a new approach. The solution put forth has been the creation of a new currency, based around the ill-fated ECU(European Currency Unit) that predated the Euro. This would work by creating a basket of the worlds most important currencies, weighting them and averaging out a single value that would be used as a unit of account.

If this idea is to come to fruition it will require institutional organisation. Effectively a global regulatory body to provide oversight over the currency. This new international institution will have some serious implications for global politics. First off US economic dominance comes into question. To date as the base currency the dollar underwrites US economic influence abroad.Without it what are the implications for its foreign policy or even its position as the worlds only superpower. Who will ultimately be responsible for the management of this new international regulatory body? To whom will it be accountable? What adaptations will national economies have to make? How does this effect political and economic sovereignty? How will trade relations be affected? Will this represent a move towards a global government? There are undoubtedly a myriad of issues that this new prospect raises. It can be safely assumed however that this will have considerable consequences for the international order politically, economically and strategically.

Given the seriousness of the current economic crisis something must be done to ensure our global vulnerability to such problems is addressed. Global currency or not, greater international cooperation and coordination is going to be necessary moving forward. But equally if and when this is being considered serious thought must be given to it consequences. It is not simply the case that China and Russia are concerned about economic stability, in this day and age the traditional balance of power is in flux. The US has now to treat equally with the BRIC nations(Brazil, Russia, India and China) as they begin to out pace the West economically. The adoption of the global currency means a serious reordering of the hierarchy of the global powers. It is no coincidence that it is some of these very nations calling for change. Nonetheless change is coming because as we have witnessed in the last year the cost of the status quo is no longer viable.

Over-populated and Under-resourced: The true cost of the 21^st Century Lifestyle

Recently a study found that human civilisation is currently consuming enough resources to equal one and one third the capacity of the planet earth. Quiet an astounding fact, not to mention inherently unsustainable. The study estimated that by the time the readers of this article are hitting retirement age, humanity will require two planet earths to sustain current consumption trends. This is basically down to demographic growth which sees human population expand from its current level of 6.7 billion to around 9 billion by the 2040’s. The repercussions of this are equally astounding.

While certain regions, mostly in the developed West will see a decreasing birth rate, this will fail to balance the growth in the developing world. The culmination of which is poverty and famine as our planet’s resources dry up. The earth can only supply a fixed amount of raw materials, oil as the most recognisable example is running out yet its demand has never been higher. Oil based technologies underpin the global economy, in particular the structure of the global agricultural industry. With depleting oil reserves the cost of food will climb. The irony is that oil allowed us to boost food production globally to never before seen levels, this in turn has been the engine behind the incredible demographic explosion of the past century to where today it is estimated 50-75% of all the humans that ever lived are alive right now.

The reserves of oil along with all of our other fundamental natural resources cannot sustain our current population, let alone two or three extra billion mouths to feed. This leaves us in a precarious position.  Our current quality of life allows us to live alot longer than ever before. Ordinarily nature would intervene with diseases to check population growth, but with the advent of modern medicine, most people especially in the West can expect to live long into their sixties, seventies and eighties. Birth rates on average across the world are less than they were a few decades ago, however, the numbers of women of child-bearing age continues to rise and due to medicine are more likely to live longer and have children. This is a disastrous combination for demographics. With more people living longer because of better medicine and more people being born than ever before, the strain on the limited and scarce resources of the planet is ever worsening.

Add to this the impact of global warming. First of all there are the rising sea levels, eroding low-lying coastal land, which is home to much of the world’s agricultural base. Less land is available for cultivation, and then there is the land used to grow bio-fuels, again at the cost of food production. Changing climate renders regions unsuitable for specific crop types or at worst completely infertile, reducing supply of particular products. Unpredictable weather patterns destroy or damage harvests, as we saw here in Ireland last summer and autumn as upwards of 150 million Euros worth of produce was lost to torrential rain and flooding.

In truth we can only guess at the full repercussions of what is to come if current trends continue. But the harsh reality is that few governments in the world today are factoring in much of this into their policies. This is evidenced enough by the complete lack of preparation or planning. Even efforts to slow or reverse climate change have been hampered by political expediency and even denial. The recent economic problems have not helped either. But the costs of ambivalence today are too great to ignore. As resources dry up and populations expand the scope for violence and warfare expands. As such resource wars can be seen to get more common and increasingly dominate the international environment as powers struggle to monopolize ever-shrinking reserves.

9-11 billion are the estimates of the ceiling at which the population will collapse. This will either be the product of mass starvation, global war or catastrophic environmental destruction, either one is not something we want to endure. So this leaves us with a choice to make; carry on as we are or arrest the situation by taking remedic actions now, starting with reforming our relationship with nature. Otherwise nature will make that choice for us and it will come at an extremely high cost, with nothing less than the future of our very species at risk. We have to start prioritising the future over the here and now; to date each generation has never been able to see beyond its own welfare, we cannot afford to make that same mistake anymore.