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

1. Delivering Integrated Rural and Local Development post 2014 in the Light of the Alignment Proposals. Roinn na Tíreolaíochta Brendan O’Keeffe Killorglin, May 2013 Department of Geography

2. Contents • Local Government in Ireland • Drawing on International Best Practice • Lessons regarding Existing Structures • The ILDN Position

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

4. 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.

5. State Systems in the ESPON 29 Space The Role of Local Authorities How Ireland Compares • Functions Lost since 2002 • Health • Vehicle Registration • School Attendance Monitoring • Waste Management • National Secondary Roads • Third Level Grants • Water • Driving Licences

6. Comparative Local Authority Size

7. Local Authority Size and Administrative Overheads, 2012 “Blind Up-scaling” Source: Callanan, M., Murphy, R and Quinlivan, A (2012)

8. Charter on Local Self-Government Considering 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.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. Community-Led Local Development According 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.

12. O.E.C.D. Recommendations OECD (2006) The New Rural Paradigm

13. Enabling Bottom-Up Participation 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).

14. ESPON Recommendations • 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.

15. The Scale of LEADER Excludes The Netherlands and Belgium Sweden=2,760km2. Finland = 6,127km2

16. 3. Lessons from and for Existing Structures 3.1: County Development Board 3.2: LEADER

17. 3.1: Evaluation of CDBs We 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

18. 3.2 Independent Evaluation of LEADER • 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)

19. 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).

20. 4. The ILDN Proposals for Stronger Local Democracy Commission for Economic and Social Affairs 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 • 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

21. SEC Roles and Functions in Respect of Community and Municipal Planning and Interfaces between Local Development and Local Government Department of Environment , Other Government Departments, Pobal EU DG Regio Policy Direction Brokerage Regional Assembly Policy Direction Resources Planning Policy Proposals S.E. COMMISSION Policy County Spatial and Economic Plan Resources and Expertise Resources / Initiatives / Programmes /Contracts Representative Democracy Advocacy Facilitation Dissemination Information Data Capture Monitoring Proofing Promotion Planning and Oversight City / County Authority Resources and Expertise Formulation of City / County Community and Local Plan Participative Democracy Election of Councillors Resources, Mainstreaming, Outsourcing Municipal Plans Community Plans Municipal District Community Plans Contract-Holding Autonomous Local Development Companies Implementation Delivery and Ownership Citizen- Centred Service Delivery Community-Led Local Development

22. Commission Membership State and EU Executives Councillors Forfás / Teagasc / Prefect Colleges/ Municipal & Local Authorities Executives Universities Public Regional Assemblies Financial Service Institutions Public Geographical Communities Economic Development Government Agencies Sector Community Local Development / LEADER Partnerships /Voluntary DSP / Solus Interest Social Social Progress Communities Partners Third Sector HSE Cultural Environment Special Interest Productive Sector Social Economy Environmental Forum Trade Unions Women Youth Farmers Employers

23. 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.

24. 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.

25. Putting People First needs to be revised to: • 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, • 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.