Today’s announcement of local government reform included substantial changes to the organisation of regional government and governance in Ireland. The current eight regional authorities and two regional assemblies will disappear and be replaced by three regional assemblies. No doubt, the current system is non-functional but we would argue that the new situation is a retrograde step for bottom-up regional development.
To support this argument, let us first take a look at the evolution of the current system. Regional governance has never been high on the agenda of the Irish state. But during the 1980s and 1990s, the European Union placed growing emphasis on developing a regional input into the spending of structural funds within member states. It was only under this pressure by the EU that the Irish government establishing the eight regional authorities in 1994. It was a token gesture to secure structural funds. The boundaries were established in an ad-hoc manner and the authorities were given a very limited remit. Their remit was to monitor the spending of EU structural funds at regional level within Ireland. But they were given no resources, they had no authority and received no technical assistance to conduct their task. These were relatively small authorities, in some cases staffed by less than a hand-full of people.
The establishment of the two Regional Assemblies was driven by maximising Objective 1 funding. Until 1999 the EU had treated Ireland as a single unit for determining eligibility for Objective 1 funding. But the Celtic Tiger and the strong growth of the Irish Economy started to create problems. As a whole, Ireland started to converge to the EU average which would mean that Ireland as a whole would no longer qualify for Objective 1 status. This would mean a serious loss of funds. In reaction, the country was split into two NUTS II regions (BMW and the Southern & Eastern regions). The BMW region was still within Objective 1 criteria. The process of establishing the boundaries of the regions had little to do with determining functional or nodal regions. It was a ploy to maximise structural funds.
Administratively the two new regions are currently lead by Regional Assemblies. They are comprised of elected representatives nominated by the local authorities from the membership of the Regional Authorities within each region. The Operational Committee is composed of the CEOs of the public authorities and the Directors of the Regional Authorities in the region. The Assemblies contribute little to a process of bottom-up regional development. One of the main tasks of the Assembly is to monitor the implementation of the Regional Operational Programmes.
The remit of the Regional Authorities was expanded with the launch of the National Spatial Strategy in 2002. The NSS included a role for the Regional Authorities, notably developing Regional Planning Guidelines. However, the Regional authorities were in no position to monitor the spending of the structural funds. They did not have the resources and did not receive the co-operation of the centralised institutions to fulfil this role. Nor did they have any power of enforcement over the local authorities. The stipulation that local authorities had to “pay regard” to the RPGs proved rather meaningless in this regard.
So, in its current form, our system of regional government and governance is ill-equipped to make a meaningful contribution to self-sustaining, bottom-up, regional development and a change should be welcomed (and has been called for by several contributors to recent Regional Studies Association Irish Branch conferences – see http://www.regional-studies-assoc.ac.uk/international-networks/pdfs/poster-nss.pdf And http://seanoriordain.ie/local-government-reform-in-ireland-myth-or-reality/). But is the content of the current announcement a step forward? Let us take a look at the boundaries of the three proposed Regional Assemblies and the associated system of governance.
In relation to the boundaries, the current set of Regional Authorities and Assemblies will be replaced by three Regional Assemblies. The Eastern and Midlands Region will cover Leinster excluding Counties Carlow, Kilkenny and Wexford. The extensive Southern Region will include Munster (including Carlow Kilkenny and Wexford) and the remainder of the country will make up the third region (see Figure 1). Unfortunately, the document makes no reference to the logic behind this new division. Would it be too cynical to suggest that the main driver is to cut numbers rather than stimulating effective regional development? It looks very much like an ad hoc, back-of-the-envelop, exercise mainly inspired by a desire to cut government expenditure. Regional boundaries can be determined on the basis multiple grounds and there is no one-size-fits-all solution. But they should be established on an evidence-based logic.
On the positive side, the creation of a Eastern and Midlands region which includes Metropolitan Dublin and its commuting belt makes a lot of sense. The inclusion of County Louth in this region makes sense as well and will support spatial planning in the wider Dublin-Belfast Corridor. However, we would argue that the other two regions are too large to make a meaningful contribution to bottom-up regional development processes. Here, the existing regional authority boundaries make more sense, with the exception of the Border region (working on the basis of the safe assumption that we will have to work with Counties as constituent elements of regions). We would argue for a regional division based on gateways and their hinterlands. Thus, in relation to the boundaries of the new Regional units, the new system is a step backwards for regional development.
In relation to the governance structure, the announcement includes positive signals in respect of a more meaningful governance role for the regions. The new Regional Assemblies are accorded key responsibility in developing regional economic strategies which will have to be adhered to by the local and national agencies. This will be underpinned by incorporation of the regional strategies into a new national regional policy. This is great news. Local authorities and national agencies can no longer simply ignore regional strategies. However, the fulfilment of the promise will crucially depend on the adoption of the compliance obligation and the provision of adequate resources to the new Regional Assemblies.
Today’s announcement also raises questions as to the status of the current regional planning guidelines, regional economic strategies, regional economic action plans and-so-forth. The idea is that the current regional guidelines will run their natural deadlines. However, the current regional planning guidelines were developed for the period 2010-2022. In the next 10 years, who will be responsible for enforcing these guidelines in the situation where the RPG area straddles two (new) Regional Assembly boundaries (as in the case of the Border RPG)?
In any case, a new system of regional government and governance will crucially depend on selective regional data relating to the new boundaries. Table 1 includes a first contribution, based on the recent CSO census 2011 data.
Chris.VanEgeraat@nuim.ie – Chairman of the Regional Studies Association Irish Branch
and Ronan Foley
Eastern & Midlands | Southern | North & West | |
Total Number of Males in 2011 | 1086224 | 767388 | 419087 |
Total Number of Females in 2011 | 1123239 | 774051 | 418263 |
Total Number of People in 2011 | 2209463 | 1541439 | 837350 |
Total Number of Households in 2011 | 900589 | 691845 | 402411 |
Number of Vacant Properties in 2011 | 84503 | 115040 | 89908 |
Percentage of Vacant Properties in 2011 | 11 | 16 | 22 |
AGE | |||
Age 0 to 4 Total | 175357 | 117288 | 63684 |
Age 5 to 9 Total | 153415 | 107797 | 59558 |
Age 10 to 14 Total | 140701 | 104294 | 57496 |
Age 15 to 19 Total | 133390 | 96512 | 53117 |
Age 20 -24 Total | 153184 | 93835 | 50212 |
Age 25 -29 Total | 193447 | 109565 | 58110 |
Age 30 -34 Total | 206084 | 123323 | 64538 |
Age 35 -39 Total | 183015 | 118620 | 62626 |
Age 40 -44 Total | 160114 | 111275 | 59423 |
Age 45 -49 Total | 144084 | 105412 | 55689 |
Age 50 -54 Total | 126648 | 95641 | 52097 |
Age 55 -59 Total | 110482 | 86147 | 47893 |
Age 60 -64 Total | 97122 | 78287 | 43377 |
Age 65 -69 Total | 76022 | 63079 | 34537 |
Age 70 -74 Total | 57623 | 47681 | 25886 |
Age 75 -79 Total | 44190 | 36994 | 20852 |
Age 80 -84 Total | 30154 | 25114 | 14845 |
Age 85+ Total | 24431 | 20575 | 13410 |
Total | 2209463 | 1541439 | 837350 |
MARITAL STATUS | |||
Single Total | 1227425 | 815088 | 442112 |
Maried Total | 797293 | 588832 | 322479 |
Separated Total | 58311 | 38813 | 19070 |
Divorced Total | 42991 | 29668 | 15111 |
Widowed Total | 83443 | 69038 | 38578 |
Total | 2209463 | 1541439 | 837350 |
NATIONALITY | |||
Irish by Nationality | 1850958 | 1347628 | 728557 |
UK by Nationality | 40370 | 42819 | 29070 |
Polish by Nationality | 59730 | 43625 | 19230 |
Lithuanian by Nationality | 21383 | 8209 | 7091 |
Other EU 27 by Nationality | 71370 | 30063 | 13804 |
Rest of World by Nationality | 104170 | 34113 | 19310 |
Not Stated by Nationality | 29148 | 16793 | 7840 |
Total by Nationality | 2177129 | 1523250 | 824902 |
ETHNICITY | |||
White Irish | 1784191 | 1322746 | 715058 |
White Irish Traveller | 12413 | 9052 | 8030 |
Other White | 212624 | 130467 | 69884 |
Black or Black Irish | 44793 | 13108 | 7177 |
Asian or Asian Irish | 58826 | 17113 | 8751 |
Other | 24222 | 10756 | 5746 |
Not Stated | 40060 | 20008 | 10256 |
Total | 2177129 | 1523250 | 824902 |
RELIGION | |||
Catholic | 1787640 | 1346760 | 726935 |
Other Religion | 221924 | 98479 | 63789 |
No Religion | 156922 | 76130 | 36759 |
Not Stated | 42977 | 20070 | 9867 |
Total | 2209463 | 1541439 | 837350 |
IRISH LANGUAGE | |||
Yes (Speak Irish) | 781307 | 647091 | 346039 |
No (Speak Irish) | 1271558 | 796390 | 439364 |
Not Stated (Speak Irish) | 48578 | 26823 | 13481 |
Total | 2101443 | 1470304 | 798884 |
FAMILY CLASSIFICATION | |||
Pre-family (No of families) | 73449 | 38699 | 19729 |
Empty Nest (No of families) | 51968 | 43649 | 23322 |
Retired (No of families) | 42518 | 33877 | 17733 |
Pre-School (No of families) | 72035 | 45729 | 23556 |
Early School (No of families) | 64995 | 44663 | 23345 |
Pre-Adolescent (No of families) | 62583 | 44891 | 23789 |
Adolescent (No of families) | 62316 | 47508 | 25394 |
Adult (No of families) | 138209 | 101125 | 54128 |
Total (No of families) | 568073 | 400141 | 210996 |
HOUSEHOLD FORMAT | |||
One Person Households (No of households) | 179268 | 135589 | 77143 |
Husband and Wife Households (No of households) | 109318 | 85068 | 45760 |
Cohabiting Couple Households (No of households) | 40816 | 21832 | 10463 |
Husband, Wife and Children Households (No of households) | 242418 | 181029 | 99512 |
Cohabiting Couple and Children Households (No of households) | 27484 | 18885 | 8542 |
Father and Children Households (No of households) | 11164 | 8830 | 4503 |
Mother and Children Households (No of households) | 77496 | 51340 | 26428 |
Couple and Others Households (No of households) | 11952 | 6476 | 3269 |
Couple, Children and Others Households (No of households) | 15242 | 10114 | 5103 |
Father, Children and Others Households (No of households) | 1584 | 943 | 459 |
Mother, Children and Others Households (No of households) | 8291 | 4776 | 2123 |
Two or more Family Units Households (No of households) | 10998 | 5376 | 2395 |
Non-family Households and Relations Households (No of households) | 19489 | 12664 | 7458 |
Two or more Non-related Persons Households (No of households) | 36168 | 17299 | 9141 |
Total Households (No of households) | 791688 | 560221 | 302299 |
HOUSING TYPE | 642109 | 515981 | 280255 |
House/Bungalow (Households) | 128321 | 33091 | 16175 |
Flat/Apartment (Households) | 4373 | 933 | 389 |
Bed-Sit (Households) | 1832 | 1816 | 1152 |
Caravan/Mobile home (Households) | 15053 | 8400 | 4328 |
Not Stated (Households) | 791688 | 560221 | 302299 |
Total (Households) | |||
HOUSING AGE | 61457 | 62712 | 25770 |
Pre 1919 (Households) | 54641 | 39012 | 21164 |
1919-1945 (Households) | 69799 | 38956 | 18936 |
1946-1960 (Households) | 62670 | 36139 | 15701 |
1961-1970 (Households) | 108879 | 69692 | 35626 |
1971-1980 (Households) | 79217 | 57950 | 35246 |
1981-1990 (Households) | 112089 | 81080 | 45555 |
1991-2000 (Households) | 121370 | 88941 | 55799 |
2001-2005 (Households) | 76036 | 58787 | 36574 |
2006 or Later (Households) | 43698 | 25136 | 10776 |
Not Stated (Households) | 789856 | 558405 | 301147 |
Total (Households) | |||
HOUSING TENURE | 296290 | 188457 | 98401 |
Owner Occupier with Mortgage (Households) | 232018 | 212487 | 122271 |
Owner Occupier No Mortgage (Households) | 166375 | 90590 | 48412 |
Rented from Private Landlord (Households) | 65402 | 44063 | 19568 |
Rented from Local Authority (Households) | 7540 | 5090 | 2312 |
Rented from Voluntary Body (Households) | 9644 | 9751 | 6041 |
Rented Free of Rent (Households) | 12587 | 7967 | 4142 |
Not Stated (Households) | 789856 | 558405 | 301147 |
Total (Households) | |||
HOUSING HEATING | |||
No Central Heating | 10140 | 12394 | 4418 |
Oil (Central Heating) | 216694 | 298539 | 196097 |
Natural Gas (Central Heating) | 413298 | 124360 | 12557 |
Electricity (Central Heating) | 83734 | 38432 | 18253 |
Coal (Central Heating) | 15002 | 43814 | 20329 |
Peat (Central Heating) | 26630 | 14805 | 37203 |
Liquid Petroleum Gas (Central Heating) | 2951 | 4900 | 2601 |
Wood (Central Heating) | 5795 | 11199 | 4401 |
Other | 3230 | 3233 | 2061 |
Not Stated | 12382 | 6729 | 3227 |
Total | 789856 | 558405 | 301147 |
EMPLOYMENT STATUS | |||
Looking For First Job (Total) | 17338 | 10602 | 6226 |
Unemployed having Lost or Given Up Previous Job (Total) | 185280 | 130503 | 74894 |
Student (Total) | 200516 | 134888 | 73434 |
Looking After Home/Family (Total) | 157335 | 120096 | 62487 |
Retired (Total) | 202754 | 163547 | 91093 |
Unable To Work due to Sickness or Disability (Total) | 68706 | 57691 | 30596 |
Other (Total) | 6201 | 4460 | 2655 |
Total (Total) | 1739990 | 1212060 | 656612 |
SOCIAL CLASS | |||
Professional Workers (Total) | 177600 | 106734 | 52286 |
Managerial and Technical (Total) | 641204 | 398252 | 212215 |
Non-Manual (Total) | 388175 | 267758 | 145371 |
Skilled Manual (Total) | 320151 | 247971 | 139247 |
Semi-Skilled (Total) | 211762 | 177926 | 97761 |
Unskilled (Total) | 76592 | 60879 | 32543 |
All Others Gainfully occupied and Unknown (Total) | 393979 | 281919 | 157927 |
Total (Total) | 2209463 | 1541439 | 837350 |
HOUSEHOLD SEG | |||
A Employers and managers (Households) | 131053 | 70717 | 35254 |
B Higher professional (Households) | 57644 | 30019 | 15148 |
C Lower professional (Households) | 93613 | 56546 | 32209 |
D Non-manual (Households) | 152984 | 91322 | 46727 |
E Manual skilled (Households) | 70614 | 57609 | 29139 |
F Semi-skilled (Households) | 61186 | 51872 | 26220 |
G Unskilled (Households) | 27820 | 22193 | 12143 |
H Own account workers (Households) | 39086 | 30148 | 17603 |
I Farmers (Households) | 15682 | 40872 | 29177 |
J Agricultural workers | 3405 | 4417 | 2239 |
Z All others gainfully occupied and unknown (Households) | 138601 | 104506 | 56440 |
Total (Households) | 791688 | 560221 | 302299 |
TRAVEL TO WORK MODE | |||
On foot | 239359 | 123222 | 52357 |
Bicycle | 45764 | 10031 | 5382 |
Bus, minibus or coach | 166004 | 69778 | 52780 |
Train, DART or LUAS | 66150 | 3515 | 1311 |
Motorcycle or scooter | 6601 | 2061 | 650 |
Car driver | 515322 | 401907 | 210167 |
Car passenger | 208808 | 196109 | 103421 |
Van | 44301 | 44886 | 29804 |
Other | 36971 | 44407 | 23475 |
Not stated | 42682 | 29134 | 17774 |
Total | 1371962 | 925050 | 497121 |
TRAVEL TO WORK TIME | |||
Under 15 mins | 382906 | 346801 | 192017 |
1/4 hour – under 1/2 hour | 402218 | 273344 | 137211 |
1/2 hour – under 3/4 hour | 260271 | 133429 | 69482 |
3/4 hour – under 1 hour | 96157 | 36207 | 20530 |
1 hour – under 1 1/2 hours | 92081 | 30376 | 18088 |
1 1/2 hours and over | 28144 | 13932 | 8962 |
Not stated | 78341 | 52618 | 31289 |
Total | 1340118 | 886707 | 477579 |
INFORMAL CARERS | |||
Age 0-14 years | 25466 | 18637 | 8955 |
Age 15-24 years | 21921 | 15271 | 7321 |
Age 25-44 years | 60881 | 39699 | 19846 |
Age 45-64 years | 80879 | 61365 | 31025 |
Age 65+ years | 89955 | 72536 | 41578 |
Carer Total | 279102 | 207508 | 108725 |
CARING HOURS | |||
1-14 Hours (Total) | 36716 | 28704 | 15471 |
15-28 Hours (Total) | 12575 | 10475 | 6205 |
29-42 Hours (Total) | 5846 | 5136 | 3157 |
43+ Hours (Total) | 16765 | 14532 | 8685 |
Not Stated (Total) | 10638 | 7934 | 4273 |
Total (Total) | 82540 | 66781 | 37791 |
HEALTH STATUS | |||
Very Good (Total) | 1352558 | 925217 | 489906 |
Good (Total) | 603438 | 436802 | 242716 |
Fair (Total) | 165247 | 126464 | 76420 |
Bad (Total) | 27174 | 19044 | 11025 |
Very Bad (Total) | 6109 | 3996 | 2313 |
Not Stated (Total) | 54937 | 29916 | 14970 |
Total (Total) | 2209463 | 1541439 | 837350 |
CAR OWNERSHIP | |||
No motor car | 158108 | 86596 | 45018 |
One motor car | 322294 | 221602 | 124870 |
Two motor cars | 252309 | 197825 | 105902 |
Three motor cars | 43700 | 38615 | 18949 |
Three motor cars | 13445 | 13767 | 6408 |
ICT AVAILABILITY | |||
Yes | 602995 | 391732 | 204571 |
No | 168223 | 155427 | 90947 |
Not Stated | 18638 | 11246 | 5629 |
Total | 789856 | 558405 | 301147 |
October 17, 2012 at 7:16 pm
The restructuring of the regional authorites/assemblies was an opportunity to create a regional authority for the Greater Dublin Area (i.e. Dublin and Mid-East Regions together). Currently they are required to work together in the preparation and review of Regional Planning Guidelines but the fact that they are two Regions helps to polarise debates at least at a political level.
The new Leinster Reg Assembly serves to give the message that the likes of Longford is part of the functional region of Dublin, which belies reality but could be politically powerful/problematic. When will regional governance decisions start to be made on a rational, evidence-informed basis taking cognisance of actual socio-spatial relations?
October 23, 2012 at 9:55 am
Reblogged this on European Energy Geographies.
November 6, 2012 at 6:36 pm
[…] New Regional Assemblies Announced […]
January 28, 2013 at 3:46 pm
The proposals in relation to Regional Government in “Putting People First”, like much of the rest of the document, clearly puts the permanent Government first and reduces the power of the elected Councillor. In that respect they represent a lost opportunity and are unacceptable.
The practice of coterminous Boundaries should be applied across the State Sector to any new Regional structure established
The decision to abolish the Dublin Regional Authority is a major mistake for Dublin and Ireland.
Placing Dublin into a new Regional Council along with Longford, Westmeath Offaly and Laois compounds that problem.
Composition of proposed Regional Council of two members per county seriously militates against urban areas and is fundamentally undemocratic. It is bad for democracy and bad for the Irish people. Such figures would not be acceptable in the Dail and should not be acceptable at Local Government level. Representation on these Councils should be proportionate to population with a minimum number of representatives being two and rising accordingly.
The role of the Councillor in the proposed new Regional Councils is even less than in existing Regional Authorities
The objectives envisaged for these Regional Councils need to be spelled out clearly.
The proposed Regional Councils should directly determine the membership of the EU Committee of the Regions Representatives and alternates. A specific role for the alternates should be provided for. Indeed Ireland’s qualification for membership of the Committee of the Regions now questionable.
Throughout the document any reference to additional powers for Councillors is on the lines of will be “explored” “reviewed” and “considered”. Powers for the Executive and Department are more definite.
The proposed role for the Local Government Oversight Bodies is dangerous, unclear and fundamentally anti-democratic.
The provision at 8.7.2 that “the provision of statutory observations on development plans be designated as administrative functions not requiring decisions by the members of the Authority” removes an important and significant power from Councillors and transfers even more power to unaccountable and unelected officials on Development Plans. This is clearly unacceptable to Councillors.
Councillor Dermot Lacey
January 31, 2013 at 12:12 pm
[…] this shift in approach are fully considered. See the comments from Cllr Dermot Lacey on this issue here. The possibility for Regional Authorities to have a role in determining key aspects of spatial […]