Today's agenda is a meeting with the County and City Management Association, CCMA, and concerns the role and importance of local government in the effective delivery of national infrastructure. I welcome Mr. Barry Kehoe, chief executive of Westmeath County Council and chair of the CCMA's transport, infrastructure and networks committee, and Mr. Simon Walton, director of services at Laois County Council.

Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that may be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory with regard to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

I remind members that they will each be afforded six-minute speaking slots for questions and answers, with a second change to contribute at the end, if they wish. I am conscious that we might have a number of votes as we proceed, so I would like to keep people within the six minutes rather than going over that time. It might be tight, as we do not know how today is going to go.

I invite Mr. Kehoe to make his opening statement.

I thank the committee for the invitation to appear before it today to discuss the role and importance of local government in the delivery of national infrastructure. Local authorities have been at the heart of infrastructure delivery in Ireland since the establishment of the modern local government system under the Local Government (Ireland) Act 1898. For well over a century, county and city councils have planned, built and maintained the roads, water systems, housing and public amenities that underpin the daily lives of communities across the country. The local government sector has a long and proud record of delivering infrastructure efficiently, on time and within budget.

The role of local authorities has evolved significantly over the decades. Beyond the traditional functions of roads, housing, water and planning, councils have become increasingly involved in community development, local economic development, tourism promotion and enterprise support. Local authorities now play a central role in climate action, active travel, urban regeneration and place-making, functions that go well beyond the original statutory remit but are essential to the quality of life in our communities.

At the same time, there have been significant structural changes in how infrastructure is delivered at national level. The establishment of the National Roads Authority, NRA, which is now Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, and the National Transport Authority changed fundamentally the structures through which transportation infrastructure was delivered and managed. More recently, the establishment of Uisce Éireann has transferred responsibility for the delivery of water services from local authorities to a national utility. These were major shifts in the infrastructural landscape.

Despite these changes, the local government sector retains a crucial role in infrastructure delivery. Local authorities remain directly responsible for the vast majority of the road network, housing delivery, active travel infrastructure, public realm improvements and a wide range of community facilities. Equally important is the co-ordination role that local authorities play as planning authorities, as the bodies that manage road openings and utility access, and as the organisations that engage most directly with communities on major projects. No significant infrastructural project is delivered without the involvement and co-operation of local government.

The CCMA welcomes the publication of the "Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan" document and the commitment by the Government to streamline processes and remove barriers to infrastructure delivery. The establishment of the accelerating infrastructure task force and the comprehensive programme of 30 actions represent a serious and welcome statement of intent. Local authorities will co-operate fully with the implementation of the actions set out in the report, including those actions that fall under the proposed joint utilities and transport clearing house, JUTCH. The CCMA has already been actively engaged through the joint electricity and transport working group, which is addressing the critical interface between electricity grid infrastructure and the road network. We recognise the urgency of this work and are committed to playing our part.

We welcome the task force’s identification of risk aversion and multi-annual budgeting as key issues. Risk aversion has created a culture of caution that slows decision-making at every level. Local authorities experience this directly in their role as planning authorities and in the delivery of their own infrastructural projects. A system that penalises decision-makers for taking reasonable and proportionate decisions will inevitably produce delay.

On multi-annual budgeting, the current system of annualised capital allocations makes it extremely difficult to plan and deliver infrastructural projects that span multiple years. The commitment to multi-year funding certainty through five-year sectoral investment plans is a very positive development. This will allow local authorities and other delivery bodies to plan with greater confidence, engage supply chains earlier and deliver projects more effectively and efficiently.

The report’s recognition of public acceptance as a barrier to infrastructure delivery is also significant. However, I urge the committee to consider this issue through the lens of local democratic representation. It is important to remember that the elected council is the only body at local level that has a direct mandate from the community to make decisions on its behalf. Councillors are accountable to their communities in a way that no other body or agency is. Meaningful engagement and consultation with local authorities, both with the executive and with elected members, can do much to achieve broad community acceptance of major projects. Where communities feel that their concerns have been heard and that local decision-makers have been genuinely involved in the process, acceptance is far more likely. Conversely, where projects are perceived to be imposed from the centre without adequate local engagement, opposition tends to intensify. The local authority network, with its democratic legitimacy and community connections, is a significant asset in building public support for infrastructure.

I will conclude by making a point that is sometimes overlooked. With the right structures and supports, the local government sector can and does deliver large-scale infrastructure efficiently and effectively. The national motorway network built from the early 2000s is a case in point. The programme to connect Dublin to Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford with high-quality motorways was delivered through a partnership between the then NRA and local authorities through our national road design offices. Local authority staff managed these projects from start to finish through planning, land acquisition, environmental compliance, community liaison and construction. The result was one of the most successful infrastructural programmes in the history of the State. More recently, local authorities have been to the forefront of delivering active travel infrastructure across the country. The sector has now delivered over 660 km of pedestrian routes, 400 km of cycling infrastructure and 220 km of greenways. This has been achieved at pace, demonstrating the capacity of local government to mobilise quickly when given the funding, the mandate and the flexibility to deliver. Other recent examples of major infrastructural investment in which local authorities have played a key role include the urban and rural regeneration programmes, the outdoor recreation scheme and the national broadband plan.

Finally, I draw the committee’s attention to an issue that is sometimes overlooked in discussions about national infrastructure but that is of fundamental importance to the communities we serve. The delivery of housing at scale must be accompanied by investment in the community and social infrastructure that makes a collection of houses into a functioning community. This includes sporting facilities, community centres, playgrounds, parks, libraries, schools, primary care centres and other local amenities. Local authorities see at first hand the consequences when this softer infrastructure is not provided in parallel with housing development. New residential areas without adequate community facilities place enormous strain on existing services and can lead to social isolation and a diminished quality of life for residents. The experience of rapid development in the early 2000s, where housing was delivered without corresponding investment in community infrastructure, is a lesson we cannot afford to repeat. I would urge that, as the national development plan, NDP, is implemented and as housing delivery accelerates, funding and support for community and social infrastructure be prioritised alongside them. Local authorities are well placed to identify what is needed in their areas and to deliver these facilities but they need the resources and the multi-annual funding certainty to do so.

These examples demonstrate that the local government sector is not a barrier to infrastructure delivery; it is a key enabler.

With the right structures, adequate funding, multi-annual certainty and genuine partnership, local authorities will continue to be central to delivering the infrastructure that Ireland needs. We are happy to take any questions the committee might have.

Míle buíochas as teacht isteach inniu. I have one quick question. The motorways were delivered really well through the local authorities. Something that is not being delivered really well at the moment is flood defences. I think Laois has a significant flood defence issue as well. Why is it the case that flood defences are desperately slow? Many of them take 20 or 30 years from concept to delivery. Most of the flood defences promised at the moment are not even finished getting through planning. I am thinking of Midleton in Cork, promised in 2015 with still no application in place. Why were the motorways delivered in a fashion that the flood defences are not?

We do have experience of flooding. Unfortunately, we had a very negative experience in Athlone for many years of flooding. Over the last ten years now we have been installing flood defences in the town and they are 98% complete. They were installed in a manner in which there was co-operation between ourselves as a local authority and the OPW, with the local authority acting as the client, effectively, commissioning consultants and designing the defences. The OPW then installed the defences and paid us for any costs we had in terms of our design and so on. It was similar to the model that was used to deliver motorways, and it was effective. It does put significant pressure on the local authority and on the entire system, but it is a model that can work. Like other infrastructure, flood defences have to be put through a really complicated planning process, as the Deputy knows.

The habitats directive, I imagine, impinges massively on flood defences.

It can, because there is a requirement to protect the natural environment, whatever infrastructure we undertake. Certain habitats and their conservation value have protection in EU and Irish law. There is always a question of going through a process, identifying the potential impact on those habitats and dealing with it.

Can Mr. Kehoe identify a couple of reasons flood defences are taking so long at the moment?

It is the complexity of delivering infrastructure in Ireland. That is the position.

The system is too complex.

It is very complex. The report on accelerating infrastructure identifies that, in fairness.

Active travel was mentioned. We are all for active travel, but there seems to be a very centralised development of active travel in this country. For example, in Navan, there is a plan to pedestrianise the main street. Most of the councillors are against it but the council is still going ahead with the planning to a stage where the councillors are going to vote against it. When asked why, they say it is coming from the Department so they have to do this. Is that the case?

I cannot comment on that, in fairness.

Not on the Navan one, but just the process.

The way active travel works, in my view, is that there are standards that must be achieved in terms of providing adequate space on the road for pedestrians, cyclists and any other vulnerable road users. Those standards must be achieved.

They are determined by the Department.

There are standards that are set down at central level for the delivery of active travel infrastructure, and it is incumbent on us to achieve those standards.

Where does the initiation of the concept for a particular project come from? Does it come from the Department or does it come from the council?

It varies, but generally, in my view, the local authority would identify the most appropriate projects for its area and seek to deliver them. Would that be Mr. Walton's experience as well?

Yes.

We would identify the priorities in our county and put them forward for funding.

Do you have enough staff for planning? Are you finding it difficult to employ planners? Is the lack of planners impinging on the process timewise?

There is a shortage of planners across the sector. A number of years ago, a study was undertaken and a need for over 500 additional professional planners in the system was identified. Since then, over 200 have been recruited but there is significant competition for experienced planners in the country. An Coimisiún Pleanála has recruited and continues to recruit. We are competing for the same pool of planners. We are challenged by the number of planners across the entire sector, and there is quite a bit of movement from one county to another and between bodies, which makes life difficult for us as well.

What role did the councils have in the development of the Government's accelerating infrastructure plan? Were they consulted, were there inputs and what role did they have in that?

We were not members of the task force but we did get the opportunity to have an input into it. We were consulted formally and made a number of submissions to the task force as a sector.

What are the major blockages at the moment in the housing development system at local authority level?

We are continuing to deliver significant numbers of houses now. What we are experiencing in many areas is a significant upturn in delivery of private housing and we are delivering social and affordable houses ourselves as well.

In terms of blockages and difficulties, where would you like Leinster House to----

This is the Deputy's final question.

The issue for us on an ongoing basis is speed of approval when we have schemes that are ready to go to construction and go through planning. Funding certainty into the future would allow us to plan better.

I thank Mr. Kehoe and Mr. Walton for coming in today, and Mr. Kehoe for his opening statement. We are all in broad agreement that infrastructure needs to happen, and as quickly as possible. We need to find out where the bottlenecks are. Mr. Kehoe spoke briefly about the accelerating infrastructure report and the recommendations that came from that. What recommendation of that report directly affects the local authorities in how they operate and will operate in the future to accelerate the speed we are going at with infrastructure?

The commitment to multi-annual funding will be really important for us. That is critically important. The streamlining of the processes that is envisaged in the accelerating infrastructure report will be relevant to us as well and will allow us to accelerate, when the legislative changes that are promised in the report take place. The co-ordination mechanisms will be useful as well, particularly for electrical infrastructure, in clearing any blockages that are impeding its speedy delivery. There are a number of things there that I think will help. Another issue we are interested in seeing advancing is that the various statutory processes can run together rather than one after the other. At the moment you need to get planning before you move on to the next stage, which might be licensing of some kind, and then we have MARA dealing with the issues around the coast. Each of these tends to have its own timeline, run consecutively rather than together. If the legislation can be changed that they can operate at the same time, it would save significant time.

Mr. Kehoe is happy that the bottlenecks slowing up planning with regard to infrastructure and infrastructure delivery are taken out of it now, once the legislation is changed, with the recommendations that were made in the infrastructure report.

It will certainly help.

Deputy Tóibín spoke about planners and the figure that is being bandied around is about 550 planners across the whole local authority set-up in the country, that is, vacancies in the local authorities. How does Mr. Kehoe see us resolving that? We have only got so many planners in the country and coming out of college every year. I find that a lot of people who are entering into planning offices in the local authorities now do not have the experience that would have been required previously. As a result, maybe the planning office is not working as efficiently as it would have previously. How can we resolve that issue?

Through a number of strands. I think the figure of 550 that was mentioned was a shortfall in terms of numbers of additional planning staff we would need across the sector. We have recruited over 200 of those now, as I understand it, across the sector and we continue to recruit. I think it will be dealt with through a number of initiatives that are under way. There is work to encourage more people to go into the planning profession, be that as school leavers or as graduates and maybe people who might want to change career and go into planning. We are bringing in planners from other countries as well. A number of planners from the UK have come across and started work here. Some people have come out of the private sector to us, and that is to be welcomed. It is a combination of all those things, and over time I think we will get the number of planners we need. We continue to prioritise in the meantime and we deal with our planning applications across the country, our development plans and the variations the Minister has asked us to do. We continue then to put as much resource as we can from other professions into activities like planning enforcement, for example, which is another activity we have to carry out, but we get technicians or engineers to do some of that where we are short of planners. We are challenged on every local authority.

I come from County Offaly and I am lucky that we have a very good local authority there that consults and works with the elected representatives daily. There are never any issues there. Looking at that, implementation of national policy should be consistent across the State, yet delivery speeds appear to vary between local authorities. Even the local development plans have to be changed now to increase the amount of zoned land. That is happening at different speeds across the country, and some of the local authorities had to be nearly beaten into making those changes that are required for us to be able to build the houses that are needed for people. How do the witnesses think they would address that inconsistency?

It can be difficult. The first thing I always say about the inconsistency is that every local authority is different and circumstances will vary from one town and one county to another. Some counties may already be advanced in a development plan cycle, maybe dealing with towns within their area, or they might be about to commence the formal review of a county development plan. It varies. Some counties have not had very significant residential development in the past few years; some have. It just varies across the country. It is our experience that it is difficult to get consistency. It is one of the strengths of local government that we can respond to local needs and local circumstances, and that means there will inevitably be differences between counties. I reassure the Deputy, however, that every county is working to achieve the request the Minister has put to us. We are all working to increase the amount of zoned land and we are working to make sure there is enough land zoned to meet the housing needs in our counties. I reassure the Deputy that every local authority is doing that. It may not be apparent when you look around at where the various statutory processes are at, but people are working on it.

The gentlemen are very welcome. I thank them for joining us. I will start on a very simple level. Sometimes we get very caught up in the high-level infrastructure here. Do the witnesses feel there is adequate provision in local authorities for the delivery of footpaths?

If I go back to, I think, 1997, the restoration improvement programme was introduced by the Department of Transport to address shortcomings in the overall quality of the road network. That scheme and funding stream have been in place for coming on 30 years now. It has been hugely effective. There has not been in the same period a similar programme for footpaths, and it warrants consideration-----

Would Mr. Walton say there is an adequate provision right now for the delivery of footpaths through local authorities?

I would say it is inadequate.

Why would he say that is?

Ultimately, for local authorities, it will be a question of funding.

Would local authorities apply for the funding and be rejected or would they just know not to apply for it?

I think, going back to my comment about the restoration-----

I appreciate that, so there is no option right now.

There is no specific fund.

Taking the announcement this week in relation to roads, bridge rehabilitation, climate mitigation and so on, would Mr. Walton have any thoughts on the process as to how that funding is allocated to each county in terms of the responsibility of roads or engineers to make applications to the Department?

There is a system there. Each local authority abides by it. We are required annually to make submissions to the Department of-----

Does Mr. Walton think it is a good use of local authorities' time if there is a bridge rehabilitation, masonry repair, that costs maybe €7,000 and the local authority has to apply to Dublin, to a Department, for that? Does he think that is good use of council resources?

Possibly not. For low-value expenditure there might be some local discretion.

But there is not because you have to apply for it.

Yes, but for low-level-----

Where does Mr. Walton think that threshold should fall or be set? If we have local authorities applying for €7,000 grants or funding allocations for masonry repair of bridges, is that good use of council time, first and foremost?

I would think that it is unusual that a council individually would apply to the Department for a repair to a masonry bridge that has an overall value of €7,000.

There would be occurring cases of that. Would Mr. Walton say there is sufficient trust between the Department and TII in local authorities as to what they do?

Absolutely. We rely on TII and on the Department. We liaise closely with both, and it is very important that there is an effective, proactive relationship between the parties.

As regards that relationship, whether it be the likes of TII or the Department, or even working with the likes of the OPW, would Mr. Walton say local authorities have the final say, or do TII and the Department?

As the funding authority, obviously, the Department of Transport, TII-----

But local authorities do not get any autonomy in prioritising funding for a certain area.

We get our opportunity to put our priorities forward, but then, ultimately, they will decide on what the-----

So, basically, Dublin is deciding which bridge is fixed in Laois.

Yes.

Does Mr. Walton think that is a good system?

Obviously, we prioritise the bridges and they are the ones-----

I appreciate Mr. Walton's point, but does he think it is a good system?

More discretion afforded to the local authorities would be welcome.

Does Mr. Walton think discretion has been lost at area engineer level in recent years?

Perhaps somewhat.

Would he say there is a satisfactory level of discretion?

There is a system there which does afford us the opportunity to prioritise and make the application to the Department of-----

But you do not have the approval.

And the question is the approval.

Is that problematic, the level of discretion-----

It can be problematic, yes.

In terms of active travel, I do not want to dwell on this because I want to get one question in before the clock gets to zero, but does Mr. Walton think we should be doing one project and completing it at a time where it is a multimillion euro fund or does he think the current process of phases is more effective?

I think there are some active travel projects that are not progressing, that are major projects, and other Deputies have referred to those. It goes back to the multi-annual funding requirement of local authorities. There might be an active travel scheme that is to an overall value of €5 million, but if you have certainty only regarding €500,000 in year one, that does not give you certainty about the balance of the €4.5 million you need over the course of the coming years, and you do not know how many years it will be, whereas those projects are better delivered in one visit.

Other speakers have mentioned the inconsistencies across the country in relation to the roll-out of renewable energy development. In my county we have pushed ahead in this regard. How will we achieve that consistency of development across the country or will it be left to counties like Offaly to deliver? How will we get a consistency and a buy-in to have delivery right across the country in terms of renewable energy development?

Again, it is a question of the definition of consistency. What does that mean? I am not asking the Deputy; I am just posing the question.

If you see the likes of a county like Offaly with 2% landmass being the top producer of wind energy development in January, where other counties, whether in the region or across the country, would not have done anything at all, how will we square that circle?

There will always be differences between counties.

I appreciate that, but how do we reduce the variance?

I think what the Deputy is getting at is that there is an inordinate amount in some counties compared with others.

Yes.

That can be because of their landscape or the quality of the wind blowing there in terms of wind energy. Maybe it is the south east for solar energy. Who knows? Then there are the connections to the grid and the proximity to the areas where the energy is required.

All of those factors will play a part. The only way to distribute it better from the perspective of planning would be more rigid national guidelines. Again, the issue with rigid national guidelines is that the prerogative is removed from the local area. We would always argue in favour of giving as much discretion as possible to locally elected councillors and local members to make those decisions as an example of subsidiarity within the country, that we would devolve that decision-making down. In our view that is the best way to run a local government system. That is the position.

You made my blood run cold saying "rigid national guidelines". The thoughts of it even is part of our problem.

I thank the witnesses for coming in and I thank Mr. Kehoe for his presentation. All of us here cut our teeth in local authorities and we have great respect for the work that is done. Local authorities are planning for population growth. I am glad that it has been mentioned that we seem to lag behind with the delivery of essential services such as schools. In north Kildare we have a huge growing community and a young population but not enough schools. The reply to me in this regard was that we have loads and about 200 spare. The next thing I hear is that a school that is already packed is being asked to provide another 200 places. We really are not planning ahead. I know the witnesses have a hard job.

Flooding is very much in the news. While Kildare did okay this time, you are passing fields that are covered in puddles and are wet to their core. Will the witnesses talk to me about how they feel when a local authority does not grant planning permission for, say, 100 houses in Prosperous, the planning permission has been refused four times, An Bord Pleanála has declined it twice, and then it is given even though there has been little or no change? It is crazy to consider building on a field that is a puddle at the moment. How do local authority members feel when they are, basically, ignored? This planning permission was refused four times. Local authorities should have the final say. Nobody knows an area as much as a local authority and the councillors in that area. How do witnesses feel when An Bord Pleanála grants permission after the local authority has refused planning permission for a specific reason?

To comment on the flooding issue, without getting into the decision, as I cannot comment on particular decisions that might be made, as I am sure that the Deputy will understand, there are flood guidelines in place since 2009 and those guidelines are clear that land that is vulnerable to flooding cannot be zoned for a use that is not compatible with occasional flooding. That means you cannot provide commercial or residential development on those lands. It is incumbent on us, when we prepare a development plan, to identify the lands in our county or jurisdiction that are subject to that flood risk. We produce a report and maps to that effect. That report and those maps are inspected and vetted by the OPW, which is the national authority when it comes to flood risk. If the OPW has an issue with any of the lands that we propose to zone for residential or commercial purposes, that they might be subject to flooding, we are told and we have to take them out of the development plan. There is a robust system there now that allows us to identify flood-risk lands and ensure that they are not zoned inappropriately. That is the starting point. After that, if we get development applications on lands, we take that flood risk into account and, by and large, refuse development on those lands. I am not familiar with the case the Deputy mentioned and do not know anything about it but, by land large, that is the way the system should work.

Local authorities should be listened to when an area is deemed to be a flood risk and there is planning. Why should An Bord Pleanála be able to overrule them?

We identify those lands in our development plans. They are listed on all our websites for anybody to inspect.

I want to ask about public acceptance of infrastructure delivery, generally. What are the main factors for building acceptance of wind energy or whatever?

I am thinking about roads projects, active travel projects, which were mentioned previously, and so on. The process has to involve a huge amount of local engagement and consultation with the local business community, local residents, the people in the wider area, the people who will benefit from the proposed infrastructure and the people who are discommoded by it to explain why the council and the NTA propose to deliver whatever it is, how it fits into the overall development of the area and the town, to listen to people's concerns and respond to them as best we can, and then to be upfront and transparent in the decision-making and involve local councillors, who in many cases have the final say, and continue to go through the process until we reach a conclusion. We must respect the outcome of the process. If something does not reach the point of local approval and agreement, then we have to rethink that project, but if it does, we move on with it. That is how you build local engagement, involvement and acceptance in due course.

Could you talk to me about the local authority prevention network, particularly the circular economy aspects of that? What kind of uptake is being seen across the State?

I am not familiar with the numbers on it. Does Mr. Walton know?

No.

The Rediscovery Centre in Ballymun offers people the opportunity to borrow equipment such as a ladder or drill, which is important nowadays when people do not have as much storage area in their homes. Local authorities have been asked to look at that. Is it not something the witnesses have come across?

No, I have not.

Yes, I think. Many local authorities operate their own civic amenity sites where people have the opportunity to come and-----

There is a possibility that we could look at that for civic amenity centres.

There is an opportunity at those sites, perhaps, to develop an exchange hub, as it were, which would be wholly consistent with the circular economy.

It would be a great opportunity for local authorities to have oversight of that.

I understand that local authorities would be happy to do that, but ultimately it would come down to a funding issue. Where there is space available, there could be the opportunity for people, who are already engaging with civic amenity sites, to have the opportunity to exchange goods.

It is something we worked on at the climate committee and it would be interesting to see if what was working in Ballymun could work in Kildare and across the country.

I love the Deputy's idea for Kildare.

I hope that my contribution will not be interrupted by a vote. I have a few questions on the co-ordindation gaps. Before Christmas, we had witnesses in who made very pertinent points about the issues with zoned land, local authorities and utilities. What sort of mechanism or engagement has taken place? Has anything been done through the new housing activation office to co-ordinate that better? We have had delays with housing and local authorities having real difficulty compelling utilities to do something as simple as carry out a connection.

We have had a number of structures in place for the last two years trying to work our way through those issues. On the one hand, we are trying to deal with the high-level critical infrastructure like the high voltage cables that must be installed across the country. We are working with ESB Networks and the ESB to put together appropriate protocols so that those cables can be installed without delay in the road network and in a manner that is compatible with the protection of the network and its essential function as a transport corridor while respecting all the other utilities.

We are working very well with the ESB on that. We have a joint electricity task force.

What are the biggest difficulties, blockages or issues around that?

The issues we are working through are the differences in standards that might apply between what the CRU would put in place for the ESB and what we might have in place under the Department of Transport. The other issues are around routing and the actual roads and corridors that these cables use, the actual depths and where this infrastructure is placed in the road. They are the kinds of things that we are resolving in that forum.

We have had a vote called, Chair.

We were just talking about that. It is probably a ten-minute bell. Deputy Sheehan can keep going and then finish up.

I want to ask about the section 28 guidelines. Only two local authorities have carried that out and others are in the middle of it. When local authorities got those section 28 guidelines from the Minister, was the perception that they had enough zoned land? Certainly, that is what I have been hearing.

It varies across the country. In some areas where maybe there was not so much residential development over the last few years because of viability reasons, they may have legitimately said they have enough land. However, most local authorities would not have had enough zoned land to provide for what the Minister requested. The majority if not all of the local authorities are going through the variation process.

Would Mr. Kehoe have a concern about land being rezoned without adequate infrastructure, or about inappropriate land being rezoned?

We are confident, and should be, that the lands we put forward for residential development are serviceable without major infrastructure. They may require new roads and new surface water pipes, drains and so on, but nothing insurmountable that could not be provided as part of a development. The lands are serviceable; otherwise, we would not be putting them forward as phase 1 land.

I know the County and City Management Association made a submission to the accelerating infrastructure task force. What are the most important or significant actions or recommendations to come from that?

For the purpose of providing infrastructure, which is part of it, multi-annual funding is important to give us the certainty to take on teams of people, to get them working on these projects and to deliver them. Also, the changes in the legislation that I mentioned earlier where processes might run concurrently would be helpful as well. Anything that can be done to streamline those processes is important.

The local authorities do not deal with water services any more. That has gone to Uisce Éireann, which makes the same argument. I agree with Mr. Kehoe on multi-annual funding. It is ridiculous that critical infrastructure is nearly competing with social protection, education and everything else. If we are serious when we talk about housing, we have to move away from the system we have at present. I am dealing with my own local authority, which is waiting on the Minister for housing to commence the new housing infrastructure fund. It should not be the case that development is completely jammed up for the sake of €6 million for a plaza and public realm work.

That can be freed up. In fairness, the housing activation office and the €1 billion it has to spend will make a significant difference.

Does the housing activation office need to be underpinned by legislation?

I am afraid I do not have a view on that. I am looking forward to it being effective in assisting in the delivery of infrastructure to activate housing as it is. I am not able to comment on whether a legislative basis is required.

I will do Deputy Aird a turn and let him go first. Even though he is not actually on the committee, I will let him go ahead of me.

I know, because I have to go back into the-----

Deputy Aird is not on this committee, but he wanted to come in.

I just wanted to come and ask a few questions on transport and so forth.

The Deputy has six minutes.

If it needs to be that much time.

What concrete mechanisms exist to resolve conflicts between local needs and national planning guidelines?

Can I seek a little bit of clarification? What does the Deputy mean by local needs?

There are always local needs that exist. I refer to when people have to prove they have local needs in order to build in an area.

The Deputy is talking about rural housing development as opposed to other-----

Yes.

Every local authority has to have a rural housing policy in its development plan and then decisions on rural housing applications are made in accordance with that policy. The avenue for people who are dissatisfied with a decision that might be made is to appeal that decision to An Bord Pleanála. Therefore, An Bord Pleanála has the ultimate call if a particular decision is appealed. When it comes to the making of the policy, that is a function of the elected members in the local authority when they are reviewing their development plan. The planning regulator and the Department might form a view on the draft rural housing policy that might be in a development plan and might issue a direction, and it is a matter for the local authority to work its way through that.

I do not ever tell anybody to appeal to An Bord Pleanála. I would ask them to go back in a second time and talk to the likes of the director of services about roads and so forth if I was having a problem with the council.

Recent knowledge shows significant delays and cost overruns in regional transport projects. As chair of the CCMA transport infrastructure committee, can Mr. Kehoe provide a concrete example where local councils were held accountable for underperformance and explain why national oversight failed to prevent it?

I do not have any projects that I am aware of-----

That is fine.

-----where there was something that was done wrong or-----

No, I am not saying "done wrong". I am just talking about an overrun.

Overruns occur for particular reasons on particular projects. Every project is different. It is almost impossible when we set out on a project to predict all of the issues that might arise in the planning, design and construction of that project. What happens at various points along the way is that things come up and arise that were unforeseen. They must be dealt with in the context of the contract and occasionally they result in additional payments to the contractor, but only where particular issues that were unforeseen arose and had to be dealt with, and that gave rise to additional expenditure. That is how contracts work.

I will just ask Mr. Kehoe a question. I represent Laois, and the capital town is Portlaoise. There are over 30,000 people now living in Portlaoise. The Portlaoise northern orbital route, PNOR, was planned many years ago, before the bust. When the bust came, it went off the radar. Despite the efforts of officials in the local authority, we were never able to get it back on the agenda again. It was the same the last time. I look at projects in towns that are only half the size of Portlaoise, maybe with populations of approximately 20,000, and they seem to be approved. There are probably some such towns in Mr. Kehoe's area, where he is chief executive. Who is making these decisions? How do they come to make decisions on these proposals?

I am sorry; I do not know anything about the project the Deputy mentioned.

Mr. Kehoe does not know how people come to the decision.

As I understand it, the funding authorities have to look at the demand for a particular road project or transportation project in a particular area and the number of people who will benefit. Other benefits of providing the road might be that it will accelerate housing development, commercial development or enterprise development, etc., that might not otherwise take place. For those reasons, certain schemes are prioritised over others where the public benefit or benefit to the local area or wider area is larger. I am presuming it is on that basis that decisions are made.

I will ask Mr. Kehoe a question. If he does not know, he can just tell me he does not know. When TII is deciding who is going to get the money, surely to God it considers factors like whether the project is going to bring an end to delays in a town where it might take the residents an hour to move from A to B. I am asking because every time I travel from Portlaoise through Tullamore, it strikes me that Tullamore got left and right on the road and it even got an extension to the bypass this year. I know that Deputy McCormack's constituency had a Taoiseach at the time - in fairness to the Deputy, I give credit where credit is due - but we got nothing. It is very difficult for me as a public representative to try to engage and explain how TII works. That is all I am saying. Maybe Mr. Kehoe is not in a position to answer that.

I wish Mr. Kehoe well with the leisure centre project, as I call it, in Mullingar. We are trying to do something like that in Laois. Maybe he will have a chat with our chief executive the next time they meet somewhere to explain exactly how he is doing it. I have been a politician for long time. I know they have two Ministers of State in Westmeath; they are very lucky. Maybe they are going to put up the money for it. What happens to the likes of me is that I get tortured by people who ask what I am doing, given what they are able to do in Westmeath. I wish Mr. Kehoe well. That is all I will say to him. Will he look after me? Will he talk to my chief executive?

I thank Deputy Aird very much.

I never got a chance to wish Mr. Walton the best. I worked with him for years in Laois County Council. A better person you could not have. He is an absolutely fantastic person.

That is fair. I have six minutes now and then Deputy Connolly can jump in. I have been letting everyone else jump in. I could be here all day, and I might never get a chance to ask a question.

I thank everyone for coming today. Can Mr. Walton just clarify for what area he is director of services?

I am director of services for transportation, foreign emergency services, health and safety and capital projects, so it is special projects-----

Capital projects over everything-----

Yes. As Mr. Kehoe outlined earlier, there are a number of capital funding streams coming into the council. Many Departments rely on local authorities to actually deliver the infrastructure and progress it through the planning system. For example, the special projects office that I oversee handles the urban regeneration and development fund and the flood relief schemes. All of those are going through our capital-----

That is unusual, is it not?

No, it would not be unusual. Now, having regard to the reliance on local authorities to-----

No, I am sorry; I will clarify and rephrase that question. Is it unusual or common that capital projects would be a typically defined role for a director of services? Mr. Walton seems to be cutting across different directorates.

No, I think it would be more common now than previously in local authorities.

I have not seen that before. I did not know about that.

I would be familiar with a number of local authorities that have dedicated, having regard to the quantum of capital projects that now-----

Yes, I know but even then you are crossing over a different director of services with your role. That is fine. I am conscious of my own time so I will move on.

How often does Mr. Kehoe meet the Minister to review his work?

I do not meet the Minister regularly.

Okay. Who do you meet from the Department of local government to review your work?

We have ongoing engagement-----

No, how often do you meet the Department of local government to review your work?

In my role as chief executive of Westmeath County Council, I am accountable to the elected members of Westmeath County Council.

No, let us be honest. How often do you meet the Department of local government?

I meet Department of housing officials with my director of services maybe twice per annum.

Twice a year.

Yes.

Who do you meet with?

It varies. We have summits that we attend in Dublin-----

No, I am asking about one-to-one meetings. I do not care about summits.

It would vary. It might be an assistant secretary or the principal adviser.

What do you review at those meetings? Do you review your performance? Do you have a performance review with them?

We have an ongoing performance appraisal process that we go through with the Department in terms of the delivery of housing, for example where we have to feed information into a system that the Department monitors on an ongoing basis.

Do they help you to review your own team? Who are you accountable to?

I am accountable, as I said earlier, to the chairperson - the cathaoirleach - and to the members of the council.

Yes, but you can operate independently of them to a large degree. I was a councillor for 15 years, so I know you can. That is often how it works.

I would not agree with that.

I lived it so I know it. With the director of services, Mr. Kehoe would meet with his team once a week. I presume it is something like that.

Fortnightly, with my management team.

Would you review their performances? You are here as part of a representative body so I presume these are fairly standard behaviours set down by the Department of local government. Would you review their individual performances? Are they accountable to you? Would you look at ongoing projects or how does that work?

Yes, we do. We have a review of delivery at every fortnightly meeting. We have standard items on our agenda and accountability is there. We have reviews as well, twice per annum, with each director on performance. We have that system in place.

Did either of the local authorities meet with the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Ministers recently?

I did not.

Neither of the local authorities represented here was part of the eight or nine.

No.

That was seen to be an unusual situation, I would have thought. Was it?

We are invited to attend various Departments on an ongoing basis. We have relationships with a wide number of Departments, delivering various programmes and projects. It is not unusual for us to be engaging with them.

There would be open questions about the direction of the local authorities versus the Departments and whether they would be like-minded. That would be openly questioned. Are we zoning enough land in individual areas? Is the direction of travel the same? Is there pushback from the local authorities? We have read about that. What is your view on that?

We work continuously to deliver Government policy and abide by any instructions or policy papers the Government adopts. We do everything in our power to implement any circulars we get as directed by the Government.

Yes, but obviously there has been conflict in that and a question about that. Mr. Kehoe might be doing it in his local authority. This is not necessarily a question for him but there has been conflict. That has been openly questioned by Ministers and Departments recently. Is the direction of travel of individual local authorities the same? That is why I wanted to bring that up.

How does Mr. Kehoe feel about local authority decision-making for him and his team? Are they fully backed by the Department? One of the biggest issues, which Mr. Kehoe mentioned in his opening statement, is risk analysis and delivering what authorities should deliver. Making a decision can often be the most dangerous thing that someone in Mr. Kehoe's position can do. The easiest thing in a local authority is often not to make a decision because you cannot be held accountable for a non-decision but you can be accountable for a decision you get wrong. How does Mr. Kehoe deal with that in his team?

We are a very progressive, forward-looking local authority and I find all my colleagues across the country are. If we had------

That is not necessarily the feedback we would be getting.

It is my experience that every chief executive wants to progress their county and area and wants to deliver the infrastructure around it.

There is a difference between wanting to do it and actually doing it, at the same time.

I will put it this way: everybody is doing it to the best of their ability with the resources they have, taking account of the risk management procedures we have to go through to make sure the decisions we take are solidly based in law and have adequate resources, have gone through the statutory processes and so on and so forth, and then moving on to try to deliver that infrastructure as best we can at that point. That is what every local authority chief executive is doing.

Not necessarily to the same level. They could not be. It is not possible. They might want to.

Every local authority is different, has different sets of resources and so on.

My questions are on a similar theme to those of Deputy Aird. They relate to the relationship between national bodies that define policies and expect local authorities to implement them. Deputy Aird talked about TII. I want to focus on the NTA. I come from an urban local authority, Galway City Council. I was a member there for a number of years. It always frustrated me that the Galway city park and ride office was with the NTA in Dublin and the development of the new Galway bus strategy was done by NTA officials in Dublin. I feel we would be better off if we defined those transport policy initiatives within the local authority. I wonder if that view is shared on the witnesses' side of the table.

We would always welcome that there would be as much local control and prerogative as possible in implementing local services for local people. My experience is the NTA works closely with the local authority on delivering these programmes. We were in the fortunate position on Monday of this week to launch the new Mullingar local bus service. It was designed and delivered in partnership between ourselves and the NTA and it is commencing now on 22 February.

When you say "in partnership", what role did Westmeath County Council play in that?

We were involved in the design of the routes, in working with local communities to identify the best routes, in making sure local people are happy to have the bus service in their area and in working with local members to ensure there is support from the business community for the various pieces of infrastructure that had to go in, such as bus stops. There were some traffic management measures we had to take as well to make the bus service work efficiently.

To tease that out a bit, what role did the members of the local council have in delivering bus routes?

The members had a significant role in terms of the consultation we undertook with them on the proposal. They were supportive of it from the outset. The elected members of the council were aware of local communities and their views on the bus service and whether they wanted the bus service to pass through their area. It is that type of information they brought forward. They would have been involved in the decision-making regarding the final routes.

Is there at times friction - not friction but unease - with some of the decisions made by the NTA and their implementation locally?

No. My experience in our county is we work closely with it. We put forward projects. We have a team in place that delivers those projects and we work closely with the NTA through the delivery of those projects. We ensure as we go forward that we have local council support for the projects we are delivering. In other words, the members support them. If we have the support of the members, that means we have the support of the community. We work hard to achieve that.

I will take a principal example in my constituency close to where I live. The NTA funds the development of cycle lanes on parts of the urban road network. The development of cycle lanes is important and good work but these roads already have footpaths for pedestrians. They are good roads. Not too far away we have a legacy of rural roads within the city network currently being developed for residential purposes. That is being done in a piecemeal manner. When planning is granted for a residential estate, the developer then puts in a footpath going as far as that estate.

The road is still quite narrow and the developer has built a footpath on one side. People are scratching their heads and asking me why €1 million or €2 million is being given to put in cycle lanes but the money is not there for residential development along that road.

It can be difficult on those legacy roads. It is a question of the local authority working with the developers and the NTA on the development contributions.

The ambition of local authority members is to bring the roads alongside which people will be living in the next two or three years up to a standard such that it can be walked safely. However the NTA's current priority, and I see merit in that and I welcome and support it, is to develop the cycle lanes and narrow the carriageway on roads that already have good-quality pedestrian facilities and are safe to walk.

Without knowing the detail, I would say-----

It is a policy point.

Yes. What the NTA is likely trying to achieve with this is the modal shift away from private car transport to cycling. We really can only achieve that by providing those segregated facilities. I accept it is a long haul and a difficult transition journey on which to take people. It will take time. The first step, which is where the NTA is coming from, is to provide the infrastructure and hope people will start using it. In that context, we must concentrate on arterial routes that will have the highest-desire lines.

As a member of a local authority, something that always frustrated me was that when we were developing housing schemes, the council would purchase a site and devise a concept, which would then have to go through an excessive level of bureaucracy and assessment by the Department before the green light could be given to commence the project. This could take up to two years in a scenario where we have a housing emergency. It frustrated me no end. When I researched it, I found out there was a four-step process within the Department, with the local authority having to satisfy every stage. I saw this as duplication and excessive bureaucracy slowing down the process. The Government has reduced the approval process to one stage. Have we seen any positive impact from that yet?

I think we will see it. The change is a recent development. We will not see the impact in terms of construction but we will see, in the next year or two, an impact in terms of the saved time between the commencement of a planning process and seeing builders on site constructing houses. I think we will see an impact but it will take a little time to manifest.

What is the relationship like between local authorities and Uisce Éireann? Mr. Walton might answer that as he is in charge of capital projects at Laois County Council.

There are two issues operating in parallel. First, having regard to the housing activation office and the emphasis on housing, we meet monthly with both the ESB and Uisce Éireann to ensure our policies and strategic objectives are aligned with the strategic objectives of Uisce Éireann and the utility providers.

Mr. Walton is talking about the high-level perspective of housing delivery and strategic meetings. Regarding upcoming projects, road opening licences and planning for the future, how is Uisce Éireann at liaising with the area engineers?

In terms of road opening licences, Uisce Éireann, as with any other utility, is obliged to apply for those licences, which we administer in the normal way. Traditionally, local authorities had responsibility for both roadworks and the water services network.

Exactly. My point is that there is now more of a disconnect.

Yes, there is that disconnect now and the full separation will happen at the end of this year. That makes the need for co-ordination between the two separate bodies even more important to ensure our roadworks programme is not directly conflicting with the objectives of Uisce Éireann.

I see it as being more the other way around in that its objectives are conflicting with those of the local authorities.

The policy of the State now requires local authorities to ensure they are proactively engaging with the utility providers on the protection of day-to-day services in addition, as I said earlier, to the development of strategic objectives.

Is Mr. Walton happy with the level of work and research they are putting in before they look for those objectives?

Yes, I am generally satisfied in that regard.

I was curious to know Mr. Walton's thoughts on that.

I have a question regarding the engagement with the Department of education on the delivery of housing. Too often in this country, houses are built and it is only afterwards that we look to put in everything else. It is one thing to forget to put in a bus stop or a train station but it more important to put in schools. How is the relationship between local authorities and the Department of education as regards future planning? I have always seen a big disconnect in that regard because a structure was never put in place to look at this, before drawing up county development plans, which could have been done. What is Mr. Kehoe's view on that?

Our experience is that the Department of education engages with us whenever we request it to do so when we are in the preparatory stage of a new county or town development plan. We provide to the Department information on the amount of housing we foresee being delivered in the next five, ten, 15 or 20 years and where we expect that zoning to be. We request it to advise us as to what provision we need to make in the development plan for new schools or the extension of schools to deal with that increase in population. The Department generally engages with us on that and we generally zone the sites or the land appropriately in our development plans. However, it can happen that there is a delay in the provision of those schools relative to the delivery of the housing. That causes difficulties.

Is it the case that developers are happy to go in and build and sell the houses but the Department is too slow in enabling that?

I am saying there can be a delay in the delivery of the schools infrastructure to support the housing delivery. We could cite examples of that around the country.

There is a shortage in Kildare and I am sure the same arises in different areas. I know some senior people in the local authority in Kildare have gone to Offaly and Carlow. There is that bit of competition even aside from people leaving the system or retiring. Other than the personnel issues that may or not arise, and the competition in that regard, what are the biggest stumbling blocks local authorities face to enabling them to get the houses built and, which is more important for the purposes of this question, to put in the infrastructure around them, whether roads, bridges, train lines, GAA and soccer pitches, swimming pools or whatever the need might be in an area?

The only significant issue is funding. We can step up teams and go through the process required to deliver infrastructure if we have certainty on the funding. If we are talking about a new swimming pool, as Deputy Aird mentioned, it can cost €50 million, which is a significant funding requirement. It is not possible for us to raise that kind of money on something like development contributions without adversely affecting the delivery of housing. That type of infrastructure requires increased Government support. It is the same for parks and open spaces that might be needed. Green areas are provided within housing developments but, as towns develop, more substantial areas are needed for parks, pitches and so on.

Have the local authorities been able to buy strategic land banks for future development? Dublin City Council always historically had legacy land, whereas in places like Kildare, Laois, Westmeath and similar areas, councils did not historically buy farms or land 5 miles outside Mullingar, say, or 1 mile outside Portlaoise. It is the same in Naas and Maynooth. Now, when the councils need to buy such land because towns are growing out that far, it is too expensive. That is an issue in Kildare. Are other local authorities having the same problem? How do they provide the parks and pitches in a situation where a developer has 5 acres to build houses and only leaves a little field that is of no value to the wider community?

We try to put together the resources we need to buy land and for that purpose. We talk to our members about that and we look at the various options we have in terms of raising funding for that. For example, a certain amount of development contributions can go towards it. Maybe, there could be an increase in our commercial rates to fund it because as the economy grows there is a bit more capacity there and we could set money aside for that reason. We would then be looking to the various grant schemes that emerge out of various Departments, like the outdoor recreation fund and so on, to see if we can get some money out of those. We look everywhere we can.

Is Mr. Kehoe happy they can identify the sites?

We are happy we can identify the lands, yes, with in our development plans. As the Leas-Chathaoirleach correctly pointed out, the difficulty and challenge is the affordability of those lands. We are now looking at more marginal lands that may not be suitable for residential development for the flooding reasons we spoke of earlier where we would be complying with the 2009 guidelines. Those lands might be suitable for sporting and recreational use, but not residential use. We are looking into that as an option.

Does Mr. Kehoe know the biggest issue the council has in terms of being unable to get lands in Leixlip?

No.

It is a graveyard. It cannot identify a site for a graveyard. Do not get me wrong, more land is going to become available in Leixlip but we cannot identify a site in Leixlip for a graveyard.

It is a challenge.

It is because it has to be in a certain place and the water table has to be a certain height. It cannot be too far out one way or another. It is complex.

It is difficult. It needs good access.

I was not saying that for any parochial reason, rather to highlight that what might seem very simple can often be among the most complex of things. That is everything from my side. Is Deputy McCormack happy enough? Yes. The meeting now stands adjourned.