Kilkenny CoCo to be merged with Carlow

road_high

I think the first round of amalgamations includes Limerick., Tipp and Waterford.
Then we and many others will be next.
Watching all the CLLRSs from around the country on RTE news is nauseating to say the least. Apparently it's a "huge" attack on local democracy :rolleyes:.
Taking the ole high moral ground to try save their cushy numbers and expenses. No mention of how they are going to do more with less or use our traxes effectively for a change...Hopefully the amalgamations will bring a healthy cut in their numbers...though given this crowds track record on real reform I wouldn't be so sure, sadly.

Captain Havoc

Cabaal wrote: »

yes
http://www.thejournal.ie/town-councils-cut-phil-hogan-local-government-reform-533422-Jul2012/

Still nothing about Kilkenny and Carlow councils merging though, only the abolition of the borough council.

road_high

It's going to happen though, I'd be fairly certain it will. Saw a list of them somewhere. Laois Offaly also one among others up the west and North midlands.

redtelephone

mfitzy wrote: »

It's going to happen though, I'd be fairly certain it will. Saw a list of them somewhere. Laois Offaly also one among others up the west and North midlands.

The "Putting People First" document seems to be saying something different regarding amalgamations. Part 7.1.1 says:

Change from a primarily city and county based system of local government to one in which the principal powers and functions might be assigned to territorially larger entities would not be likely to be conducive to greater representational effectiveness and accountability, which is much more likely to be enhanced by community proximity, or subsidiarity. In effect, there is not a convincing case for configuration of local government into regionally based political or representational entities.

Looks to me like it's a "no" to Carlow/Kilkenny merger.

road_high

Not familiar with that particular doc myself but it reads a little like a white-wash to me. No mention of the cost-savings that could be achieved and greater efficiencies. Those are key.

Something vague about not giving fair representation...oh please...we are over-run with county councillors as it is! Is someone sincerely telling me I won't be "represented" any better/worse under the amalgamted Council?
There'll still be more than enough "Maurice Hickey" type funeral goers around. Trust me.

road_high

I think Carlow/KK was mentioned in the Breaking News link on page one. They seem to have edited that themselves. So maybe it's not official yet but it's good to discuss the merits for/against what is potentially going to happen.

Scallion 'ater

That's a bit of a climbdown there Fitzy. Abolishing the pointless town and borough councils was what this was all about and tidying up needless duplication within county boundaries. Joining counties together as you alluded to was never on the agenda.

road_high

Scallion 'ater wrote: »

That's a bit of a climbdown there Fitzy. Abolishing the pointless town and borough councils was what this was all about and tidying up needless duplication within county boundaries. Joining counties together as you alluded to was never on the agenda.

Hardly. The article link has been edited since the first post here. It clearly mentioned us and many other councils as being "on the list".
Do you think ain't it gona happen? Keeping and duplicating services in small counties right adjacent to eachother is a complete waste of money. Neccessity and common sense will (eventually) prevail. County boundaries will remain as always but services will be shared.
Really I just cannot understand how these small two counties each have the luxury of own fire servcies, library, planning, HR depts etc etc. It's madness.

redtelephone

mfitzy wrote: »

Not familiar with that particular doc myself but it reads a little like a white-wash to me.

Putting People First - Action Plan for the Future of Local Government is the title of the 200 page document published today by Phil Hogan's Department. It outlines the plan for the future of local government. Sorry for not being clearer.

http://www.environ.ie/en/PublicationsDocuments/FileDownLoad,31310,en.pdf

charlemont

Its not going to happen, Both Kilkenny and Carlow will more than likely be unitary councils unless some of the small towns such as Thomastown, Callan or Tullow get separate Municipal areas.

road_high

charlemont wrote: »

Its not going to happen, Both Kilkenny and Carlow will more than likely be unitary councils unless some of the small towns such as Thomastown, Callan or Tullow get separate Municipal areas.

I think it should and needs to happen. I'm not sure of exact figures, but the salaries of Co Managers alone are obscene. And we have one in each county. That would be one huge saving for a start of we were to have less of those.

Not sure what you mean by unitary? You mean leaving them as is?

God I hope you're not suggesting we create even more little quangos by giving those areas seperate councils...shudder

mfitzy

mfitzy wrote: »

The state because firstly their dole is far less than what we are borrowing form the IMF to pay them to do a job that is not necssary.
Then the private sector should step in and provide the service and/or the person uses their sills in the private sector. The public service as it's stands is one big social work scheme. But paid exhoribatantly.

What about the tax they play or the money they spend in the local economy? Sure they will have to pay redunancy sums also which will be money up front? I mean i do agree with you that we got carried away in fairness hiring far too many public and civil servants.

road_high

Deleted User wrote: »

What about the tax they play or the money they spend in the local economy? Sure they will have to pay redunancy sums also which will be money up front. I mean i do agree with you that we got carried away in fairness hiring public and civil servants.

I appreciate that, but can we really afford to keep paying high salaries for jobs that are duplications and really not all that neccessary?. And paying back with interest on the loans from the IMF/ECB, the only ones willing to even lend to us.

By all means, keep jobs that are neccessary and cost-effective. Cull the unneccessary ones. I think we are just kicking the can down the road otherwise.

Scallion 'ater

mfitzy wrote: »

Really I just cannot understand how these small two counties each have the luxury of own fire servcies, library, planning, HR depts etc etc. It's madness.

It's democracy and people like it. The Government are not be so foolish to try to create a perception of disenfrancising people in smaller counties e.g a Carlow Kilkenny council headquartered in Kilkenny (which it would be as Carlow town is way too far north) will be seen in Carlow as doing just that. Look at what happened with the original Carlow Kilkenny LEADER group. Also look at the attitute of Carlow people to KCLR radio - seen as a Kilkenny radio station that pays occasional lip service to Carlow. As a result few in Carlow listen. Place local authority power in Kilkenny and the view will be, rightly or wrongly, that Carlow will get the crumbs, hence you disenfrancise people which is a dangerous path to take. Today is as far as this reform agenda will go.

redtelephone

mfitzy wrote: »

God I hope you're not suggesting we create even more little quangos by giving those areas seperate councils...shudder

I think Chapter 6.3 of the document is actually saying something like that. It talks about Municipal districts within counties. It seems for example Kilkenny Borough council will be abolished and replaced by one of these districts. Whether that can be called a city, borough, or what is unclear.

road_high

Scallion 'ater wrote: »

It's democracy and people like it. The Government are not be so foolish to try to create a perception of disenfrancising people in smaller counties e.g a Carlow Kilkenny council headquartered in Kilkenny (which it would be as Carlow town is way too far north) will be seen in Carlow as doing just that. Look at what happened with the original Carlow Kilkenny LEADER group. Also look at the attitute of Carlow people to KCLR radio - seen as a Kilkenny radio station that pays occasional lip service to Carlow. As a result few in Carlow listen. Place local authority power in Kilkenny and the view will be, rightly or wrongly, that Carlow will get the crumbs, hence you disenfrancise people which is a dangerous path to take. Today is as far as this reform agenda will go.

I don't like it myself. I think the whole system as it is wreaks of "jobs for the boys" to be honest.
Personally would have no problem with HQ being in Carlow. It's 20 mins down the road.
Surely as well the local representation will not proprionately be affected, so say Tullow or wherever area will still have it's same voice and reps.

If there's not be a full merger why can we not have sharing even of services. That's what I'm all in favour of. I'd much rather a regional authority than the current county structure. The counties are just too small.

road_high

redtelephone wrote: »

I think Chapter 6.3 of the document is actually saying something like that. It talks about Municipal districts within counties. It seems for example Kilkenny Borough council will be abolished and replaced by one of these districts. Whether that can be called a city, borough, or what is unclear.

I haven't read the doc at all (ala Bertie Ahern dn the Nice Treaty was it?!) but I don't like the sound of that one...these Municipal districts sound a bit like what we have now i.e. there'd be no reform, just name changing. I hope I am wrong!
Or maybe they will be kind of representative areas in the wider Council area.

charlemont

redtelephone wrote: »

I think Chapter 6.3 of the document is actually saying something like that. It talks about Municipal districts within counties. It seems for example Kilkenny Borough council will be abolished and replaced by one of these districts. Whether that can be called a city, borough, or what is unclear.

Both KK and CW only have one large town each so I'd say there will be only one council in each county.

charlemont

mfitzy wrote: »

I haven't read the doc at all (ala Bertie Ahern dn the Nice Treaty was it?!) but I don't like the sound of that one...these Municipal districts sound a bit like what we have now i.e. there'd be no reform, just name changing. I hope I am wrong!
Or maybe they will be kind of representative areas in the wider Council area.

I recommend you read it, Its very good, About time we had a shake up of the system.

road_high

charlemont wrote: »

I recommend you read it, Its very good, About time we had a shake up of the system.

As you guys have pointed out though there will not be (for now at least) no amalgamations of smaller county councils.
I know some people here have voiced concerns in particular of smaller counties being possibly smothered in this scenario. My own opinion is that the cost savings and economics should come first and foremost. I'm not picking on smaller counties, but anything under 100k people is surely not viable for a whole range of "go it alone" duplicated services.
It's lovely to have these all in each and every county but when it comes to paying for this are we as willing to pay for same? Look at the furore over the household charge and I think we know the answer....

charlemont

mfitzy wrote: »

As you guys have pointed out though there will not be (for now at least) no amalgamations of smaller county councils.
I know some people here have voiced concerns in particular of smaller counties being possibly smothered in this scenario. My own opinion is that the cost savings and economics should come first and foremost. I'm not picking on smaller counties, but anything under 100k people is surely not viable for a whole range of "go it alone" duplicated services.
It's lovely to have these all in each and every county but when it comes to paying for this are we as willing to pay for same? Look at the furore over the household charge and I think we know the answer....

But for example if say KK and CW were merged, It would probably still need to be sub divided anyway to take into account the two large towns there.


I'm just personally not a fan of merging counties as I believe the county system of political boundaries is quiet evenly spread out, Some changes on the county boundaries need to be done though ie Ferrybank, Athlone etc

road_high

charlemont wrote: »

But for example if say KK and CW were merged, It would probably still need to be sub divided anyway to take into account the two large towns there.


I'm just personally not a fan of merging counties as I believe the county system of political boundaries is quiet evenly spread out, Some changes on the county boundaries need to be done though ie Ferrybank, Athlone etc

I know but having a seperate office/cost base for instance HR office, Finance etc all doing the same thing, 20 mins apart from eachother is mad.
A private company would not do it. Look at Glanbia. Sadly for the people of Dungarvan, when they merged they closed most of it as it did not make sense to have the same thing run in Ballyragget or their HQ.
County councils or any state body should not be any different.
It's a nice luxury to have, but I strongly question whether it's an effective use of (very scarce) tax resources.

Skyhawk684

mfitzy wrote: »

I know but having a seperate office/cost base for instance HR office, Finance etc all doing the same thing, 20 mins apart from eachother is mad.
A private company would not do it. Look at Glanbia. Sadly for the people of Dungarvan, when they merged they closed most of it as it did not make sense to have the same thing run in Ballyragget or their HQ.
County councils or any state body should not be any different.
It's a nice luxury to have, but I strongly question whether it's an effective use of (very scarce) tax resources.

Sure why dont we merge the hurling teams while we are at it!
I like county councils and the boundary. There's a lot of history behind it.

Sully

Skyhawk684 wrote: »

Sure why dont we merge the hurling teams while we are at it!
I like county councils and the boundary. There's a lot of history behind it.

To be fair, sports and administration for businesses/councils should not be compared in the same sentence.

road_high

Skyhawk684 wrote: »

Sure why dont we merge the hurling teams while we are at it!
I like county councils and the boundary. There's a lot of history behind it.

We all like them but can we afford such duplication?
Nobody even mentioned the GAA here, I don't think Carlow's hurlers are gona be joining us any time soon! This is about cost savings and cutting waste.

Scallion 'ater

mfitzy wrote: »

I know but having a seperate office/cost base for instance HR office, Finance etc all doing the same thing, 20 mins apart from eachother is mad.
A private company would not do it. Look at Glanbia. Sadly for the people of Dungarvan, when they merged they closed most of it as it did not make sense to have the same thing run in Ballyragget or their HQ.
County councils or any state body should not be any different.
It's a nice luxury to have, but I strongly question whether it's an effective use of (very scarce) tax resources.

But this is not simply a business, it's democracy.

I agree there may be some scope for sharing services between neighbouring counties but the fundamental of retaining a county council for every county must, and thankfully will, be retained. Some things are worth paying for even if we don't always see a very tangible return. Local democracy is something we can and should reform certainly but not throw away with radical change at the behest of the likes of the troika who know the price of everything we do today but the value of nothing. To risk throwing away the democracy that we have always cherished would I think be something we could deeply regret in years to come.