Report of the Local Government Efficiency Review Group

Report of the
Local Government Efficiency
Review Group
To be purchased directly from the
GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS SALES OFFICE,
SUN ALLIANCE HOUSE, MOLESWORTH STREET, DUBLIN 2,
or by mail order from
GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS POSTAL TRADE SECTION,
UNIT 20 LAKESIDE RETAIL PARK, CLAREMORRIS, CO MAYO
(Tel; 01 6476834/37 or 1890 213434; Fax; 01-6746843 or 094-9378964)
(Prn. A10/1024) (€10.00)
ISBN 9781406425192
July 2010

Table of Contents
1. Introduction and Terms of Reference
1.1 Establishment and Membership of Local Government Efficiency
Review Group
1.2 Terms of Reference and Guiding Principles
1.3 Approach and Methodology
1.4 Local Government in Ireland
1.5 White Paper on Local Government
1.6 OECD Review and Transforming Public Services
1.7 Compliance Requirements on Local Authorities
2. Budgetary Situation
2.1 National Public Finances
2.2 Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure
Programmes
2.3 Local Government Budgetary Situation and Income
2.4 Local Government Current Expenditure
2.5 Scale Issues Across the Local Government Sector
2.6 Indecon Review of Local Government Financing and
Commission on Taxation
2.7 Financial Trends
3. Local Government Experience of Efficiency Reforms – Progress To Date
3.1 Shared Services
3.2 Value for Money Agenda
3.3 Procurement
3.4 Staff Reductions
3.5 Service Indicators
4. Context – Looking Forward
4.1 National Fiscal and Economic Position
4.2 Competitiveness Agenda
4.3 Local Government Finance and the Programme for Government
2

5. Organisational Efficiency Issues
5.1 Structural Issues and Efficiencies in Local Government
5.2 Financial Supports for Elected Members
5.3 County and Town
5.4 Town Council Personnel
5.5 Services Provided by Rating Town Councils
5.6 County and Town Cooperation
5.7 Other Local Bodies
6. Local Government Staffing
6.1 Organisational Structures within Local Government
6.2 Staffing Levels
6.3 Local Authority Staffing Levels and Population
6.4 Joint Administrative Areas
6.5 Dublin City and Cork City
6.6 Staff Ratios
6.7 Local Authority Service Areas
6.8 Corporate Functions
6.9 Roads
6.10 Planning
7. Value for Money and Audit
7.1 Local Government Audit
7.2 The Local Authority Internal Audit Function
7.3 Local Authority Audit Committees
7.4 External Audit and Value for Money
7.5 Local Authority Financial Performance
7.6 Risk Management in Local Authorities
8. Shared Services
8.1 Shared Services in Local Government
8.2 International Experience with Shared Services
8.3 Recent Government Policy in this Area
8.4 Shared ‘Back Office’ Services
8.5 Regional or ‘Lead Authority’ Approach to Service Provision
8.6 Regional Support Structures for Technical Services
8.7 Shared Services with other Service Providers
8.8 Progressing the Shared Services Agenda
3

9. Procurement
9.1 Role of Procurement
9.2 Local Government Procurement
9.3 International Experience with Procurement
9.4 LA Quotes
9.5 Analysis of Main Areas of Local Government Procurement
9.6 The National Procurement Service
10. Efficiencies in Specific Programme Areas
10.1 Housing
10.2 Roads
10.3 Water Services
10.4 Planning
10.5 Waste
10.6 Motor Tax and Driving Licences
11. Other Operational Efficiencies
11.1 Treasury Management
11.2 Online Services
11.3 Advertising
11.4 Use of Professional Consultants
11.5 Local Authority Facilities and Logistics
11.6 Innovation Fund
12. Local Government and the Wider Public Service
12.1 Publicly-Funded Services at Local Level
12.2 Local Government and Local Development Bodies
12.3 Local Government and County/ City Enterprise Boards
12.4 Local Government and County/ City Development Boards
13. Cost Recovery and Revenue Issues
13.1 Economic Cost Recovery
13.2 Agency Services
13.3 Rationalisation of Provisions on Charging, Penalties and
Revenue Collection
13.4 Local Taxes and Charging
4

14. Recommendations
14.1 Recommendations
14.2 Summary of Recommendations and Savings
14.3 Implementation Plan
Appendices:
1. List of Submissions Received
2. Local Government Efficiency Review Group Meetings with Stakeholders
3. Local Government Income and Expenditure
4. Local Government Population Size
5. Local Government Net Budgeted Expenditure Per Head of Population,
2010
6. List of Value for Money Reports Published by the Local Government
Audit Service
7. Performance Indicators for Inclusion in Annual Financial Statement
8. Objectives of the Local Government Strategy for e-Procurement
9. Unaccounted for Water in Local Authorities, 2008
10. Motor Tax Transactions, 2008
11. Membership of County / City Development Boards
5

1. Introduction and Terms of Reference
1.1 Establishment and Membership of Local Government Efficiency
Review Group
1.1.1 The Government in Budget 2010 announced that an efficiency review
of local authorities would be carried out with a report completed by
mid-2010. Subsequently in December 2009, the Minister for the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government John Gormley T.D.
announced the establishment and membership of the Local
Government Efficiency Review Group to review the cost base,
expenditure, and numbers employed in local authorities.
1.1.2 The Minister appointed Pat McLoughlin, CEO of the Irish Payment
Services Organisation (IPSO) and former Deputy Chief Executive of
the HSE as a member and Chairperson of the Local Government
Efficiency Review Group. The other members of the Group appointed
by the Minister were:
• Donal McNally, Second Secretary General, Department of
Finance;
• John O’Hagan, Professor of Economics, Trinity College;
• John Quinlivan, former County Manager;
• Ian Talbot, Chief Executive, Chambers Ireland;
• Geraldine Tallon, Secretary General, Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
1.1.3 The Group was supported by a Secretariat in the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
1.2 Terms of Reference and Guiding Principles
1.2.1 The Group’s Terms of Reference were as follows:
1.2.2 To review the cost base, expenditure of and numbers employed in
local authorities with a view to reporting on:
• Specific recommendations to reduce costs;
• The effectiveness of particular programmes;
• Optimal efficiency in the way programmes are delivered; and
• Any other proposals to enhance value for money in the delivery
of services at local level.
1.2.3 The Group was also asked to take account of Government policy on
local government organisation, reform and finances, the public
service context set by the Task Force on the Public Service and
6

associated Government Statement, necessary legal compliance by
local authorities particularly in relation to environmental requirements,
public health, and health and safety, and have regard to the state of
the public finances.
1.2.4 The origins of this examination of local government are in the severe
financial crisis facing the State and the need for all levels of
government to contribute to national recovery. The extent of that
crisis is amply illustrated in Table 2.1 below.
1.2.5 The Groups’ analysis was not exclusively focussed on financial
concerns. There is a need not only to seek cost savings but to
ensure that the well developed structure of local government and the
efforts of the many publicly motivated local government members
and officials are directed towards improving and extending the
delivery of local public services in the most efficient and effective
way.
1.2.6 The Group was impressed by the skills and dedication of the public
representatives and local government managers and officials that it
met and their obvious pride in and devotion to both the national and
the local interests of citizens. It is important to build on that.
1.2.7 There are a number of recurrent themes and guiding principles in the
report which the Group believes should inform the approach we as a
nation take to local government. These are set out below.
1.2.8 Firstly, aside from providing a democratic forum at local level, a key
role of local government is to provide public services and it should be
judged by how well it performs this function. It should be measured
by performance and rewarded for managing above the norm. The
extensive range of service indicators on the 34 county and city
councils collated and published by the Local Government
Management Agency should be used more widely as a management
tool to identify good performing providers and to assist those lower
down the rank to improve. Resource allocation and the structure of
fees and charges should reward above average performance and
encourage it. We recognise the practical and policy issues involved
but the principle of encouraging the best should be a guiding one.
1.2.9 Secondly, the system of local authorities must be structured
efficiently. What is best done at county level should be done there,
such as planning and roads. What is better done at town level
should be concentrated there, such as community development and
leadership. As Appendix 5 shows, there is a major difference in
spend per head of population by the various local authorities and in
many cases, the spend per head is so low that there must be at least
question-marks over what such small local bodies can contribute.
Services must also be rationally and effectively delivered, and this
includes through cooperation between particular local authorities on a
7

jointly administered basis. This is a major theme of sections 5, 6 and
8 of the report. Efficiency and cost containment are important not
just in money terms, but because local business relies on efficient
and effective public local services and efficient local authorities are a
key element in restoring national competitiveness. The savings
inherent in this report should help reduce the burden that would
otherwise fall on those who pay for local government.
1.2.10 Thirdly, local authorities should have a lead role in the provision of
local services, especially in community services. This does not mean
that all local publicly-funded activities must be run by local authorities
but they should be linked with the local government system. There
are a multitude of local bodies funded centrally by Government
Departments, often by more than one Department with little reference
to the local authorities concerned. This is not good administrative
practice either locally or centrally and must lead to duplication of
resources and effort, with consequent costs for the Exchequer and
the community.
1.2.11 As with all elements of public administration, it is vital that resources
are well managed at all times. That is why the Group has placed
such emphasis on staffing and procurement. There are savings to be
made here without putting service levels at risk. There are
possibilities for transferring tasks down to a more appropriate level
within local authority grades. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the
opposite process has been at work in the past ten years or so as new
grading structures were developed. There is a need to allocate
responsibility for tasks to the right level of actual service provision.
There are opportunities in redeployment, in materials purchasing,
and in how services are organised which must be availed of to allow
Government to provide more public services with the existing or
lower levels of inputs.
1.2.12 Finally, all public services must rely on sufficient funding. Otherwise
they cannot be sustained. This applies all the more so at local level
where there is a mixture of funding sources – local rates, charges for
services and Exchequer funding either directly by transfers or via
Departmental grants for services provided. It is important in all cases
that revenue sources are broadly based, stable and service related.
There is great risk in relying on highly cyclical revenues (such as
development levies). Taxes and revenues are better based if related
to what the local authority does. In this way those bodies that spend
money on improving or extending their services may reap the extra
revenue from the greater use of such services.
1.2.13 These principles are guiding themes, not prescriptions for every
case. The Group used these as guiding principles in its work, not just
in terms of how they can yield cost savings, but also improvements in
service quality. Many of the savings will take time fully to be realised.
Others will yield results more immediately. Public accounting is now
8

more focussed than previously on multi-annual budgeting. Public
financing is based on a plan to reduce the fiscal deficit to 3% by
2014; in these circumstances, a saving in two to three years time is
just as important as a saving in 2011 and should not be discounted or
devalued because it takes time to be realised.
1.3 Approach and Methodology
1.3.1 The Group at its initial meeting agreed an overall approach to its
work and a work programme, with the aim of meeting the deadline of
reporting by mid-2010.
1.3.2 The Group reviewed a large volume of financial data and other
information on local government expenditure and revenue, as well as
staffing levels. These data were examined by service area, by local
authority, and trends identified across a number of years. Much of
this information was held in the Department of the Environment,
Heritage and Local Government and local authorities, and this was
supplemented by other sources.
1.3.3 The Group launched a public consultation process in February 2010,
inviting submissions from interested organisations and members of
the public. Those making submissions were encouraged to identify
possible savings and efficiencies and ensure that any proposals
being made were relevant to one or more of the topics covered in the
Group’s of reference. A full list of those making submissions to the
Group is included as Appendix 1.
1.3.4 The Group also held a number of meetings with stakeholders,
including representatives of local authorities at both elected and
official levels, Government Departments/ agencies which interact with
local authorities, and others. As with the written submissions, the
focus of these meetings was also on identifying possible savings and
reductions in expenditure, either through efficiencies or through
reducing spend in certain areas. A list of those organisations that
met with the Group is included as Appendix 2.
1.3.5 As issues arose, different papers were prepared by the Secretariat
for consideration by the Group and to inform the Group’s work and its
recommendations.
1.3.6 Sources for these papers included financial data, previous
evaluations and reviews, VFM reports, information sourced from local
authorities, and international studies and analyses of efficiency
initiatives within local government.
9

1.4 Local Government in Ireland
1.4.1 All countries throughout the world have local government systems to
set local priorities and address local concerns. Local authorities
operate within a specific geographical area within the state, are
locally democratically elected, have some discretion and autonomy
from national government, and generally have the power to raise
local sources of income, as well as receive financial transfers from
the state.
1.4.2 There are 114 local authorities in Ireland, each directly elected every
5 years. The 29 county councils and 5 city councils are the primary
units of local government under the Local Government Act 2001.
Within the counties there are 80 town councils - 5 referred to as
borough councils and the remainder as town councils.
1.4.3 Local authorities are multi-purpose bodies responsible for an
extensive range of services including housing, roads, water services,
community development, environmental services and protection,
planning, fire services, libraries, arts and culture, parks, open spaces
and leisure facilities, higher education grants, motor tax, maintaining
the register of electors, and other services. County and city councils
exercise the full range of functions while town councils are
responsible for a more limited number of services. Local authorities
have under the Local Government Act 2001 general powers of
competence. All local authorities exercise a representational role and
enjoy broad powers to support the community interest, to make byelaws
to regulate local matters and may raise a community
contribution to support local projects. In a broader context, local
authorities promote the economic, social and cultural development of
their areas and work with a wide range of other agencies and
interests.
1.4.4 At town level, two distinct groups can be identified. The first group,
referred to in this report as ‘rating town councils’, include the five
borough councils and 49 of the town councils, and are equivalent for
most practical purposes and have generally the same range of legal
functions. Each of these councils has exclusive rating jurisdiction
within its own area. Boroughs and rating town councils have legal
responsibility for planning, housing, local roads, amenity and other
miscellaneous functions in their own areas. In practice, many
functions statutorily vested in some rating town councils are actually
carried out by the county council. However, arrangements vary for
individual authorities and for different services, with, in some cases,
a substantial county council input, while in others this is limited.
1.4.5 A second group consist of what this report refers to as ‘non-rating
town councils’ – these are the 26 town councils that were known as
town commissioners before 2002. In practice, the role of the non-
10

ating town councils is largely representational. These town councils
have a very limited range of functions and a consequential low level
of expenditure and staffing. Almost all functions in these towns are
the responsibility of the county council.
1.4.6 In addition to the 114 directly-elected local authorities, there exist a
number of other bodies to which local Councillors are appointed,
such as regional authorities, regional assemblies, joint drainage
committees, joint burial boards, Vocational Education Committees,
local development bodies, and Regional Health Fora. Eight regional
authorities were established from 1994. Their main tasks are to
promote co-ordination of public services at regional level and the
preparation of Regional Planning Guidelines. Two regional
assemblies were established in 1999 whose main function is to
manage their respective Regional Operational Programmes under
the National Development Plan. Both the regional authorities and
regional assemblies have very small staffing numbers. Regional
structures are being considered in the context of the White Paper on
local government. Joint drainage committees and joint burial boards
are addressed in more detail in section 5.7.
1.4.7 County councils have a membership ranging from 20 to 48
councillors; city councils from 15 to 52; borough councils 12 and
town councils usually nine. Elected members (councillors), who are
elected at 5-year intervals, constitute the elected council of a local
authority and are the policy making arm of the authority. The day-today
management of local authorities is vested in the city/county
manager who is a full-time chief executive. The county manager is
also manager for any borough or town local authorities within the
county.
1.4.8 Legally all functions, whether performed by the elected council or the
manager, are exercised in the name of the local authority. Functions
performed by the elected council are known as ‘reserved functions’
defined by law, and specified across a whole range of enactments.
They involve decisions on major matters of policy and finance, such
as the adoption of the annual budget, or the making or varying a
development plan. This general policy role is explicitly recognised in
local government law, as is the right of members to represent the
views of the local community to other public bodies. The manager
discharges what are termed ‘executive functions' – in effect the dayto-day
running of the authority – within the policy parameters
determined by the elected council. The manager has a duty to
advise and assist the elected council in the exercise of their
functions. While the division of functions between the elected council
and the manager is clearly defined for legal purposes, in practice, the
policy and executive roles are not wholly divorced and the elected
council and manager operate together.
11

1.4.9 There are some 32,252 whole-time equivalent staff employed in the
local authority sector, compared with 37,425 in the civil service,
95,145 in education, and 109,753 in healthcare (the latter figure
includes public health workers only). The 32,252 local government
staff include management, administrative, technical, craft and general
operative grades, including personnel dealing with specific services
such as library and fire services. This compares with 29,008 staff in
2000, and 37,242 in 2008. Pay and pensions represented 41% of
current local authority spending in 2008. Some 0.8% of staff are in
the managerial grades of county/ city manager and director of
service, with a further 3.3% in the grades of senior executive officer
and senior engineer and equivalent, and Grade 7. The manager is
responsible for staffing and organisational arrangements. While staff
structures and numbers may vary according to the size of the county
or city council, directors of service/ heads of finance are the next tiers
of senior management in most authorities.
1.4.10 There are a wide range of other bodies that interact with the local
government system on an ongoing basis at local level. These range
from community and voluntary groups, business interests, and
individual citizens, as well as a range of central government and
state-funded bodies that have a presence at local level. The latter
include local development bodies such as County Enterprise Boards,
local development companies, state bodies at local level such as the
HSE and FÁS, and Government Departments at local level such as
the Department of Social Protection. County/ City Development
Boards (CDBs), led by local government, were established in 2000 in
all 34 counties and cities to bring together a number of these actors
and to improve the co-ordination of publicly funded services at local
level.
1.5 White Paper on Local Government
1.5.1 In parallel with the work carried out by the Local Government
Efficiency Review Group, a Cabinet Committee has been considering
the structural and other changes to local government to be contained
in a White Paper. This Paper will address Government policy on
local government arising out of the consideration of the issues set out
in the Green Paper published in 2008 and commitments contained in
the renewed Programme for Government (on the latter see section
4.3).
1.5.2 The specific issues the Green Paper was tasked with addressing
included:
• Ensuring a proper balance of power at local levels between the
manager and the elected representatives;
• The issue of directly elected Mayors/ Chairs;
• The establishment and functions of town councils; and
12

• The provision of quality customer service to the public.
1.5.3 The renewed Programme for Government committed to the provision
of democratic leadership for regional authorities and to the
strengthening of their strategic role across a range of functions.
1.5.4 The White Paper will respond to the issues referred to above as well
as to other issues which arose as part of the public consultation
process and the deliberations of the Cabinet Committee.
1.5.5 The approach to implementing recommendations of the Local
Government Efficiency Review Group, insofar as they relate to issues
around the delivery of shared services across county boundaries, or
the realignment of functions at county and town level, will depend
significantly on the final decisions of Government in relation to these
structures.
1.5.6 The Group considers, however, that there can be a coherence
between its recommendations and the decisions to be implemented
arising from the White Paper, including any possible
recommendations that may be made with regard to structures, which
could offer new opportunities to introduce new and more efficient
ways of doing business, and in providing services and democratic
representation to the public, which may not so easily arise when
operating with outdated structures which no longer correspond to
current needs.
1.6 OECD Review and Transforming Public Services
1.6.1 The OECD Review of the Public Service, and the subsequent report
of the Task Force on the Public Service ‘Transforming Public
Services’, both published in 2008, made a number of observations
about the local government system and how it interacts with other
parts of the public sector.
1.6.2 The OECD noted how subnational expenditure has grown rapidly in
Ireland, with the major growth areas in recent years including
environmental protection, road transportation, and water services.
This was attributed to the growth in population and major investment
plans in these areas, and the OECD commented on the need for
buoyant revenue sources for local government. The OECD also
noted that many services provided by local authorities continue to be
provided for free or at low cost, such as water supplied to domestic
consumers.
1.6.3 A key theme running through the OECD Review was the need for a
greater emphasis on performance, standardised information about
the impact of public services, and a focus on whether programmes or
services are achieving their goals or producing results. Performance
13

information also needs to be used more systematically in
management and budgetary decision-making, and used to question
the necessity for, or appropriateness of, programmes and services.
1.6.4 The OECD argued that much local authority activity takes place on
the basis of defined statutory frameworks and according to legislative
and departmental guidelines. The OECD advocated more devolution
of responsibility to local government (with effective use of
performance indicators). It argued however that this would require
local authorities to build capacity in terms of skills and experience,
and that there should be increased mobility between local authorities
and the civil service.
1.6.5 Following the publication of the OECD Review, the Government
established the Task Force on the Public Service which examined
the findings of the OECD Review and produced a follow-up set of
recommendations and an implementation plan in its report entitled
‘Transforming Public Services: Citizen centred – performance
focused’.
1.6.6 The report followed the key themes of the OECD review and made
recommendations in relation to a number of substantive areas for all
public service organisations, including motivating performance,
shared services, procurement, and e-government.
1.6.7 The Task Force and accompanying Government Statement made a
number of proposals, including:
• Development of output targets to allow the performance of
individual organisations and groups of organisations to be
measured;
• Greater use of performance assessment to address
underperformance and to distinguish high performance;
• Assess the potential for shared services and e-government to
yield cost savings and service improvements for the citizen;
• Devolution of authority and responsibility between the different
levels of Government, as well as between Departments and
agencies and within individual organisations;
• Review geographical boundaries in order to deliver greater
efficiency and value for money – where possible, services
should be delivered along county lines (or groups of counties) to
ensure greater coherence and consistency across the entire
public service at local level;
• Strengthen role of County and City Development Boards to
identify specific joint service initiatives across agencies for
priority implementation.
1.6.8 The Group takes up a number of these themes in this report and in
developing recommendations.
14

1.7 Compliance Requirements on Local Authorities
1.7.1 Financial activities of local authorities are heavily influenced by
mandatory compliance requirements particularly in environmental
and health & safety areas, and more generally in other fields of
activity. These requirements result in significant non-discretionary
expenditure that local authorities effectively have to undertake. In
these cases, local authorities are statutorily bound or obliged by
national government or EU policy to incur these costs. In many
cases, non-compliance could result in fines for the Irish government
or the local authority, and in some cases criminal prosecution of staff
involved. Local authorities are also statutorily bound by other
legislative provisions, such as the requirements of the Official
Languages Act.
1.7.2 In the field of water services, specific regulations and statutory
instruments exist in several areas, such as drinking water, urban
waste water treatment, surface and groundwater, bathing water, and
waste water authorisation. In a typical authority, the capital costs of
water/ waste water plants for new and existing compliance
requirements totals €60 million. In terms of waste management,
recent legislative initiatives include regulations on different waste
streams such as sewage sludge, mining waste, legacy waste
disposal sites, tyres, electrical and electronic waste, packaging, food
waste, batteries and end-of-life vehicles, as well as legislation
governing the operation of waste management facilities such as
landfill sites and waste to energy facilities. Health and safety
requirements increasingly place a heavy financial burden on the
sector, having regard to the dispersed and diverse range of local
authority operations, and it can be expected that this will be an area
of significant continuing cost growth for the future.
1.7.3 Legislation in these fields typically implies a series of costs involving
local authority capital and current expenditure in areas such as the
following:
• New capital works in water and waste water services;
• Significantly increased operating and maintenance costs due to
more stringent standards;
• Monitoring obligations to ensure standards are being met
(monitoring functions have become more complex and the
frequency of analysis has increased, with protocols being
developed in certain areas);
• Regular sampling and testing (especially in the case of water
services);
• Improvement and remedial works that are required (for example
in terms of water conservation);
15

• Cost of licensing functions carried out by local authorities (for
example discharge licensing, licensing of private water
supplies);
• Enforcement activities (in areas such as illegal dumping or fly
tipping for waste, or farm surveys for water quality);
• Awareness and education programmes;
• Cost of insurance against environmental damage;
• The need to recruit or train/ upskill specialist staff and dedicated
technicians in specific areas and to oversee specific
environmental operations.
1.7.4 Costs also arise due to fees charged to local authorities by
supervisory bodies such as the EPA. This includes annual fees
payable to the EPA for the review of landfill licences (currently some
€30,000 per site, which it is currently proposed to increase), and a
fee for registration of historic landfill sites (currently €5,000 per site),
and fees for urban waste water discharge licences which in a typical
authority total some €400,000 for 36 applications or on average
€11,000 per application.
16

2.1 National Public Finances
2. Budgetary Situation
2.1.1 The State is borrowing around one third of its day-to-day spending.
This is unsustainable. A series of measures has been undertaken at
national level to restore the public finances in the past 2 years,
including expenditure reductions across a range of public service
areas, particularly through Budget 2009 announced in October 2008,
the supplementary Budget of April 2009, and Budget 2010
announced in December 2009. Other measures have been
undertaken to reduce expenditure in specific areas, including
initiatives undertaken on the foot of the Report of the Special Group
on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure Programmes.
2.1.2 Nevertheless, Government current spending remains much higher
than available revenues. Budget 2010 published in December 2009
estimates that Government gross current expenditure in 2010 will be
just under €62 billion. Government current receipts are expected to
be just over €48 billion. Ireland continues to borrow heavily and the
General Government deficit is estimated at over 11% of GDP for
2010, well above the 3% Eurozone limit below which the Government
is committed to returning to by 2014.
Table 2.1 – Projected Gross Government Finances 2010
€ billion % of GDP % of GNP
Current Spending*
61.9 38.4 47.9
Current Receipts°
48.2 29.9 37.3
Current Deficit -13.7 -8.5 -10.6
Capital Spending
7.3 4.5 5.6
Capital Receipts & Resources
2.2 1.4 1.7
Capital Deficit -5.1 -3.1 -3.9
Exchequer Deficit -18.8 -11.7 -14.5
General Government Deficit -18.7 -11.6 -14.5
* Of which Debt Servicing costs are an estimated €5.2 billion
° The vast majority of current receipts are Exchequer tax receipts and Departmental receipts such as
PRSI, health levies etc.
Source: Budget 2010 (Note: rounding may affect totals)
17

Figure 2.1 – Total Government Voted and Non-Voted Net Current Expenditure / Total Local Authority Net Current Expenditure, 2000-2010
€000's
50,000,000
45,000,000
40,000,000
35,000,000
30,000,000
25,000,000
20,000,000
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
0
Year
2000
Year
2001
Year
2002
Year
2003
Year
2004
Year
2005
Year
2006
Year
2007
Year
2008
Year
2009
Year
2010
Total Government
Voted and Non-
Voted Current
Expenditure
Total Local Authority
Current Expenditure
Source: Department of Finance and Local Authority Budgets 2010 – Government net expenditure figures take account of
certain Departmental revenue items and levies. Local authority net expenditure figures exclude inter-authority
contributions and provision for debit/ credit balances

Figure 2.2 – Total Local Authority Net Current Expenditure as a % of Government Voted and Non-Voted Net Current Expenditure, 2000-10
12.00%
10.00%
8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
0.00%
Year
2000
Year
2001
Year
2002
Year
2003
Year
2004
Year
2005
Year
2006
Source: Department of Finance and Local Authority Budgets 2010 – Government net expenditure figures take account of certain
Departmental revenue items and levies. Local authority net expenditure figures exclude inter-authority contributions and
provision for debit/ credit balances
Year
2007
Year
2008
Year
2009
Year
2010
19

2.1.3 The Government’s approach to returning stability to the public
finances has involved undertaking a series of measures on the
expenditure side, including:
• Public service savings, for example through a moratorium on
recruitment within the public service, incentivised early
retirement schemes, the reduction of the pay bill and a public
service pension levy;
• Reductions in social welfare and health spending, and cut-backs
across a range of other public services;
• A cut of over 30% in capital expenditure in 2009 and 2010;
• New approaches to controlling public service numbers, with a
view to a progressive reduction in overall public service staff
numbers;
• The present Local Government Efficiency Review.
2.1.4 Other relevant developments include the OECD review of the public
service, annual output statements in Government Departments,
rationalisation of agency structures, multi-annual capital envelopes,
and improved procedures for appraising and managing capital
projects, public procurement, and value-for-money.
2.1.5 Figures 2.1 and 2.2 illustrate the overall figures for local government
current expenditure over the past decade in the context of total
government voted and non-voted expenditure.
2.1.6 In terms of revenue, key developments include:
• The report of the Commission on Taxation, which will inform
Government decisions on taxation policy over the medium to
longer term;
• A broadening of the tax base, for example through the
introduction of the income levy, the carbon tax and the removal
or restructuring of tax reliefs;
• Commitment to introduce a property tax;
• Future reforms, including a new universal social contribution on
income to replace various health and PRSI levies, phasing out
mortgage interest relief by 2017, and charging for water and
other public services.
2.2 Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure
Programmes
2.2.1 The Report of the Special Group on Public Service Numbers and
Expenditure Programmes mainly reviewed central government
spending, but also proposed the rationalisation of local government
structures. Their Report also proposed that local government should
become self-financing in the long-term and that additional forms of
20

evenue were needed for the local government system, as well as the
need for increased cost recovery for services provided.
2.2.2 The Special Group’s report further proposed that domestic water
charges be reintroduced, arguing that pending the installation of
water metering in domestic dwellings, a flat rate fee could be
introduced, followed by a pay by use system. It also proposed that
water services be delivered though a national agency rather than the
local government system. The Special Group also proposed a
reduction in Exchequer support through the Local Government Fund,
and an overall reduction in current expenditure of 10%.
2.2.3 The Report of the Special Group recommended that the Local
Government Audit Service should transfer to the Office of the
Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) to ensure greater
coherence and uniformity in the auditing standards applied across
public bodies, and that the C&AG become the external auditor for all
bodies in receipt of significant amounts of public money.
2.2.4 The Special Group voiced concerns over the large number of small
local organisations that are in receipt of State funding to provide
services at local level, the potential for overlap, the difficulties in
measuring how the organisations help achieving specific objectives,
and concerns that the same organisation may be in receipt of funding
from different Government Departments and agencies.
2.2.5 Their report suggested that “a local appraisal step should be
introduced to ensure that the set of local organisations in a given
local authority area serves that area in the most efficient and effective
way. Instead of each local organisation submitting its funding
application to separate central Government Departments and
agencies, they would individually or in partnership with other
organisations submit applications to their local authority”. A shared
service structure could also be run by local authorities to support the
work of various local bodies.
2.3 Local Government Budgetary Situation and Income
2.3.1 Total local government current and capital expenditure in 2010 is
estimated at €8.5 billion. Net budgeted current expenditure
represents just under €4.7 billion of this amount. Current and capital
expenditures are funded in different ways.
2.3.2 Current expenditure is funded through a combination of commercial
rates, charges for goods and services, specific Government grants,
and funding from the Exchequer-funded Local Government Fund, as
shown in Figure 2.3 below.
21

2.3.3 Rates are property taxes that are levied on commercial properties –
the level of this rate is determined each year by the local authority as
part of its annual budgetary process. Annual rates liability is
determined on the basis of the rate made by the elected members,
and the valuation of commercial property, as determined by the
Commissioner of Valuation.
2.3.4 Further sources of current income for local authorities are the
charges they levy for certain services. These include housing rents,
commercial water charges, planning application fees, refuse and
landfill charges, library fees, parking charges, and fire charges. The
Local Government (Charges) Act 2009 introduced, from 2009
onwards, a new charge of €200 on non-principal private residences
(NPPR). The charge is collected and retained by the relevant local
authority, and amounted to €63 million in respect of 2009.
2.3.5 Commercial rates and charges for goods and services are local
sources of income over which local authorities have a measure of
control, although some charges (such as planning application fees)
are set centrally.
2.3.6 There are two types of Government grant available to local
authorities:
• General – which are not constrained by specific spending
parameters, including most of the financing allocated from the
Local Government Fund;
• Specific – which are earmarked for specific purposes and cover
the delivery of certain state services or projects through local
government such as roads or higher education grants.
2.3.7 The Local Government Act 1998 provided for the establishment of
the Local Government Fund made up of an Exchequer contribution
and motor tax receipts. Allocations of general-purpose grants are
made from the Fund to the individual local authorities annually. In
their 2010 budgets local authorities have provided for a total of €774
million in general-purpose grants.
2.3.8 In 2010, the share of local authority budgeted current income
provided directly by the State amounts to €1.8 billion or 41% of total
budgeted current income. Commercial rates account for 29%, with
the remainder attributable to income in respect of charges for goods
and services and other income.
2.3.9 The breakdown of revenue for the local authority budgeted current
expenditure for 2010 is illustrated in Figures 2.3 and 2.4, and Table
2.2. Further details on local government revenue by local authority
are included as Appendix 3.
22

Figure 2.3 – Sources of Local Authority Current Income 2010
General Purpose
Grant
17%
Commercial Rates
29%
Source: Local Authority Budgets, 2010
Pension Related
Deductions
2%
Government
Grants/Subsidies
24%
Goods/Services
28%
23

Table 2.2 – Sources of Local Authority Revenue Income 2010
County Councils City Councils
Borough
Councils
Town
Councils (1)
Miscellaneous
Bodies (2)
Total 2010
Budget Budget 2009 (3)
€ € € € € € €
Total Expenditure 3,151,395,664 1,189,054,437 74,157,067 232,788,185 8,294,222 4,655,689,575 5,036,518,053
Expenditure Financed by
Government Grants/Subsidies 854,444,888 226,898,815 6,669,880 17,399,274 0 1,105,412,857 1,255,207,212
General Purpose Grant 597,205,473 109,355,491 13,245,423 54,105,946 0 773,912,333 937,328,704
Pension Related Deductions 51,871,333 23,135,793 1,112,312 2,755,371 0 78,874,809 -
Goods/Services 804,936,494 393,153,838 30,823,713 89,519,255 6,351,711 1,324,785,011 1,429,784,341
Commercial Rates 763,063,872 426,770,948 37,281,654 129,644,291 1,942,511 1,358,703,275 1,404,332,809
Sub-total 3,071,522,060 1,179,314,885 89,132,982 293,424,137 8,294,222 4,641,688,285 5,026,653,066
Provision for Debit/ Credit Balances (4) -3,536,758 -9,739,552 -900,000 1,376 0 -14,174,934 8,611,771
County Charge (5) 76,336,847 0 -15,875,915 -60,634,575 0 -173,643 1,253,216
Total Income 3,151,395,664 1,189,054,437 74,157,067 232,788,185 8,294,222 4,655,689,575 5,036,518,053
(1) Comprises rating Town Councils (Formerly Urban District Councils)
(2) Includes non rating Town Councils (Formerly Town Commissioners), Joint Drainage Boards, and other miscellaneous bodies.
(3) Pension related deductions introduced after adoption of 2009 budgets.
(4) In preparing their annual budgets, local authorities may provide for debit/credit balances. In 2010, local authorities provided for a credit
balance of some €14 million. Debit Balances are shown as plus values and credit balances are shown as minus values.
(5) Where a county council provides a service or carries out a function on behalf of a town/ borough council it levies a charge on that town/
borough council. In their adopted budgets, this is shown as an income to a county council and an expenditure item of a town/ borough
council.
Source: Local Authority Budgets, 2010 (Note: rounding may affect totals)

Figure 2.4 –Sources of Local Authority Income 2010 by Local Authority Type
COUNTY
COUNCILS
CITY
COUNCILS
BOROUGH
COUNCILS
TOWN
COUNCILS
% % % %
Government Grants/Subsidies 27.8% 19.2% 7.5% 5.9%
Goods/Services 26.2% 33.3% 34.6% 30.5%
Commercial Rates 24.8% 36.2% 41.8% 44.2%
General Purpose Grant 19.5% 9.3% 14.9% 18.5%
Pension Related Deductions 1.7% 2.0% 1.2% 0.9%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
* Excluding non-rating authorities
25

2.3.10 In terms of capital spending, local authorities have responsibility for
providing a range of capital works such as social housing, water and
sewage treatment, collection and distribution networks and road
construction and maintenance. Capital expenditure is financed
largely (about 80%) by Government grants, with the balance being
funded from borrowings and by local authorities’ own locally raised
resources (for example, through development contributions).
Development contributions are invested in public infrastructure,
including roads, waste water and water treatment facilities, drains
and watermains, public transport, the provision of open spaces,
recreational and community facilities, etc. Income from development
contributions has been reducing significantly in recent years due to
the fall-off in construction activity.
2.3.11 The extent to which local authorities can invest in public
infrastructure is determined by the amount of funding made available
for these purposes from central government. The element of the
capital programme funded from central funds can pose financial
difficulties for authorities where they bear the financial costs of
preliminary planning and payments to contractors etc., in advance of
recoupment, and where they are expected to provide an element of
matching funding in some projects.
2.3.12 While capital expenditure on infrastructure is met largely through
Government grants, it should be noted that the expansion and
improvement of infrastructure can have significant knock-on
implications for current expenditure by local authorities especially in
terms of operation and maintenance costs.
2.4 Local Government Current Expenditure
2.4.1 Local Government current expenditure is divided across the eight
local government ‘service divisions’, reflecting the different areas of
local government service provision.
2.4.2 The breakdown of local authority budgeted current expenditure for
2010 is illustrated in Figures 2.5 and Table 2.3. Further details on
local government expenditure by local authority are included in
Appendix 3. A breakdown of actual audited expenditure for 2008,
according to pay and pensions, various operating costs,
administration and other expenses is illustrated in Table 2.4.
26

Figure 2.5 – Local Authority Current Expenditure 2010 by Division
Agriculture,
Education, Health &
Welfare
9%
Recreation and
Amenity
9%
Environmental
Services
17%
Development
Management
6%
Source: Local Authority Budgets, 2010
Miscellaneous
Services
7%
Housing and
Building
17%
Water Services
15%
Road Transportation
& Safety
20%
27

Table 2.3 – Local Authority Current Account Summary 2010, by Division
Division Expenditure Income
€ €
Service Division A - Housing and Building 778,721,318 667,189,078
Service Division B - Road Transportation & Safety 919,344,529 563,535,922
Service Division C - Water Services 722,252,270 269,184,924
Service Division D - Development Management 296,578,714 67,243,134
Service Division E - Environmental Services 804,318,703 290,022,924
Service Division F - Recreation and Amenity 396,812,502 63,195,464
Service Division G - Agriculture, Education, Health & Welfare 406,186,452 375,941,489
Service Division H - Miscellaneous Services 331,475,088 133,884,932
Sub-Total 4,655,689,575 2,430,197,867
Commercial Rates 1,358,703,275
General Purpose Grants 773,912,333
Provision for Debit/ Credit Balances (1) -14,174,934
County Charge (2) -173,643
Pension Related Deductions 78,874,809
Total 4,655,689,575 4,655,689,575
(1) In preparing their annual budgets, local authorities may provide for debit/ credit balances. In 2010, local authorities
provided for a credit balance of some €14 million. Debit balances are shown as plus values and credit balances are
shown as minus values.
(2) Where a county council provides a service or carries out a function on behalf of a town/ borough council it levies a
‘county charge’ on that town/ borough council. In their adopted budgets, this is shown as an income to a county
council and an expenditure item of a town/ borough council. County demand is shown as a plus value for county
councils and as minus value for borough/ town councils
Source: Local Authority Budgets, 2010 (Note: rounding may affect totals)
28

Payroll Expenses
Table 2.4 – Breakdown of Local Authority
Gross Current Expenditure for Year ended 31/12/2008
2008 2007
€ €
2008 as 2007 as
% %
Salary & Wages 1,745,738,832 1,647,882,796 33.86% 33.77%
Pensions (incl Gratuities) 314,286,291 288,009,073 6.10% 5.90%
Other costs 78,089,659 85,692,636 1.51% 1.76%
Total 2,138,114,782 2,021,584,505 41.47% 41.43%
Operational Expenses
Purchase of Equipment 74,794,284 80,957,681 1.45% 1.66%
Repairs & Maintenance 75,374,723 73,062,014 1.46% 1.50%
Contract Payments 439,638,150 427,891,522 8.53% 8.77%
Agency services 245,204,194 215,180,321 4.76% 4.41%
Machinery Yard Charges incl. Plant Hire 227,717,729 191,608,949 4.42% 3.93%
Purchase of Materials & Issues from Stores 318,633,605 342,471,324 6.18% 7.02%
Payment of Grants 250,612,093 226,934,019 4.86% 4.65%
Members Costs 15,288,530 14,955,733 0.30% 0.31%
Travelling & Subsistence Allowances 55,111,611 50,398,144 1.07% 1.03%
Consultancy & Professional Fees Payments 74,981,963 69,049,594 1.45% 1.42%
Energy Costs 146,090,414 139,447,545 2.83% 2.86%
Other 314,785,773 327,541,960 6.10% 6.71%
Total 2,238,233,069 2,159,498,806 43.41% 44.26%
Administration Expenses - -
Communication Expenses 44,598,265 40,089,390 0.86% 0.82%
Training 33,095,115 29,741,185 0.64% 0.61%
Printing & Stationery 29,729,465 28,534,505 0.58% 0.58%
Contributions to other Bodies 73,354,121 79,996,842 1.42% 1.64%
Other 60,290,118 59,385,984 1.17% 1.22%
Total 241,067,084 237,747,905 4.68% 4.87%
Establishment Expenses - -
Rent & Rates 97,609,049 95,750,619 1.89% 1.96%
Other 44,539,935 31,844,200 0.86% 0.65%
Total 142,148,984 127,594,819 2.76% 2.61%
Financial Expenses 256,285,326 208,241,583 4.97% 4.27%
Miscellaneous Expenses 71,527,528 65,403,348 1.39% 1.34%
County Charge 68,970,047 59,408,891 1.34% 1.22%
Total Expenditure 5,156,346,820 4,879,479,856 100.00% 100.00%
Source: DEHLG, based on Annual Financial Statement Data for all Local Authorities, 2008 (Note: rounding may affect totals)
29

2.5 Scale Issues Across the Local Government Sector
2.5.1 As in many other countries, Irish local authorities vary considerably in
terms of the population size they serve (see Appendix 4 for details).
This has consequences in terms of both the staffing complements
and the overall budgets and level of expenditure within different local
authorities.
2.5.2 The 34 county and city councils accounted for 93% of total local
government current spend in 2010. Four of these authorities (Dublin
City Council and Cork, South Dublin and Fingal County Councils)
accounted for 36% of local government expenditure across the 88
rating local authorities in 2010. The same four local authorities
accounted for 37% of all local authority staff in 2010.
2.5.3 Efforts to reduce spending across the local government system must
take into account the need to ensure that savings are made in the
larger spending authorities.
2.6 Commission on Taxation and Indecon Review of Local
Government Financing
2.6.1 Two recent reviews of local government financing were carried out by
Indecon Economic Consultants and published in 2006, and the
Commission on Taxation in 2009.
2.6.2 The Indecon report made several recommendations in respect of
alternative sources of revenue for local government in the future, as
well as areas where savings might be made though shared services,
contracting out, and introducing differential pricing to direct users to
lower cost approaches.
2.6.3 The Commission on Taxation that reported in 2009 had as part of its
remit the financing of local government. The Commission noted that
local government would face significant expenditure demands in the
future arising from population growth, implementation of the National
Development Plan, and implementation of new legislation in waste
management and water supply and protection.
2.6.4 The Commission set out a series of recommendations on the
financing of local government. In essence, these involved the
following proposals:
1. An annual tax on all property, either via commercial rates or
through a specific tax on domestic property proposed by the
Commission, based on self-assessed valuation bands, with
local authorities ultimately given powers to vary the rate set in
their area;
30

2. Reintroducing domestic water charges, starting with low flat
fees, gradually increasing, and structured so as to incentivise
the installation of meters;
3. New revenues from 1 and 2 above should replace the motor tax
contribution to the Local Government Fund;
4. Greater cost recovery should be made in areas such as
commercial water charges and planning fees;
5. Removal of a series of exemptions to commercial rates, such as
those for state properties, larger B&Bs, farm buildings owned by
corporate bodies, off-shore structures such as windfarms and
power stations, and part-rating for third level institutions and
community halls where a significant amount of commercial
activity takes place;
6. Standardising the approach taken to vacancy relief for
commercial rates;
7. Removal of maximum rent levels (while respecting the principle
of rents being based on ability to pay);
8. Periodic review of the needs and resources model in
conjunction with local authorities;
9. Exploring other options, such as a tax on undeveloped zoned
land to prevent hoarding, a ‘betterment’ tax on gains and
increases in land value due to zoning decisions or investment in
public infrastructure, and the introduction of a bed levy to
enhance tourism facilities in local authorities with high tourist
numbers.
2.6.5 The Commission also supported the views of the OECD review of the
Irish public service and Transforming Public Services (see above)
that greater use should be made of shared ‘back-office’ services.
2.6.6 Many of the issues raised in the Commission on Taxation report fall
within the remit of the Local Government Efficiency Review Group,
and are addressed in subsequent sections. However the question of
a tax on undeveloped land or on gains from zoning decisions largely
relates to capital expenditure.
2.7 Financial Trends
2.7.1 This section plots changes over the past decade in local government
current income and expenditure. Figure 2.6 illustrates trends in local
government expenditure across different service divisions over the
past decade while Figure 2.7 illustrates trends in local government
revenue sources over the same period.
31

€'m
1,300
1,200
1,100
1,000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Figure 2.6 – Local Authority Current Expenditure by Service Division 2000-2010
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year
Service Division 1 -
Housing and Building
Service Division 2 - Road
Transportation and Safety
Service Division 3 - Water
Services
Service Division 4 -
Development Management
Service Division 5 -
Environmental Services
Service Division 6 -
Recreation and Amenity
Service Division 7 -
Agriculture, Education,
Health and Welfare
Service Division 8 -
Miscellaneous Services
Source: Data for 2000 to 2008 is derived from Local Authority Annual Financial Statements; Data for 2009 & 2010 is derived from Local Authority Budgets
32

Income €m
€ 1,600.0
€ 1,400.0
€ 1,200.0
€ 1,000.0
€ 800.0
€ 600.0
€ 400.0
€ 200.0
€ 0.0
Figure 2.7 – Local Authority Income Trends 2000 - 2010
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Government
Grants/Subsidies
LGF General
Purpose Grant
Goods/Services
Commercial Rates
Pension Related
Deductions
Source: Data for 2000 to 2008 is derived from Local Authority Annual Financial Statements; Data for 2009 & 2010 is derived from Local Authority Budgets
33

2.7.2 At €4.7 billion, net budgeted revenue expenditure in 2010 fell by €381
million (or 7.6%) compared to the corresponding 2009 budget figure. From
2000 to 2009, total budgeted current expenditure grew year-on-year by an
average compound rate of 8.6% and by some 110% in the period, reflecting
local government’s response to increased economic activity, the expansion
in population and enhanced demand for service provision.
2.7.3 The biggest area of budgeted current expenditure in 2010 is road
transportation and safety, which accounts for some €919 million or 20% of
total budgeted current expenditure. Expenditure increased in the period
2000-10 by some 20% underlining the investment that was made at that
time in upgrading and maintaining our regional and local roads networks.
2.7.4 Budgeted current expenditure on environmental services at €804 million or
17.3% of total budgeted current expenditure in 2010 is the second biggest
expenditure area. Expenditure increased by 101% in the period 2000-10
and reflects the level of activity by local authorities in protecting and
maintaining the high quality of our environment.
2.7.5 Budgeted current expenditure of €722 million on water services fell by some
4% in 2010 compared to 2009. Expenditure increased by 167% in the
period 2000-10 and reflects the considerable expansion that has taken
place in the provision of water services infrastructure in the period.
2.7.6 Further details on revenue and expenditure over the past decade are
included as Appendix 3.
34

3. Local Government Experience of Efficiency Reforms –
Progress to Date
3.1 Shared Services
3.1.1 Many similar functions and activities, under the same legislation, are carried
out across local government. While local circumstances and priorities may
sometimes differ, there are nevertheless opportunities for greater
cooperation between local authorities in service provision. Shared services
provide an opportunity to increase efficiency through reorganisation and
sharing of assets with others and an opportunity to minimise duplication of
processes, accommodation and management effort across local authorities.
As well as the potential for financial savings, shared services can also lead
to service improvements and greater consistency. In order to work well,
shared service models must involve the redesign of processes, and there
are opportunities to learn from the experience of existing shared service
approaches.
3.1.2 Local authorities already have extensive experience to date of shared or
joint service provision. The Government Statement and the ‘Transforming
Public Services’ report published in 2008 identified shared services as a
priority area for the public service as a whole. At nation-wide level in local
government services, examples include:
• IT programme design and support (the Local Government Computer
Services Board (now known as the Local Government Management
Agency) design IT programmes for most local authorities);
• Industrial relations support and advice (the Local Government
Management Services Board (now known as the LGMA) acts a
repository of expertise in industrial relations and employment law
issues so that this is not required in each individual local authority);
• Procurement system (LAQuotes system hosted by Kerry County
Council);
• Health and Safety (a specialist office to provide advice and support to
all local authorities on best practice and their obligations in this area
under legislation, hosted by Meath County Council);
• Trans Frontier Shipment of Waste (a specialist office to administer the
notification procedure for cross-border movements of waste as
required under an EU Regulation, hosted by Dublin City Council);
• Non-Principal Private Residencies Charge (NPPR) (single web-based
payment collection system).
3.1.3 At regional level, shared service models have been adopted for different
regions that involve the participation of most if not all county/city councils.
These include:
35

• Water Quality and Protection (‘lead authority’ approach employed on
behalf of a group of local authorities for each River Basin District);
• Waste Management (‘lead authority’ approach employed on behalf of a
group of local authorities used for waste management planning and
infrastructure);
• Road Design Offices (a series of regional design offices exist to pool
expertise and skills involved in the management of major national
roads projects through planning and construction);
• Communications System for the Fire Service (known as CAMP, where
a ‘lead authority’ works on behalf of a group of local authorities to host
the system);
• Energy management (a series of regional energy agencies exist to
assist several local authorities with advice on energy management,
and the savings that can come from reducing local authorities’ carbon
footprint).
3.1.4 In several parts of the country, a shared service approach is also taken to
the delivery of certain additional services across several county/ city areas,
for example:
• Motor Tax (collected on behalf of the four Dublin local authorities by
Dublin City Council, on behalf of Cork city and county by Cork County
Council, and on behalf of Galway city and county by Galway County
Council);
• Fire Service (provided for the four Dublin authorities by Dublin City
Council, and for the two Galway authorities by Galway County
Council);
• Libraries (the two Tipperary and the two Galway authorities provide a
joint library service);
• Water Supply and Treatment (for example between the Dublin local
authorities).
3.1.5 At local level, multiple examples exist of joint town/county council provision
of a service. In many service areas, the county council provides services for
the county ‘at large’, including to those living in town council areas. This
includes services such as:
• Water services;
• National and regional roads;
• Motor tax;
• Fire services;
• Library services.
3.1.6 In addition to the above list, many aspects of other services are effectively
delivered by county councils on behalf of town councils in many cases. In
the case of the 26 non-rating town councils (formerly known as town
commissioners), virtually all services are provided by the county councils.
However it is also the case that for many of the remaining 54 rating town
councils, many aspects of planning services, housing services, and roads
36

maintenance are provided by the county council on behalf of the town
council. For example, although 54 town councils are planning authorities, in
the bulk of cases in practice the planning staff of the county council prepare
reports on planning applications and prepare town development plans on
behalf of the town council. In the case of housing, technical assistance for
the capital programme is often provided to the town councils by county
council staff, and many housing waiting lists are either joint lists between the
county and town or managed by the county council on behalf of the town
(see section 5.5 for further details).
3.1.7 The Group noted the constructive approach local authorities had taken
towards adopting shared service models to date, but felt that more work
could be done in this area. An expansion of the shared approach to service
provision (both to other local authorities and to other service areas) offers
the potential for cost savings, particularly in areas which require a high
degree of specialisation. This issue is addressed in more detail in section 8.
3.2 Value for Money Agenda
3.2.1 The Group makes a number of recommendations on the role of the Local
Government Audit Service in section 7 designed to enhance its role and
effectiveness. The Local Government Audit Service, which acts as the
external auditor to local authorities, also incorporates a dedicated Value for
Money Unit which was established in 1993. The Unit has produced 25
Value for Money Reports on local authority activities to date covering topics
such as internal audit, financial management reporting, etc. A VFM study is
underway on local authority housing maintenance/ management of vacant
dwellings and a feasibility study is also being prepared on areas such as
local authority procurement practices. A listing of the VFM reports is
contained at Appendix 6.
3.2.2 The work of the VFM Unit has focused on undertaking national VFM studies
on single-issue topics and publishing reports on these. Where appropriate,
the implementation of the recommendations contained in these VFM reports
is monitored by the Local Government Audit Service at the annual
regulatory audit of the individual local authority annual financial statements.
3.2.3 Each local authority is expected to have an active and adequately resourced
internal audit function in place to assure local authority management and its
stakeholders that value for money is being achieved through maintaining
sound arrangements, including procedures for planning, appraisal,
authorisation and control of resources.
3.2.4 Significant enhancements have been made in recent years in equipping
local authorities with tools to measure and promote value for money. For
example, new Financial Management Systems (FMS) have been introduced
in all local authorities and these provide enhanced functionality and better
management information. Since 2004, local authority annual financial
statements are required to be prepared on a full accruals basis and to
37

include all of the assets and liabilities of local authorities. From 2005, the
Local Government Management Agency (LGMA) has published annual
reports on the performance of local authorities across a range of service
indicators (see section 3.5 below). A new costing system to provide
enhanced management and service cost information has been introduced
recently. This new system will lead to greater transparency in the financial
affairs of local authorities and in the presentation of financial data. It will
also strengthen the capacity of local authorities to enhance value for money
and in monitoring performance in local authority activities.
3.3 Procurement
3.3.1 Local authorities have also worked together in recent years to obtain better
value for money in procurement, to reduce the administrative overheads
associated with procurement in the local government sector, as well as
making the approach to bidding for local authority contracts more
convenient for suppliers.
3.3.2 A key vehicle that has contributed to savings in procurement in local
government has been the online system known as LAQuotes. LAQuotes,
originally developed and still hosted by Kerry County Council, is an online
annual quotation application used by 30 of the 34 county/ city councils,
accepting quotations from suppliers in a number of areas including plant
hire and haulage, tool hire, road making materials, and supplies and
services. Instead of having to submit paper-based quotations to each local
authority, suppliers can now submit a quotation to all participating councils
online.
3.3.3 Other advantages of the system have included the standardisation and
streamlining of online processes, increased competition from an increased
number of suppliers using the system across more local authorities, and
reduced paperwork associated with the purchasing of stores and machinery
items for both local authorities and suppliers.
3.3.4 A concerted effort has been made in recent years to reduce the amount of
paper-based supporting documentation that must be submitted by suppliers,
for example, by permitting some supporting documentation to be submitted
online, by introducing an electronic system to validate ownership of machine
and plant vehicles quoted for by suppliers, and where hardcopies of a
number of documents can be submitted to and hosted centrally by Kerry
County Council. These developments have meant that the number of hard
copy documents requested from suppliers by local authorities has been
reduced from just over 284,000 to approximately 36,000, and an additional
10,000 documents are collated online via electronic forms.
3.3.5 The system has yielded significant savings to local authorities. Based on
assumptions regarding reductions in the unit price paid for supplies (arising
from leveraging buying power and improved procurement practices),
reductions in transaction costs (arising from lower administrative costs), as
38

well as reductions in the number of transactions (arising from a more
structured ordering processes), the benefits have been in the order of €250
million in the period 2006-2009. There is a recurring cost saving per annum
of approximately €58 million based on current expenditure levels.
3.3.6 Further refinements of the LAQuotes system are planned for the future, for
example to allow multiparty framework agreements and electronic requests
for a quotation. These should result in additional efficiencies and savings
arising from more competitive pricing and further reductions in
administrative overheads.
3.3.7 Further details on the background to LA Quotes, as well as a more detailed
analysis of local government procurement, are contained in section 9.
3.4 Staff Reductions
3.4.1 Since 2003, local authorities have operated within a staffing quota system
agreed with the Department of Finance and the Department of Environment,
Heritage and Local Government. In March 2009, the Government
introduced a moratorium on recruitment.
3.4.2 Staffing levels in the local government sector have been reduced by 5,000
in the period between mid-2008 and early 2010. This represented a
reduction of over 13% in the overall number of local government staff, which
has contributed significantly to the reduction of the cost base of local
government. The operation of the moratorium, the utilisation of the
Incentivised Scheme of Early Retirement and the non-retention of significant
numbers of contract staff have all added to this reduction.
3.4.3 The bulk of this reduction (78%) has been in the employment of contract
staff, with permanent staff representing 22%.
3.4.4 The moratorium, while effective in reducing staff numbers is somewhat
uneven in that staffing reductions in different local authorities and different
grades and service areas have varied considerably, depending both on the
numbers of contract staff and the age profile of people working in the area.
The moratorium on staff numbers will require management to rebalance and
redeploy resources in line with service demands. This will involve using the
provisions of the Croke Park agreement as appropriate (see section 6).
3.5 Service Indicators
3.5.1 Since 2005 annual reports have been published on the performance of local
authorities across a range of service indicators. Following a review in 2008,
the number of indicators was increased from 42 to 46 and a number of
indicators were amended in order to ensure that the indicators remain
meaningful and relevant.
39

3.5.2 The service indicator data include a range of statistical information,
including details on service levels in areas such as recycling rates, response
times for fire and emergency services, water quality, litter pollution levels,
the processing of planning applications, environmental and planning
enforcement, and library services. The suite of service indicators also
include data on what might be considered as efficiency measurement, for
example, detailing levels of unaccounted for water (such as leakages), time
taken to process motor tax and driving licence applications, and turnover of
housing vacancies, as well as data on corporate functions such as levels of
absenteeism and revenue collection.
3.5.3 Service indicators are a guide to differences in efficiency and effectiveness
between local authorities at a given point in time. While they do not cover
all aspects of local authority performance they are a starting point indicating
where further questions can be raised and a signal to how resources might
be better allocated. They are an indication of best practice and a potential
management tool.
3.5.4 The Group believes that the service indicators would be improved through
the substitution of a number of the existing indicators with additional key
financial indicators that would be reported on and monitored each year. The
Group considers that the potential exists for service indicators to be used to
guide allocation of central government resources at local level in future.
Service indicator data should also be more firmly embedded in the internal
management decision-making process within local authorities and used as a
basis for driving change and challenging existing approaches to service
delivery. They should also be used as one of the considerations when
selecting issues for examination as part of VFM studies. Further details in
this respect are included in section 7 below.
3.5.5 At local level, local authorities should make greater use of the data and
analysis that exists in terms of local decision-making, including in relation to
the allocation of resources. This includes not only service indicators, but
other sources such as figures on financial performance, value for money
reports, benchmarking based on quantitative and qualitative information,
and other metrics and analysis available.
40

4. Context – Looking Forward
4.1 National Fiscal and Economic Position
4.1.1 The Irish public finances have been severely affected by the downturn in
economic activity. In response, the Government has implemented a series
of measures, beginning in July 2008, aimed at stabilising the public finances
and beginning the process of returning to a more sustainable fiscal position.
4.1.2 In total, fiscal adjustments – both expenditure-reducing and revenue-raising
– designed to yield about 5% of GDP in 2009 were implemented between
July 2008 and April 2009.
4.1.3 Budget 2010 introduced a further set of adjustments, designed to save €4
billion or 2½% of GDP in 2010 with the intention to stabilise the General
Government deficit at the underlying 2009 level – approximately 11½% of
GDP. The 2009 headline deficit stood at 14.3% of GDP, the highest in the
EU, when account was taken of the capital injection into Anglo Irish Bank.
4.1.4 The focus of the Budget 2010 adjustments was on reducing expenditure
and included cuts to public service pay rates and reductions in social
welfare benefits. Capital spending was also curtailed. The reductions in
spending have been far reaching and have impacted on all sectors of
society.
4.1.5 The overall projected position for 2010 is set out in Table 2.1 above. In
short, the Exchequer is borrowing around one-third of current day-to-day
spending. This is not sustainable.
4.1.6 The Government has set out a framework to restore order to the public
finances and to reduce the General Government deficit to less than 3% of
GDP by 2014. Delivering on this plan means that further adjustments will be
required over the coming years. This 3% target includes all State spending,
including the net position of local government finances.
4.1.7 While reducing the deficit to below 3% of GDP, it will still be necessary, over
the period 2010-2014 to undertake very considerable levels of borrowing.
Current projections are that close to an additional €75 billion will have to be
borrowed, thus doubling the national debt again over the period to 2014. As
recently as 2007, the national debt was just €38 billion.
4.1.8 The sharp increase in our national debt means that an increasing proportion
of tax revenues will be needed to service this debt. This year, some 14% of
estimated tax revenues will be used for this purpose. By 2014, this will
increase to 20%. In 2007, the comparable figure was 3%.
4.1.9 On the economic front, it is expected that growth will return to the Irish
economy on an annual basis in 2011 and that modest growth in tax
41

evenues will resume. This follows three years, 2008-2010, during which
real living standards are forecast to have fallen by about 14%. The recovery
will be led by the exporting sectors of the economy. This will rely on the
improving international economic environment, as well as the
competitiveness adjustments that have taken place. However, export-led
growth is less employment-rich and less tax-rich than domestically-driven
growth, so there may be a time lag before the pick-up in the economy feeds
through into the labour market. The expected pick-up in tax revenues,
based on existing policies, will not be sufficient on its own to close the
significant gap that has emerged in the public finances.
4.1.10 The Government has made clear that the overall budget consolidation in
2011 will be €3 billion, of which €1 billion will come from capital spending.
Budget 2011 will be framed in this overall context.
4.2 Competitiveness Agenda
4.2.1 Along with the challenge of redressing the deficit in Ireland’s public finances,
the Group was very conscious of the current extremely challenging
economic climate, and the need to ensure Ireland restores its competitive
advantage. Local government can make a contribution towards this effort
through minimising the financial burden on local businesses and ratepayers,
but also in a proactive way through improving physical infrastructure and
supporting economic activity at local level.
4.2.2 Local authorities must strive to play their part in restoring Ireland’s cost
competitiveness, for example, by keeping commercial rates and other
charges on businesses at reasonable levels. There is some movement in
this direction. In 2009 the average increase in the annual rate on valuation
(ARV) was 1.15% compared to 2008, with 34 local authorities introducing no
increase in commercial rates for the year. In 2010, there was an average
reduction in the ARV by 0.62%.
4.2.3 In 2008, Forfás reported that commercial water charges in Ireland were
lower than those of our major European competitors. Out of 11 European
states examined, charges in Ireland were the third lowest. In terms of waste
collection, private providers are now the dominant players in most local
authority areas.
4.2.4 Income from development contributions has declined significantly with the
slowdown in the construction sector. Policy guidance has been issued to
local authorities emphasising the importance of local competitiveness, and
achieving an appropriate balance between necessary revenue collection
and the need to provide attractive locations for future development.
4.2.5 It is clear from the Group’s interaction with local authorities during the
course of the efficiency review that local authorities are acutely aware of the
need to minimise the difficulties businesses face at local level, and the need
for proactive support for economic development in their areas.
42

4.2.6 Aside from keeping costs down, local authorities can also respond in a
proactive way to promoting economic recovery in their area. The National
Competitiveness Council has suggested that cities in particular can play a
key role in driving economic development not just for their areas but their
regional hinterlands. Certain issues that affect competitiveness are outside
of the direct control of local authorities, such as national taxes, education,
labour costs, and currency fluctuations. However, local authorities are key
actors in ensuring the availability of zoned and serviced land, investing in
physical infrastructure and broadband, and making their areas attractive to
talented and highly skilled workers and to economic investment.
4.2.7 The Group noted that county and city councils are responding to the
economic downturn through increasing their role in supporting economic
activity and through pursuing initiatives with other agencies through the
County/ City Development Boards (CDBs). A multi-agency group dedicated
to economic development has been set up under the auspices of the CDB in
each county / city area to support the co-ordination of economic
development and promotion in the local area. In addition, each county / city
council has established a Business Support Unit (or put in place similar
arrangements) to act as a point of contact to ensure a quick, coordinated
response to businesses from local authorities in areas such as planning,
water and roads.
4.3 Local Government Finance and the Programme for Government
4.3.1 The Commission on Taxation that reported in 2009 set out a series of
proposals on annual local taxation, domestic water charges, and other
aspects of local government finance (see section 2.6 above).
4.3.2 The renewed Programme for Government agreed in October 2009 indicated
the Government’s intention to introduce a new local government financing
system, including a site valuation tax for non-agricultural land, covering both
residential and commercial properties. Unlike the property tax proposed by
the Commission on Taxation, however, such a tax would be based on the
site or land value, rather than the property or any construction built upon the
land.
4.3.3 In the Budgetary Statement for Budget 2010, the Minister for Finance,
stated that “considerable groundwork will need to be done before a Site
Valuation Tax can be introduced”, but signalled that work would begin
shortly on the registration of ownership and the valuation of land.
4.3.4 The 2009 Programme for Government also proposed that a charging
system for treated water be introduced which will be fair and easy to apply.
Under the proposals, households would be allocated a basic volume of
water free of charge, with charges applying for water use in excess of the
allowance, to incentivise conservation. However, the Programme for
43

Government states that such a system would depend on the installation of
meters in households.
4.3.5 The Minister for Finance, in the Budgetary Statement for Budget 2010
indicated that water charges, along with the new site valuation tax, will
finance the provision of local services by local authorities.
4.3.6 These areas are further addressed in section 13.4.
44

5. Organisational Efficiency Issues
5.1 Structural Issues and Efficiencies in Local Government
5.1.1 Local government in Ireland, like local government in any other country, has
inherited distinctive traits, including its structures, functions and financing
system. As noted in section 1.4 above, taking the county, city, borough and
town councils together, there are 114 distinct local authorities in Ireland. Of
these, the 34 county and city councils cover the entire territory of the State.
There are a variety of population bases amongst this group, from 28,950 in
Leitrim County Council and 34,391 in Longford County Council, to 506,211
in Dublin City and 361,877 in Cork County Council according to Census
2006 (see Appendix 4). In addition, the area of each county council is
varied and ranges from 7,457 square kilometres in Cork county to 820
square kilometres in Louth.
5.1.2 There are 80 borough and town councils where some 14% of the population
reside. In these areas the electorate has two separate votes in local
elections – one for the county council and one for the town council. Again,
there is a significant variation in the population base of town council areas –
from 401 and 790 within the legal boundary of Ballybay and Lismore Town
Councils respectively, to 29,037 and 28,973 within the legal boundary of
Dundalk Town Council and Drogheda Borough Council respectively.
5.1.3 There are also significant differences in terms of the number of elected
Councillors on different councils. Taking the county and city councils,
Dublin City Council has the largest number of elected members (52),
followed by Cork County Council (48). Galway and Waterford City Councils
have the fewest elected members (15). Most of the county councils elect
between 20 and 30 members. The average number of elected members for
a city or county council is 26. This can create some anomalies when one
considers the ratio between population and the number of councillors in
different areas. In the case of county and city councils, Leitrim County
Council has one councillor for every 1,300 persons, whereas Fingal County
Council has one councillor for every 10,000 persons.
5.1.4 There are efficiency issues arising from these structures. Such
arrangements have implications for the cost base of delivering local
government services. Local government boundaries and political structures
were outside the Terms of Reference of the Group and are matters for
examination in the context of the White Paper on Local Government.
5.1.5 While the Group had no remit directly to address democratic policy-making
structures that are in place at local government level, it should be noted that
these do have a bearing on efficiency. The Group has examined the
administrative structures that underpin political structures at local
government level. The Group has presented a series of recommendations
where it considers efficiency gains can be made from greater integration of
45

administrative structures across county / city areas, and greater integration
of administrative structures between town and county. The question of joint
management structures between certain county areas is more fully
addressed in section 6. Much of the remainder of this section addresses
the question of integration of administrative structures between county and
town.
5.2 Financial Supports for Elected Members
5.2.1 The amount provided by local authorities in 2009 for Representational
Payments to local Councillors was €18.6 million, while that provided for
expenses and allowances was €24.5 million.
5.2.2 The level of payments made to elected members has been reduced over
the past two years as a result of:
• The reduction of remuneration of all public servants and the application
of the pension levy to the Representational Payment;
• The reduction in the rates of travel and subsistence allowance rates for
public servants; and
• The application by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and
Local Government of a cap on the overall amount that a local authority
can provide in its budget for attendance by councillors at conferences,
seminars and other events.
5.2.3 In line with the approach to public sector spending generally, there is a need
to continue to keep these expenses under review to ensure that they remain
reasonable and proportionate.
5.3 County and Town
5.3.1 As noted in section 1.4, there are two distinct tiers of local government in
Ireland – at town council and at county/ city council level. Each is directly
elected.
5.3.2 The 34 county and city councils are the primary units of local government
under Irish law, and designated as such under the Local Government 2001
Act. Within the counties there are 80 town councils – 5 titled as borough
councils and the remainder as town councils.
5.3.3 Two further groups at town council level can be identified. The first group,
referred to in this report as ‘rating town councils’, include the five borough
councils and 49 of the town councils, and are equivalent for most practical
purposes and for the most part have the same range of functions assigned
to them by law. Each of these town councils also has exclusive rating
jurisdiction within its own area. Boroughs and rating town councils have
responsibility for planning, housing, local roads, amenity and other
miscellaneous functions in their own areas. In practice, many functions
46

statutorily vested in certain rating town councils are actually carried out by
the relevant county council.
5.3.4 A second group consists of ‘non-rating town councils’ – these are the 26
town councils that were formerly known as Town Commissioners before
2002. These town councils have a very limited range of functions and a
consequential low level of expenditure and staffing. Almost all functions in
these towns are the responsibility of the county council. In practice, the role
of the non-rating town councils is largely representational.
5.3.5 This distinction between the functions of rating and non-rating town councils
is clear from the respective budgets of town council areas. For example in
2009, rating town councils had aggregated budgeted expenditure of €344
million for a population base of 451,259 giving an average spend of €762
per capita. Non-rating town councils had aggregated budgeted expenditure
of €2,785,280 for a population base of 124,323 giving an average spend of
€22 per capita.
5.3.6 Central Statistics Office data show a growing urbanisation of Ireland.
Census 2006 highlighted the fact that the population in urban areas (i.e. in
towns with a population of 1,500 or more) has increased at every census
since the foundation of the State, and had reached 61% of the population by
2006. Whilst the cities of Dublin, Cork, and Limerick lost population share
since Census 2002, the trend of increasing urbanisation is most evident in
the other towns. Many towns have expanded beyond their legally defined
boundaries. Revisions of the legally defined boundaries tend to lag behind
development.
5.4 Town Council Personnel
5.4.1 The county manager for a county council is also the manager for any town
councils in its functional area. In practice, a ‘town manager’ is often
appointed by the county manager (often drawn from the senior management
team of the county council) to perform the town council managerial function.
In the case of a small number of larger town and borough councils, the
county manager continues to perform this function. There is no additional
remuneration for these responsibilities.
5.4.2 The executive manager for the town council is the town clerk. Town clerks
in rating town councils are in many cases full-time positions and the town
council often has a staffing complement to discharge their functions. The
staffing grade for the position of town clerk varies amongst local authorities
depending on size. In the large majority of cases, the county council area
engineer doubles up as town engineer. The county manager may transfer/
rotate staff in the town councils to any other local authority under his/her
control. A review of the staffing complements of rating town councils carried
out by the Group identified considerable variation in staffing levels employed
by town councils. The level of variation depended on the extent to which
work was carried out in-house or by the county council for the town area.
47

5.4.3 In the case of non-rating town councils, the position of town clerk is a parttime
position and is administered by a whole-time staff member of the
county council in addition to their other duties. A small allowance is payable
for this position. The range of non-rating town council functions are limited
and are discharged on a shared service basis by the county council.
5.5 Services Provided by Rating Town Councils
5.5.1 This section outlines the current services provided by rating town councils. It
should be noted that the Group was mindful of the fact that there is a shared
service approach involving extensive cooperation between town and county
councils in many areas of service provision. In many cases, a large element
of the work associated with planning, roads and housing services is
provided by the county council on behalf of the town council.
Planning
5.5.2 All rating town councils are designated as planning authorities and are
responsible for the control and enforcement of proper planning and
sustainable development in their urban area. The functions of town councils
in this respect include:
• Making and reviewing of the town development plan;
• Pre-planning consultations;
• Development management and processing of planning applications;
and
• Planning enforcement.
5.5.3 The planning function also extends to other areas such as Part V housing
supply, protection of architectural heritage and licensing of outdoor events.
5.5.4 Planning applications are received by town councils but in the bulk of cases
are assessed by county council planning officers. Town council
development plans are prepared by the county council planning staff and
adopted concurrently with the county. Exceptions include the town councils
in Tralee, Killarney, Drogheda, and Dundalk, who employ their own
planners.
Roads
5.5.5 Town councils that are designated as roads authorities carry out the
following range of road services with regard to local roads in their area:
• Improvement and maintenance of public roads;
• Control of public road network;
• Public lighting;
• Traffic management; and
• Road safety education and publicity.
48

5.5.6 Roads are classified into national primary roads, national secondary roads,
regional roads, and local roads. Local roads include all rural and urban
roads. The town council is the road authority for the construction and
maintenance of all local roads in its administrative area. The work carried
out in most town councils includes routine maintenance and street cleaning.
A number of towns, through local agreement, are also road authorities for
regional and national roads.
Housing
5.5.7 The following range of housing services is provided by rating town councils:
• Building and maintenance of houses;
• Housing applications and allocations, transfer applications, rent
assessment and collection;
• Tenant purchase schemes; and
• Estate management.
5.5.8 Town councils own about 10% of the local authority housing stock and carry
out many of the traditional functions of a housing authority, including needs
assessment, allocations, rent determination, the procurement of housing
supply under the social housing investment programme, and the
management and maintenance of their social housing units. A number of
specialist functions – the operation of the Rental Accommodation Scheme,
regulation of the voluntary sector, Traveller accommodation, affordable
housing – and some others are carried out at county level. The assessment
of housing needs is carried out generally on a joint or shared basis. Where
separate assessments are carried out by both town and county, this results
in duplication of work, which the Group consider to be a poor use of
resources (see section 10.1).
Community Services
5.5.9 Many town councils operate leisure facilities, swimming pools, community
facilities, and support local arts projects in their area. Town councils also
engage in a range of other activities designed to support economic and
community development in their area, including tourism development and
promotion, community support, economic development projects, supporting
festivals and events, and facilitating voluntary contributions and work for the
town, such as through tidy towns.
Environment
5.5.10 Town councils have a range of responsibilities in this area, including the
control of environmental pollution, the safety of structures and places, street
cleaning, and the prevention of litter. For example, town councils employ
litter wardens or community wardens (who also issue parking fines) to carry
out functions under this heading. Town councils maintain a derelict sites
49

egister of such sites in their area. A small number of town councils have
landfill operations.
5.6 County and Town Cooperation
5.6.1 The Group noted the constructive approach town and county councils have
taken in working together on a shared service basis in many areas. The
Group was also in no doubt as to the positive contribution town councils
have made towards supporting community development and economic
activity within their towns. Town councils have a proud record representing
the interests of their town, and of leveraging local voluntary effort in the
improvement of their areas, and have facilitated local people in taking
decisions about additional services for their areas such as street cleaning.
This manifests itself in improved outcomes for local people and businesses.
For example, in the Irish Business Against Litter 2009 final results, based on
a survey in 60 towns and cities, 30 out of the 38 towns which were deemed
to be in the category “clean to European norms” had town councils.
5.6.2 Notwithstanding this, the fact remains that town councils are an additional
cost on the local government service, which is met by local ratepayers,
income from fees and charges and Government grants and subsidies, etc.
Some of the difficulties town councils face result from matters that are
outside of their control, such as increased expectations from the public, new
demands arising from legislation, boundary issues, and the anomalies within
the town level (where for largely historic reasons some urban areas have
town councils and others do not). The Group also noted the increasing
tendency towards area-based delivery at sub-county level, and the
increasing prominence of area-based structures in the delivery of local
government services. While a small number of submissions to the Group
favoured retaining the status quo in terms of town councils, a number
suggested either the transfer of specific functions to the county council, or
the full-scale restructuring of town councils and their consolidation into a
single level of local government at county level.
5.6.3 These are matters that the Group considers are appropriate to the White
Paper on Local Government due to be published shortly (see section 1.5).
Without pre-judging any decision resulting from the White Paper on the
future of the sub-county level however, the Group believes that there is a
case for re-examining the balance of responsibilities between town and
county on efficiency and service level grounds in relation to planning, roads
and housing.
5.6.4 In terms of planning, the Group considers that there is scope for savings, in
particular, in terms of reducing the number of administrative steps involved
in the processing of planning applications in respect of town councils. There
is a very significant input by the county councils in the functions of forward
planning, development management, and enforcement. A large proportion
of the costs in these areas arise from services provided by the county
council, but there is an element of replication on the administrative side. In
50

the majority of town councils, a planning application is received by the town
council, referred to a county council planner to draft a decision, that draft
decision is referred to the town council, and the decision is issued by the
town council.
5.6.5 There is an obvious potential to streamline this process and remove
duplication. Some counties have a number of planning authorities (one at
county level and several at town level). Each planning authority has to
provide a counter service to receive a planning application and each
authority has its own scanning and digitising arrangements. This duplication
of administrative work is repeated throughout the process, including the
appeal stage. If the planning function was transferred from the town
councils to the county councils, savings in the region of 10%-15% can be
achieved. This release of resources can be utilised to address lacunae in
planning and building enforcement.
5.6.6 In the roads area, grants for road improvements / maintenance are allocated
by the Department of Transport to rating town councils as road authorities
for local urban roads. In contrast, with the exception of the recently
introduced footpath grant, no specific allocations are made for urban areas
that do not have a rating town council, even though in some cases the
populations of such towns may be much greater than those having town
council status. According to Census 2006, there are 34 towns with
populations of 10,000 and over (in the case of town councils this includes
the population in the legal boundary and the census environs). Only 23 of
these have rating town councils, while 6 have non-rating town council
status, and 5 are towns which do not have town council status, such as
Swords, Celbridge, and Carrigaline. A more balanced and equitable
approach would be to allocate to each county council an urban grant for
local urban roads, with the county council determining the urban road spend
across all towns in its administrative area.
5.6.7 In terms of housing, a major reform programme has been underway in
recent years involving a significant shift away from the traditional
construction/ acquisition model and towards a greater role for sourcing and
leasing social housing from the private sector, that has fundamentally
changed the work and responsibilities of housing authorities. This
reorientation of policy means that future work in terms of housing services is
likely to result in a need to concentrate resources on the management and
maintenance of housing stock, on balancing supply and demand for social
housing, and on sourcing suitable accommodation through leasing
arrangements.
5.6.8 There are a number of activities of housing authorities that could be better
undertaken at a county level due to their complexity (e.g. new leasing
arrangements), specialisation or for reasons of economies of scale. These
include:
• Procurement of social housing accommodation and the management
of projects;
51

• Operation of housing lists;
• Housing needs assessment; and
• Maintenance of stock.
5.6.9 However, the Group equally believes that consideration could be given by
individual county councils to delegating specific functions appropriate to
local operations back to a town council, in particular in relation to allocations
and estate management. This would also permit town councils to remain
the owners of social housing in their areas, obviating the need for stock
transfers between authorities.
5.6.10 Section 71 of the Local Government Act 2001 places a duty on county
councils and town councils within a county area to cooperate in the delivery
of services in order to maximise efficiency and effectiveness, and to
promote a unified local government service to the public, including the
integration and coordination of organisational arrangements, systems and
procedures, shared office accommodation and points of contact for the
public.
5.6.11 The Group believes that the transfer of the planning, roads and housing
functions to the county councils is required on efficiency grounds if the
development of the towns is to be facilitated. These towns have traditionally
been well served by elected members and officials devoted to the
advancement of the towns. However, small urban authorities will inevitably
face increased difficulties in providing the resources and staff required to
discharge their functions effectively and so develop the towns to their full
potential.
5.6.12 There is no evidence to suggest that there would be any inefficiencies
arising if these responsibilities were transferred to the county council. The
transfer of the planning, roads and housing functions across all rating town
councils would result in the elimination of administrative duplication. In the
context of total current expenditure of €344 million in 2009 by town councils,
it is estimated that the efficiencies identified above on the administrative
overhead, over a period of time, should yield savings in the order of €6
million. Where a town council has developed the resources for a particular
function these could be transferred to the county in the interests of
consistency and efficiency.
5.6.13 If the planning, roads and housing functions are transferred to the county,
the costs of these functions in the towns would have to be met by the county
at-large charge. In that event, rating town councils would be effectively
striking a rate to hand over to the county council. This would be a hollow
process and, therefore, the power to determine the annual rate on valuation
should be removed and town charges be applied in the same manner as
other existing non-rating town councils.
52

5.7 Other Local Bodies
5.7.1 A small number of other local government bodies exist at local level,
including regional authorities, regional assemblies, joint drainage
committees, joint burial boards, and the Lough Corrib Navigation Trustees.
Regional structures are matters for consideration in the context of the White
Paper on local government. In 2002, a number of joint drainage committees
were dissolved with their functions transferred to their respective county
councils, while six joint drainage committees were left intact. In all, it is
estimated that the remaining joint drainage committees, the joint burial
boards, and the Lough Corrib Navigation Trustees will account for
expenditure of just under €2 million in 2010.
5.7.2 The six drainage district joint committees are subject to the Arterial
Drainage Act 1945, and most originate in legislation dating back to the 19 th
century. Most committees are small organisations with limited remits.
However, as distinct bodies joint drainage committees are required to hold
separate meetings, keep accounts, be individually audited, and as such
absorb a disproportionate amount of councillor time and administrative
work.
5.7.3 There are also six joint burial boards/ joint cemetery committees. Joint
burial boards were established under the Public Health (Ireland) Act 1878 in
order to provide a burial ground in certain localities, while a joint cemetery
committee was established under the Local Government (Ireland) Act 1898
for the same reason. The structure and membership of the burial boards
are not uniform, although in general approximately 10-15 councillors sit on
each board. In some instances, other community interests are represented,
such as religious denominations, undertaking firms and other noncouncillors
nominated by county councils. While the number of meetings
held of the boards is usually quite low, as with the joint drainage
committees, the joint burial boards as distinct bodies carry with them a set
of administrative overheads.
5.7.4 The Lough Corrib Navigation Trustees are responsible for the maintenance
of navigation aids, and a limited number of piers, on the Corrib System, as
well as the Eglington Canal system, associated walkways, tow paths, lock
gates, and boundary walls. It consists of members of Galway City and
County Councils and Mayo County Council.
5.7.5 Sections 230 and 231 of the Local Government Act 2001 empower the
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to dissolve
joint burial boards and joint drainage committees respectively, and to
transfer the functions of the committees to the local authority concerned.
Each local authority would then be responsible for the functions of bodies
within its area. In these circumstances, the requirement to hold separate
meetings, produce separate annual accounts and audit them would no
longer apply.
53

5.7.6 Section 13 of the Lough Corrib Navigation Act 1945 enables the Minister for
Transport to authorise the abandonment, or the transfer to a local authority
any portion of the Navigation or works forming part thereof.
5.7.7 The above bodies are responsible for just under €2 million in annual
expenditure and as such savings arising from their dissolution and the
transfer of their functions to a parent local authority would not yield
significant savings. However, there would be some administrative savings
in that there would not be a need to hold separate annual budget and other
meetings (sometimes involving large numbers of councillors and officials),
or to produce and audit annual accounts. In this regard, it is being assumed
that there could be an annual saving of between 10 and 15% (or €200,000 -
€300,000) of expenditure if the functions were transferred to a parent local
authority.
5.7.8 The Group therefore suggests that the joint drainage boards, the joint burial
boards, and the Lough Corrib Navigation Trustees be dissolved with their
functions transferred to local authorities or a ‘lead’ authority as appropriate
as soon as possible.
Recommendations:
5.8.1 In summary, the Group recommends that planning, roads and housing
functions of rating town councils be transferred to their respective county
councils. Town councils have a proud history of service to their local
community, but the Group considers that the transfer of functions should
take place for several reasons:
• The increasing complexity of service provision (in areas such as
housing);
• The need to reduce administrative overheads (in the planning service);
and
• The need to pursue equity across all urban areas (in terms of roads
allocations).
5.8.2 The Group also suggests that there is scope for rationalising a small
number of local bodies that exist.
5.8.3 Thus the Group recommends that:
• Responsibility for planning, roads and housing functions be transferred
from town councils to county councils;
• County councils be allowed delegate specific aspects of housing
service provision to towns where this is economically efficient;
• Each county council be allocated an urban grant for local urban roads,
with the county council determining the urban road spend across all
towns in its administrative area;
• The power to determine the annual rate on valuation be removed from
town councils, and town charges be applied in the same manner as
other existing non-rating town councils;
54

• County council offices / area offices and town council offices be colocated;
• Joint drainage boards, joint burial boards, the Lough Corrib Navigation
Trustees, be dissolved, and their functions transferred to local
authorities or a ‘lead’ local authority;
• The payments and expenses provided to local elected members be
kept under review to ensure that they remain reasonable and
proportionate.
5.8.4 These recommendations will ultimately be dependent on policy on the subcounty
level arising from the White Paper on Local Government. It will be
important in this context that policy and organisational change be
implemented before the next scheduled local elections in 2014.
5.8.5 The total value of the savings identified above is €6.3 million in a full year.
Financial Summary:
1. Transfer of planning, roads and housing functions from town to county council
level – €6 million
2. Co-locate county council and town council offices – unspecified savings
3. Dissolve joint drainage boards, joint burial boards, and Lough Corrib
Navigation Trustees – €0.3 million
Total Amount: €6.3 million
55

6. Local Government Staffing
6.1 Organisational Structures within Local Government
6.1.1 It is vital at all times that staff resources are managed to maximum effect at
local and national level. The Group has set out a range of
recommendations which it is satisfied will lead to better use of the staff
resources of the local government sector. The Croke Park agreement
provides a flexible framework to support implementation. These
developments offer the scope for effecting the better use of staff resources
which the Group details below.
6.1.2 There are a wide range of organisational structures in operation in the local
government sector. This is partly a function of the type of local authority (for
example urban versus rural areas), the scale of the local authority, and the
extent to which local authorities have adopted an area-based approach to
service provision. The organisational role of the manager is underpinned by
the Local Government Act 2001. Section 159 of this Act provides that “the
manager shall, for the purposes of discharging the responsibilities set out
under section 149 make such staffing and organisational arrangements as
may be necessary for the purposes of carrying out the functions of the local
authorities for which he or she is responsible”.
6.1.3 Section 160 of the Act further provides, amongst other things, that “…a local
authority may, from time to time, fix qualifications for any employment…”
The above provisions were seen as necessary to provide the local authority
manager with sufficient autonomy in organisational matters to effectively
manage the local authority.
6.1.4 These provisions are circumscribed by public service pay, conditions and
grading norms, and staffing quotas and controls which are administered by
the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government by
delegation from the Department of Finance.
6.1.5 Much of the data set out in the Tables and Figures in this section has been
derived from a 2010 survey of local authorities.
6.2 Staffing Levels
6.2.1 Local authorities have, since 2003, operated within a staffing quota system
agreed with the Department of Finance and the Department of Environment,
Heritage and Local Government.
56

Figure 6.1 – Local Authority Staff Numbers (End Year Whole Time Equivalents)
26488 26496
Quota = 33,300 Permanent Staff
27865
(agreed in 2003)
31539
33079
2548 3094 3492 3563 3164
30846 30973 31189 31423 31844
Source: Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government
6.2.2 Under this system, local authorities are expected to operate within strict
staffing limits. Any exemptions from this, which arise in exceptional
circumstances only, are subject to sanction from the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The system has operated
effectively to manage numbers and overall local authorities have been able
to operate successfully within this framework from 2003 to the present.
6.2.3 By end-2009, there were 32,252 whole time equivalents (WTE) staff
employed in local authorities. In March 2009, the Government introduced a
moratorium on recruitment. The moratorium for the local government sector
is administered by the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local
Government. Staffing levels in the sector have been reduced by 5,000
since June 2008. The operation of the moratorium, the utilisation of the
Incentivised Scheme of Early Retirement and the non-retention of significant
numbers of contract staff have all contributed to this downsizing. This has
been reinforced by national and local budgetary constraints, reductions in
funding from both these sources, and reduced activity in the economy (for
example in the planning and housing sectors). Staffing levels will, on an
ongoing basis, be subject to the Employment Control Framework currently
in development.
6.3 Local Authority Staffing Levels and Population
6.3.1 Staffing levels within the county and city councils range from 6,480 WTE in
Dublin City (the largest) to 302 WTE in Leitrim (the smallest).
1690
30561
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Temporary &
Contract Staff
Permanent Staff
57

Table 6.1 – Local Authority Staffing Levels (Whole Time Equivalents), End-2009
Local Authority
Dublin City
Cork Co
Fingal
Cork City
South Dublin
Kerry
DLR Rathdown
Mayo
Donegal
Kildare
Galway
Clare
Staffing Level
6480
2364
1490
1420
1403
1225
1196
1178
1008
947
934
828
Local Authority
Wicklow
Wexford
Limerick Co
Meath
Louth
South Tipp.
Kilkenny
Waterford Co
Roscommon
Sligo
Limerick City
North Tipp.
Staffing Level
827
805
739
703
692
654
568
566
551
530
528
504
Source: Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government
Local Authority
Westmeath
Galway City
Offaly
Cavan
Monaghan
Waterford City
Laois
Carlow
Longford
Leitrim
Staffing Level
6.3.2 Staffing levels per 1,000 of population reveal a significant range across local
authorities. Taken at a national level, a total complement of 32,252 WTE
staff for a population of 4.24 million equates to a staffing level per 1,000
population of 7.6 WTE.
6.3.3 To enable meaningful comparisons across local authorities, the Group
clustered local authorities with similar characteristics. Counties Mayo, Kerry,
Donegal, Cork and Galway could be considered to share similar
characteristics, and as such might be expected to have similar staffing
levels (see Figure 6.2). However, analysis suggests a significant variance
from Mayo (the highest) to Galway county (the lowest). The presence of
complementing city councils in Cork and Galway could be a contributing
factor to lower staffing levels in situations where services are shared
between city and county, or provided on an agency basis by one for the
other.
6.3.4 Notwithstanding this, the apparent variance between specific counties is
significant. The levels of output generated by each local authority would
need to be further analysed fully to understand the situation. However, it is
clear that where output rates and levels are broadly similar, staffing levels
should be modified accordingly.
58
488
488
478
446
434
410
406
331
330
302

Figure 6.2 – Staffing per 1,000 Population (Western Counties), end-2009
9 . 5
8 .7
6 . 8 6 .5
M a y o K e rry D o n e g a l C o rk G a lw a y
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010
6.3.5 There is a wide range of staffing levels per 1,000 of population for urban
local authorities (see Figure 6.3). The question of minimum efficient scale
may need to be considered in some smaller cities (for example Waterford
and Limerick City Councils) given that levels are significantly lower in Dún
Laoghaire – Rathdown and South Dublin County Councils (see section 6.5
for observations on Dublin and Cork City Councils).
Figure 6.3 – Staffing per 1,000 Population (Urban Areas), end-2009
1 0
8. 9
6.7
Lim er ic k C it y W at erfo rd C ity G a lw ay C ity D LR R at hdo wn S t h Du blin
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010
6.1
5 .6
5 . 8
59

6.3.6 Staffing in suburban local authorities varies from Clare, with 7.4 staff per
1,000 of population to Meath at 4.3 WTE per 1,000 population (the lowest
level in the country).
Figure 6.4 – Staffing per 1,000 Population (Suburban Areas), end-2009
7.4
5.6
Clare Limerick Co Kildare Meath
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010
6.3.7 Given a national average of 7.6 WTE per 1,000 population, this analysis
would suggest that larger local authorities (Clare, Limerick County, Kildare
and Meath) have sufficient scale to operate at lower staffing levels.
5
6.3.8 For the remaining 18 counties, staffing levels range from 10.4 per 1,000
(Leitrim) to 6 per 1,000 (Laois). The question of minimum efficient scale
needs to be addressed in the cases of Leitrim, Longford and others. This
analysis suggests that there is a need to find a means to provide critical
mass across county/ city boundaries. The Group considers this further in
the context of Joint Administrative Areas (see section 6.4).
4.3
60

Figure 6.5 – Staffing Per 1,000 Population (Other Counties), end-2009
Le itrim
10 .4
Longford
9. 6 9.3 9 8 .7
Ro sc ommon
W aterford Co
S lig o
Tipp Sout h
7 .8 7. 7 7. 6
Monagh an
Tip p North
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010
6.4 Joint Administrative Areas
Cavan
6 .9
Offa ly
6.7 6.5 6.5 6.4 6.2 6.1 6.1 6
6.4.1 As part of any efficiency review, the question of scale efficiencies has to be
addressed. This is particularly the case where staffing is concerned, given
the high percentage of overall cost for which it accounts. The concept of
scale efficiency and the associated concept of the minimum efficient scale
relate, in a staffing context, to the principle that there is a minimum staffing
requirement to complete a task of a certain scale. Below this scale, the task
can be said to be performed inefficiently. Increasing the scale of the task
can lead to greater levels of efficiency where staffing levels do not increase
proportionately.
6.4.2 In a local government context, tasks can be considered as the services of
the local authority, and the concept of scale is currently circumscribed by
the boundaries of the local authority (i.e. the maximum scale currently being
achieved is the performance of a task at a county level on behalf of all of the
structures within the county). However, given the range in size of local
authorities across the country, the potential to achieve scale efficiencies
varies greatly. Dublin City Council, Cork County Council, and the other
larger counties have sufficient scale to enable them to achieve scale
efficiencies. However, smaller counties cannot be expected to achieve
minimum efficient scale in several areas, regardless of how well they work.
This leads to a situation where the staffing per 1,000 of population is very
high in several of the smaller counties. It can also lead to a situation where
the management overhead being carried is excessive for the volume of
work being undertaken. As an example, the Group suggest that the current
Carlow
Wi cklow
Kilkenny
Lo uth
W estme ath
W exford
La ois
61

staffing level of five directors of service for a county as small as Leitrim is
excessive.
6.4.3 The question then needs to be addressed as to whether an alternative
configuration would enable a greater level of scale efficiency. At present,
counties such as Sligo and Leitrim operate independently of each other.
Given the low population levels served by each (Sligo has a population of
60,894; Leitrim’s population is 28,950), the group considers that the option
of clustering smaller contiguous counties into joint administrative areas to
enable them to achieve greater scale efficiencies should be pursued.
Clearly, this would have implications for the overall structure of local
government, and in this regard the group feels that as many as 20 local
authorities would benefit from some form of clustering to enable scale
efficiencies (see Table 6.2 below). The consequential implication of this is a
series of joint administrative structures, each covering more than one local
authority. As a rough guide, a minimum population target per structure of
100,000 is recommended.
6.4.4 There were a number of factors taken into consideration in determining the
proposed joint administrative areas presented in Table 6.2. These included
the population base of the proposed areas, geographical factors, and the
fact that many of the proposed joint administrative areas historically shared
a county manager. While the Group did consider the potential for certain
areas to contain up to three counties based on population, it came to the
conclusion that no manager could reasonably be expected to support more
than two county councils.
6.4.5 A possible approach to realising such efficiencies might be to consider
delivery of corporate service functions on a joint basis across two
contiguous local authorities. A scale efficiency of 10% across selected local
authorities through joint administrative arrangements or otherwise would
release 170 WTEs for redeployment elsewhere.
6.4.6 However, such an approach needs to take account of the overall staffing
levels in each joint area. Staff released through efficiencies in the corporate
areas would be available for redeployment elsewhere in the sector or
beyond.
62

Cluster Data
Cluster
Mayo
Roscommon
Sligo
Leitrim
Waterford
City
& County
North Tipp
South Tipp
Cavan
Monaghan
Longford
Westmeath
Limerick
City
& County
Carlow
Kilkenny
Laois
Offaly
Galway City
& County
Population
182,607
89,844
107,961
149,244
120,000
113,737
184,055
137,907
137,927
232,670
Table 6.2 – Recommended Joint Administrative Areas
Staffing
(whole time
equivalents)
1728
832
975
1158
880
818
1266
899
883
1421
Current Staffing Levels
Staff per
1,000 of
Population
(National
Average
=7.6)
9.46
9.27
9.04
7.76
7.34
7.19
6.88
6.52
6.41
6.14
% of Staff
in
Corporate
Areas
(National
Average =
16%)
13%
16%
15%
14%
19%
18%
16%
16%
16%
15%
Number
of Staff in
Corporate
Areas
225.5
136.3
146.4
161.9
171.4
145.5
208.4
146.9
142.8
213.5
Revised Staffing Levels
(10% reduction in Corporate Area Staffing)
Staffing
(whole time
equivalents)
1705
818
961.2
1142
863
803.6
1246
884
869
1400
Staff per
1,000 of
Population
(National
Average
=7.6)
9.34
9.11
8.90
7.65
7.19
7.07
6.77
6.41
6.3
6.04
% of Staff
in
Corporate
Areas
(National
Average=
16%)
63
11.9%
15.0%
13.7%
12.8%
17.9%
16.3%
15.1%
14.9%
14.8%
13.7%

6.4.7 This will require joint management structures to be put in place across these
local authority areas to drive such a process, with the attendant implications
for the levels of staffing required at county/ city manager and director of
service level. Managers will be expected simultaneously to manage two
counties within a joint administrative area. This is necessary to drive the
process of extracting efficiency gains from the corporate areas and other
service areas through the integration of these areas into a joint
administrative function across both authorities in the cluster (efficiencies in
other functional areas are dealt with separately below).
6.4.8 In addition to corporate services, the manager for each joint administrative
area will also be expected to work towards achieving synergies and
integration to the greatest extent possible in relation to the range of services
performed by local authorities.
6.4.9 A reduction in manager and director of service staffing levels of one per joint
administrative area (10 in total) would yield a WTE staffing saving of 20
senior managerial staff. There is a historical precedent for one manager
being responsible for two counties, as several managers were responsible
for more than one county in the past. The local government arrangements
for Limerick will be addressed as part of the work of the Limerick Local
Government Committee. Nevertheless, the Group is persuaded that there is
also a case, at a minimum, for joint administration in respect of Limerick city
and county.
6.5 Dublin City and Cork City
6.5.1 The major urban authorities (Dublin city and Cork city) have higher staffing
levels than elsewhere in the country (see Figure 6.6). This may in part be
justified by certain agency roles (for example the fact that Dublin City
Council provides fire services, water and motor tax services on behalf of
surrounding counties), as well as the additional workload Dublin carries by
virtue of being a capital city with an international peer grouping. Cities also
experience additional demands for services by virtue of the fact that they
host a large daytime population made up of people who live outside the city
(for example commuters and shoppers) and who are therefore not captured
in census data and population ratios. Nonetheless, the potential for greater
scale efficiencies needs to be examined in both cities, especially given that
their combined staffing level represents almost 25% of total local
government staffing.
6.5.2 Given the scale of Dublin city and Cork city, and the levels of staffing
associated with both, a further independent exercise should be undertaken
to examine the potential for efficiencies. Further detailed analysis, having
regard to the complexities involved and the time available to the Group,
would need to be dealt with separately. Such an exercise would need to
address the fact that despite their scale, the two authorities have the highest
levels of staff per 1,000 of population across the sector (12.8 / 1,000 for
Dublin and 11.9 for Cork). Both local authorities also have large numbers of
64

senior management staff – for example Dublin city has 52 staff at director of
service level or above, with 11 further staff at this level in Cork city. This
appears to represent an excessive level of senior management staffing
when compared with levels nationally. In this regard, it is recommended
that the director of service level grade of executive manager engineering in
Dublin city be merged into the executive manager grade and rationalised
thereafter. There are currently seven director of service level staff at this
grade in Dublin city.
6.5.3 Within the Dublin region, the Group is aware that new structures are to be
put in place to support the proposed Mayor for Dublin (see section 1.5). It
will be important that these structures are based on an overall rationalisation
of management systems across Dublin. The Group recommends that new
structures should draw on existing resources from within the four Dublin
authorities and in particular, Dublin City Council. In this context, consistent
with the joint administrative approach envisaged nationally, appropriate
broadening of existing responsibilities of management posts in new
structures must be considered.
Figure 6.6 – Staffing per 1,000 Population (Larger City Areas), end-2009
1 2. 8
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010
6.6 Staff Ratios
1 1.9
Du blin Cit y Co rk C ity
6.6.1 Thirty seven percent of local authority staff work in administrative areas. On
average, director-level posts and above account for 0.8% of all staff;
however this varies from 0.5% to 1.5% across local authorities (see Figure
6.7). Below this, senior management grades (including 273 staff at senior
executive officer level and 615 staff at administrative officer level) account
for between 3.2% and 8.1% of staff, with the sectoral average at 4.6%.
Other managerial grades range across local authorities from 7-16% of total
65

staff, with the average around 11.3%. Clerical and administrative staff
account for 21.7% of total staff, ranging from 16% to 30% of staff across
local authorities.
6.6.2 Therefore, on average therefore spans of control across the levels are 1:6
(director to senior management), 1:2½ (senior management to
management) and 1:2 (management to clerical and administrative staff).
The span of control is a function of the complexity of the work – complex
work requires lower spans of control, whereas more straightforward work
can be managed with higher spans of control. For example, in call centres,
ratios as high as 1:40 can be found. A span of control of 1:6 at director level
might be considered reasonable (especially when it is combined with the
director’s responsibility for the outdoor area, including professional technical
and general operatives – see below). However the spans of less than 1:3
which exist at senior management : management, and management :
clerical and administrative staff are low for some of the more straightforward
work of a local authority, particularly in work areas of less complexity.
Figure 6.7 – Staffing Pyramid – Administration, end-2009 (% of all staff)
Director
0.8%
Senior
Management
4.6%
Management
11.3%
Clerical / Admin
21.7%
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010
• Director
– Co Manager / Director of Service / Head of Finance
and equivalents
• Senior Manager
– Senior Exec Officer (Grade 8) / Admin Officer
(Grade 7) and equivalents
• Management
– Senior Staff Officer (Grade 6) / Staff Officer (Grade
5) and equivalents
• Clerical / Admin
– Assistant Staff Officer (Grade 4) / Clerical Officer
(Grade 3) and equivalents
6.6.3 Outdoor and professional/ technical staff make up 60% of total local
authority staffing. Levels at senior engineer/ senior planner or equivalent
amount on average to 3.8% of staff (including 172 senior engineers), but
this varies from as low as 2.5% up to 6.9%. For engineer/ planner or
equivalent grades, the average is 6.5% but the range is from 3% to 10%.
Taken together, technicians and craftworkers/ general services supervisors
account for anywhere from 3.4% of staff to 20.4% of staff, with an average
of 10.1%. General operatives and equivalents account for 40.2% of staff,
66

ut this figure varies from 22% to 57% across local authorities (see Figure
6.8).
6.6.4 The span of control of 1:4¾ for director to senior engineer/ senior planner is
reasonable when combined with the parallel ratio of 1:6 which directors also
exercise over administrative staff (leading to a combined span of control of
almost 1:11). However, there is significant variance in the director of
service staffing level across the country.
6.6.5 To ensure a more uniform approach that better reflects demand for
services, the Group recommend that director of service staffing levels
should be guided by a standard template. Such a template would be driven
by agreed criteria including, in part, the size of the local authority
(population/ geography etc.) and its characteristics. Allowance would need
to be made for the existence of major capital projects which benefit from
director-level leadership. Nonetheless, the overall levels at director of
service would be expected to drop significantly as a result of introducing a
staffing template.
6.6.6 Consequently, a number of directorates will need to be merged within
individual/ joint local authorities. There were 255 directors including heads
of finance in December 2006. This number rose to 268 by December 2008,
and subsequently fell to 240 by the end of 2009, a reduction of over 10% in
12 months. The Group recommends that there be a further overall
reduction of at least 20% in the number of directors to approximately 190,
based on need. This will require individual local authorities or authorities on
a joint basis to reorganise directorates through the amalgamation of service
areas under a smaller number of directors of service.
6.6.7 While technical areas are by their nature complex, the spans of control
across the sector for senior engineer/ senior planner : engineer/ planner of
less than 2:1 are not considered stretching. Likewise, the spans for
engineer/ planner to the combined area of technician and craftworker/
general services supervisor, at 1:1½ are low. The span between technician
and craftworker/ general services supervisor and the general operative level
is around 1:4. While a higher span may be desirable in this area, the
staffing is somewhat constrained by the need to comply with legislation
relating to health and safety, and restrictions on working alone.
67

Figure 6.8 – Staffing Pyramid – Professional/ Technical, end-2009 (% of all staff)
Director
0.8%
Senior
Engineer /
Planner
3.8%
Engineer / Planner
6.5%
Technician
3.5%
Craftworker / General Service Supervisor
6.6%
General Operative
40.2%
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010
• Director
– Co Manager / Director of Service / Head of Finance and
equivalents
• Senior Engineer / Planner
– Senior Engineer & Planner / Senior Exec Engineer & Planner
and equivalent (e.g. County Architect / Senior Quantity
Surveyor / Senior Parks Superintendent etc)
• Engineer / Planner
– Exec Engineer & Planner / Assistant Engineer & Planner /
Graduate Engineer & Planner and equivalent (e.g. Scientific
Officer / Exec Architect / Quantity Surveyor / Executive Parks
Superintendent etc)
• Technician
– Chief Technician / Senior Exec Technician / Exec Technician
/ Technician Grade 2 / Technician Grade 1
• Craftworker / GSS
– Mechanic / Bricklayer / Electrician / Foreman / Carpenter /
Plumber / Painter / Gardener / Caretaker etc
• General Operative
– Driver / Ganger / Assistant Foreman / Craftsmans Mate /
Chargehand / Water Caretaker (lower grades) / School &
Community Wardens / Refuse Collector / Storeman / Dog
Warden / Cleaner etc
6.6.8 The Group considers that the spans of control at the middle levels of the
staffing pyramid are not sufficiently stretching, and suggests that a shift over
time from middle management levels to more junior management levels
would be in keeping with a drive towards greater efficiency, while
maintaining service standards. By reducing administrative staffing levels of
senior and middle management by 15% each (some 222 Whole-Time
Equivalents (WTE) for senior management, and 545 WTE for middle
management) and replacing them with the same number of staff at more
junior levels, the sector should save close to €7 million in senior
management costs (based on a €30,000 cost reduction for lower level staff),
and over €8 million in middle management costs (based on a €15,000 cost
reduction for lower level staff).
6.6.9 Likewise, the spans of control for outdoor staff could be reviewed, while
maintaining service standards. The levels of staff at senior engineer/ senior
planner could be reduced by 15%, with an equal reduction at engineer/
planner or equivalent level. The reduction in staff in this area would be
offset by an identical increase in staff at technician and/ or craftworker and
general services supervisor level. Using the same rationale as for the
administrative area, a 15% reduction in senior management would equate to
some 184 WTE staff. A €30,000 salary cost reduction for their replacement
by lower level staff would save well over €5 million. Likewise, the reduction
by 15% in the levels of staff at middle levels would equate to a saving of up
to 313 WTE staff. A €15,000 salary cost reduction achieved by their
68

eplacement with lower level staff would generate a saving of close to €5
million.
6.6.10 It is noted that the health and safety constraints under which local
authorities operate limit the ability to stretch spans of control at general
operative level. Nonetheless, the levels of supervision of general operative
grades should be reviewed to identify the potential for further efficiencies.
6.6.11 These savings would mainly be achieved over time as more senior staff
leave the system and sanctioning and organisation structures are adjusted
to allow for their replacement at more junior levels. The Group
acknowledges the commitment of local authorities to quality customer
services, and is confident that the reorientation of service delivery arising
from the recommendations in relation to staffing will underpin a continued
commitment to quality service.
6.7 Local Authority Service Areas
6.7.1 While individual local authorities have a range of different structures, their
operations can be broadly broken down in to 13 service areas as illustrated
in Table 6.3.
69

Table 6.3 – Local Authority Service Areas
Housing Roads Water
Tenant Support Services
Housing Liaison
Estate Management / Home
Ownership
Housing Capital / Design /
Construction / Maintenance
Social & Voluntary Housing
Special Housing Needs
Architecture / RAS Scheme
Roads Capital Schemes
Network Management
Projects
Road Design
Plant & Machinery
Stores
Water & Wastewater Schemes
Water Metering Project
Drainage
Leakage Detection
Planning Traffic Waste / Environment
County & City Development
Boards
Regional Authorities
Conservation
Enforcement / Forward
Planning / Development
Management
Development Levies
Archaeology
Traffic and School Wardens Refuse Collection
Recycling / Litter Wardens /
Energy Usage
Laboratories / Pollution
Control
Environmental Awareness
Landfill
Corporate Services HR IT
Register of Electors
Town Clerk Offices / County
Secretariat
FOI / Access Officer / Irish
Language Officers
Higher Education Grants
Organisation Development
Senior Management Team
Support
Facilities & Catering /
Customer Service
Cleaning / Porter / Print Room
Personnel / Training /
Partnership / Legal
Superannuation / IR /
Recruitment
Staff Welfare
PMDS
Core HR & Payroll
Business Systems Support &
Development
Infrastructure & Technical
Support & Development
GIS
Networks & Communications
Finance Libraries Community & Enterprise
Agresso Financial
Management System
Rates / Auditors / Housing
Rent
Cash Office / Revenue
Collectors
Payroll / Risk Management
Accounts Payable / Debtors /
Procurement
Fire Services
Fire Service Operations
Emergency Planning
Libraries
Mobile Libraries
Archives
Rapid Programme / Economic
Planning & Development
Sports
Arts / Museums / Parks /
Amenities
Recreation / Tourism / Sports /
Heritage
Veterinary Services / Dog
Control / County Enterprise
Harbours / Burial Grounds /
Horticulture
Public Toilets
6.7.2 In December 2009, there were 32,252 whole time equivalent (WTE) staff
employed in local authorities. Using the above categories, the largest
service area for employment was roads, with almost 7,000 staff, or 22.1% of
total employment in the sector. The corporate functions (which includes
70

Corporate Services, HR, IT, and Finance) taken together with Motor Tax
account for close to 16% of all staff.
Figure 6.9 – Local Authority Staff by Service Area, end-2009
Fire & Emergency
Planning
6.1%
Motor Traffic
Tax IT
1.6%
HR 2% 1.8%
2.1%
Corporate Services
4.6%
Planning
5.4%
Libraries
5.1%
Finance
5.3%
Community &
Enterprise
9.7%
Water & Wastewater
10%
Senior
Management
0.8%
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010(Note: rounding may affect totals)
6.8 Corporate Functions
Roads
22.1%
Housing
12.4%
Waste / Environment
10.9%
6.8.1 Staffing levels across service areas vary greatly across local authorities.
For several functional areas, this is to be expected. For example, the roads
function accounts for as many as three times the level of staff in rural local
authorities compared to urban authorities, whereas urban authorities have a
greater concentration of staff in the housing area. However, staffing levels
in the corporate areas should be largely comparable across local
authorities, where demand for the function is less sensitive to local city and
county characteristics and more dependent on individual organisational
factors. Practice varies however, as Figure 6.10 shows to a greater extent
than expected.
71

Monaghan
Cork
Figure 6.10 – Corporate Service Staff as % of Total Staff, end-2009
21 .6 2 0.8
Kerry
W exford
19 1 8. 4 17. 8 17 .4 17 .4 1 7.2 17. 1
Westmeath
Limerick
1 5. 5 1 5. 4 15 .4 15. 4 1 5.3 15 .1 14. 6 1 4. 4 14 .2 14 .1
Sth Dublin
Kildare
Galway
Offaly
Leitrim
Cavan
Limeric k City
Louth
Wicklow
Laois
G alway Cit y
Sligo
Donegal
Dublin City
1 7 16 .8 16 .7 16. 6 16 .5 16. 3 16 .1 1 5. 9
Clare L ong ford D LR
Rat hdo wn
Kilke nny M ea th W at erfo rd Tip p No rt h C arlo w
13. 8 13 .5 1 3. 4 1 3. 2 12 .3 1 2.2
Cork City
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010 – Corporate Services includes Finance, IT, HR, Motor Tax
and Other Corporate Services
6.8.2 The analysis above suggests that the percentage of staff allocated to
corporate areas varies significantly across local authorities. Aside from the
20 county/ city councils that comprise the proposed joint administrative
areas, analysis of the remaining 14 county and city councils suggests that 6
of these (Meath, Kerry, Wexford, Louth, Clare and Dún Laoghaire –
Rathdown) have more than 16% of staff allocated to corporate areas. A 5%
reduction in staffing across corporate areas in these six local authorities
would yield some 50 WTE resources for redeployment purposes.
6.8.3 The above efficiencies should be greatly facilitated by the full roll out of the
CORE HR and Payroll system to 27 local authorities and the realisation of
savings which it promises. In this regard, it is noted that the sector is
advancing the development of a shared superannuation service and a
shared payroll service (see section 8 for details). Further potential for
sharing service exists in the areas of training, recruitment (to include the
introduction of national panels and the extension of the use of the Public
Appointments Service to all clerical, administrative and professional staff),
and other corporate functions such as the register of electors and the
provision of legal advice.
6.8.4 While the range of staffing levels for the corporate area might in part be
attributed to a variance in what is reported by local authorities as a
corporate service, nonetheless there appear to be significant opportunities
to realise efficiency gains through identifying individual local authority best
practice and adopting it across the sector. The question of a minimum
efficient scale is essential, as is the option of delivering corporate services
on a shared basis (see section 8). To achieve scale, the option to bring
together smaller neighbouring local authorities as joint administrative areas
Mayo
Waterford City
Tipp South
Rosco mmo n
Fingal
11
72

to provide services in the corporate area using a combined pool of staff
could enable savings (see section 6.4 above).
6.8.5 The Group recommends that a saving of 10% on the overall corporate
staffing level should be targeted for local authorities operating through joint
administrative areas. In addition, a 5% reduction should be targeted in
those other local authorities that have relatively high numbers of staffing in
the corporate services area.
6.9 Roads
6.9.1 The roads function accounts for almost 7,000 WTE staff, some 22% of the
entire local government staffing level. This figure varies hugely depending
on the characteristics of the local authority. For urban authorities, it can be
below 10% of staff. In contrast, for rural authorities it can represent as much
as 46% of total staff. Apart from the geographical area and length of road
surface of the county, the staffing profile for roads will be driven by the scale
of the maintenance requirement (driven in part by the nature of the terrain),
as well as the operational policies and service delivery mechanisms
adopted by the local authority (driven in part by the need to use direct
labour). However it is clear from a comparison of the length of road per staff
member that significant variances exist with, for example, Donegal
managing almost twice the length of road per staff member as Mayo (see
Figure 6.11). On this basis the Group suggest that significant efficiencies
can be achieved leading to reductions in the levels of staffing in the roads
function in a number of local authorities.
6.9.2 Further analysis is needed to examine the cost of maintaining roads across
local authorities with a view to establishing unit costs and reviewing staffing
levels and operational approaches accordingly. This exercise would need
to be carried out in conjunction with the Department of Transport and local
authorities. Given that current staffing levels in the roads area vary
significantly, even when allowing for county characteristics, it is reasonable
to demand a significant efficiency dividend in this area. In this context, the
Group considers that a reduction in overall roads staffing of 250 can be
achieved (see section 10.2).
73

Figure 6.11 – Kilometres of Road per Roads Staff Employee, end-2009
10 .7
10. 9
15. 4
1 6. 7
18 .6
Ma yo Ke rr y Co rk G alwa y Do neg al
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010
6.10 Planning
6.10.1 The planning function accounts for over 1,700 staff across all local
authorities. This level has been built up to cater for levels of demand which
have fallen off considerably in recent years. Traditionally, increases and
reductions in demand for development management and the processing of
planning applications tend to correspond closely with the overall economic
climate. While the volume of planning applications has declined
significantly, there remains an ongoing workload in the areas of forward
planning and planning enforcement, where the latter in particular requires a
significant number of inspections and investigations (see section 10.4).
Notwithstanding this, it is reasonable to expect that the current levels of
resourcing for planning staff and administrative support in the development
management role should decline significantly.
6.10.2 The Croke Park agreement provides for the redeployment of staff within
local authorities, across local authorities, and between local authorities and
the wider public service. The agreement will enable local authorities to
move staff within functions as required, including the ability to move
technical staff into administrative areas and vice versa, qualifications
permitting. Based on an estimate of a 10% reduction in staffing levels, up to
171 staff would be available for redeployment from the planning function
across the 34 local authorities. This level of reduction might need to be
moderated in circumstances where the levels of enforcement and related
work significantly exceed expected levels. However the long-term target
across the sector should remain a 10% reduction in staffing levels in the
planning function.
74

Recommendations:
6.11.1 In summary, the Group considers that there is potential to reduce the
number of senior managerial and managerial grades within local
government. Based on its analysis of staffing levels in different local
authorities, the Group also recommends reducing staff numbers in specific
service areas, as well as the establishment of several joint administrative
structures covering two counties for the purpose of joint management teams
and pooled corporate functions.
6.11.2 Thus the Group recommends that:
• The number of county/ city managers be reduced from 34 to 24,
representing a reduction of 30%;
• The number of directors, based on a standard template related to the
size of the local authority, be reduced by at least 20% from 240 to 190;
• The number of senior and middle managers (administrative and
professional) be reduced by 15%;
• Ten joint administrative areas across 20 county and city council areas
be established to pool corporate functions and other service areas,
with each joint administrative area under the responsibility of a single
manager;
• The number of corporate service staff be reduced by 10% in the joint
administrative areas, and by 5% in several other local authorities;
• The number of planning staff be reduced by 10%;
• The number of roads staff be reduced by 250, with an emphasis on
reducing numbers in certain local authorities (this will yield a saving of
€8 million – see section 10.2);
• The staffing complements and number of senior managers in Dublin
and Cork cities be independently reviewed (over a six-month period),
with a target of reducing numbers by at least 15%.
6.11.3 The total value of the savings identified above is €94 million in a full year,
but excludes the cost of pensions as these are unknown and will depend on
the length of service, etc of personnel exiting the system.
75

Financial Summary:
1. Reduce number of county/ city managers and directors through joint
administrative areas – €2 million
2. Reduce number of directors – €4 million
3. Establish 10 joint administrative areas to pool corporate services – €7 million
4. Reduce number of corporate services staff in other local authorities – €2
million
5. Reduce number of senior and middle managers (administrative) – €15 million
6. Reduce number of senior and middle managers (professional/ technical) –
€10 million
7. Reduce number of planning staff by 10% – €7 million
8. Reduce number of staffing in Dublin and Cork cities by 15% – €47 million
Total Amount: €94 million
6.11.4 It should be noted that these estimates do not take account of staffing
savings likely to accrue from recommendations made by the Group in other
areas, such as motor tax (section 10), rent collection (section 10.1), town
councils (section 5), and shared HR and payroll systems (section 8).
76

7.1 Local Government Audit
7. Value for Money and Audit
7.1.1 Internal audit in local government is carried out by specially assigned staff
within local authorities. Each county and city council also has an audit
committee (see sections 7.2 and 7.3 below).
7.1.2 External audit of local authorities is carried out by the Local Government
Audit Service (LGAS). It is an independent service, which for administrative
purposes constitutes a Division of the Department of the Environment,
Heritage and Local Government. It audits the accounts of 184 local bodies
such as city, county, borough and town councils, and miscellaneous bodies
including some harbour authorities. All audit staff are professionally
qualified accountants and have for many years been recruited externally,
having worked in industry, public audit firms, and public sector bodies, and
this mix of skills enhances the external audit function. The LGAS provides
independent scrutiny of the financial stewardship of local authorities and
other bodies. Its role is to carry out audits of local authorities and other
bodies and promote the achievement of value for money in local authorities
by undertaking Value for Money (VFM) audits and publishing such reports.
A VFM Unit has been established within the LGAS.
7.1.3 The Director of Audit, who is fully independent in the discharge of his
responsibilities, is the organisational head of the service. Each local
government auditor is assigned an audit district under warrant of authority
from the Director of Audit. There are at present twenty-one local
government audit districts. Local government auditors operate
independently of the Department when discharging their professional
functions. This independence is protected in legislation through the Local
Government Act 2001.
7.1.4 Audit districts comprise a number of audits grouped, as far as possible, in
convenient geographical areas, and these districts are further grouped into
four regions – Western, Southern and two Eastern. Principal auditors assist
in the regional organisation and supervision of audits. In addition, they have
direct responsibility for the major audits in their region.
7.2 The Local Authority Internal Audit Function
7.2.1 The role of the internal audit function covers the following:
• Appraisal of systems and procedures;
• Assessment of adequacy, reliability and integrity of data;
• Examination of compliance with policies, plans and procedures;
• Assessment of arrangements for acquisition, safeguarding and
disposal of assets;
77

• Examining arrangements for economic, efficient and effective use of
resources.
7.2.2 Local authority resources assigned to internal audit, stood at 99 staff for all
city and county councils at the end of 2008. Most internal audit staff do not
have formal auditing or accountancy qualifications, and three county
councils did not have an internal auditor for 2008. The VFM Unit of the
LGAS has produced a number of publications relating to internal audit.
7.2.3 Recommendations contained in these reports and handbook on internal
audit should be considered and implemented by local authorities where
appropriate. Full systems reviews should be included in the work
programme of the local authority’s internal audit unit and should also be
extended to the associated town councils over time. Local authorities
should ensure that their internal audit function is operating in accordance
with best practice, given their respective size and resources. Liaison with
other authorities and the wider public service through forums and interest
groups would be useful in this regard. The internal audit function should
report directly to the county/ city manager and the local authority audit
committee, rather than through the finance function. A breakdown of the
work carried out by the local authorities internal audit staff at the end of
2008 is illustrated in Table 7.1 below.
Table 7.1 – Activities of Internal Audit Staff in Local Government
Time Allocation
Audit assignments 71%
Checking receipts 13%
Checking Motor Tax 7%
VFM 6%
Other 3%
Source: Local Government Audit Service
7.2.4 Local authority internal audit units have a responsibility in relation to VFM
and it is clear that the proportion of resources allocated to VFM work is low
at 6%. Internal audit should be required to allocate say 10% of their
resources to VFM audit work. In order to coordinate the VFM audit work
being carried out, the local authority internal audit units should liaise more
with the LGAS VFM audit unit. Copies of local authority internal audit VFM
reports should be forwarded to the LGAS so that good practice identified
from this work can be shared with all councils. Local authorities should
have local arrangements in place for the internal checking of receipts,
including motor tax. This work should be separate from the work of internal
auditors, who should not spend 20% of their time checking receipts.
7.2.5 The Group recommends that the internal audit function in local authorities
should be resourced by staff with suitable professional qualifications and
sufficient ICT skills to allow the extraction and analysis of data from the
financial systems. As current posts become vacant, posts should be filled
78

through open recruitment. Opportunities for exchange and secondment of
audit personnel with the private sector should be explored.
7.2.6 The scope for sharing internal audit services between local authorities
should be explored as a matter of priority. This would assist in developing
specialist skills, more team audits and increasing the independence of the
internal audit function. The grouping of internal audit services in such a
manner could be along the lines of the current County and City Managers’
Association regional structures or other appropriate clustering arrangements
or regional structures which may be proposed in the White Paper on Local
Government.
7.3 Local Authority Audit Committees
7.3.1 The Local Government (Business Improvement Districts) Act, 2006 (referred
to below as the 2006 Act) and Circular Fin 11/2007 set out the functions and
the role of audit committees under the following headings:
• Financial and budgetary reporting;
• Internal audit function and reports;
• Local government audit reports and responses;
• VFM;
• Risk management; and
• Annual report to the elected council.
7.3.2 Audit committees are now established in all city and county councils and
their membership generally consist of five members; three external and two
serving or retired Councillors. The chairperson is appointed from the
external members. Local government auditors attend audit committee
meetings to discuss the statutory audit reports and other matters of concern
to the committee. Audit committees have an important role to fulfil in driving
the VFM agenda in their respective local authorities. This work can be
undertaken in a number of ways such as:
• Ensuring that recommendations contained in VFM reports issued by
the LGAS are implemented;
• Reviewing local authority performance vis-à-vis service indicators and
comparing with national performance;
• Seeking proposals from management on internal VFM initiatives;
• Reviewing the authority’s corporate procurement plans;
• Ensuring that the annual internal audit work programme contains
specific VFM assignments.
7.3.3 The secretary to the local authority audit committee should keep the
committee briefed on any major change to the council’s financial
management procedures and on the possible impact of new legislation.
The committee should meet with all senior management and receive
presentations on their areas of responsibility, including a review of the key
79

isks which they have to manage. The annual report produced by the
committee should cover all aspects of their oversight role, including
overseeing the internal audit function, risk management and VFM initiatives.
It should also show the number of meetings attended by each member
during the year. The report must be presented to the full council for their
consideration. The 2006 Act provides for the issue of regulations by the
Minister on the working arrangements of local authority audit committees.
No regulations have issued to date.
7.3.4 The Group recommends that the annual internal audit plan should be
discussed with the local government auditor and presented to the audit
committee before finalisation. Any VFM studies or efficiency reviews carried
out within the local authority should be reported through internal audit. The
role of VFM officer within an authority could be assigned or extended to
cover internal audit. Regulations, as provided for in the 2006 Act, should
now be issued on the operation of audit committees. This should include
good practice as identified from experience to date.
7.4 External Audit and Value for Money
7.4.1 The external audit of local authorities is provided for in Sections 114 to 126
of the Local Government Act 2001. The statutory outputs of the audit
process are audit opinions and audit reports on the local authority annual
financial statements. Audit reports include the comments of the county/ city
manager in response to the matters raised as an integral part of public
accountability of local authority management. Reports are addressed to the
elected members of the local authority and are presented to the full council
for consideration. The issues raised in these reports are also reviewed by
the authority’s audit committee.
7.4.2 An annual activity report is published each year by the Director of Audit of
the LGAS and includes commentary on some of the more common issues
reported on by local government auditors. The Group considers that there
is scope for this report to include a greater focus on the issues arising in the
local government sector, based on the financial data contained in the
audited annual financial statements of the city and county councils.
7.4.3 There is a need for a stronger and more strategic overview of financial
management and audit across the Local Government Sector. The Group
recommends that the Director of Audit produce an annual report, building on
the existing activity report, taking a sectoral perspective. This overview
would take account of issues emerging from individual audits, through
interaction with audit committees and the work of internal audit processes
and arising from VFM studies. The report would provide the opportunity for
the Director to put before the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and
Local Government key issues for attention and for the sector to address.
7.4.4 The annual report should be sent to the Oireachtas committee on the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government which can be discussed with
80

the Director and relevant local government officials. This approach will
provide the Oireachtas oversight of local expenditure of central funds, while
at the same time recognising that expenditure by local authorities is a matter
of local democratic accountability.
7.4.5 The VFM Unit currently carries out VFM reviews, and capital spot checks.
Performance auditing is carried out by questionnaires and structured
interviews on councils’ arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and
effectiveness in the use of resources. VFM reports, once approved by the
Minister, are published on the Department’s website. Reports to date have
concentrated on single areas across all local authorities, with the focus on
recommending best practice for achieving greater efficiencies and
effectiveness in local government performance.
7.4.6 Short summary reports, with more performance and quantitative measures,
on individual local authorities, should be made available to the local
government auditors on follow-up studies undertaken by the VFM audit unit.
This would assist auditors to assess and comment on the authority’s
performance in the course of the annual audit.
7.4.7 Local authority performance against national VFM studies, capital spot
checks, efficiency reviews or VFM follow-up reports should be considered
by the auditor. Local authority progress in relation to VFM / efficiency
reviews should also be discussed with the audit committee.
7.4.8 An improved website area should be created for the LGAS, on which all
audit publications, including the annual audit reports could be made
available to the public. A “Best Practice” area should be created on the
Department website under LGAS. This would allow the publication of data
on local VFM studies and efficiency reviews carried out by local authorities.
These data would be collated by the VFM Unit and the use of the site would
be monitored and encouraged by the unit.
7.5 Local Authority Financial Performance
7.5.1 Local authorities prepare their annual budgets and annual financial
statements in accordance with specific statutory requirements. Draft annual
financial statements are due for submission to the Department by 1 April of
the following year. Both the budget and the financial statements have to be
approved by the local council’s elected members. Only 14 of the 34 major
authorities had submitted their draft 2009 annual financial statements to the
Department by end of April 2010. All draft annual financial statements are
required to be produced by 1 April of the following year in accordance with
the Department’s code of accounting practice.
7.5.2 The timely preparation of the draft annual financial statement is very
important and every effort should be made to ensure that all local authorities
meet the statutory deadline.
81

7.5.3 Notes and appendices to the accounts provide additional information,
including revenue income collection performance on the main sources, and
note 17 in the annual financial statement shows the difference between the
adopted budget and the actual outturn for the year by service division. Very
few local authorities produce full monthly or even quarterly accounts,
although management reports are used for budget monitoring purposes.
This makes the task of producing the annual financial statement more time
consuming.
7.5.4 The Group is of the view that there is a need for an improvement in the
management reporting in local authorities. Local authority elected members
should receive quarterly reports on the financial performance of the council
against the approved budget.
7.5.5 The Local Government Management Agency (formerly the Local
Government Management Services Board) collates and publishes a report
on service indicators for local authorities (see section 3.5). This report is
addressed to the Minister and is made available to the public through the
LGMA website.
7.5.6 The Group recommends that financial performance indicators, as shown in
Appendix 7, should be verified as part of the annual audit. Performance in
relation to these should be assessed and commented on in the audit report
and published in the annual financial statement, as appropriate. These
relate to financial information contained in the accounts and should be
collated on a national level by the LGMA and reported on as part of its
publication of the service indicators. Other locally-determined performance
indicators should be published in the annual report of the local authority as
agreed with stakeholders.
7.6 Risk Management in Local Authorities
7.6.1 Local authorities are engaging with the process of risk management as a
key element of corporate governance. A risk management policy should be
in place for all city and county councils. Individual departments and
sections within local authorities should be responsible for drawing up their
own risk registers. Training should be provided to staff concerned to assist
in embedding a risk management culture throughout the authority. The risk
manager/ unit should report on the most significant corporate risks to the
audit committee on a regular basis.
7.6.2 Credit control management procedures vary widely across local authorities
and even within a local authority for the different income sources. Some
income sources such as commercial rates may have well-established credit
control procedures, while others may depend on resources available in
various finance units throughout the council. Generally, where an
established credit control process is put in place, collection performance
improves. This may be within the relevant department or in a centralised
credit control function.
82

7.6.3 Local authorities should consider the suitability of their credit control
procedures for each of the main sources of income. Management of this
area should be the responsibility of either the financial or management
accountant, who should report directly to the head of finance. General
principles of good practice such as, weekly or monthly arrears monitoring
and early intervention should be shared between local authorities.
7.6.4 The Group has been advised that there are a number of local authorities
that have significant deficits on their revenue accounts. In this context, the
Group recommends that the necessary remedial actions continue to be
pursued.
Recommendations:
7.7.1 The essence of the audit function is to draw the attention of responsible
authorities to failures and failings and to have these rectified. Publicity and
public probing play an important role in this respect. In the Group’s view, to
give a greater focus and impact to the work of the Local Government Audit
Service, particularly in terms of the recommendations made by external
auditors, the Local Government Director of Audit should produce an annual
report covering all of his functions and deal specifically with the primary
local authorities. This report should be made to the Oireachtas Committee
on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government for purposes of debate
with appropriate local representatives and managers presenting with regard
to local spending of central funding. This could act as a spur to enhanced
performance and efficiency at local level.
7.7.2 In addition to the above recommendations, the Group recommends that:
• The internal audit function in local authorities be resourced by staff with
suitable professional qualifications and sufficient ICT skills to allow the
extraction and analysis of data from the financial systems;
• Opportunities for exchange and secondment of audit personnel with
the private sector be explored;
• The scope for sharing internal audit services between local authorities
be pursued as a matter of priority;
• The annual internal audit plan be discussed with the local government
auditor and presented to the as local authority audit committee before
finalisation;
• Any VFM studies or efficiency reviews carried out within the local
authority be reported through internal audit. The role of VFM officer
within an authority could be assigned or extended to cover internal
audit;
• Authorities to have local arrangements in place for the internal
checking of receipts, including motor tax. This work should be separate
from internal audit;
• Regulations, as provided for in the 2006 Act, to be made on the
operation of audit committees. This should include good practice as
identified from experience to date;
83

• Financial performance indicators, as shown in Appendix 7, should be
verified as part of the annual audit and reported on as part of the audit
report, the annual financial statement, and the publication of service
indicators;
• Local authority performance against national VFM studies, capital spot
checks, efficiency reviews or VFM follow-up reports be considered by
the auditor. Local authority progress in relation to VFM / efficiency
reviews should also be discussed with the audit committee;
• An improved website area to be created for the LGAS, on which all
audit publications, including the annual audit reports, as well as
information on local VFM studies, efficiency reviews and best practice
be made available to the public;
• Local authority elected members to receive quarterly reports at a
minimum on the financial performance of the council against the
approved budget;
• All local authorities must meet the statutory deadline for preparation of
the draft annual financial statement;
• Cash flow statements to be prepared at regular intervals and
considered by the local authority management team, with appropriate
action taken;
• Necessary remedial action continue to be pursued intensively in
respect of the significant revenue account deficits in a number of local
authorities.
84

8. Shared Services
8.1 Shared Services in Local Government
8.1.1 As noted in section 3.1, local authorities already have considerable
experience of shared service provision aggregated at national, regional and
local levels. This includes the use of various shared service models,
including:
• Joint procurement or commissioning of work – where two or more local
authorities jointly purchase a service or part of a service from an
external supplier;
• Lead authority model – where one local authority provides a service on
behalf of one or more others;
• Third-party provision – where two or more (or sometimes all) local
authorities engage a third party to provide a service on their behalf;
• In-sourcing – where one local authority has the skills and resources
needed by another local authority, with individuals working for another
local authority, usually on a temporary basis.
8.1.2 Although evidence of all of these approaches exists across several service
areas within local government, the Group considers that a further expansion
of the shared approach to service provision offers the potential to realise
cost savings, to re-engineer processes to align with new systems, and to
improve services to the public. Shared services offer the potential not just
to save money, but by economising can free up resources for more
productive work on core areas of local government service provision.
8.1.3 The Group considers also that while extensive use of shared service models
have been made for newer service areas such as the charge on nonprincipal
private residences (NPPR), local authorities also need to examine
existing services, and how some of these could be transferred to a shared
service model.
8.1.4 Section 85 of the Local Government Act 2001 allows any local authority or
any public body to enter into an agreement with another local authority to
provide a specific function on its behalf. Such agreements usually contain
provisions regarding the transfer of financial responsibility and the levying of
a charge for the provision of services on behalf of another local authority.
Section 86 of the Local Government Act 2001 allows for arrangements to be
made between two or more local authorities for the joint provision of
services. Section 87 of the same Act authorises the Minister for the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government to direct local authorities to
make an agreement under section 85 where he/she feels such an
agreement should be made, having first given the authorities concerned the
opportunity to make representations on the subject.
85

8.2 International Experience with Shared Services
8.2.1 The provision of shared services involving two or more local authorities has
also become more common internationally, although it remains the
exception rather than the rule of service provision. The trend in recent
years has shifted from an emphasis on shared services being pursued
purely on the basis of expected efficiencies and economies of scale, to a
wider consideration of shared services based on its potential for
improvements in service quality and better use of scarce or expensive
expertise.
8.2.2 There are examples of this approach being used in several cases in
countries such as the UK, France, the US and New Zealand. In many
cases, the traditional focus of shared service provision in different
jurisdictions has been on ‘back office’ support services and, in particular, the
routine transactional elements of ICT, HR and finance services. However,
this is also extending to ‘frontline’ services provided to the public, including
joint contact centres.
8.2.3 In the UK, for example, some ‘back-office’ areas that have been the subject
of increased collaboration between local authorities include:
• ICT systems and informational management system administration;
• Payroll;
• Financial services, such as accounts payable;
• Procurement;
• HR functions and personnel administration;
• Recruitment;
• Design of major roads schemes;
• Facilities and asset management;
• Records management;
• Legal services;
• Shared chief executive officer and management teams between
smaller district councils.
8.2.4 In terms of ‘frontline’ services, for example, a number of the London
boroughs and local authorities in other larger cities have come together to
form joint boards to provide certain services, such as transport services,
waste disposal and fire services. Others have come together to provide
joint one-stop-shop contact centres for members of the public.
8.2.5 Because of the very small size of many French municipalities, many local
authorities have made use of inter-municipal associations or consortia to
deliver services on behalf of a number of neighbouring local authorities.
Many of these have focussed on technical services, such as water, waste
management, public transport and to some extent on areas such as
planning and social housing.
86

8.2.6 Many parts of the United States also have a tradition of special-purpose
bodies or joint cooperative arrangements between neighbouring local
authorities. These include special-purpose districts that have been
established to provide services such as education, water and sewerage
services, fire services, parks and recreation, libraries, housing, roads and
healthcare. Usually, members of the boards of such organisations consist
of council members from the authorities involved. Other forms of
coordination include contracts between local authorities, whereby one
authority agrees to provide a service on behalf of others.
8.2.7 Since 2002, all New Zealand local authorities have been obliged to
negotiate a Triennial Agreement for each region. This is a statutory
agreement that acts as a basis for dialogue around shared services and to
encourage attention to regional policy issues that transcend local
boundaries. Areas where a shared service approach has been pursued
include waste management facilities, fire services, library services, building
control and economic development and tourism promotion, very often on the
basis of the lead authority model. There has also been some contracting
between local authorities to share technical and engineering staff to operate
infrastructure facilities and specialist planners to work on urban design.
While these services can be formalised through contracts for complex
activities, sometimes they are undertaken jointly through semi-formal
arrangements. There is also increased joint procurement in areas such as
energy and road maintenance.
8.2.8 Some of the suggested benefits of shared services include:
• Reduced operating costs through standardising, streamlining,
automating and sharing back office processes and standard software
systems;
• Reduced requirement for administrative support;
• Lower accommodation costs;
• Fewer management overheads;
• Greater specialisation and skills levels amongst employees through the
pooling of resources;
• Greater consistency in service levels; and
• Other staff able to focus on the core business of the local authority.
8.2.9 International experience also shows, however, that shared services can
produce mixed results. Hard evidence of actual savings achieved through
shared services do not always live up to the expectations of original
assessments (which can be over-estimated). Research suggests the need
to examine each proposal for shared services on its merits, as well as an
assessment of the transitional and start-up costs of moving to a shared
service arrangement (which can be under-estimated). Advice from the New
Zealand Controller and Auditor-General to local authorities in this area
suggests that the costs, potential financial and non-financial benefits and
risks of moving to a shared service model should be contrasted with other
options, such as in-house provision and outsourcing. Different cost-benefit
analyses that have been conducted show that it can take a number of years
87

for savings to compensate for what can be significant up-front investment
costs. It is important to ensure that the volume of transactions under
consideration will yield savings in excess of the costs of moving to a shared
service arrangement. Transitional costs can be particularly high where
organisations have incompatible IT systems.
8.2.10 The experience in both the UK and New Zealand suggests that the buy-in of
local councillors and senior management at the outset is seen as critical in
terms of progressing the shared services agenda.
8.3 Recent Government Policy in this Area
8.3.1 The Transforming Public Services report and accompanying Government
statement recommend greater use of shared service provision, not just
between local authorities but across all parts of the public service. Some of
the areas where potential for shared services exist include:
• Human resources, including recruitment, training and development,
pay and benefits, HR advisory services and pensions;
• Finance, such as purchasing, accounts payable, accounts receivable,
fixed asset and inventory management, travel and subsistence, payroll,
general ledger accounting and financial reporting;
• Procurement – a National Procurement Service has been established
within the Office for Public Works (OPW) to create additional
purchasing power, to allow various bodies including local authorities to
purchase goods and services and to provide professional public
procurement advice across the entire public service; and
• Information and communication technologies.
8.3.2 However, the report recognised that for any shared services initiative to
succeed, local sponsors in senior positions must be identified to drive the
initiative. Better use of information was also proposed to minimise data
requests from citizens, which will require greater sharing and re-use of data
across the public service.
8.3.3 Specific working groups have been established to examine the potential for
shared services across the public service in different fields, such as HR and
pensions, and financial shared services. In the context of local government,
shared support services already exist in the provision of HR and industrial
relations support, and in the area of IT support, by the Local Government
Management Services Board and the Local Government Computer Services
Board respectively. These two organisations have been merged as the
Local Government Management Agency (LGMA), providing a significant
platform for expanding shared service delivery in local government.
88

8.4 Shared ‘Back Office’ Services
8.4.1 Shared services provide an opportunity to increase efficiency through the
reorganisation and sharing of assets with others and an opportunity to
minimise duplication of processes, accommodation and management effort
across local authorities. As well as the potential for financial savings,
shared services also can lead to service improvements, greater consistency
and allow local authorities to concentrate on their core business.
8.4.2 Much of the Transforming Public Services agenda concerning shared
services has a focus on ‘back office’ functions and support to local
authorities. This includes building on existing work in areas such as human
resources, recruitment, pensions, payroll, procurement, and IT systems and
design. International experience also shows that these areas tend to be the
initial focus for shared service initiatives between local authorities.
8.4.3 As part of this process, local authorities are currently implementing a shared
HR and payroll system, known as the CORE project. This system is
currently being installed across 27 of the 34 county / city councils. All 27
local authorities are to use the standardised processes and software of the
new system, with 20 local authorities also availing of a shared hosting
option. Initial sites using the new system are forecasting an estimated 40%
of savings in the overall resource requirement needed for the payroll
function. If these savings are realised across all 27 local authorities, it could
allow for the potential saving of 62 WTE staff, or almost €3 million per year.
As well as payroll, the system is also projected to deliver significant savings
in other HR related areas, such as superannuation, time and attendance,
recruitment, the performance management system, training, and health and
safety.
8.4.4 A greater use of the shared service approach to ICT, building on existing
practices, is also worth pursuing. The combination of consolidation and the
adoption of government frameworks for purchases of ICT equipment and
services, as well as the aggregation of the sector’s purchasing power for
software licences and services should yield efficiencies and savings across
the sector. There is an opportunity for the sector to modernise and update
its ICT service provision and technical infrastructure, by simplifying
technologies, sharing technologies and resources and achieving economies
of scale in technology investment and licensing costs.
8.4.5 Each of the 34 county and city councils have their own ICT unit. In addition,
a shared ICT service, the Local Government Computer Services Board
(currently being consolidated into the LGMA) is used by many local
authorities to develop programmes used to support service provision across
several local authority areas of activity. The number of ICT units has
inevitably led to duplication of effort and investment across local authorities,
and opportunities exist to consolidate and save on this spend.
89

8.4.6 Instead of each local authority having its own ICT unit, they could
increasingly buy some (or all) of their ICT products and services from a
consolidated central group. When properly executed, the greater the
amount of consolidation, the greater the savings that are likely to result. It is
worth noting that up to 70% of ICT budget goes to infrastructure and
operational services.
8.4.7 It is no longer necessary to have people located where the infrastructure
resides as today’s technologies allow for infrastructure to be managed from
anywhere with a network connection. Instead the focus should be on
ensuring an appropriate allocation of responsibilities to the party best able to
manage them.
8.4.8 The areas that should be addressed through consolidation, frameworks and
aggregated purchasing include ‘functional’ applications supporting specific
service areas and common ICT services.
8.4.9 Functional applications are those service-specific ICT applications (such as
planning, water, housing etc) as well as corporate services and which are
common across the sector. To support this service would require
development, operation, maintenance and support of ICT applications that
deliver or support core sectoral business.
8.4.10 Common ICT services include other ICT services required by all local
authorities, such as:
• Network services – provision and management of local and wide area
network connectivity and capacity;
• Infrastructure services – identity management/ directory services,
server management, system administration, security, contingency/
business continuity/ disaster recovery, capacity management;
• Desktop services – provision to all users of a workstation with web
browser and access to both common and line of business applications;
• Common application services – provision and management of the
range of common applications available to all users, such as email,
diary/ scheduling, contacts, word processing, spreadsheet,
presentation, document/record management, video conferencing,
instant messaging;
• Common web services – hosting of external websites, access to
Government Gateway, portal management, intranet hosting, content
filtering, content management.
8.4.11 Local authorities should build on the positive work done thus far in these
areas, with a view to maximising economies of scale and return for the
taxpayer. The Group endorses these efforts and believes that progress
should be made in other relevant areas as soon as the relevant
assessments and pilots are carried out to show that the investment required
will yield real cost savings. Consideration should also be given to
examining potential synergies with the wider public service.
90

8.4.12 For example, recruitment to senior positions in local government are
conducted through the Public Appointments Service (PAS), while
recruitment and promotion at lower grades is managed locally. The Group
considers that having recruitment for all clerical, administrative, and
professional staff conducted through a central specialised body such as the
PAS would allow local government HR staff concentrate on core functions,
as well as realising efficiencies from economies of scale in recruitment
processes. Such a move could represent an overall annual saving of some
10% on recruitment costs.
8.4.13 The amalgamation of a number of housing bodies including the National
Building Agency, Affordable Homes Partnership, the Centre for Housing
Research, and the Homeless Agency into a single agency, the Housing and
Sustainable Communities Agency, should produce efficiencies in supporting
the work of local authorities in the provision of housing services.
8.4.14 The Group also believes that consideration could be given to extending the
shared services model in a range of other areas beyond ‘back office’
corporate functions.
8.5 Regional or ‘Lead Authority’ Approach to Service Provision
8.5.1 Local authorities carry out many of the same functions and activities under
the same legislation. Staff require similar skills, training and expertise in
particular areas, for example, to comply with the requirements of new
legislation. While local circumstances and priorities may sometimes differ,
there are nevertheless opportunities for greater cooperation between local
authorities in service provision.
8.5.2 Again as noted above, local authorities are far from starting with a blank
page in terms of shared service provision. The lead authority approach, in
particular, has been used in several service areas, such as for water quality
monitoring and protection for each River Basin District, for waste
management planning, and for major road construction projects. That said,
it is not always clear to the Group why only some authorities have engaged
in a shared service approach.
8.5.3 The Group has the impression that shared service delivery (in areas like
motor tax and fire services) has evolved in certain parts of the country, but
not others, for reasons of tradition and local convention, rather than a
fundamental examination of the business case for shared provision. It is not
clear to the Group why Waterford City and County, or Limerick City and
County operate separate fire services, whilst Galway County Council can
operate a shared service for both Galway City and County. Shared services
also appear to be most commonly used in terms of the introduction of new
services such as the NPPR charge, but less frequent when it comes to
examining existing more embedded approaches towards service delivery.
91

8.5.4 In the submissions to the Group, a number of services were suggested as
possible areas where the shared regional service or ‘lead authority’
approach could be extended. These included:
• Fire services;
• Homelessness services;
• Higher education grants; and
• Building inspectorates (combining local authorities’ planning
enforcement, building control, and derelict site inspection role);
• Internal audit;
• Motor tax.
8.5.5 The Group considers that the potential for greater collaboration between
county and city councils at a regional level in these areas needs to be
evaluated in order to assess whether this would yield cost savings and
service improvements. These are relatively specialised areas of work and
could, therefore, be candidates for the shared service model.
Fire
8.5.6 The deployment of fire services personnel in 220 stations across the country
in many respects reflects the legacy of station locations from an earlier time.
While many new stations have been built in new communities, there
remains a considerable historical legacy reflecting the requirements and
roads infrastructure of the past.
8.5.7 The Group notes the introduction of new structures at national level for the
leadership and management of Fire Services through the establishment of
the National Directorate for Fire and Emergency Management. The
approach builds on the experiences gained in recent years through the
development of national approaches and systems and the local delivery of
these by fire authorities, for example, the development and operation of the
Framework for Major Emergency Management which was used successfully
by local authorities during the severe weather emergencies in winter 2009-
2010.
8.5.8 There has been a significant investment programme in station and
equipment infrastructure, including appliances in recent years. The current
fleet compares favourably with international comparisons. With the
exceptions of Dublin, Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford cities which
have full-time services, and Drogheda and Dundalk which have a combined
full-time and retained service, all other fire services are provided throughout
Ireland by retained services. There are 1,000 full-time firefighters and some
2,000 retained personnel overall. The retained services provide a cost
effective model of service delivery where to a substantial degree a
contingent rather than continuous capability is required.
8.5.9 It is understood that the Management Board of the National Directorate is
developing a multi-annual development plan which will advance work across
all areas of delivery. This work includes adoption of a new risk based
92

approach which will be used to assess current deployment patterns having
regard to the societal changes and the improvements to roads and
communications infrastructure in recent years.
8.5.10 The risk assessment software recently developed should be used to review
the most appropriate configuration of all facets of the fire service to meet the
current and future state of development of the service. The Group endorses
the establishment of the National Directorate for the fire service, and
considers that there is potential to build on the existing shared services
approaches and to look at regional approaches outside of the major urban
areas. It should be possible also for a small number of local authorities to
act as the lead authority for certain specialised fire responsibilities on behalf
of other counties. The business case to investigate the feasibility of
developing a shared service approach in this area should be prepared.
Homelessness
8.5.11 In early 2010 local authorities were asked to establish homelessness
consultative fora on a regional basis with a view to preparing regional action
plans to address homelessness for the wider regional area. One local
authority is designated as lead authority with primary responsibility for
preparing the action plan. This approach seems sensible given that in many
cases there is a main centre of population in each region which tends to be
the main focus for homelessness issues for the wider area. The lead
authority plays a largely coordinating role, although this does not affect the
statutory responsibilities of individual authorities. Current Government
policy on homelessness emphasises moving away from long-term
occupancy of emergency accommodation and towards long-term
mainstream housing. This, along with a focus on preventative measures
and particularly the proposed rationalisation and merger of certain services
in Dublin such as reconfiguration of emergency homeless accommodation,
rationalisation of certain outreach and day services, decommissioning of
expensive private emergency accommodation and reconfiguration of
existing homeless support resources into visiting housing support teams,
should lead to a more effective homeless service that maximises value for
money and the reduction of costs in certain areas.
8.5.12 The Group recommends that local authorities with a small base of homeless
persons should consider whether a partnership approach to relevant
homeless services could be adopted with neighbouring areas to pool
resources and improve access to local services. Partnership with the HSE
in this area should be continued or enhanced where necessary, based on a
clear understanding of the respective roles of the agencies, whereby local
authorities have responsibility for accommodation aspects and the HSE for
health and care services.
Building Inspections / Enforcement
8.5.13 Local authorities are involved in the inspection of buildings and properties
for a variety of different purposes that span several different service areas,
93

such as fire and safety, building control, planning enforcement, derelict
sites, and private rental properties. The qualifications and expertise of
inspectors is tailored to each of these individual inspections. For example,
an environmental health officer is not qualified at present to carry out a
structural survey but is qualified to carry out an inspection of properties for
the purposes of the private rented regulations. Sometimes a property can
be inspected by a number of local authority officials, with each inspection
taking up to 3 hours. There is potential therefore, with streamlining and
upskilling, to rationalise the inspection process.
8.5.14 The Group recommends that the potential for rationalising these
responsibilities into a single Building Inspectorate service, perhaps
operating on behalf of several local authorities, is further examined to
assess the scope for efficiencies and cost savings in this area. A feasibility
study should be conducted in this respect.
8.5.15 It was also suggested to the Group that a single local authority could
process Higher Education Grants on behalf of all local authorities. The
issue of Higher Education Grants is dealt with in more detail in section 13.2.
8.5.16 Other areas where there may be potential for a shared service approach
include internal audit, motor tax, e-government initiatives, laboratory
services, and legal services. Many of these issues are dealt with in other
sections of this report, such as sections 7.2 (internal audit), 10.6 (motor tax),
8.4 (e-government), and 10.3 (laboratory services).
8.5.17 These areas might be investigated more thoroughly to assess the costs,
potential benefits and risks of moving to a shared service model, and
whether shared services present advantages over other options such as inhouse
provision and outsourcing. The Department of the Environment,
Heritage and Local Government, working with the Local Government
Management Agency, should examine the potential of shared service
models in these areas, as well as facilitating exchange of experience in
shared services.
8.5.18 The Group has also made a set of proposals regarding joint managers and
a joint management team for more than one county. Further details on
these proposals are included in section 6.6.
8.6 Regional Support Structures for Technical Services
8.6.1 A number of Regional Design Offices (RDOs) exist around the country to
support the work of local authorities in the delivery of the national roads
programme. These Offices have been engaged primarily in managing
major national road projects through planning and, in the case of non-PPP
projects, through construction. It is proposed that this support function be
enhanced and extended to other aspects of the roads function, including
asset management (see section 10.2). The Offices provide a number of
94

enefits in terms of pooling resources and specialised skills across a
number of local authorities.
8.6.2 The Group considers the Regional Design Offices a good model of shared
technical support services which could be replicated in other local authority
service areas. The Group suggests that specialised skills such as
procurement, land acquisition, project management through planning and
construction and asset management would also be beneficial as support
services to other local authority services involving strategic infrastructural
investments, such as water and waste management and public lighting. It
should be noted that waste management infrastructure is predominantly
being developed by the private sector and thus the role for RDOs in this
area may not be as significant in future as in other areas. The NRA has
also indicated to the Group its willingness to provide support and advice to
local authorities based on its expertise in public-private partnerships.
8.6.3 In that context, the Group suggests that the RDO model be expanded to
incorporate technical support services to water and waste infrastructure and
not be confined to road-related work only. This should reduce the need for
local authority use of private consultants (see section 11.4). One implication
of this would be that the governance and management arrangements for the
RDOs would have to be reviewed in light of their taking on new
responsibilities.
8.6.4 The gross benefit of this enhanced role for the RDOs could be up to 5% of
the capital investment involved, but there would be some offsetting staffing
and administrative costs as that role increased.
8.6.5 The Group is also recommending that the number of RDO locations be
streamlined so that each RDO serves several county areas – the new RDO
structures should reflect any new regional structures which may be
proposed in the White Paper on Local Government (see section 10.2 for
further details on these proposals).
8.7 Shared Services with other Service Providers
8.7.1 As noted above, the Group considers that options for shared services
involving the wider public sector should be explored. There are limited
examples of the shared service approach being employed across the wider
public sector. One area where this is being pursued relates to the
assessment of means to determine entitlements to different public benefits
or services across multiple organisations.
Means Testing
8.7.2 A number of public bodies are involved in means testing to assess claims
for different benefits. In particular, this includes the Department of Social
Protection for social welfare entitlements, the HSE for the purposes of
95

medical cards and the Supplementary Welfare Allowance, local authorities
and other public bodies.
8.7.3 In terms of local government, housing is the main service area where
means testing is carried out. This includes applications for social housing,
and applications for a range of housing schemes and the Rental
Accommodation Scheme (RAS), as well as assessments of local authority
tenants’ income for re-assessment of differential rents. Local authorities are
also involved in means assessments for the purposes of processing
applications for higher education grants, and entitlements to waivers for
environmental charges and fire services charges.
8.7.4 In 2008, local authorities carried out approximately 18,000 means
assessments for new claims on approved housing applications and
approximately 176,000 means reviews. At present, there is only limited
sharing of information and data on means assessment between public
bodies. The Group believes that the existing arrangements involve
considerable duplication of work, both on the part of the applicant who may
have to submit the same information to multiple bodies, and on the part of
the various public bodies that carry out means assessments. In addition, a
common understanding of an individual’s needs is essential for a holistic
approach to good service provision.
8.7.5 A working group established under the Transforming Public Services
programme is currently examining the establishment of a shared approach
towards means assessment to capture the data required across several
support programmes run by different public bodies. The first phase of this
process will involve the simplification and sharing of information by
establishing a common data set. This common data set will be used to
collect information on the basis of a means assessment and will allow the
various participating organisations to determine eligibility for various
services. It has been proposed that a pilot scheme be introduced to allow
for the identification of possible logistical issues, as well as the quantifiable
savings such a system could yield.
8.7.6 A second proposed phase would involve individual organisations
reassessing the costs and benefits of requiring individuals to provide
information in addition to that provided under the common data set, as well
as a possible standardisation of exemptions and allowances. Overall, it has
been proposed that in the long term a central means testing agency model
could be established (either through the establishment of a special-purpose
body to carry out this work on behalf of several public bodies, through an
existing body carrying out this work on behalf of others or through
outsourcing to a contractor). It is understood that any data protection issues
are being dealt with as part of this work.
8.7.7 The Group believes that a shared service approach to this area could yield
significant savings for the local government system and allow for a more
efficient approach towards data collection across the entire public service
96

while also improving the service for the customer. Pending the outcome of
the pilot project, this work should be progressed as soon as possible.
Reporting Arrangements
8.7.8 Local authorities have to report regularly or make returns to a variety of
public bodies, for the purposes of oversight and to allow for the publication
of statistics in different areas of service provision. Such bodies include
amongst others the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local
Government, the Department of Transport, the Environmental Protection
Agency and An Bord Pleanála.
8.7.9 In many cases however, the incompatibility of ICT systems between these
different public bodies means that reporting becomes cumbersome and a
labour intensive process and the Group considers that efficiencies and
savings in hours worked could be gained through greater compatibility
between systems used by local authorities and those bodies to which they
must report. This would allow for automated reports to be returned to
Government Departments and agencies. Where a large number or all local
authorities use the same system, the body to which local authorities report
should ensure that their systems can be adapted to receive the data
required.
8.7.10 One area where progress has been made in this respect is in relation to
financial management systems. Most local authorities (30) have
implemented the Agresso financial management system. Dublin City
Council has adopted Oracle, Cork County Council and Cork City Council
implemented JD Edwards and Wexford County Council adopted Integra. A
common accounting system used by all local authorities means that each
financial management system works to a common accounting code of
practice and chart of accounts. This ensures that each local authority is
capable of reporting for its annual financial statement in the same format,
regardless of which specific financial management system is used.
8.8 Progressing the Shared Services Agenda
8.8.1 Three basic strategies are open to Government in seeking to encourage
greater use of shared services between local authorities, and indeed within
the wider public service:
• Active exchange of learning and dissemination of good practice on
shared services, especially where the model has proven its worth in
delivering efficiencies, savings and service improvements;
• Requirements on local authorities to regularly review and assess
shared service opportunities, whether the shared service option is
feasible or desirable, justifying the ‘status quo’ if that is the preferred
option;
• A direction by Government that local authorities (and other public
bodies where applicable) proceed with a shared service – this is most
97

likely to apply in cases where the level of investment requires a wholeof-sector
approach, or the initiative cannot proceed without the
participation of a considerable number of public bodies and local
authorities. As noted above, the Local Government Act 2001 allows
the Minister to direct local authorities or a public body to enter into an
agreement with another local authority to provide a specific function on
its behalf.
8.8.2 Each of these strategies are relevant to different service areas. Where
necessary, however, the powers of the Minister should be used to direct
local authorities to participate in shared service initiatives.
Recommendations:
8.9.1 Thus the Group recommends that:
• A uniform human resource and payroll system be implemented for
local authorities;
• All local government recruitment and promotion for clerical,
administrative, and professional staff be conducted through the Public
Appointments Service;
• The business case for a shared service approach between local
authorities be evaluated in the fields of fire services, homelessness,
building inspection, internal audit, motor tax, and e-Government
initiatives, either on a regional basis or on a lead authority model,
having regard to timescale, service improvements and anticipated cost
savings, as well as the proposed joint administrative areas;
• Single, national ICT applications with common business rules for all
local authorities be pursued wherever possible, as opposed to multiple
and duplicating local ICT applications;
• ICT infrastructure services across the sector be consolidated and
delivered as a shared service by the LGMA or ‘lead authorities’ ;
• The ICT systems used by local authorities and those bodies to which
they report be made compatible;
• The Regional Design Office model be extended to other local authority
service areas, for example to the procurement, land acquisition, project
management through planning and construction, and asset
management of water and waste infrastructure and public lighting;
• Local authorities in specific regions be obliged to negotiate a
framework agreement for the region every 5 years, which would
include assessments of shared service opportunities, and to
encourage attention to regional policy issues that transcend local
boundaries.
8.9.2 The total value of the immediate savings and extra charges identified from
shared human resource and payroll systems is €3 million in a full year.
Future savings in this area are more likely to be realised in the medium
rather than the short term. The opportunity can exist for shared services to
deliver non-financial as well as sizeable financial benefits, for example by
improving the quality of the service provided to the public. The
98

Implementation Group suggested in section 14.3 should monitor and review
progress in other potential areas for shared services.
99

9.1 Role of Procurement
9. Procurement
9.1.1 The role of procurement has gained enhanced status in the past few years
as a management tool to contain costs, achieve quality and improve the
effectiveness in purchasing the inputs necessary to provide public and
private goods and services. The discipline and techniques applied in
effective procurement are a key driver of efficiency and quality in delivering
services to the public. Improvements in procurement are being developed
at central level by the National Procurement Service. At local level, there
has been important progress but as with central government more can be
done.
9.2 Local Government Procurement
9.2.1 Until relatively recently, local authorities used largely to procure on an
individual basis and, as a result, there were different and often inconsistent
approaches to the tendering process. While adhering to EU Directives and
national guidelines on procurement, for smaller items many local authorities
used ‘annual quotation books’ whereby suppliers submitted a quotation list
or catalogue of supplies and services at the start of the year, and buyers
could directly select suppliers from this list as required throughout the year.
9.2.2 Arising from the national e-Procurement strategy for the public sector in
October 2001, the local government sector initiated a project to develop a
sector-level e-Procurement strategy, published in 2003. The purpose of the
strategy was to provide a set of recommendations and an implementation
plan to guide the development of procurement in the sector so that
significant savings could be achieved by exploiting the opportunities for
improving procurement performance. It was recognised that the existing
approach was not always the most effective in terms of leveraging buying
power and ensuring adequate competition in the supply market, and that a
technology based system was required. The overall objectives of the Local
Government e-Procurement Strategy are set out in Appendix 8.
9.2.3 The development of sectoral policies and procedures were needed to
ensure that a more integrated approach was taken across the sector in this
area. A key requirement to addressing this issue was the introduction of a
modern financial management system and a unified coding system. Since
2003 all local authorities have implemented new financial management
systems based on accrual accounting. In all cases the FMS systems can
support the raising of purchase orders through to payment of suppliers
electronically. In general, manual activities such as raising purchase orders
have been automated. In 2008, a standard coding system was introduced.
100

9.2.4 The Local Government e-Procurement Strategy in 2003 projected
substantial financial benefits and savings, particularly through reductions in
transaction costs (from lower administration costs through standardisation,
streamlining and automation) and in unit costs (from leveraging buying
power and improved procurement practices), as well as reducing the
number of transactions and savings on logistics through reductions in costs
for storage and delivery. This strategy report was written with the
assistance of a cross-functional team comprised of local authority staff from
the e-procurement pilot sites of Cork County Council, Cork City Council,
Dublin City Council, and Kerry County Council, in conjunction with staff from
the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the
Local Government Computer Services Board. It was agreed that the
recommendations be implemented in a pilot site and Kerry County Council
developed an electronic procurement system called LAQuotes (see section
9.4).
9.3 International Experience with Procurement
9.3.1 Joint purchasing has become a common theme in many countries to
increase efficiency in local government and take advantage of purchasing
power. For example, key areas for collaborative regional procurement
between local authorities in Britain have included:
• Energy;
• Insurance;
• Vehicle fleets;
• Agency staff.
9.3.2 Part of this process of sharpening procurement practice involves building
capacity and support on best practice in procurement and category
management within the local government system, as well as introducing
low-value procurement cards to reduce the transaction costs associated
with processing invoices. A precursor to collaborative procurement is
communication between local authorities so that renewal dates for contracts
in high spending areas can be aligned between neighbouring authorities.
Other tools such as eAuctions (a kind of reverse eBay) have been
developed, with pre-qualified suppliers invited to offer improved prices and
other terms under an online auction.
9.3.3 In some cases, joint procurement has gone beyond the local government
system to include other public sector bodies based in different regions. For
example, there are increasing efforts to ensure joint public sector-wide
procurement agreements on energy. There are also examples of
collaborative procurement across public sector organisations in different
regions in the purchasing of transport vehicles involving local authorities, fire
authorities, police services, health services, probation services, and higher
education.
101

9.4 LA Quotes
9.4.1 LAQuotes is an online annual quotation and procurement application for
local authorities and suppliers to local authorities (www.laquotes.ie). It
accepts quotations from suppliers in a number of sectors including plant hire
and haulage, tool hire, road making materials and supplies and services.
The system, which was developed in 2003 by Kerry County Council and is
now being used by 30 city/ county councils and a number of town councils,
has modernised the way suppliers submit annual quotations. The volume of
quotations received has grown by 44% since 2008.
9.4.2 The system was originally developed by Kerry County Council in 2003, and
at the request of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local
Government the application was offered to other local authorities. In 2004,
in excess of 750 suppliers were registered on the system where they
completed and submitted the electronic forms online. This had grown to
3,600 suppliers by 2010.
9.4.3 All local authorities were invited to join the system in 2006, which resulted in
twenty four local authorities using the system soon afterwards. By 2009
there were 30 local authorities participating in the system (Clare County
Council, Dublin City Council, Longford County Council and Waterford City
Council are the only local authorities that currently do not use the system).
It is expected that Waterford City Council will join the system in 2010.
9.4.4 Dublin City Council in 2005 carried out a comprehensive review of its own
procurement processes. The review made a number of recommendations
concerning procurement practices, including increased aggregation of
procurement and centralisation of procurement skills, suggested that
savings of €30 million could be achieved if the recommendations were fully
implemented by 2010.
9.4.5 The increased use of LAQuotes by both local authorities and suppliers
demonstrates strong customer confidence in the efficiency and usability of
the system. Also from a local government perspective it marks a major
milestone in the standardisation of processes amongst participating
authorities and the collaboration of purchasing functions and resources.
Moving to a standardised online process has delivered improvements in
internal workflows, process management and has led to a faster and more
efficient system. Traditionally, suppliers had to submit paper-based
quotations to each local authority. This system means that they can now
submit a quotation to all participating councils online. They can also view,
edit and delete quotations as well as copy information from the previous
year’s submissions. The service is free for suppliers and includes a number
of online training tutorials.
9.4.6 The system has recently been modified so that supporting documentation
can be received online. In an effort to reduce the volumes of paper
generated, and to simplify the process for local authorities, insurance
companies/ brokers, and suppliers, some of the supporting information/
102

forms are now captured online. This has eliminated the need to collate
approximately an additional 38,000 hardcopies of these forms.
9.4.7 In 2009, an online document management system was implemented where
documents were streamlined and hosted centrally by Kerry County Council,
which has eliminated the need for a further 9,000 hardcopies. An electronic
system to validate ownership of the vehicles quoted for by suppliers on
LAQuotes has also been developed, further eliminating the need for the
submission and approval of the hardcopy certificates. Overall, the number
of hard copy documents requested from suppliers by local authorities was
reduced from just over 284,000 to approximately 36,000 and an additional
10,000 documents are collated online via electronic forms (such as the
insurance questionnaire and the pre-qualification questionnaire).
9.4.8 Further developments are planned for LAQuotes in 2010. The design and
development of an electronic request for a quotation (eRFQ) module is
underway and will work in conjunction with the LAQuotes system to assist
local authorities in conducting mini competitions which are a requirement of
multiparty framework agreements. The development of an eRFQ module
integrated with the LAQuotes system and using framework agreements
provides a fully compliant and transparent process for recurring
procurement and ensures value for money. The complete process will lead
to a more efficient and effective procurement process for all participating
local authorities. These improvements, geared towards making the local
government procurement process more user-friendly, are important in
encouraging local suppliers to bid for public contracts – while there is an
underlying principle that best value must be obtained in terms of economy,
equally local authorities must enable local suppliers to participate in the
tendering process.
9.4.9 The development of LAQuotes has introduced greater efficiencies into the
procurement process in the local government sector, resulting in ongoing
savings to the sector. Based on the benefits predicted in 2002, the system
has yielded savings to local authorities in the order of €250 million in the
period 2006-2009. There is a recurring cost saving per annum of
approximately €58 million based on current expenditure levels. The system
also facilitates competitive tendering by being user-friendly and involving a
wide range of potential suppliers.
9.4.10 Notwithstanding these positive outcomes, the Group identified a number of
limitations of the system. The management information that the LAQuotes
system produces is limited in terms of providing usable data upon which
local authorities can assess whether they are securing value for money in
procurement. The Group recommends that the LAQuotes system should be
adapted to install metrics that would measure throughput in value terms,
count the number of transactions and record the transaction size, and
identify the products and services being procured.
9.4.11 The Group also noted how a number of unsuccessful tenderers tended to
undercut official suppliers by offering lower prices post the publication of the
103

official list. Some local authorities are achieving lower prices by seeking
quotes for chemicals on a more frequent basis than the annual list. This
has the effect of undermining LAQuotes, and the integrity of the
procurement process should be protected in order to ensure value for
money in the long-run.
9.4.12 The Group considers that the procurement systems in operation in Dublin
City Council, Clare County Council, Longford County Council (currently
outside of LAQuotes), as well as the LAQuotes system itself, should be
subject to an independent review, to establish which system can deliver the
greatest cost savings through aggregation. Following the review, which
should be carried out within the next twelve to eighteen months,
participation in an aggregated sectoral procurement system should be
mandatory for all local authorities.
9.4.13 The Group suggests that these issues be addressed through its
recommendations below.
9.5 Analysis of Main Areas of Local Government Procurement
9.5.1 Expenditure by local authorities on non-pay items in 2009 is estimated at
€2.14 billion (based on provisional un-audited accounts). The net procured
expenditure (with non-procured items removed e.g. grants, agency works
etc), amounted to €1.19 billion.
9.5.2 A survey of local authorities was carried out in April 2010 regarding the
procurement process for the principal spend items. These are listed in
Table 9.1 below. Particular emphasis was placed on the top 20 items as
these account for 95% of all spend in this category. The top 5 items alone
account for more than two-thirds of expenditure.
104

Table 9.1 – Non-Pay Items Procured by Local Authorities, 2009
Account element Total (€m) % of Total Cumulative
Minor Contracts - Trade Services & other works 235,085,974 19.76% 19.76%
Materials 185,165,623 15.57% 35.33%
Capital Contracts Expenditure 128,853,309 10.83% 46.16%
Energy 121,760,311 10.24% 56.40%
Hire (Ext) - Plant/Transport/Machinery & Equipment 116,929,566 9.83% 66.23%
Insurance 78,520,284 6.60% 72.83%
Consultancy/Professional Fees and Expenses 42,148,564 3.54% 76.38%
Repairs & Maintenance - Plant 31,057,936 2.61% 78.99%
Rent 27,606,183 2.32% 81.31%
Repairs & Maintenance - Other Equipment 21,988,894 1.85% 83.16%
Communication Expenses 21,739,282 1.83% 84.98%
Computer Software and Maintenance Fees 19,589,974 1.65% 86.63%
Training 19,406,999 1.63% 88.26%
Printing & Office Consumables 18,554,730 1.56% 89.82%
Legal Fees and Expenses 15,854,773 1.33% 91.15%
Security - Property 13,250,858 1.11% 92.27%
Non-Capital Equip Purchase - Other 12,201,405 1.03% 93.29%
Library Book Purchases 10,415,148 0.88% 94.17%
Repairs & Maintenance - Computer Equipment 9,578,485 0.81% 94.98%
Non-Capital Equip Purchase - Machinery Yard 8,285,914 0.70% 95.67%
Advertising 7,324,164 0.62% 96.29%
Repairs & Maintenance - Buildings (excl. LA Housing) 7,201,794 0.61% 96.89%
Overdraft interest & financial charges 7,031,546 0.59% 97.48%
Non-Capital Equip Purchase - Fire Services 6,795,104 0.57% 98.06%
Cleaning 6,664,414 0.56% 98.62%
Non-Capital Equip Purchase - Computers 4,587,544 0.39% 99.00%
Canteen 3,290,223 0.28% 99.28%
Non-Capital Equip Purchase - Office Equip/Furniture 2,445,147 0.21% 99.48%
Issues from Stores - No Markup 1,948,412 0.16% 99.65%
Security - Cash Delivery 1,349,411 0.11% 99.76%
Courier 1,002,259 0.08% 99.85%
Scanning 894,683 0.08% 99.92%
Flood Damage 541,951 0.05% 99.97%
Non-Capital Equip Purchase - Civil Defence 402,088 0.03% 100.00%
GRAND TOTAL 1,189,472,952
Source: Survey of County and City Councils, 2010
9.5.3 The Group confirmed that these items are sourced through a competitive
process, where appropriate. Exceptions include rents, which are
understandably negotiated with landlords in leasehold agreements by
individual local authorities, and insurance, where most local authorities are
insured by Irish Public Bodies Mutual Insurance Ltd., was set up under the
Local Authorities (Mutual Assurance) Act, 1926.
9.5.4 All local authorities have procurement plans in place following a direction
from the Department of Finance to all public bodies in 2006. The plans
cover two categories of procurement (a) supplies of goods and services and
105

(b) works. Minor works are contracted in accordance with these
procurement plans. These set out requirements to obtain competitive
quotations from suppliers for small contracts, with public advertisement and
advertisement on e-tenders generally for contracts above €50,000, as well
as compliance with the procedures required under the EU Procurement
Directives for contracts above the EU thresholds.
9.5.5 Materials are procured through a combination of written quotations, tenders,
e-tenders, LAQuotes, Low Value Purchase (LVP) cards and fuel cards. The
LVP card is a specific form of charge card for the purchase of low value but
frequently purchased goods and services. The card while similar in
operation to a credit card, has inbuilt limits on individual transaction value,
monthly combined transaction value and category of business in which it
may be used. The effect is to substantially reduce transaction costs thereby
providing a more efficient and cost-effective method of handling purchases
and the related payment procedures.
9.5.6 Almost two-thirds of expenditure under the heading of materials is spent on
roads, with the majority of the remainder spent on water services. The
principal materials used in roads are bitumen, road chippings, and road salt.
Road chippings are procured through LAQuotes, and bitumen and related
products through LABitumen (a specialist procurement vehicle for these
products as the price of these tends to fluctuate more regularly).
9.5.7 Road salt is bought by local authorities on an individual basis and annual
usage is about 50,000 tons at a cost of approximately €10 million. Due to
the severe weather conditions which affected Ireland in December 2009–
January 2010, there were difficulties in securing supply of salt. Many local
authorities were effectively placed in direct competition with one another
because of the high demand for road salt and a shortage of supply.
Because of this situation the procurement of road salt was moved on a
temporary basis to the National Roads Authority. The Group considers that
a repeat of this situation should be avoided and measures put in place to
move this procurement function to the National Roads Authority on a
permanent basis.
9.5.8 Chemicals, including aluminium sulphate, and fluoride for water treatment
are procured from LAQuotes.
9.5.9 All local authorities have tendered or are going to tender for their electricity
supply and contracts have been awarded to Bord Gais, ESB, and Airtricity.
In some authorities, all three are suppliers. Tenders were secured on a joint
basis, with counties grouping together to purchase electricity in the majority
of cases. It is estimated that savings of €5 million were made in 2009 due
to the tendering process and this is expected to rise to €10 million in 2010.
In addition, a number of local authorities have established joint energy
bodies to carry out energy audits, promote renewable energy and energy
efficiency, and reduce the carbon footprint of local government. Savings of
3% per annum are targeted for each of the next 10 years equating to €3
million per annum for local authorities.
106

9.5.10 LAQuotes is used by the vast majority of local authorities for plant and
machinery hire. Very specific small jobs are tendered separately as are
tenders for long term hire as better value is achieved in this manner.
9.5.11 There is also considerable use of regional procurement in different parts of
the country. The example of joint procurement of energy is noted above.
Professional fees for environment and water services are procured on a
regional basis in Dublin. The West of Ireland Local Authority Procurement
Network Group (which includes Roscommon, Galway City Council, Galway
County Council, Leitrim County Council and Mayo County Council) is
currently looking at joint tendering for water chemicals and heating oil.
9.5.12 The Group recommends that local authorities should examine other
opportunities for joint procurement to increase the purchasing power of local
government – this process will be facilitated in a number of local authorities
through the establishment of joint administrative areas (see section 6.4), but
should where appropriate extend to the regional and national procurement
of items. Regional procurement specialists from the National Procurement
Service (see below) should work with a number of local authorities in each
region to encourage the identification and exploitation of opportunities for
more effective procurement co-operation and co-ordination across local
authorities and the broader public sector, and should coordinate their efforts
across multiple regions and at a sector level.
9.6 The National Procurement Service
9.6.1 The National Public Procurement Operations Unit (NPPOU) was
established by Government decision in April 2009, with the name later
changed to the National Procurement Service (NPS). The NPS, based in
the Office of Public Works in Trim, subsumes all functions of the former
Government Supplies Agency. These functions include:
• Organising the procurement of common goods and services;
• Providing professional procurement advice;
• Assisting in specialist procurement projects;
• Organising networks of public service procurement professionals;
• Developing targeted and accredited training and education;
• Establishing appropriate links with procurement in Northern Ireland;
• Operating and developing the e-tenders system;
• Integrating the whole-of-Government policies and issues into
procurement practice.
9.6.2 The intended clients of the NPS are civil service Departments and offices,
local authorities, the education sector, the health sector and state agencies.
The overall procurement strategy being pursued by the NPS is to:
• Determine top spend areas;
107

• Focus on those that may yield savings;
• Research the potential for aggregated demand;
• Research the potential for innovative solutions;
• Research the potential for administrative efficiencies.
9.6.3 The service will also seek to achieve savings from economies of scale
through aggregation of demand, and to secure administrative savings on
running centralised tender processes. The top categories of spend across
the public service identified by the NPS are: construction; ICT consumables;
travel; roads; energy; professional services; waste disposal; water; plant &
equipment; medical supplies; transport; advertising; telephones; insurance;
postage; general maintenance; lab supplies; fuel; food; catering; security
services/ fire prevention; printing/ publishing; cleaning/ janitorial;
recruitment; training; stationery; uniforms/ clothing; audit and accountancy;
office equipment.
9.6.4 The areas that the NPS intends to target in 2010 are illustrated in Table 9.2.
Table 9.2 – NPS Priority Areas, 2010
Electricity Natural gas LPG Bulk Liquid fuels
(Fuel Charge cards) Office Equipment Stationery Photocopying
IT consumables Print Travel Advertising
Vehicles Clothing Water meters Janitorial supplies
Source: National Procurement Service
9.6.5 NPS proposes to establish central or sectoral contracts and framework
agreements. A lead procurer will be agreed for specific categories, for
example the HSE for pharmaceuticals. The NPS have advised local
authorities who are proposing to enter into any arrangements in these
markets to contact the NPS in the first instance. They have also requested
that each authority appoint a designated procurement liaison officer.
9.6.6 The Group considers that each local authority should designate a contact
point and resource to support the procurement process within the authority.
This position need not be full time, and can be assigned to an existing
officer. This person should be the main point of contact for all those
involved in procurement on behalf of the local authority, and where required,
will act as liaison between procurers and the National Procurement Service
specialists. The procurement officer should provide advice and support for
the operational aspects of procurement, including supplier management,
compliance with public sector and EU regulations.
9.6.7 Under existing arrangements some local authorities have more
sophisticated organisational structures in place, with delegated
responsibilities for procurement entailing large amounts of expenditure.
Local authorities have also formed alliances in different regions to deal with
procurement issues and logistic arrangements not covered by LAQuotes.
The Group considers that there is a need to formalise the links between
procurement officers in local authorities, in particular at local government
108

sectoral level, to promote exchange of best practice and coordinate efforts
at shared procurement. This could be facilitated by the Local Government
Management Agency on a national basis, who in turn should establish
formal links with the NPS.
9.6.8 It is vital that an investment in procurement skills be made to maximise
value-for-money in local government purchasing. Therefore, the Group
recommend that cost effective training for all key participants in the
procurement process should be developed and implemented across the
sector. The skills of participants should be enhanced to collect, aggregate
and analyse high level spend data through detailed spend analysis, market
analysis, negotiating and contracting skills, supplier and contract
management, and supplier performance management.
Recommendations:
9.7.1 In many respects, Irish local authorities compare well with their counterparts
abroad in developing a coordinated online approach to procurement. The
development and implementation of LAQuotes has put local government at
the leading edge of procurement in the Irish public service. There are gaps
in the system, and these could be addressed through new linkages between
local authorities and the National Procurement Service. Local authorities
are estimated to have achieved savings of 3%-4% to date. With a
professionalisation of the procurement, and a further refinement of
procurement processes, the Group is confident that savings of a further 3-
4% are possible over time, giving an additional full year saving of €40 million
per annum. The Group believes that additional savings of up to €30 million
should be possible over the long-term.
9.7.2 For this reason, the Group recommends that:
• Procurement systems in operation in Dublin City Council, Clare County
Council, Longford County Council and LAQuotes be reviewed within
12-18 months to establish which system can deliver the greatest cost
savings through aggregation – following this review, participation in an
aggregated sectoral procurement system should be mandatory for all
local authorities;
• LAQuotes be adapted to ensure that metrics are installed to measure
throughput in value terms, count the number of transactions and record
the transaction size, and identify the products and services being
procured;
• The procurement of road salt be transferred to the National Roads
Authority to ensure that local authorities do not have to compete with
one another when there is a high demand for road salt;
• Local suppliers be encouraged to participate in the tendering process –
the underlying principle is clear that best value must be obtained in
terms of economy, but equally local authorities must enable local
suppliers to participate in the tendering process;
• Each local authority designate a contact point and resource to support
procurement;
109

• Links be formalised between the procurement officers in local
authorities to promote exchange of best practice and coordinate efforts
at shared procurement;
• Regional procurement specialists from the National Procurement
Service work with the Local Government Management Agency and a
number of local authorities in each region to encourage the
identification and exploitation of opportunities for more effective
procurement co-operation and co-ordination across local authorities
and the broader public sector;
• Cost effective training be provided for all key participants in the
procurement process and should be developed and implemented
across the sector – the skills of participants should be enhanced to
ensure adherence with best practice in specific cases of procurement,
but also the strategic procurement skills to collect, aggregate and
analyse high level spend data through detailed spend analysis, market
analysis, negotiating and contracting skills, supplier and contract
management, and supplier performance management.
9.7.3 The total value of the savings and extra charges identified above is €40
million in a full year in the medium-term, with a further €30 million in the
long-term.
Financial Summary:
Through a combination of savings and measures a total of €70 million can be
achieved based on the following items
1. Further refinement of the procurement process through the above
recommendations should reduce costs over the course of the next 5 years by
a further 3-4% – €40 million in a full year, with a further €30 million in the
long-term
Total Amount: €70 million
110

10.1 Housing
10. Efficiencies in Programme Areas
10.1.1 This chapter outlines a series of efficiencies identified by the Group in
specific local government programme areas. Starting with housing in this
subsection, each sub-section commences with a brief overview of the
activities of local authorities in the service area concerned, identifying which
of the local authorities are involved, the budgeted expenditure for the area in
2010, and the staffing resources for the service. Where applicable,
reference is made to proposals elsewhere in the report that may have
particular relevance to the service concerned.
10.1.2 All 114 local authorities are designated as ‘housing authorities’ for the
purpose of housing services. However, it should be noted that while the 34
county and city councils have responsibility for all housing functions the role
of the 80 town councils is restricted in a number of aspects of housing
provision, for example town councils are not empowered to grant shared
ownership leases. The role of the 26 non-rating town councils is particularly
limited.
10.1.3 The responsibilities of local authorities in this area include:
• Carrying out assessments of need for applicants for social housing;
• Provision of social housing through various means, such as
construction of dwellings, purchasing and long-term leasing from the
private sector;
• Housing allocations;
• Housing stock maintenance, repairs, as well as larger-scale
refurbishment projects;
• Estate management and dealing with anti-social behaviour;
• Processing applications under a variety of schemes to promote home
ownership, such as the tenant purchase and shared ownership
schemes;
• Processing applications under a variety of schemes to improve public
and private dwellings, such as adaptations needed for the elderly or
those with a disability;
• Enforcement and inspection of standards in privately rented
accommodation;
• Liaising with and supporting voluntary housing bodies in the provision
of social housing;
• Homeless accommodation and accommodation related services; and
• Traveller accommodation.
10.1.4 The total local authority budgeted current expenditure for housing services
in 2010 comes to €778.7 million. According to figures collected from local
authorities by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local
111

Government, in early 2010 the number of staff working in the housing area
in local government was just under 4,000, accounting for some 12% of all
local authority staff.
10.1.5 Recent years have seen a major reorientation in social housing policy. In
particular a greater emphasis is being placed on sourcing social housing
units from the private sector, through schemes such as the Rental
Accommodation Scheme and the more recent Social Housing Leasing
Initiative, as opposed to the traditional source of supply via construction and
acquisition of dwellings. It is expected that in 2010 over 50% of new social
housing supply will come from these two sources.
10.1.6 In the context of this reorientation in housing policy and the provision of
social housing (namely away from housing construction and acquisition, and
towards sourcing social housing from the private sector through options
such as RAS and leasing), the Group considers that there is a need for
housing sections within local authorities to be reconfigured. In particular,
this should involve a reassignment of staff, with a greater focus on
management issues arising from a greater use of leased properties, the
regulation of the social housing market and increased use of shared
services at county and regional level. An implication of this change in
emphasis in the delivery of social housing could be a reduced need for
technical and professional staff assigned to housing sections for the
purposes of construction projects. Issues of redeployment of staff to other
duties arise here, where the staff concerned would have a number of
important transferable skills, for example in areas such as procurement,
property surveys and assessment of leasing submissions.
10.1.7 The policy of moving towards leasing as a key mechanism for the provision
of social housing has led, and will lead, to more frequent requirements to
inspect proposed dwellings for a number of different purposes (such as
private rented regulations, structural surveys, fire and safety inspections,
etc). At present these inspections for different purposes are often carried
out by separate local authority officials. The Group is proposing that the
establishment of a single Building Inspectorate, perhaps operating at either
county/city level or at a regional level, could lead to savings and efficiencies
in this process – further details in this respect are included in section 8.5.
10.1.8 Service indicator data for 2008 and previous years show considerable
variation between local authorities in the time taken to re-let vacant housing.
While direct comparisons with other jurisdictions have their limitations,
available data also suggests that vacancies are higher in Ireland than in
England, Scotland or Northern Ireland. While the Group understands that
there can be multiple reasons for vacancies, including refusals of offers from
applicants, difficulties in letting properties in areas of low demand and
budgetary restrictions on renovations or refurbishments, the Group
considers that further efforts could be made to reduce the time taken to let
and re-let social housing properties to improve supply and reduce costs,
and encourage a more efficient use of housing stock.
112

10.1.9 Two issues arise in this respect. Firstly, there is the physical dimension in
terms of exchanging and replicating identified best practice in maintenance
and refurbishment work. Secondly, there may be a need to examine the
efficiency of administrative procedures to ensure that tenants are ready to
occupy vacant dwellings as soon as they are ready to be occupied.
10.1.10 In addition, the Group also considers that local authorities should to the
greatest extent possible avail of the professional services that are available
from in-house staff, from other local authority staff on a shared service
basis, or from staff of the new Housing and Sustainable Communities
Agency (incorporating the former National Building Agency) to support the
procurement and management of housing projects, as opposed to the
considerable costs associated with engaging the use of private professional
companies. Data from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and
Local Government suggest that where local authorities obtain full design
team services from consultants the cost can range from 7.5% to 12.5% plus
VAT @ 21% depending on the location, size, nature and complexity of the
project. It is estimated that less than half of the projects undertaken by local
authorities utilise external consultants.
10.1.11 For illustrative purposes, the following calculations show the potential saving
that would accrue for every €100 million worth of expenditure on traditional
housing construction. Of the €100 million, €83 million is the value of the
construction expenditure (€73m excluding VAT). Taking professional fees
at an average of 9% this gives a figure of €6.6m (excluding VAT). The
proportion of projects that are undertaken by the private sector, weighted to
reflect that larger projects are more likely to be externally managed, is two
thirds. This results in a figure of just over €4 million as the amount spent on
external consultants per €100 million housing construction expenditure. On
the assumption that local authorities would not use consultants in 50% of
cases, this would produce a saving in the region of €2 million on every €100
million of expenditure in housing construction. The actual amount of
savings will depend on the size of the construction programme (declining at
present), the availability of underutilised resources within the public sector,
the impact of new fixed price contracts and state of the market for
professional services which is currently driving down prices.
10.1.12 At present, an assessment of need for housing carried out in one local
authority is not valid in another. It is proposed, through the implementation
of the relevant provisions of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act
2009 that a single assessment process be put in place, whereby a housing
assessment carried out by one local authority would be valid in another.
This should ensure that there are no duplicate assessments being carried
out. In the last statutory housing needs assessment carried out in 2008
approximately 5,500 duplicate applications were assessed by local
authorities. Assuming each assessment takes on average 1½ hours (in
fact, some can take up to 3 or 4 hours), one could estimate that this would
result in a saving of 8,250 working hours, equating to a saving of €0.2
million. In addition, the prospect of establishing specialist teams across
113

several local authorities to carry out housing needs assessments should
also be investigated with a view to achieving further efficiencies.
10.1.13 At present, the potential to streamline and standardise the assessment of a
household’s means for the purposes of a range of publicly-funded supports,
from social welfare to healthcare to social housing, is being examined. The
assessment of means is one of the most time consuming aspects of a
housing needs assessment. Therefore any streamlining of this process is
likely to bring about efficiencies, as well as benefiting the citizen by reducing
the number of times an individual has to supply the same information to
different public bodies. In relation to rents assessment, which is linked to
the area of social housing support, better co-ordination and information
sharing processes between local authorities and the Department of Social
Protection could bring about additional efficiencies. This issue is further
addressed in section 8.7.
10.1.14 A business planning improvement project has been initiated to explore both
national and local ICT requirements on foot of changing housing policy. At
present the majority of local authorities, with the exception of the Dublin
local authorities, use a similar housing ICT system to manage housing
functions. This ICT system is not necessarily suitable to the management of
a housing client base as big as that managed by the larger local authorities,
such as those in Dublin. A national data warehouse has already been
developed for the collection of information centrally. If a single ICT system
is not to be progressed, local authorities that do not have an automated
reporting process to this warehouse should ensure, at a minimum, that their
housing ICT systems are compatible to provide better efficiency in terms of
their future reporting.
10.1.15 The Group is also recommending that a more efficient approach to
collection of social housing rents be put in place. The amount of arrears
due to local authorities in 2008 for housing rents was €40 million, while the
budgeted amount for rent collection and collection of tenant purchase
payments in 2010 was €36.2 million. A large proportion of local authority
tenants are in receipt of social welfare payments. While official statistics are
not compiled on this matter, records from different local authorities suggest
that between two-thirds and three-quarters of local authority tenants are
either on full-time social welfare, are on income supplements based on parttime
working or working for low pay.
10.1.16 The Group considers that the current situation where the State makes
payments to social welfare recipients only for another public body to have to
seek to recover a proportion of these payments in social housing rents,
sometimes through the Courts, is inefficient and contrary to the optimal use
of State resources. Direct deductions of rents at source would also
streamline processes for local authority tenants and reduce the time they
have to spend dealing with rent collectors. If necessary, legislation should
be amended to allow for this more streamlined approach to revenue
collection and the Departments of the Environment, Heritage and Local
Government and Social Protection should address any operational issues
114

that may arise in this respect as part of the overall commitment towards a
more integrated public service. Local authorities should also ensure that
direct debits from social welfare payments are made a condition for new
tenancies.
10.1.17 On the basis that some 70% of local authority tenants are in receipt of some
form of payment from the Department of Social Protection direct deduction
of rents at source would lead to annual savings on the costs associated with
rent collection of some €25 million. In addition to this figure, however, the
Group considers that direct deductions would have significant positive sideeffects,
in that a natural consequence of this change would be the cessation
of the future accumulation of arrears in respect of a substantial proportion of
local authority rents.
10.1.18 In early 2010, local authorities were asked to establish homelessness
consultative fora on a regional basis with a view to preparing regional action
plans to address homelessness for the wider regional area. One local
authority is designated as lead authority with primary responsibility for
preparing the action plan. This approach seems sensible given that in many
cases there is a principal centre of population in each region which tends to
be the main focus for homelessness issues for the wider area. The lead
authority plays a largely coordinating role, although this does not affect the
statutory responsibilities of individual authorities.
10.1.19 With regard to services for the homeless, local authorities with a small base
of homeless persons should consider whether a partnership approach to
relevant homeless services could be adopted with neighbouring areas to
pool resources and improve access to local services, as appropriate.
Partnership with the HSE in this area should be continued or enhanced
where necessary, based on a clear understanding of the respective roles of
the agencies, whereby housing authorities have responsibility for
accommodation aspects and the HSE for heath and care services (see
section 8.5 for further details).
10.1.20 The Group understands that consideration is being given to undertaking a
value for money study into the costs and benefits of different Traveller
accommodation options to identify the scope for increased effectiveness in
investment and issues that arise in terms of the costs of Traveller
accommodation.
10.1.21 In addition, the Group is also recommending that the housing-related
functions of rating town councils be transferred to county councils. This
along with the transfer of other responsibilities should yield a significant
saving in costs each year (for further details see section 5.6).
10.1.22 The Group noted that one of the most significant challenges for local
authorities in the medium term in this area is likely to be the need to provide
a housing response to Government proposals in relation to the
deinstitutionalisation of individuals from mental health facilities and
congregated settings. This process will need to be planned, implemented,
115

managed and resourced effectively, within agreed achievable timescales
through an appropriate framework between the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the Department of Health
and Children, local authorities and HSE to manage the process. It is
envisaged that agreed proposals will be reflected in the new national
housing strategy for people with a disability which is currently being
developed.
10.1.23 The Group also notes the recent amalgamation of the functions of a number
of housing bodies including the National Building Agency, Affordable Homes
Partnership, the Centre for Housing Research, and the Dublin Homeless
Agency (with regard to certain functions of relevance nationally) into a single
agency, the Housing and Sustainable Communities Agency. Apart from
producing efficiencies in supporting the work of local authorities in this area
of service delivery, the new consolidated Agency should have as part of its
remit the dissemination of best practice across local authorities in areas
such as repair work on vacancies, administrative procedures to ensure that
new tenants occupy vacant dwellings as soon as possible and the
processing of adaptation grants on a shared service basis to secure
efficiency gains.
Recommendations:
10.1.24 In summary, the Group considers that the new direction implied by a
fundamental shift in the means of supplying social housing calls for a reexamination
of the profile of housing sections within local authorities.
Further potential savings are also possible through exploring options for
streamlining and sharing service provision in areas such as housing
assessment and the inspection of buildings. A greater emphasis is needed
at local level to identify and replicate best practice in housing management,
with the advice and assistance of housing support structures.
10.1.25 Thus the Group recommends that:
• Housing sections within local authorities be reconfigured to reflect the
more varied sources of housing supply, arising from a greater
emphasis on sourcing social housing units from the private sector
through RAS and long-term leasing;
• A single building inspectorate service could be established on a
regional basis to streamline the approach to the inspection of property.
This should be examined to see how a single inspection could serve
most if not all purposes across housing, planning, fire and other
functions – this process should also be facilitated through the
establishment of joint administrative areas (see section 6.4);
• The time needed to let and re-let social housing properties be further
reduced to improve supply and reduce costs, and encourage a more
efficient use of housing stock;
• The use of the professional services that are available from in-house
staff, from other local authority staff on a shared service basis or from
116

the new Housing and Sustainable Communities Agency be maximised
to support the procurement and management of housing projects;
• Housing assessments carried out by one local authority be valid in
others to eliminate duplicate assessments, and the possibility of
establishing specialist teams to carry out housing needs assessment
on behalf of several local authorities should be evaluated;
• Social housing rents due to local authorities be deducted directly from
social welfare payments to reduce overheads associated with revenue
collection in this area and to substantially reduce arrears, as well as to
streamline processes for local authority tenants and reduce the time
they have to spend dealing with rent collectors. This should also be a
condition of new tenancies;
• Opportunities for partnership with other local authorities in the
provision of relevant services for the homeless be explored to pool
resources and improve access, as appropriate, and partnership with
the HSE be continued or enhanced where necessary, having regard to
the respective roles of the agencies;
• ICT systems used by local authorities and those bodies to which they
report must be made compatible;
• The housing-related functions of town councils be transferred to county
councils;
• County councils be allowed delegate some local aspects of housing
service provision to towns; and
• The dissemination of best practice across local authorities be a central
element of the remit of the newly consolidated Housing and
Sustainable Communities Agency.
10.1.26 The total value of the savings and extra charges identified above is €30
million in a full year of implementation.
Financial Summary:
Through a combination of savings and measures a total of €30 million can be
achieved based on the following items
1. Maximise use of in-house / local authority / Housing and Sustainable
Communities Agency professional services wherever possible – €2 million
(for 2011, but likely to decline significantly as housing construction declines)
2. Savings resulting from a combination of greater outsourcing and efficiencies
in housing maintenance, reductions in vacancy times from re-lettings, and
implementation of best practice identified by the Housing and Sustainable
Communities Agency – €3 million
3. Social housing rents from existing and new tenants to be paid directly to local
authorities by Department of Social Protection to reduce overheads
associated with rent collection – €25 million
4. Transfer of housing functions from town to county council level – (see section
5)
Total Amount: €30 million
117

10.2 Roads
10.2.1 The 34 county and city councils are designated as ‘road authorities’ for the
purpose of the construction and maintenance of all national and regional
roads in their administrative areas. In addition, county and city councils have
responsibility for local roads outside of rating town council areas. The 54
rating town councils are roads authorities that are charged with
responsibility for the construction and maintenance of all local roads in their
administrative area.
10.2.2 The responsibilities of local authorities in the roads area are set out
principally in the Roads Acts and include:
• Project management of road schemes / road construction;
• Improvement and maintenance of public roads;
• Road safety initiatives, such as through addressing ‘blackspots’ and
educational campaigns;
• Traffic management;
• Maintenance of public lighting;
• Maintenance of essential services during severe weather conditions;
• Temporary closure of roads; and
• Control of dangerous structures near roads.
10.2.3 Local authority total budgeted current expenditure for roads services in 2010
amount to €919.3 million. According to figures collected by the Department
of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government from local authorities,
in early 2010 the number of staff working in roads services in local
government (including road design, road projects and capital schemes,
network management, and plant and machinery and stores) was
approximately 7,000, accounting for over one-fifth of all local authority staff.
10.2.4 The low density of our population, coupled with dispersed population in rural
areas, means that Ireland has a high dependency on the roads network for
private and commercial transportation. It also has a far larger road network
per capita (in kilometres) to be maintained than most European countries.
National roads account for less than 6% of the total road network, even
though they account for 45% of traffic volume. In contrast, regional roads
make up 12% of the network and local roads 82% of the network – together
regional and local roads carry just 55% of traffic.
10.2.5 The Group considered the possibility of additional tolls on national roads.
This offers a number of advantages in promoting a more efficient and
environmentally-responsible use of Ireland’s national road network and
incentivising private and commercial vehicle users to consider other
transport options. Such a move would also closely align with the National
Climate Change Strategy proposals to introduce fiscal measures to reduce
transport demand and Government policy on environmental charging in
other areas.
118

10.2.6 To date, the emphasis of tolling policy has been on the public-private
partnerships (PPPs) for national roads (with the exceptions being the M50
electronic toll and the Dublin Port Tunnel). The Eastlink Bridge is an
example of a toll scheme on a non-national road. The 9 current PPP toll
projects have raised over €2 billion in the period 2006 to 2010. The Group
believes that there is scope for raising further revenue for investment in
national, regional and local roads by introducing new tolling schemes on
national roads (both new and existing), based on an equitable distribution of
tolling points across the national roads network and to broaden the base of
tolling revenue across a greater number of road users. The Group
understands that the extension of tolling is currently under consideration by
Government. It is difficult to quantify the possible revenue until an NRA
(National Roads Authority) scoping study that is currently underway is
completed and a Government decision is made. Depending on traffic
volumes, and the particular tolling schemes chosen, it might in the medium
term raise in the region of €50-100 million gross for investment in road
improvements and maintenance. Following Government approval in
principle and completion of the preparatory studies, the Group understands
that there is an average lead-in time of 12-20 months for tolling schemes on
existing roads, allowing for design of the tolling system, public consultation,
and statutory approval. For a toll on a new road, the road construction
timetable will be the determining factor.
10.2.7 The Group took note of some of the proposals (such as the DTO’s Greater
Dublin Area Travel Demand Management study) on congestion charging as
a means of promoting a more responsible use of road capacity and to
encourage modal shifts to other forms of transport. Congestion charging is
a logical ‘next step’ to tolling and encouraging moves from private vehicles
to public transport. While this is a longer term project, it is in line with
promoting a greater shift to public transport.
10.2.8 An important support to the roads-related work of local authorities comes
from the 11 Regional Design Offices (RDOs) located in Cork, Limerick,
Kerry, Kildare, Waterford, Donegal, Galway, Mayo, Meath, Roscommon and
Westmeath. These offices are staffed largely by local authority personnel,
funded by the NRA, and established to support the NRA and local
authorities in their joint efforts to deliver the national roads programme.
Some RDOs support individual counties, while others support several
counties.
10.2.9 The RDOs have been engaged primarily in managing major national road
projects through planning, and in the case of non-PPP projects, through
construction. The Group consider that this specialised support role should
be extended to other aspects of the roads function, including the
management of non-PPP major projects, strategic regional road projects,
asset and network management and rehabilitation work. In light of the
reducing number of major roads projects, this additional workload could be
accommodated within existing staff complements, while also having the
effect of freeing up local authority staff for other duties. Apart from the
119

enefits of centralising specialised skills in these areas as a combined
service available to several local authorities, the extension of RDO
responsibilities into these areas has the potential to yield savings.
10.2.10 The Group considers that there are opportunities to streamline the number
of RDO locations, and that each RDO should serve several county areas. It
is not clear why a number of the Offices only serve a single county area,
and there would be opportunities for economies of scale here in light of the
specialised nature of the work done. The Group understands that a
reduction in the number of RDO offices and an extension of their roads
functions could lead to a saving of some €5 million on 2009 levels and
efficiencies of the order of €5 million per annum. The new RDO structures
should reflect any new regional structures which may be proposed in the
White Paper on Local Government (see section 1.5). RDOs are financed
from the capital budget through the Department of Transport, the combined
effect would be to increase the funding available for direct investment by up
to €10 million per annum, some of which has already been achieved.
10.2.11 The Group also believes that the RDOs are a good model of shared
technical support services which could be replicated in other local authority
service areas. Investment in the inter-urban routes between the major cities
is now largely complete. With a viewing to maximising value for money,
spare capacity in the RDOs could be utilised in other service areas. The
Group suggests that specialised skills such as procurement, land
acquisition, project management through planning and construction and
asset management, would also be beneficial as support services to other
local authority services involving strategic infrastructural investments, such
as water, waste management and public lighting. The NRA has also
indicated to the Group its willingness to provide support and advice to local
authorities based on its expertise in PPPs. In that context, the Group
suggests that the RDO model be expanded to incorporate technical support
services to a number of local authority service areas and not simply be
confined to road-related work. One implication of this would be that the
governance and management arrangements for the RDOs would have to be
reviewed in light of their taking on new responsibilities. The gross benefit of
this enhanced role for the RDOs could be up to 5% of the capital investment
involved, but there would be some offsetting staffing and administrative
costs as that role increased.
10.2.12 The Group also considers that greater efficiencies could be secured through
uniform technical specifications, use of project management guidelines and
making bridge/ technical specialists available to local authorities, either via
RDOs or through the NRA. It is not possible to quantify the financial
benefits at this point.
10.2.13 The Group understands that the Department of Transport is currently
investigating the reasons for variations in unit costs and rates for road
improvement and maintenance works. The Group consider that this matter
should be pursued as a matter of priority.
120

10.2.14 The Group also noted the large divergence in the number of roads staff per
kilometre of road across different local authorities (see section 6.9). In this
context, the Group considers that there should be a reduction of 250 staff in
roads sections across local authorities.
10.2.15 Section 13(6) of the Roads Act 1993 allows members of the local
community, with the consent of the relevant local authority, to carry out
maintenance work on a local road. The local authority may provide material,
plant, equipment and may make staff available to the local community to
carry out these works. According to figures supplied by the Department of
Transport, in 2008 €1.1 million was raised for improvement works and €0.3
million for maintenance work (surface dressing) via a community
contribution (in cash or in-kind). In 2009, €0.9 million was raised via a
community contribution for improvement works and €0.8 million for
maintenance work.
10.2.16 The Group believes that a greater community contribution could be made
towards the costs accruing to the State in the upkeep of lesser-used local
roads, particularly where these roads serve very small numbers of
dwellings. There is nothing, for example, under roads legislation that would
prevent a Community Employment scheme being used for this purpose.
Local authorities could be encouraged to seek a greater community
contribution (financial or in-kind) towards the upkeep of low volume local
roads serving small numbers of households, with a view to raising an
additional €2 million towards local roads improvement and maintenance
work.
10.2.17 In addition, the Group recommends that the roads-related functions of rating
town councils be transferred to county councils. This, along with the
transfer of other responsibilities, should yield a significant saving in costs
each year (for further details see section 5.6).
Recommendations:
10.2.18 In summary, the Group considers that there is a case for fiscal measures to
incentivise a modal shift towards other transport options and a more efficient
use of the road network, as well as potential efficiencies arising from
concentrating specialised skills involved in the management of road
infrastructure and other strategic infrastructural assets at regional level.
10.2.19 Thus the Group recommends that:
• New tolling schemes on national roads (both new and existing) be
introduced, based on an equitable distribution of tolling points across
the national roads network, with a dedicated proportion of revenue
used to invest in local and regional roads;
• The role of the Regional Design Offices be extended to areas such as
the management of non-PPP major projects, strategic regional road
projects, asset and network management, and rehabilitation work;
• The number of Regional Design Offices be reduced;
121

• The Regional Design Office model be extended to other local authority
service areas, for example to the procurement, land acquisition, project
management through planning and construction, and asset
management of water and waste infrastructure;
• The number of roads staff be reduced by 250, with an emphasis on
reducing numbers in certain local authorities;
• A greater community contribution be secured towards the upkeep of
local roads serving a small number of households;
• The roads-related functions of town councils be transferred to county
councils.
10.2.20 The total annual value of the savings, efficiency benefits and additional
revenue sources identified above is €10 million in current expenditure.
Financial Summary:
Through a combination of savings and measures a total of €10 million can be
achieved based on the following items
1. Reduction of roads staff – €8 million
2. Greater community contribution to upkeep of local roads – €2 million
Total Amount: €10 million
10.2.21 These figures do not include an estimated €60 – €110 million that could be
raised for capital expenditure arising from new tolling schemes on national
roads, based on an equitable distribution of tolling points across the national
roads network, and a rationalisation of Regional Design Offices.
10.3 Water Services
10.3.1 The 34 county and city councils are designated as ‘water services
authorities’ for the purpose of the construction and maintenance of water
and waste water infrastructure. Legislation in 2001 consolidated water
services at county and city council level by transferring water functions from
town councils to county councils.
10.3.2 The responsibilities of local authorities in this area include:
• Assessment of need for the provision of water services, and
prioritisation of works;
• Management of construction and capital projects under the Water
Services Investment Programme;
• Operation, management and maintenance of waste water and water
treatment schemes, water supply distribution and waste water
collection;
• Water conservation and rehabilitation works;
• Monitoring of water quality;
122

• Allocating grants to improve the quality of private and private group
water supplies through the Rural Water Programme;
• Water metering and charging for non-domestic water users;
• Acquisition of premises and wayleaves.
10.3.3 The total budgeted expenditure for water services in 2010 by local
authorities comes to €722.3 million. According to figures collected by the
Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government from local
authorities, in early 2010 the number of staff working in the water services
area in local government was in excess of 3,000, accounting for about one
in ten of all local authority staff.
10.3.4 Some 1.6 billion litres of drinking water are treated by water services
authorities on a daily basis, and the public water network comprises over
22,000 kilometres of mains. The water supply sector comprises a number
of large water supply systems in larger urban areas, together with many
smaller systems dispersed through the country, reflecting the availability of
water in proximity to most areas of population. Local authorities are
responsible for over 950 public water supply zones ranging from the very
small (50 or more) to the very large (such as Ballymore Eustace which
supplies water to a population of 500,000 in Dublin). Similarly, local
authorities are responsible directly, or indirectly, for waste water treatment in
some 482 agglomerations with a population equivalent of more than 500
(including some very large schemes in areas such as Dublin, Cork, Galway,
and Limerick). Supervision of the provision and operation of water and
waste water services is carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), which has powers to direct authorities to carry out specific actions
and, in situations of non-compliance, powers to prosecute authorities.
10.3.5 While there are some notable outcomes under the current structures, and
overall water supplies achieve a high level of compliance with drinking water
standards, the structures also have a number of inherent weaknesses which
impact on overall effectiveness and efficiency and in facing future
challenges. The EPA has highlighted deficiencies in the operational
practices of local authorities in its reports of its water-related supervisory
activities. For example, the EPA’s report on waste water treatment
discharges for 2006 and 2007 noted that 20% of treatment plants were
found to be non-compliant due to inadequate sampling and monitoring by
local authorities. Local authority service indicators for 2008 have also
highlighted issues regarding unacceptably high levels of unaccounted-forwater
in certain areas (see Appendix 9), and with the collection rates for
non-domestic water charges.
10.3.6 Since 2007, service provision costs have been rising by approximately 7.5%
per annum. Drivers of costs include the increased costs of regulatory
compliance with EU and national legislation, increases in energy costs, and
costs associated with the significant investment in new infrastructure for
treating drinking water and waste water (see section 1.7). The €4.6 billion
invested in public water and waste water infrastructure over the past decade
has increased capacity by the equivalent of a population of 3.6 million in
123

elation to waste water, and 1.51 million in relation to water. The provision
of this secondary waste water treatment has significant and ongoing cost
implications by comparison to primary or preliminary treatment. The
number of secondary treatment plants serving agglomerations of over 500
population equivalent, has risen from 252 in 1998/99 to 370 in 2007. It is
planned through the current Water Services Investment Programme and
future cycles of investment, to further improve quality of treatment and
capacity for water and waste water services, and this will have
consequences for operational costs. While a portion of these costs will fall
to be met by the non-domestic sector, there is a need to optimise
operational efficiencies to ameliorate the rising cost curve associated with
improved compliance.
10.3.7 The EU Water Framework Directive, adopted in 2000, requires the
management of water quality in Europe to be based on a catchment model.
This model requires a coherent implementation of measures on a consistent
basis within a River Basin District. As is required by the Directive, River
Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) are being put in place for each of the
seven River Basin Districts in Ireland.
10.3.8 While recognising the challenges posed by the current administrative
structure, the Group welcomes the significant progress made in reorientating
the Water Services Investment Programme towards priority
schemes required to address environmental and economic priorities on a
River Basin basis.
10.3.9 Delivery of the River Basin Plans will be challenging as responsibility for
implementation of the plans is assigned across too many organisations and
no single body has ultimate responsibility. Furthermore, the current
administrative systems are fragmented along administrative lines (i.e.
geographically and functionally) and do not facilitate analysis, identification
and implementation of the most cost-effective solution (or measures) to
manage water quality at river basin level.
10.3.10 The Group believes that there are advantages in strengthening the delivery
approach at a regional level for both infrastructure delivery and
implementation of the RBMPs. It is considered that this approach has
potential to:
• Improve efficiencies and co-operation;
• Build and retain appropriate expertise in identified areas which all
water services authorities can avail of;
• Exploit potential economies of scale, and potential for cross-boundary
efficiencies;
• Strengthen the capacity to plan and deliver strategically important
projects, and give a broader strategic context for locally delivered
programmes;
• Minimise duplication of resources and reduce the administrative
burden; and
• Improve service delivery.
124

10.3.11 It would also facilitate the collation of key data at a regional level, and
support more coordinated and synchronised planning and decision making.
10.3.12 This approach can build upon existing shared service arrangements vis-àvis
the range of lead authority approaches currently being advanced mainly
in gateways and their hinterlands and the (albeit limited in size and
functionality) River Basin District Offices established to co-ordinate
development of the first round of RBMPs and the project offices being partfunded
under the Water Services Investment Programme in a number of
local authority areas. The Group also noted the potential synergies with the
NRA’s Regional Design Offices in terms of using existing project
management and administrative support capacity.
10.3.13 As well as infrastructure delivery and RBMP implementation, the possibility
of the regional project office delivering monitoring, authorisation, inspection
and licensing functions currently carried out by local authorities under a
range of legislation should also be explored. To take monitoring as an
example, local authorities, as well as the EPA, Marine Institute and other
public bodies, undertake water-related sampling under multiple Directives
(Urban Waste Water, Drinking Water, Nitrates, Water Framework, Bathing
Water, Shellfish Waters). There are opportunities for efficiencies in this
area through collaborative effort. The Department, the EPA and local
authorities have been examining the local authorities’ water sampling and
monitoring obligations in the context of a review of laboratory facilities. This
has identified that local authorities have not achieved the required statutory
level of sampling. While this would seem to rule out immediate opportunities
for cost-savings (as local authorities will have to increase their monitoring
outputs), the Group considers that there may be opportunities to achieve
efficiencies by identifying any duplication of water-related monitoring across
other public bodies.
10.3.14 The extended regional River Basin Office approach could also be used to
manage bulk purchasing (for items such as energy, chemicals), externally
procured sampling and monitoring and to seek economies of scale in
contracts for equipment maintenance. It could also work with the Water
Services Training Group (already regionally based) to optimise training.
The River Basin Office would also have a role in providing energy audits
and operational audits to identify potential for savings.
10.3.15 There are practical issues which would have to be taken into account
including the size of individual river basins (in particular the Shannon river
basin) as well as some local authorities which have land areas in more than
one river basin district. The precise location and size of office would have to
take account of factors such as the current location of relevant skilled staff,
the stage of development of various strategic projects and available
capacity of procurement and project management skills that may be
available through staff secondments/ service level agreements.
125

10.3.16 The river basin management approach does not preclude any possible
future decision to establish new national level structures if justified on cost
and efficiency grounds. Indeed, in order to implement Government policy
on water charges, consideration should be given to the establishment of a
dedicated agency for metering and regulation of prices.
10.3.17 The Group recognises the steps by the Department of the Environment,
Heritage and Local Government in aligning the inspection regime operated
by local authorities under the Nitrates Directive with the broader inspection
role undertaken by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
(DAFF) inspection staff. Some 1,500 nitrates inspections were completed
this year by DAFF inspectors for local authorities. There appears to be
considerable potential for improved efficiency under this arrangement given
the expertise and extent of information available to the DAFF. The Group
believes that extension of this arrangement should be explored further.
10.3.18 There are a number of other possible operational cost savings in the short
to medium term in areas such as water conservation, installation of chlorine
monitors and alarms, use of Design, Build and Operate (DBO) contracts,
energy efficiency, and a shared service approach to laboratory services.
10.3.19 Investment in water conservation results in savings in operational costs and
the consequent deferral of capital spending. The National Water Study
estimates the economic level of leakage (point at which investment in new
capacity is preferable to continued network improvement) is about 25%.
This is significantly below the unaccounted-for-water level in most counties.
The increased investment in mains rehabilitation provided under the Water
Services Investment Programme 2010-2012 will take time to deliver
operational savings. However, there is evidence from early investment, that
active leakage control in areas with relatively high unaccounted-for-water
and high production costs is more than self financing.
10.3.20 Chlorine monitors and alarms have been installed in nearly all public water
supplies allowing the remote monitoring of these facilities by technical staff
and reducing the need for caretaker cover at all sites. The Group
recommends that this approach to remote monitoring for scheme
management should be extended to all plants where it does not exist. This
should lead to an operational saving, in terms of reduced over-time
payments.
10.3.21 The Group suggests that continued use of DBO and bundling of operation
and maintenance contracts can also deliver efficiencies. As DBO contracts
are performance based with contractual guarantees and are also based on
the whole life costs, they provide the opportunity to achieve a more efficient
outcome than traditional procurement. Experience indicates that the
operational costs tend to be 10-15% lower than the public sector benchmark
for the particular plant.
10.3.22 Potential for savings on input costs should be examined further in areas
such as energy efficiency, and revising operational controls to reduce
126

consumption (see also section 9 in relation to energy procurement
generally). For example, the installation of variable-speed drives on the
main pumps in Leixlip Water Treatment Plant resulted in an on-going
operational saving of over €40,000 per month. It achieved a pay-back
period of just under 10 months and resulted in a carbon emission reduction
of over 360 tonnes per year. The energy benchmarking approach recently
rolled out by the Water Services Training Group (WSTG) should be
extended to all water services facilities by end of 2011 to produce an energy
audit and identify achievable efficiencies. The Department should consider
providing some funding facility under the Small Schemes Programme in
2011 in this regard.
10.3.23 The IT-based Performance Management System should be implemented for
all plants so that comparative data are available to establish benchmarking
for service delivery and inform savings measures.
10.3.24 Collaborative sampling/ monitoring arrangements could be undertaken with
other public bodies. The review of laboratory facilities could consider, in
consultation with other public agencies involved in water monitoring, the
scope for efficiencies through sharing of services and the elimination of
duplication.
10.3.25 The question of water pricing and water charges is dealt with separately in
section 13.
Recommendations:
10.3.26 In summary, the Group recommends the development of an enhanced
regional office approach at river basin level for:
• Infrastructure delivery and implementation of the RBMPs;
• Managing bulk purchasing (such as energy, chemicals), and externally
procured sampling and monitoring and to seek economies of scale in
contracts for equipment maintenance;
• Working with the Water Services Training Group (already regionally
based) to optimise training;
• Following further analysis, (a) delivering monitoring, authorisation and
licensing functions currently carried out by local authorities under a
range of legislation and (b) providing operational audits to identify
potential for savings.
10.3.27 The Group also recommends that:
• The ‘agency’ working arrangements between DAFF and local
authorities on inspections under the nitrates regulations be extended
with a view to a more efficient use of the overall inspection resource;
• Where appropriate, the necessary equipment be installed to allow
remote operation and monitoring of water/ waste water facilities;
• There be a concerted effort to reduce unaccounted for water including
water leakage levels;
127

• There be a continued emphasis on water conservation, instead of
schemes to increase capacity, leading to savings in operational costs
and deferred capital investment;
• There be continued use of DBO and bundling of operation and
maintenance contracts;
• The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government
and local authorities further to investigate ways to reduce input costs in
areas such as energy efficiency through carrying out energy audits and
improving operational and maintenance practices;
• The IT-based Performance Management System be implemented for
all water plants so that comparative data is available to establish
benchmarking for service delivery and inform savings measures;
• The review of laboratory services currently underway be expanded to
include an examination, with a view to identifying efficiencies, of water
monitoring by other public agencies. This review should be completed
within 6 months.
10.3.28 The total annual value of the savings identified above is €5 million in short to
medium-term operational costs (with possible additional savings of €30
million in the long term).
128

Financial Summary:
Through a combination of savings and measures a total of €5 million in short to
medium-term operational costs savings (with possible additional savings of €30
million in the long term) can be achieved based on capital investment:
1. A continued strong emphasis on water conservation instead of schemes to
increase capacity – net operational savings of €5 million per annum are
achievable through active leakage control in the short to medium-term
2. On the basis of sustained investment in mains rehabilitation, a 10% annual
reduction in unaccounted for water can be achieved over the long-term (by
2016) – additional net annual savings (taking into account increased
operational costs related to statutory compliance obligations) of €15 million in
the long-term
3. On the basis of the introduction of domestic water charges and associated
water metering, this will yield additional savings based on reductions in
demand. These savings ought to arise from enhanced information on water
usage and leakage which will allow local authorities to pro-actively manage
their water distribution networks, and increased demand reduction measures
by householders as they become aware of their consumption patterns and
associated costs. This would be supported by greater utilisation of shared
resources on a regional basis – potential €15 million per annum in the longterm
(this estimate does not include the capital costs of metering)
4. Further critical examination by the Department and local authorities to reduce
energy usage with dedicated funding to be provided from the Department’s
capital allocation from 2011 – potential €5 million saving per annum (though
this could increase to €10 million per annum in future years through
investment in renewable energy for new and existing treatment plants where
feasible under the Department’s capital investment programme – this saving
has already been accounted for in the section on procurement)
Total Amount: €35 million (of which €5 million are short to medium-term savings)
10.4 Planning
10.4.1 In all, 88 local authorities are designated as ‘planning authorities’ for the
purposes of planning legislation, including forward planning, development
management, and planning enforcement for their area. All 34 county and
city councils are planning authorities, as are the 54 rating town councils
(although it should be noted that the bulk of town councils in practice rely
heavily on the planning staff of their respective county council to carry out
their duties in this area – see section 5.5). Non-rating town councils do not
have planning functions.
10.4.2 The responsibilities of local authorities in this area include:
• Forward planning and the preparation of a development plan every 6
years, as well as local area plans;
129

• Development management and the processing of planning
applications;
• Pre-planning consultation meetings with prospective applicants;
• Planning enforcement and dealing with unauthorised development;
• Conservation, protected structures, and protection of buildings of
architectural, historical or cultural significance;
• Taking of estates in charge; and
• Carrying out Strategic Environmental Assessments of local authority
plans and programmes, and Environmental Impact Assessments of
local authority development projects.
10.4.3 The total budgeted expenditure for planning services in 2010 by local
authorities is €296.6 million, significantly down from just under €341 million
spent on these services in 2009. The €296.6 million figure also includes
significant expenditure on community and enterprise, economic
development and promotion, heritage and conservation, and other nonplanning
expenditure. In early 2010 the number of staff reported by local
authorities working in development management, forward planning,
planning enforcement, conservation, and other planning fields in local
government was just over 1,700, accounting for over 5% of all local
authority staff.
10.4.4 The nature of the work in the planning area has changed significantly over
the past number of years. During the construction peak, the focus at
planning authority level was on development management with the
processing of large numbers of planning applications (92,600 applications in
2006 and 86,800 in 2007). With the number of planning applications now
reduced significantly (to 38,500 in 2009), there is a major shift in emphasis
towards forward planning in the following areas:
• Review and implementation of regional planning guidelines;
• Preparation of local area plans;
• New forward planning requirements in planning legislation; and
• New obligations on planning authorities arising from recent European
Court of Justice cases in relation to Environmental Impact Assessment
and Appropriate Assessment.
10.4.5 The bulk of the foregoing work is now being carried out in-house where
previously planning authorities would have engaged external consultants.
10.4.6 Planning staff are also assisting in enforcement proceedings in relation to
the collection of outstanding development contributions. By the end of
2009, nearly 2,500 individual cases had been referred to enforcement
sections for legal action. In addition nearly 4,300 individual developments
had been inspected to establish if development contributions were due.
10.4.7 Notwithstanding the ongoing workload in the areas of forward planning and
planning enforcement, where the latter in particular requires a significant
number of inspections and investigations, it is reasonable to expect that the
130

current levels of resourcing for planning staff and administrative support in
the development management role should decline significantly. The Group
is therefore proposing a 10% reduction in staffing levels in the planning area
through redeployment (see section 6.10). This level of reduction might need
to be moderated in circumstances where the levels of enforcement and
related work significantly exceed expected levels. However the long-term
target across the sector should remain a 10% reduction in staffing levels in
the planning function.
10.4.8 While planning fees are set by central government, they only cover a
fraction of the actual cost of processing planning applications – planning
fees have not been increased since 1998.
10.4.9 The Indecon review of local government financing (see section 2.6)
concluded that the costs of providing the planning service (including forward
planning, development management, and enforcement functions)
significantly exceeded the income generated in receipts from application
fees – the costs providing these services in 2004 was €78.5 million, with fee
income of €41.3 million, a shortfall of some €37 million. The report
recommended that services provided on behalf of central government, such
a planning, be charged at full economic costs.
10.4.10 In 2007, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local
Government initiated a review of current planning fees with a view to
establishing, across a number of applications classes, the extent of the
shortfall that existed between fee levels currently charged and the
corresponding service delivery level. The review broadly supported the
findings of the Indecon Report and showed that costs of processing
applications significantly outweighed fees income. For example, the current
planning application fee for the construction of a single house is €65, while
the average current cost of processing a planning application for a single
house is several multiples of this amount at approximately €490,
representing a gap of €425 (the €65 fee for a single house, also compares
with an equivalent fee of €369 in England, €404 in Scotland and €765 in
Northern Ireland). The fees charged for other categories of development
also fall well short of the costs to local authorities of processing planning
applications. This shortfall is being met through the general resources of
local authorities.
10.4.11 The Commission on Taxation report also noted that planning fees are
significantly lower than they are in other European countries, and the
Commission proposed increased charges and an end to maximum fees for
large developments.
10.4.12 On the basis of the review undertaken by the Department in 2007, it was
estimated that an additional €40 million income could have been secured by
moving to recovery of 50% of the costs of processing a planning application.
This was based on the number of planning applications in 2006 which
amounted to almost 92,600. The number of planning applications in 2009
had dropped to 38,500 planning applications, some 42% of the 2006 level.
131

Moving to a 50% recovery rate could lead to an income increase of
approximately €15 million overall, based on 2009 application levels. A
move to full cost recovery over a 5 year period, based on 2009 application
levels and existing processes, with an interim move to 75% cost recovery
after 3 years, would lead to additional income of €22 million after 3 years,
rising to €30 million after 5 years.
10.4.13 The Group is aware that a range of measures designed to facilitate the
move to e-planning at local authority level will be advanced during 2010:
• New regulations will be made in relation to e-planning;
• The Dublin City Council on-line application system is to be extended to
the other Dublin authorities and Wexford County Council (as they all
use the same IT system);
• The scope for, and challenges involved in, extending the Dublin City
Council on-line application system to other authorities in collaboration
with the LGMA is to be explored, as well as the scope for using
alternative on-line systems;
• It is intended that planning authorities will set up systems to accept online
submissions on planning applications (including electronic fee
payments) by the end of this year.
10.4.14 It is estimated that each electronic planning application submitted via the e-
Planning Portal in the UK can deliver potential savings of £122 for planning
authorities and £120 for applicants, rising to a total of £970 for large
applications.
10.4.15 Dublin City Council, which has put in place a pilot ePlanning project
enabling small-scale applications to be submitted electronically, is satisfied
that there are significant benefits for both itself and the public, arising from:
• Significant savings in the cost of scanning paper applications;
• The time taken to validate applications (which has been reduced on
average from 10 to 3 days);
• Savings by architects using the electronic process in the cost of
printing and posting 6 copies of applications, and the flexibility in being
able to lodge applications outside office hours (the system is available
24/7); and
• Faster access by third parties to current applications – files are put up
on the website 24 hours after registration.
10.4.16 Mayo County Council is also developing an innovative on-line inquiry
service for pre-application inquiries, and is running a pilot project, starting
with the on-line submission of third-party comments on current planning
applications. The results of this initiative should be replicable across many
other planning authorities.
10.4.17 The review of fees conducted by the Department in 2007 identified up to 50
manual transactions associated with the normal processing of a planning
application. The move to e-planning provides the scope to considerably
132

educe the number of such transactions and the associated costs by up to
25%, once the upfront costs associated with a move to e-planning have
been met (including software, licensing and hardware costs. A 25% cost
saving, based on the 2010 estimates for local authority development
management costs, would suggest a cost saving of the order of €15 million
per annum, once the majority of planning applications are received and
processed by means of e-planning processes. This figure is based on a
2010 budgeted expenditure of €105.9 million nationally for development
management, of which some €70 million is estimated to be made up of
staffing costs.
10.4.18 There are also potential efficiencies to be gained in examining the time
taken to process planning applications, the various steps involved in the
process, and the scope for streamlining.
10.4.19 The Group recommends that the planning fee levels set by the Department
of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should be revised to
allow for a greater recovery of administrative costs for different types and
scales of planning applications. An initial increase, to allow 50% cost
recovery, should be introduced at this stage. The increase in fees should
be linked to an accelerated roll-out of e-planning in local authorities, with the
aim of reducing transaction costs for both the local authorities and
customers. A further move to greater cost recovery (to say 75%) could be
facilitated within 3 years but only as a quid pro quo for the introduction of
ePlanning and the provision of greater efficiencies and removal of costs
from the development management system. A move to full cost recovery
over a 5 year period should also be envisaged.
10.4.20 The cost of introducing ePlanning would be met from increased fees; the
cost of implementing to ePlanning on national basis is estimated at €5
million.
10.4.21 The Department had identified a range of proposed improvements to the
planning system at local level arising from a fees increase. These include:
• Over the counter validation of applications in planning authority offices;
• Pre-application consultations on demand for significant development
proposals; and
• Regular information sessions or planning advice clinics.
10.4.22 The Group believes that these are the minimum in terms of service
improvements that should be achieved in response to an increase in fees.
10.4.23 As part of the introduction of ePlanning, the Group also recommends that a
Business Process Re-Engineering exercise of development management in
a representative sample of local authorities be undertaken to determine best
practice and high efficiency models in the development management
function.
133

10.4.24 The Group also recommends that the planning-related functions of rating
town councils be transferred to county councils. This along with the transfer
of other responsibilities should yield cost savings each year (for further
details see section 5.6).
10.4.25 There are also potential efficiencies to be gained in adopting a more
streamlined and unitary approach to the preparation of development plans
and local areas plans across administrative boundaries.
10.4.26 Planning policies for all of the borough councils and 22 of the town councils
are spread over at least 2 development plans (i.e. borough/ town council
plan and a separate environs plan). There are also examples where spatial
planning of the town is dependent upon 3 development plans.
10.4.27 There are efficiencies to be gained if a single plan was to be prepared and
adopted at the same time by the respective authorities. For example,
evidence suggests that by combining the approach to specialist exercises
such as the preparation of Strategic Environmental Assessment, unitary
plans in the 22 town councils would save in the region of €250,000 per
annum, with further similar savings to come from reduced plan preparation
and administrative costs.
10.4.28 A number of other planning authorities (such as Dún Laoghaire – Rathdown
County Council and Fingal County Council) are exploring the scope for
enabling on-line submission of observations on draft development plans and
local area plans, which is estimated to have potential significant savings in
planning staff time, as well as more efficient working practices.
Recommendations:
10.4.29 In summary, the Group recommends that:
• Planning fees be increased with the aim of moving towards full cost
recovery over a 5 year period, and maximum fees for large
developments be terminated;
• A range of efficiency measures be introduced, such as:
- Over the counter validation of applications;
- Pre-application consultations on demand for significant
development proposals; and
- Regular information sessions or planning advice clinics;
• The introduction of e-planning be accelerated and business process
re-engineering exercises be completed to strip costs from the system;
• The number of planning staff be reduced by 10%;
• The planning-related functions of town councils be transferred to
county councils.
10.4.30 The total value of the savings and extra charges identified above is €38
million in a full year.
134

Financial Summary:
Through a combination of savings and cost recovery measures a total of €38 million
can be achieved based on the following items
1. An increase in planning fees to secure greater cost recovery – €30 million
(€15 million in the short term, rising to €30 million after 5 years)
2. An accelerated move towards e-planning and completion of a business
process re-engineering exercise leading to reduction in transaction costs,
together with a reduction in the number of planning staff by 10% – €15 million
in the medium term (once the majority of planning applications are received
and processed by means of e-planning processes) (of this amount, €7 million
has already been accounted for in the section on staffing)
Total Amount: €38 million
10.5 Waste
10.5.1 County and city councils play the primary role in waste management at local
level, although many town councils play a specific role in areas such as litter
management.
10.5.2 The responsibilities of local authorities in the waste area include:
• Waste management planning (usually operating in regional groupings);
• Waste prevention and minimisation initiatives;
• Recycling facilities and civic amenity sites;
• Operation of waste management facilities;
• Issuing of waste facility permits and waste collection permits;
• Refuse collection (a minority of local authorities only);
• Handling registrations or notifications under various producerresponsibility
waste schemes (such as for packaging waste, electrical
and electronic waste, waste batteries, and end-of-life vehicles);
• Litter pollution control;
• Environmental enforcement; and
• Environmental education and awareness initiatives.
10.5.3 The total budgeted expenditure for waste management services in 2010 by
local authorities is €482 million, which includes the operation and aftercare
of residual waste facilities whether operated directly by local authorities or
by way of contract (e.g. landfill), waste collection services, street cleaning,
the provision and operation of recycling facilities, litter management and the
discharge of statutory duties including enforcement of waste management
legislation. Costs in this area are largely driven by EU and national
regulatory requirements and legacy costs, for example associated with
landfill remediation. According to figures collected by the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government, in early 2010 the number of
135

staff working in the areas of waste management, refuse collection,
recycling, environmental awareness, enforcement and litter pollution in local
government in April 2010 was some 3,500, accounting for more than one in
ten of all local authority staff.
10.5.4 Of the €482 million expenditure in this area, some €153 million is required
for landfill operation and aftercare. It should be noted that as a condition of
landfill licences issued by the EPA and in compliance with the Waste
Management Act, provision by way of funding must be made by landfill
licensees for the remediation and aftercare of such facilities. A further €41
million is budgeted for the provision and operation of recycling facilities
which are critical to Ireland meeting its EU obligations in relation to recycling
targets.
10.5.5 The second most substantial expenditure is in support of the provision of
waste collection services at €132 million, but this is also the area with the
greatest income at approximately €120 million. Local authorities, acting
generally in regional configurations are responsible for waste management
planning and some €7 million is allotted to support this statutory duty. The
role of local authorities in relation to both of these areas is currently being
reviewed as part of the review of waste management policy.
10.5.6 Some €26.5 million is budgeted for the discharge of local authorities’
statutory obligations for the management of litter, with a further €96 million
provided for street cleaning. Local authorities have statutory responsibility
for the enforcement and permitting of a range of waste management
legislation. Therefore, approximately €28 million is allocated to discharge
these responsibilities and as is outlined below, this is an area which has
been identified as having the potential for some degree of rationalisation
and savings delivery.
10.5.7 One option to improve efficiencies in this area is to consolidate waste
enforcement activities on a regional or national basis. Local authorities
have a positive experience of achieving savings in this area on a lead
authority basis, in particular through the consolidation of the administration
of transfrontier waste shipment rules into a single national competent
authority run through Dublin City Council, which allowed for an overall
reduction in the number of staff assigned to this area. It is further proposed
to consolidate the system of control for internal movement of hazardous
waste within Ireland into the national office within Dublin City Council during
2010/2011. This will yield a projected cost saving nationally of just under €1
million, and free up a number of local authority staff to deal with other
waste-related regulatory demands.
10.5.8 Another measure to reduce costs would be to remove the waste collection
permitting role from local authorities. This could potentially yield an overall
saving if consolidated into a single body. Alternatively, greater use could be
made of the Regional Waste Management Offices’ expertise to coordinate
permitting issues. Initiatives in this area, taken together with a continuation
136

in the trend of rationalisation of local authority activity in waste management
services, could yield a further saving of some €4 million.
10.5.9 The Group is advised that it is planned to publish a consultation document
on the future direction of national waste policy. Given the recommendations
of the consultants’ report underpinning the review of waste management
policy, it can be expected that the role of local authorities in relation to waste
management will undergo significant change in the coming years. The dual
role of the local authorities as both regulators and suppliers of a service is to
be addressed in light of obligations under the EU Services Directive.
10.5.10 One key recommendation contained in the consultants’ report relates to a
move from side by side competition in the market to a tendered competition
for the market, which it is expected would result in lower waste charges
arising from economies of scale. This would also allow for a uniform system
of waivers to be introduced.
Recommendations:
10.5.11 Thus the Group recommends that:
• The system of control for internal movement of hazardous waste within
Ireland be consolidated into the national office within Dublin City
Council. This will yield a projected cost saving nationally of close to €1
million;
• The waste collection permitting role be centralised, and if necessary
implemented through the network of Regional Waste Management
Offices;
• Local authorities avail of opportunities to secure continued
rationalisation of activity in waste management services. This could
yield a saving of some €4 million.
10.5.12 The total value of the savings and extra charges identified above is €5
million in a full year.
Financial Summary:
Through a combination of savings and measures a total of €5 million can be
achieved based on the following items
1. Consolidation of controls for the internal movement of hazardous waste into a
national level – €1 million
2. Remove waste collection permitting role from local authorities and consolidate
this responsibility at national or regional level, taken together with a continued
rationalised of local authority activity in waste management services –
potential savings of €4 million
Total Amount: €5 million
137

10.6 Motor Tax and Driving Licences
10.6.1 The Group examined the approach to motor tax collection in Ireland to
identify possible means of more cost-efficient and streamlined approaches
to collection. This includes expanding the online system and incentivising
the online payment of motor tax, as well as ending what the Group sees as
anomalies within the system that increase the number of transactions that
have to be processed.
10.6.2 County and city councils are charged with the collection of motor taxation.
There are 29 motor tax authorities in Ireland and 23 associated sub-offices
covering 52 outlets in total for the payment of motor tax. Dublin City Council
collects motor tax on behalf of the four local authorities in Dublin. Galway
County Council provides a shared service for Galway City Council, as does
Cork County Council for Cork City Council.
10.6.3 Motor tax receipts amounted to €1,055 million in 2008 with €670 million
collected at motor tax offices and €385 million collected online. The total
budgeted cost for motor tax operations in 2010 by local authorities comes to
€37.9 million. According to figures collected by the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government, in early 2010 the number of
staff working in motor tax in local government was just under 650,
accounting for some 2% of all local authority staff.
10.6.4 Motor tax authorities carry out a range of functions, including the collection
of motor tax but also the issuing of vehicle licences and driving licences.
Computer services via the National Vehicle and Driver File (NVDF)
introduced nationally in 2004 provide a common platform for driver and
vehicle licence processing. Responsibility for the NVDF was transferred
from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to
the Department of Transport in 2007.
10.6.5 In 2004 an online motor tax system was introduced. A new basis for
taxation was introduced in 2008 based on carbon dioxide emissions
replacing the former engine sized system. Cars registered from 1 July 2008
are taxed based on their CO2 emissions level while cars registered before
that date continue to be taxed based on their engine size. Under the new
system, lower taxes apply to vehicles with lower CO2 emissions. The
principal taxation classes in 2009 are set out as follows:
138

Table 10.1 – Motor Taxation Classes, 2009
Taxation Class Number %
Private Cars 1,902,429 77.09
Goods Vehicles 343,940 13.94
Agricultural & General Haulage Tractors 67,503 2.73
Motorcycles 39,552 1.60
Public Service Vehicles 36,840 1.49
Exempt Vehicles 26,954 1.09
Vintage Vehicles 22,891 0.93
Motor Caravans 10,294 0.42
Other 17,257 0.70
Total 2,467,660 100.00
Source: Department of Transport
10.6.6 Motor tax can be paid quarterly, half yearly or annually. Service indicator
data show that in 2008 there were a total of 5.1 million motor tax
transactions of which 2.7 million (53%) were dealt with over the counter,
0.80 million (16%) through the postal system, and 1.6 million processed
online (just over 31%). It should be noted that the 3.5 million motor tax
transactions for motor tax offices includes tax discs, arrears and other
relevant transactions where payment was made, where as the online figure
of 1.6 million transactions includes tax discs only and excludes arrears.
Details for each county are given in Appendix 10.
10.6.7 The rates charged for each vehicle class are critically important. The
introduction of the new CO2 emission based charging system has had the
effect of diluting income as consumers have switched purchases
significantly towards low emission cars which attract low rates of motor tax –
around 84% of new car purchases are in the lower A, B and C bands. This
is an area which requires continuous monitoring. The motor tax base
income will continue to decline if charges are not adjusted annually to
ensure the new charging regime has a neutral effect on revenue. This
effect will be further compounded as electric cars are more widely
introduced.
10.6.8 The uptake in online renewal has not reached its full potential. Most local
authorities provide free Internet access in their libraries and in their county
buildings. Renewal through the Internet is the most efficient method of
delivery. From Appendix 10 it can be seen that only Dublin city and Kildare
have more than 40% processed online, with only Meath, Wicklow and Cork
county and city achieving more than 30%.
10.6.9 These figures are however based on total transactions. A difficulty arises
from the fact that not all vehicles can be taxed using the online system. If
the uptake is measured against eligible business there is an encouraging
trend. The online system reached 51% of eligible business and 43% of
overall business in January-February 2010, compared to 44% and 39%
respectively for the same period last year. Nevertheless, a greater uptake
139

of the online service should be incentivised, for example through the
introduction of a small handling fee (such as €10) to reflect the greater cost
accruing to local authorities of processing payments manually (either over
the counter or by post), and to encourage greater take-up of the online
service. If successful of course, the income coming from this fee would be
expected to decline over time.
10.6.10 The motor tax classifications which are eligible to avail of the online service
are private cars, agricultural tractors/ excavators, motorcycles, exempt
(special vehicle), vintage/ veteran and motor caravans. The online system
accounts for 84% of all taxation classes. Goods vehicles are charged
based on unladen weight which is determined by a number of subjective
tests. In order to be included in the online system simplification of the
classification system is required.
10.6.11 The Group suggests that the production of Certificates of Roadworthiness
should not be required for motor taxation purposes. These certificates
should be dealt with by the Road Safety Authority in the same manner as
NCT tests for private cars. The simplest way for goods vehicles to be taxed
is by gross design weight.
10.6.12 The Group believes that consideration should be given to extending the
online system to include commercial and other vehicles. If commercial and
other vehicles could be processed online, the uptake is likely to be
significantly higher than those for private cars – on the basis of a 60%
uptake in Internet use for this category, this would transfer some 293,000
transactions to the online system. It will also improve customer service for
businesses which will have the more convenient option of renewing motor
tax online on a 24/7 basis.
10.6.13 Under existing rules where a vehicle has not been in use in a public place
the applicant can obtain relief from tax by getting the form signed and
stamped in a Garda station confirming the signature on the declaration of
non use. It should be noted that the Garda Síochána do not have a role in
ensuring the validity of the declaration. The system is therefore open to
significant abuse. This “off-the-road” facility is generating approximately
396,000 declarations per annum and is currently costing up to €75 million.
While provisions could be made in relation to a restricted number of
exceptional circumstances which should be defined in legislation, removal of
this facility would close off a potential loophole that is open to abuse, would
broaden the tax base, and would reduce the number of transactions to be
processed. It should also lead to non-quantifiable savings in Garda time.
10.6.14 Driving licences are also issued by the motor tax offices and accounted for
664,330 transactions in 2008, equivalent to 15.89% of the overall
transactions of motor tax offices. The issuance of a driving licence is a
complex matter and as a result consumes a significant amount of human
resource. The process involves document verification, photographic
verification and security checks. The widespread use of driving licences as
a valid form of personal identification necessitates thorough attention to
140

detail in issuing licences. Motor tax offices are also required to record
disqualification of driver licences as a result of court orders. This involves a
country-wide check on the system before the licence is issued. For these
reasons it takes three times as long to process a driving licence application
compared to a motor tax renewal.
10.6.15 The Road Safety Authority proposes to replace the present paper driving
licences with plastic cards in 2012 in accordance with a 2006 EU Directive
(2006/126/EEC). This should also reduce the administrative workload
involved in the issuing of driver licences. At present, drivers in Ireland
applying to undertake the driver theory test must prove their identity and
provide proof of address. This process is repeated when the successful
candidate applies for his provisional licence, and again when applying for a
full drivers licence. With the introduction of a plastic card this information
can be captured and stored digitally once when applying to sit the theory
test. Subsequently when the individual passes his/her driving test, a full
driving licence can be issued using the same data.
10.6.16 The photograph should be renewed every 10 years to reflect changes in the
individual’s appearance (as with the current paper licence). Nevertheless,
the new system should create greater efficiencies, even if they involve startup
costs in developing and rolling out the new plastic card and associated
equipment.
10.6.17 The Group recommends increasing the cost of driving licences to more fully
reflect the costs incurred. A ten-year licence currently costs €25, which
compares favourably with the cost of a passport (€80). The cost of a first
licence in England and Northern Ireland costs £50 (or roughly €58), with the
cost of renewing the photo after ten years at £20 (roughly €23). For
example, the cost of a ten-year licence could be increased to €40. The cost
of a replacement licence could also be increased from the current €15 to
€30.
Recommendations:
10.6.18 In summary, an increase in the number of vehicles taxed online represents
a saving on the resources required to process transactions manually.
Therefore, the Group believes that the priority should be to bring more
transactions into the online system, and to incentivise greater use of online
payment.
10.6.19 Thus the Group recommends that:
• The online motor tax system be expanded to allow owners of
commercial and other vehicles to pay online;
• A handling fee of €10 be introduced to reflect the cost of processing
manual motor tax payments to reflect the additional costs involved and
encourage take-up of online motor tax service;
141

• The ‘off-the-road’ facility allowing car owners to self-declare vehicles
as not in use be removed, subject to exceptional and specified
circumstances;
• The cost of a ten-year driving licence be increased from €25 to €40,
and the cost of a replacement licence from €15 to €30.
10.6.20 When implemented in full, the total value of the savings and extra charges
identified above is €115 million in a full year.
Financial Summary:
Through a combination of savings and measures a total of €115 million can be
achieved based on the following items
1. Cessation of the ’off-the-road’ facility – €75 million
2. Enabling the online tax renewal of goods vehicles and other vehicles – €2
million
3. Introduction of a €10 handling charge for counter and postal applications –
€33 million (but expected to decline over time)
4. Increase charge on driving licences – €5 million
Total Amount: €115 million in a full year
142

11.1 Treasury Management
11. Other Operational Efficiencies
11.1.1 There are a number of dimensions to treasury management, including:
11.1.2 Liquidity management is vitally important for the normal flow of any business
activities and it is essential to establish the optimum level of short term and
long term assets. An incorrect margin may result in financial difficulties, with
councils unable to meet needs or being unable to take advantage of
investment opportunities as they arise. Maintaining a cash surplus enables
a council to carry on normal transactions and avoid treasury gaps. The
disadvantage in being too conservative is the opportunity cost, as the return
on the cash balance is lower than the return on productive investments.
11.1.3 Operational management in local authorities is largely concerned with
optimising the purchase-payment cycle and the income-cash cycle. The
prompt payments requirements set a defining boundary on the purchasepayment
cycle but unfortunately the same does not apply to the incomecash
cycle. Rates and rents account for a significant portion of local
authority income. Electronic payments are used where possible, although
door-to-door collection has proved to be the most effective in collecting
rents from tenants. Specific proposals have been made elsewhere in this
report regarding rent collection (see section 10.1). Given current economic
circumstances, some rate payers are experiencing difficulties in meeting
their obligations. In the light of this, most local authorities agree instalment
payments for such ratepayers in difficulty. Receipts from central
government have slowed considerably in the last couple of years and, as a
result, the income-cash cycle has been expanded considerably.
11.1.4 Banking management in the past has largely been concerned with the
procurement of banking facilities and was achieved by competitive tender.
All local authorities have a bank reconciliation section and accounts are
monitored online on a daily basis to ensure full value date is achieved. The
current situation in the banking system – with some banks withdrawing from
the market – may result in reduced competition, though this may be offset
by the increased relative desirability of local authority business.
11.1.5 Management of surpluses is largely subject to prudential considerations –
that is, the overriding concern should be the protection of capital. The local
authority model of investment seeks low risk investments. The underlying
principle of fiduciary responsibility to the ratepayers and taxpayers is
paramount and best value is sought within these parameters.
11.1.6 Exchange rate risk management is of little concern in local authority
treasury operations. Local authorities borrow and lend in euro, and they do
not have significant foreign exchange exposures.
143

11.1.7 Interest rate exposure, on the other hand, may be greater than currently
realised, in situations where local authorities may be borrowing on a
variable rate basis and lending on a fixed (e.g. house purchase loans), or
vice versa. Long-term debt is obtained from the Housing Finance Agency,
the National Treasury Management Agency, and the European Investment
Bank, all of which provide very favourable terms when compared to those
available currently from the private sector.
11.1.8 There are two key disciplines that apply to local government spending. The
first is that local authority revenue budgets as adopted by their members
must be balanced and the commercial rate struck accordingly.
11.1.9 The second discipline relates to the General Government Balance (GGB),
under which borrowing limits are set for the various elements of the public
service. The GGB measures the fiscal performance of the whole General
Government Sector, which includes the Exchequer, the Social Insurance
Fund, the non-commercial semi-state bodies, the National Pensions
Reserve Fund (and other extra-budgetary funds), the Vocational Education
Committees, and local authorities. During the first half of the decade
substantial income accrued to local authorities due to the receipt of
development levies. The decline in construction activity since 2008 has
seen a reversal of fortune for local authorities, with these receipts largely
drying up.
11.1.10 However, local authorities have accumulated receipts which have been
earmarked for capital works. Some of these capital works require a
contribution by the local authorities, particularly for water and waste water
treatment facilities. The spending of these accumulated funds would, in the
absence of further receipts, result in a worsening of the GGB position and to
this end local authorities have been instructed that their capital spend from
development levies is capped at the level of development levy receipts in
the current year. The consequence of this is that many capital projects
have been postponed so as not to breach the GGB requirements.
11.1.11 Local authorities require borrowing both in the short-term and in the longerterm
for a significant part of their funding. As regards short-term borrowing,
temporary borrowing in the form of overdraft facilities has been a feature of
local government finance for decades. In a 2009 survey of 32 local
authorities, it was found that 17 local authorities had their banking services
with Bank of Ireland, 14 banked with AIB and 1 with Ulster Bank.
11.1.12 A recent report by the Office for Local Authority Management illustrated that
some local authorities are being charged higher margins than others by the
banks. Given that there are only three banks involved, the Group considers
that it would be appropriate that a uniform overdraft rate be procured at
national level for those local authorities banking with the different overdraft
lenders.
11.1.13 A coordinated approach between local authorities to match overdraft
requirements with surpluses, based on base interest rates with no premium
144

for the overdraft, has the potential to yield a modest saving in the region of
€1 million.
11.1.14 For working capital purposes consideration could be given to allocating a
percentage of budgeted expenditure as an overdraft sanction. Currently,
overdrafts are predominantly sanctioned in respect of timing differences in
capital income and expenditure. Local authorities should not make
commitments to advance projects unless they have funding arrangements in
place for the full capital costs before commencement. The total value of
peak overdrafts currently sanctioned is in the region of €500 million.
11.1.15 An approach to overdrafts based on a percentage of adopted budget
expenditure could be considered for the 34 county and city councils as the
primary units of local government. Those requiring more than the agreed
percentage would need to make a formal proposal for a higher overdraft
sanction.
11.1.16 The length of time to get an approval can take up to two months due to the
system of checks and cross references in place. The approval period is
generally for 6 months. The Group considers that this could be increased to
one year and would eliminate repeating the cycle within the Department of
the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and within the banks.
11.1.17 In relation to longer-term borrowing, such borrowing should be appropriate
to the type of asset being financed and the proposed means of servicing the
loan (for example from fees/charges, or from local authority revenues). The
long-term debt of local authorities stood at €4.4 billion at the end of 2007
and increased to €5.0 billion at the end of 2008.
11.1.18 Funding from the Housing Finance Agency is available for housing and nonhousing
purposes. Costs are around EURIBOR plus 0.60% for 12/20 year
money, which is very favourable when compared to loans from the banking
sector. Where funding cannot be obtained from the Housing Finance
Agency, local authorities are compelled to go to the open market. In the
current market, the margins being applied are rising and this has
implications for longer-term borrowings that may span up to 20 years.
11.2 Online Services
11.2.1 There has been substantial investment in e-local government in the last
number of years with the use of online technology to improve efficiency,
quality and effectiveness in service delivery. Information technologies are
recognised as an important means of providing easier access to services
supplying information on the wide range of local authority activities and
speeding up service delivery.
11.2.2 Local authority websites are updated on a regular basis with news,
information, publications, along with tender and job opportunities. All
application forms are also generally available on local authority websites.
145

11.2.3 A range of online services are also available to the public:
• The online Motor Tax service, introduced in 2004, facilitates the
renewal of road tax online. Take up of the facility is growing, and
recommendations are made elsewhere in this report to further
incentivise the online option for renewal of motor tax (see section
10.6);
• Some 78 local authorities provide online enquiry facilities to planning
administration systems, and some also provide online access to all
planning application documents including a GIS system to show
locations. These initiatives should be extended to other local
authorities;
• The eLibraries project allows users to search for specific titles through
all of the local authority catalogues or browse the 11 million items in
stock by going through the central www.elibs.gov.ie. There is also a
service available www.borrowbooks.ie where all online catalogues are
available. Every library is also accessible through the eLibrary system;
• The ePayments system facilitates online payments for local authority
services (such as parking fines, bin tags and housing rents) to be
made in real-time. Payments can be made using debit or credit cards
or over the phone using Interactive Voice Response;
• The Non Principal Private Residence (NPPR) payment system was
developed in 2009 to facilitate payment of the charge on second
homes;
• Each county/ city council is responsible for the compilation and
publication of the register of electors for their area. Authorities make
the register available to view online via their own websites. In order to
assist individuals to check the register online, a web application was
developed to provide a single online point of access to the electoral
register. Users can log on to www.checktheregister.ie and then
navigate to the relevant local authority to check that their details are
present and correct. Individuals can notify local authorities of any
errors or omissions.
11.2.4 Local authorities also make extensive use of IT in supporting the provision
of key service areas such as housing, water services and roads, as well as
in procurement, with the overall objective of enhancing efficiencies in the
delivery of services. Examples include:
• An online e-Procurement quotation application (www.laquotes.ie) for
local authorities facilitates quotations from suppliers in plant hire,
haulage, tool hire and supplies and services. Suppliers can now
submit a quotation online to all participating authorities rather than
submitting paper based quotations individually to each local authority.
The system has resulted in major benefits for internal workflows and
process management. Work is also underway to develop a Request
for Quotation module, document management functionality and a
multiparty framework agreements system which have the potential for
further savings (see section 9.4);
146

• The online Roadworks Control system provides a standardised
approach to the processing and licensing of applications (mainly from
utilities) to local authorities to perform road openings. This should
result in significant reduction in public liability claims, a reduction in
staff time spent on applications and a valuable opportunity for
increased and more targeted inspections during road openings and
reinstatement
• EDEN is a centralised information exchange for environmental
monitoring data, it provides bodies using the system (local authorities
as well as organisations such as the EPA, the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government) with the ability to
submit environmental data remotely and to exchange this data with all
parties authorised for environmental monitoring. It has greatly reduced
overall costs in data exchange and has facilitated seamless application
of environmental data standards across a broader spectrum of
environmental monitoring requirements;
• eReturns is an Internet system that captures performance indicator
data, such as local authority service indicators, in an efficient and userfriendly
manner;
• A back office housing system, iHouse, is in place for the management
of Social Housing and all associated business processes. There are
now 30 sites using iHouse which is used for the management of Local
Authority Housing Property. This system also feeds into the eReturns
Housing Needs Assessment and Rental Assessment scheme.
11.2.5 The Group recommends that the development of online services be
intensified both to improve efficiencies and service provision to the public.
The Group is also recommending that local authorities build on this
experience to further develop a shared service approach towards ICT. This
area is addressed in more detail in section 8.4. The Group is furthermore
suggesting that the bodies to which local authorities report ensure that their
IT systems can receive returns from local authorities electronically (see
section 8.7).
11.3 Advertising
11.3.1 Local authorities are obliged to take out advertisements on a regular basis
in newspapers and other outlets in accordance with statutory requirements
in various legislative Acts. Research carried out for the Group indicated that
the amount spent on advertising amounted to some €7.3 million in 2009.
Typically, this advertising takes the form of notifications alerting members of
the public that a certain draft policy such as the development plan is
available for inspection, or that views are being invited as part of a
consultation process in advance of a decision being taken.
11.3.2 Some examples of where local authorities have to undertake such
advertising include:
• Road Closures – Notice of Intention;
147

• Road Closures – Notice of Decision;
• Proposals under section 38 of the Road Traffic Act 1994 (for example
for traffic calming);
• Part 8 projects;
• Notice of tenders;
• Material contravention of the development plan;
• Notice of draft development plan / area plans available for inspection;
• Proposals to change speed limits;
• Notice of opening of annual audit;
• Notice of date for holding of annual budget meeting;
• Notice of the making of the rate.
11.3.3 In other cases, such as the process for making compulsory purchase orders
(CPOs), not only do local authorities advertise such proposals, but they are
also obliged to contact every affected landowner and every occupier by
registered post.
11.3.4 While it is of course important to ensure public participation in local
decision-making, the Group is of the view that many of these requirements
belong to a bygone pre-Internet era, and could be adjusted in the light of
increased Internet access, not least through the local authority library
system. The Group considers that it is doubtful whether many people
actually take the trouble to trawl through such advertisements in
newspapers in any case, and that therefore this expenditure represents
poor value for money.
11.3.5 The Group suggests that a more fruitful approach to alerting the public and
encouraging greater online consultation would be for local authorities to
continue to advertise such notifications in newspapers, but to do so in
summary form, while providing a link to pages on the local authority’s
website where more detailed information can be accessed. Such webpages
could also provide links to email addresses where the views of individuals
could be relayed. This would considerably reduce the advertising space
that local authorities would need to buy in order to comply with the rules
around placing public notifications in newspaper. Such a change in the
rules around notifications should be provided for through amendments to
the relevant legislative provisions.
11.3.6 Through such change it should be possible to at least reduce local authority
advertising budgets by over 50%, yielding a targeted saving of some €3.9
million per annum.
11.4 Use of Professional Consultants
11.4.1 The Group noted the increased expenditure by local authorities in recent
years on professional fees and payments made to consultants in various
service areas, such as housing, planning, roads, water services, waste
148

management, etc. Use of professional consultants is also a very significant
feature of most local authority capital expenditure.
11.4.2 The Group considers consultancy expenditure to be excessive, particularly
when local authorities employ a large number of highly skilled and
appropriately qualified personnel. While there will understandably be
occasions when specialised skills can be more economically externally
purchased as opposed to investing in in-house training, the Group
recommends that wherever possible local authorities should make use of
expertise that is available in-house, or from other local authorities on a
shared service basis, or from regional / national sources such as the RDOs
and the Housing and Sustainable Communities Agency (see sections 8.6
and 10.1)
11.4.3 The Group is therefore recommending that the amounts spent on
professional consultancy be reduced by 50% compared to 2008,
representing savings of up to €8 million in the short to medium term.
Further reductions should then be sought in the light of the outturn for 2010.
Consultants should only be used where there is a clear value-added, and
there is a duty on local authorities to make use of consultants efficiently and
only where justified.
11.5 Local Authority Facilities and Logistics
11.5.1 Local authorities maintain a number of depots and facilities within their
functional area that are used for the purposes of different service areas. In
the main these include depots for roads services, but this can also extend to
water, housing, and parks.
11.5.2 The Group recommends that all local authorities carry out a review of the
number of depots used across different locations and across different local
authority service areas, with a view to examining the possibilities for
rationalisation and consolidation of facilities.
11.5.3 A number of local authorities have successfully installed GPS systems in
local authority vehicles, which allows for better information with which to
plan site inspections, street cleaning schedules, waste collection routes, etc.
The Group recommends that GPS systems be installed in all vehicles in
local authority fleets. This would allow local authorities to identify the most
time-efficient distribution of vehicles across their functional areas, and
provide excellent information for reviews and rescheduling of activities.
11.6 Innovation Fund
11.6.1 Local authorities should carry out their functions in the most cost effective
manner having regard to value for money principles and the need to provide
citizen-centred services to the public. Local government has achieved
significant efficiencies in a number of areas. Many initiatives are in place to
149

support ongoing efficiency and value for money in the local government
sector, including:
• Financial management systems;
• Five-year multi-annual capital investment programmes;
• Value for money auditing;
• Shared services;
• Service indicators; and
• Aggregated procurement of goods and services.
11.6.2 However, as detailed in this report, the need for specific measures to
increase efficiencies is recognised. In this context the Group considers that
there is merit in putting in place incentives to support and reward best
practice in achieving efficiencies.
11.6.3 The Group recommends that local authorities should be incentivised and
rewarded where they achieve innovation and efficiencies in their operations
and services. To advance this agenda, the Group considers that a modestly
funded Innovation Fund should be established within 12 months to reward
authorities that can demonstrate these values in the local government
sector. This Fund should be financed from the efficiency savings to be
made in the context of the implementation of the recommendations
contained in this Report.
11.6.4 Local authorities could be invited to make submissions or bids for funding
from the Innovation Fund in respect of projects which, in their opinion, would
have the potential to improve efficiency and value for money in the sector.
Such projects should be part-financed through a local contribution.
Although local authorities would submit applications, the projects could
involve other publicly-funded bodies at local level, particularly where they
involve proposals for delivery of joint service initiatives as agreed by the
local County/ City Development Board CDB – see section 12.4). Given that
the potential for efficiency in local government spans significant areas of
activity, the Group considered that apart from some general provisos, the
terms of the Innovation Fund should not be too prescriptive as to the precise
nature of the area which would qualify for funding.
11.6.5 Some of the areas under which local authorities could put forward proposals
include:
• Feasibility studies/ seed funding – local authorities could be invited to
put forward feasibility study projects for consideration which they
consider to have the potential to yield efficiencies across the sector;
• Pilot projects to examine alternative delivery mechanisms, such as the
potential of shared services or joint service provision both between
local authorities, but also between local authorities and other publiclyfunded
service providers as agreed by the local CDB;
• E-government – projects that would improve customer service and at
the same time enhance efficiency within the organisation;
150

• Projects to streamline existing management/ administration
arrangements, including where personnel efficiencies can be achieved;
• Projects to improve economy and reduce inputs (such as projects to
streamline or secure efficiencies in procurement of goods and
services).
11.6.6 Proposals would have to include descriptions of the project, costings of the
proposal and importantly, the likely or potential outputs in terms of efficiency
and in service delivery.
11.6.7 The Group considers that an appropriately represented assessment panel
should be established to select project applications for funding from the
Innovation Fund having regard to a set of criteria to be determined by the
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government along the
following lines:
Recommendations:
• Scope of efficiency dividend – possible savings to be generated;
• Cost of project/ extent of work by local authority;
• Potential wider application of measures to other programmes of
activity, and to other local authorities or other public bodies;
• Innovation; and
• Joint approach between local authorities and/ or local authorities and
other publicly-funded bodies.
11.7.1 In summary, the Group considers that a number of reforms could be made
to improve treasury management practices within local government,
including securing value for money with banks. The Group also considers
that the statutory requirements on local authorities to regularly place
advertisements in newspapers should be revised to reflect modern
communications tools and online participative methods. At a minimum local
authorities should be able to publish notices in summary form and refer
readers to a webpage for further information. Local authorities should also
reduce the professional fees and payments made to consultants in various
service areas, and make greater use of in-house expertise, of expertise
available in other local authorities on a shared service basis, or from
regional or national sources.
11.7.2 Thus the Group recommends that:
• Regular competitive tendering be carried out for banking services and
overdrafts, and local authorities should use their purchasing power to
procure uniform overdraft rates at national level;
• The best rates available be obtained for investments/ deposits –
markets should be checked regularly to ensure best rates are being
obtained;
• A treasury management best practice forum be established (including
a mentoring system between local authorities geared towards those
151

local authorities that lack specialised skills in this area), while
preserving financial autonomy;
• A specialist group be established to examine the possibility of pooling
arrangements for surpluses/ overdrafts of local authorities and attempt
to match them, possibly through the Housing Finance Agency as host;
• The approval period for overdraft sanctions be extended as
appropriate from 6 months to one year to reduce repeat applications;
• The development of online services be intensified to improve both
efficiencies and service provision to the public;
• Local authorities be allowed to advertise statutory notices in summary
form, providing relevant links to pages on local authority websites to
encourage online consultation and reduce advertising budgets;
• The amounts spent on professional consultants be reduced;
• GPS systems be installed in all vehicles within the local authority fleet;
• Each local authority review the potential for rationalising and
consolidating the number of depots across different locations and
across different local authority service areas;
• An Innovation Fund be established by the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government to incentivise innovation
and efficiencies in the operation and delivery of local government
services, and to incentivise joint service delivery at local level –
projects financed through this fund would also be financed through a
local contribution.
11.7.3 The total annual value of the savings, efficiency benefits and additional
revenue sources identified above is €9.7 million.
Financial Summary:
Through a combination of savings and measures a total of €9.7 million can be
achieved based on the following items
1. Pooling and aggregration of overdraft – €1 million
2. Allow local authorities to advertise statutory notices in summary form – €3.9
million
3. Continue the reduction in the amounts spent on professional consultants to
achieve an overall 50% reduction on expenditure in 2008 – €8 million (of
which €3.2 million has already been accounted for in the sections on
procurement and housing)
Total Amount: €9.7 million
152

12. Local Government and the Wider Public Service
12.1 Publicly-Funded Services at Local Level
12.1.1 The Terms of Reference of the Group included reporting on proposals to
enhance value for money in the delivery of services at local level (see
section 1.2). This included examining Exchequer savings that could arise
from greater synergies and coordination between local government and a
range of other publicly-funded service providers at local level. The Group
were of the view that local government, as an directly-elected tier of
government, should be given greater responsibility for the provision of local
and community-based services. This principle has guided the Group’s
recommendations in this area.
12.1.2 The following subsections deal specifically with local government
relationships with local development groups and County/ City Enterprise
Boards, as well as coordination arrangements through the County/ City
Development Boards.
12.1.3 In addition to these areas, the Group is also making a series of proposals in
the area of greater data sharing between public bodies at a local level
(including local authorities), as well as proposals concerning the link
between local authorities and Vocational Educational Committees (VECs).
The issues of data sharing and VECs are dealt with in sections 8.7 and 13.2
respectively.
12.2 Local Government and Local Development Bodies
12.2.1 This section deals with the local development companies (LDCs) funded by
the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs, including in
particular their relationship with local government. These include urban
Partnerships focusing on social inclusion in the major cities and their rural
counterparts, the integrated (since 1 January 2009) local development
companies which cover both social inclusion in the smaller urban areas and
rural areas, and also the Rural Development Programme. This section also
deals with community development projects (CDPs), mainly located in urban
areas which are also concerned with combating social exclusion. The
County/ City Enterprise Boards for which departmental responsibility lies
with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation are dealt with
separately in section 12.3.
12.2.2 The local development bodies were put in place in the early 1990s to
promote social inclusion, community development and micro enterprise.
For most of the decade they tended in the main to operate outside of local
government structures. However, with the advent of the County/ City
Development Boards in 2000, considerable effort has been made to more
153

closely align their operations with local authorities and other local public
service agencies.
12.2.3 The local government-led multi-agency CDBs (see section 12.4) were
established to provide an integrated planning framework for each county/
city in terms of economic, social and cultural development, as well as
supporting the co-ordination of publicly funded services at local level.
12.2.4 The closer alignment of the local development bodies with their respective
county/ city councils was also an underlying objective. This was to be
achieved through representation by these bodies on the CDBs, as well as
alignment of their plans with the CDB county/ city strategies. The local
development annual plans are ‘endorsed’ by the CDBs to avoid duplication
of work.
12.2.5 The participation of the local development bodies on the CDBs and their
sub-groups dealing with social inclusion measures, has over time drawn
them somewhat closer to their respective county/city councils. The
inclusion of Councillors on the boards of the local development bodies since
the late 1990s was also intended to help in this regard. However, in
general, while progress has been made it has been slower than originally
envisaged.
Recent Initiatives to Rationalise Local Development Bodies
12.2.6 Arising from a joint cohesion initiative involving the then Department of
Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government, most LDCs now operate on
a city-wide or county wide basis. The cohesion initiative has seen a
reduction in local delivery structures for social inclusion and rural
development programmes from 94 pre-2009, to 52 in 2010. The cohesion
initiative was supported and facilitated at local level by the respective
County/ City Development Boards.
12.2.7 A new integrated Local and Community Development Programme (LCDP)
was introduced from 1 January 2010. This has inter alia, resulted in a
reduction of 20, to 165, in the number of CDPs. Under the new Programme
the structural integration of LDCs and CDPs is planned from end-2010.
Strengthening Links between Local Government and Local Development
12.2.8 Different options have been suggested to the Group to strengthen the links
between local government and local development. These include local
authorities providing back office support to the local development bodies,
and channelling of a portion of the funding for these programmes through
local authorities.
12.2.9 In general, local development companies and community development
projects carry out most of their back office activity (such as payroll/
payments, and personnel) using their own staff. This carries with it
154

significant administrative overheads, especially for small organisations,
diverting resources away from the primary mission of local development
bodies. HR services are provided by IBEC or other HR providers. Pobal
(formerly ADM) which provides central support and supervises the work of
local development bodies, as well as acting as a channel through which
funding is provided, has recently been requested by the Department of
Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs to pilot a central HR service for
the companies with a view to achieving efficiencies and a standardised
approach. This is to be reviewed by the end of 2010.
12.2.10 The involvement of local authorities as outlined above has the potential to
generate efficiencies. However, issues around local development company
staff currently carrying out such functions and the implications of the EU
Transfer of Undertakings Regulations would require consideration in this
regard.
12.2.11 Currently Pobal manages the LCDP on behalf of the Department of
Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs. It has carried out this role for
almost two decades. Pobal provides a wide range of services in this context
(including programme planning and design, appraisal, contract
management, risk audit and programme audit etc.). Given that the LCDP is
national programme, delivered locally, the Pobal role is considered an
essential one. This role could be replicated by a Government Department
or other national body but, hardly at significantly less cost then the current
arrangements. In this respect, it is important to note the efficiencies that
have been achieved within Pobal in recent years and that this is an ongoing
process. On balance, pursuing more efficiency through current structures
would seem to be a better option than trying to do so through new
structures.
12.2.12 Of the 52 Local Development Companies (LDCs), 36 also deliver the Rural
Development Programme (RDP). Each of these LDCs has a contract with
the Minister for Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs to deliver the
Programme to end-2013 (effectively 2015 for technical reasons). That
delivery model cannot be changed mid-Programme. In the event that a new
Programme emerges to replace the current RDP, post-2013, new delivery
models, including using local authorities, could be possible.
12.2.13 In recent years, the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht
Affairs, with the support of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and
Local Government have made a major investment in the cohesion initiative,
which led to the rationalisation of local delivery structures (from 94 to 53,
now 52) from January 2009. The new structures have also achieved
efficiencies and better integrated service delivery at local level and, for the
first time, country-wide coverage.
12.2.14 The Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs is now
seeking in the context of the new integrated Local and Community
Development Programme (LCDP) which rolled-out on 1 January 2010, and
which supersedes both the Local Development Social Inclusion Programme
155

(LDSIP) and the Community Development Programme (CDP), to add value
to those new structures by integrating the 165 Community Development
Projects with the LDCs.
12.2.15 There are 52 Local Development Companies and 165 Community
Development Projects, each fully staffed and in the case of the LDCs with
CEOs at a senior level spending some €110 million, of which €88 million is
Exchequer financing and €22 million EU funding. This structure is a not an
optimal means of achieving community development goals. The local
development landscape is an unnecessarily crowded space. A simpler
approach should be taken – local government should be in the lead role
locally in this regard.
12.2.16 In the short to medium term, however, the scope for more direct
involvement by local authorities with these local development bodies is
limited. However, while accepting the potential for fundamental change is
constrained in the short term, the Group considers that it is important in
terms of efficiency, effectiveness and the correct use of Exchequer
resources, local development bodies must work much more closely with
their respective local authorities. With this in mind the Group recommends
that:
• The consolidation of the local development bodies should be
intensified, including the integration of the Family Resource Centres
with the local development bodies;
• The local development bodies must closely align the delivery of their
programmes and plans with those of the relevant local authorities to
ensure maximum value for money and a more focused impact on local
communities – in this context local development bodies should put in
place arrangements to have their plans approved by their appropriate
county/ city council, and to report on the progress made in
implementing these plans to local authorities at regular intervals;
• All new local development programmes should be placed under the
care and control of the relevant local authorities.
12.3 Local Government and County/ City Enterprise Boards
12.3.1 County/ City Enterprise Boards (CEBs) were established in 1993. They
provide a range of support in relation to micro enterprise to businesses,
community groups, individuals, etc. They operate under the aegis of the
Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation and are supported by a unit
located in Enterprise Ireland.
12.3.2 The Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure
Programmes recommended that CEBs should be transferred to Enterprise
Ireland. However, that report also made a strong case that other relevant
local development functions should be delivered through the local
government system. While there is still merit in this recommendation, the
Group recommends an alternative course which is to integrate the County/
156

City Enterprise Boards with county/ city councils. This would offer a number
of particular advantages, including:
• There is a strong relationship between both local authorities and the
CEBs since their establishment in the early 1990s. County/ city
councils set them up initially and staffed them. They continue to play a
strong role in their operation and direction. A number of councillors, as
well as the county/ city manager or his/ her nominee sit on the Board.
Local authorities are therefore, already key actors in the operation of
CEBs and also played a central role in their formative years;
• The business support role of the CEBs would fit well with both the
wider economic development brief of local authorities, as well as the
support arrangements recently put in place by all county/ city councils
to support enterprise (such as Business Support Units to act as a point
of contact to ensure a quick, coordinated response to businesses from
local authorities in areas such as planning, water and roads, and CDB
Economic Sub-Committees to support the co-ordination of economic
development and promotion in the local area);
• CEBs operate under procedures and systems similar to other public
bodies, which generally mirror local government systems such as
financial accounting/ management systems. Sustaining these
administrative arrangements carries significant overheads, especially
for relatively small organisations such as CEBs. Efficiency savings
would be achieved if these and other overheads were transferred to
and carried out by local authorities. This in turn would allow a greater
proportion of CEB budgets to be spent on the primary mission of the
Boards, namely enterprise supports, rather than administrative
overheads;
• As part of their operation, there is a regular need for information
exchange and interaction between CEBs and local authorities,
especially in latter’s role as planning and sanitary authorities – this
includes ensuring that CEB clients comply with planning and
environmental requirements. This would be streamlined through the
integration of CEBs and local authorities;
• The continuing involvement of other CEB members/ sectors on the
Board of CEBs could be ensured by way of committees established
under the local authority or under the aegis of the County/ City
Development Board (on which the CEBs are represented).
12.3.3 The integration of the County/ City Enterprise Boards with county/ city
councils would result in a greater re-alignment of local economic
development and supports to businesses, and a saving on administrative
overheads incurred by the Boards in their present form.
12.3.4 The Group, therefore, considers that County/ City Enterprise Boards should
be integrated within their respective county/ city local authorities. The
rationalisation of CEB structures would also take account of the proposed
joint administrative areas (see section 6.4), resulting in a corresponding
reduction in the number of CEBs.
157

12.3.5 The national policy direction and support for CEBs as provided by the
Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation and Enterprise Ireland
would not be affected by such integration.
12.4 Local Government and County/ City Development Boards
12.4.1 Effective co-ordination of public services at local level is an essential
element in achieving coherent publicly funded service delivery. It was
against that background that multi-agency County/ City Development
Boards (CDBs) were established in 2000. They are led and supported by
county/ city councils and indirectly widen local government’s sphere of
influence in other areas of the public service, such as enterprise, training
and local development. Their key role is one of influencing other
organisations to better co-ordinate local public service delivery. CDBs have
no direct executive powers and have limited financial and other resources.
An outline of the membership of the Boards is at Appendix 11.
12.4.2 A 2008 review of the Boards noted that while CDBs have made some
progress in regard to co-ordination of local service delivery, most notably on
social inclusion, there remains a strong need for ongoing priority and
commitment to CDBs by its member bodies at both national and local level.
The review also made a series of recommendations to strengthen and
develop the Boards (being overseen by a National CDB Group (chaired by a
Minister of State). This includes having a greater focus on the co-ordination
of economic activity at local level through the establishment of CDB
economic development sub committees (now in place). In addition, both the
OECD Review of the Irish Public Service and the Task Force report
‘Transforming Public Services’ recommended that the CDBs should be
strengthened and their co-ordination role reinforced, and that the democratic
legitimacy of elected councils should be maximised in relation to the delivery
of services at local level. ‘Transforming Public Services’ also suggested that
CDBs be encouraged to identify specific joint service initiatives across
agencies for priority implementation (see section 1.6).
12.4.3 The Group recognises the importance of better co-ordination of locally
delivered public services. In the light of the current economic situation and
the resultant tight constraints on resources maximum value for public
funding must be achieved. At the same time the Group accepts that this
presents ongoing challenges and that much more needs to be done by the
member agencies on the CDBs in this regard. Where progress is made by
CDBs, it is often dependent on the commitment by individual Board
members, as opposed to tangible engagement by the members’ parent
agency at national level. In other words, engagement on the achievement
of improved co-ordination is generally not systemic.
12.4.4 There is relatively limited resource sharing between agencies represented
on CDBs to advance the achievement of the agreed shared goals. The
incentivising of good practice is recognised as a powerful tool in influencing
the achievement of good outcomes. International and national experience
158

suggests that financial incentives can be critical to motivating action across
administrative boundaries, even if these involve only small amounts of
money.
12.4.5 The Group also considers that, notwithstanding the progress that has been
made in rationalising local development structures, greater efforts are
needed to ensure effective coordination of local development. The CDB
responsibility for ‘endorsing’ local development plans at present gives the
CDBs and local authorities only limited potential for ensuring that the work
of local development groups in different locations is not replicated.
12.4.6 In order to ensure better coordination at local level, the Group proposes that
a small percentage of budget allocations to relevant public bodies on the
CDB be conditional on the delivery of agreed joint service initiatives, or
ringfenced for the delivery of joint service initiatives as agreed by the CDB.
This would give local authorities and the CDBs greater leverage to ensure
that the activities of local development groups and other service providers
are consistent with broader plans and programmes for the county / city,
minimise overlaps, and ensure greater accountability to local elected
representatives.
Recommendations:
12.5.1 Thus the Group recommends that:
• Local authorities continue their role in promoting and leveraging
community actions and local innovation to improve local areas, for
example in the maintenance of local estates;
• The consolidation of local development bodies be intensified;
• The programmes and plans of local development bodies be aligned
with those of the relevant local authorities to ensure maximum value
for money and a more focused impact on local communities;
• The plans of local development bodies be approved by their
appropriate county and city council, and these bodies should report on
the progress made in implementing these plans to local authorities at
regular intervals;
• All new local development programmes be placed under the care and
control of the relevant local authorities;
• County/ City Enterprise Boards be integrated within their respective
county/ city local authority;
• The CDB Interdepartmental Group remain in place to strengthen and
develop the CDBs including overseeing relevant recommendations in
this report;
• CDB member bodies be incentivised to share resources and promote
better co-ordination of publicly funded local services – this could be
done either by making a small percentage of budget allocations to
relevant member bodies conditional on the delivery of agreed joint
service initiatives as confirmed by the CDB, or by ringfencing a small
percentage of budget allocations to relevant member bodies
159

specifically for the delivery of joint service initiatives as agreed by the
CDB;
• An Innovation Fund be established by the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government (see section 11.6) – a
proportion of this should be dedicated to incentivising joint service
delivery at local level.
160

13. Cost Recovery and Revenue Issues
13.1 Economic Cost Recovery
13.1.1 The Group considers that unless otherwise justified, local authorities should
be reimbursed for the economic cost of providing services for Government
Departments and other agencies and bodies. The normal principle that
should apply from an efficiency perspective is that the user pays for the cost
of the service. While full reimbursement might not be justified in certain
cases (for example, when dealing with disadvantaged groups or where
costs relate to the provision of general public good services e.g. public
parks), the guiding principle should generally be that the user pays for the
cost of the service provided, with the burden of proof falling on cases where
it may be necessary to depart from this principle. This premise is also
reflected in the polluter pays principle where through a direct link between
consumption of a service and payment, responsible environmental
behaviour can be incentivised.
13.1.2 The Group considers that this principle is relevant to the consideration of a
number of areas where charges are levied on service users, as well as
issues surrounding the commercial rates base and agency services carried
out by local authorities on behalf of central Government Departments.
Non-Domestic Water Charges
13.1.3 In relation to water, the Government’s Water Pricing Policy requires local
authorities to recover the cost of providing water services to the nondomestic
sector from users of these services. Full cost includes the
marginal capital cost, meter installation and ongoing operational and
administrative costs. The non-domestic sector includes all industrial,
commercial, agricultural and institutional users of water and waste water
services.
13.1.4 At present, the 34 councils are responsible for recovering the cost of
providing water services from the users of these services within their areas,
with the exception of households using the services for domestic purposes.
The water charges for their functional area are set annually by each local
authority and are based on metered consumption (the price is set per cubic
metre consumed). However, as the local authorities set their own prices,
there is no obvious incentive to provide for supply side efficiencies. There is
no independent regulation of the charges set by individual councils and this
has led to a variation in the charges being levied (for example, water
charges this year range from €1.49 per cubic metre to €3.04).
13.1.5 There is no mechanism to ensure that all local authorities are achieving cost
recovery as required by the Government’s pricing policy. Even though
commercial water charges in Ireland are on average considerably lower
than in other EU countries, the Commission on Taxation which reported in
161

2009 found that local authorities were not fully recouping this cost, despite
Government policy to recover the cost of water services from non-domestic
users. Moving to full cost recovery in this area would provide local
authorities with an additional income of €58 million per year.
13.1.6 Service indicator data also indicate that some local authorities have been
experiencing significant difficulties with collecting water charges from the
non-domestic sector, with almost half of water charges being unpaid across
all local authorities. This suggests the need for a more simplified approach
to penalties for non-payment as suggested in section 13.3.
13.1.7 The Group recommends that there needs to be a greater emphasis by local
authorities on billing and collection of non-domestic water charges. There is
also a strong case of this function to be managed on a shared service or
outsourced basis.
Waste Charges
13.1.8 The Group also supports greater efforts to secure further cost recovery in
waste collection. This view was also expressed by the Commission on
Taxation, although it declined to put an estimate on the saving that could be
achieved for local authorities in this area, as it considered any estimate
subject to change if local authorities continued to cede waste collection to
the private sector. However, the Group does recommend that greater cost
recovery in waste collection be pursued by those individual local authorities
that continue to be involved in this activity.
Planning Fees
13.1.9 The Group believes that greater cost recovery should be reflected in the
level of planning fees. Planning fees are set by central government, but
only cover a fraction of the cost of processing planning applications. The
current planning application fee for the construction of a single house is €65,
while the current average cost of processing a planning application for a
single house is over 7 times the amount of the fee. Other fees apply to
other categories of development. The Department of the Environment,
Heritage and Local Government estimates that when the full costs of the
planning function provided by local authorities are taken into account, the
average cost of processing a planning application exceeds the average fee
income by more than €1,500. This shortfall is being met through the
general resources of local authorities.
13.1.10 The Commission on Taxation report also noted that planning fees are
significantly lower than they are in other European countries, and the
Commission proposed increased charges and an end to maximum fees for
large developments. Unlike other jurisdictions, planning fees in Ireland are
not based on the actual costs of service provision. For example, the current
fee of €65 for the construction of a single house in Ireland compares with a
fee of €369 in England, €404 in Scotland and €765 in Northern Ireland.
162

13.1.11 The Group considers that the planning fee levels set by the Department of
the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should be revised to
allow for a greater recovery of administrative costs for different types and
scales of planning applications, subject to verification that the approach
towards processing planning permissions accords with good and efficient
administrative practice. Further details on this recommendation are
provided in section 10.4 above.
Development Levies
13.1.12 While not strictly within its terms of reference, the Group thought it
appropriate to comment on the issue of cost recovery as it applies to
development levies.
13.1.13 The adoption of individual development contribution schemes is a reserved
function of the locally elected members of each planning authority. It is a
matter for the elected members to determine the level of contribution and
the types of development to which they will apply as provided for in planning
legislation. The general intention of the schemes is to ensure that the cost of
providing the range of infrastructure (water, waste water, roads, community
facilities, etc.) that supports development does not fall to the Exchequer
alone.
13.1.14 The Group notes the wide variation (ranging from €2,000 to €20,000) across
authorities in the level of contribution being adopted. In many local
authorities, the development contribution rate falls well short of providing a
meaningful contribution to the costs of the infrastructure needed to support
development. Given the difficulties in the public finances, the Group
recommends that this matter be addressed by the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government through, for example, issuing
binding statutory guidance to local authorities on the approach to be taken
in setting the level of development contributions.
Commercial Rates
13.1.15 The Group also considers that the user pays principle, as well as basic
issues of fairness and equity, also require that a series of exemptions and
anomalies in the commercial rates base be addressed.
13.1.16 The Commission on Taxation argued that State properties currently
exempted from commercial rates such as Government offices, Defence
Forces and Garda properties, prisons, HSE administrative offices and the
constituency offices of TDs, Senators and MEPs, should be brought into the
rates system. While it might be argued that ending exemptions from State
bodies simply amounts to a circular flow of money with one set of public
bodies paying another set of public bodies, the Group believes that there
would be an efficiency gain for the Exchequer from such a change. In
particular, it would encourage State agencies and Government Departments
to examine regularly their property portfolios and incentivise more efficient
asset management practices.
163

13.1.17 There are a series of other exceptions in the current system of commercial
rates system that the Group considers need to be reviewed on the grounds
of equity and base broadening. These arise mainly in the accommodation
and catering sectors. The commercial rates system should also apply to offshore
structures, such as windfarms and power stations (the latter would
require a change in law to give local authorities rating jurisdiction in these
areas). Third-level institutions and professional institutions should be partly
rated, as should community halls where a significant amount of commercial
activity operates from them.
13.1.18 The effect of these proposals to broaden the commercial rates base was
estimated by the Commission on Taxation to be worth between €77-€87
million in income to local authorities per year. The net savings to the
Exchequer would be far less than this to the extent that other sectors of the
state would be paying these rates to local authorities. It is estimated that
€50 million of the €77-87 million relates to state properties that would be
liable for commercial rates.
13.2 Agency Services
13.2.1 The Group considers that where a local authority provides a service on
behalf of another public body, this should be done on a cost recovery basis,
provided that services are being delivered in an efficient manner.
13.2.2 Local authorities are not fully compensated for the overheads associated
with the requirement to process Higher Education Grants on behalf of the
Department of Education and Skills under the Local Authorities (Higher
Education Grants) Acts 1968-92. Four different student grant schemes
exist, one of which, the Higher Education Grants Scheme, is processed by
local authorities. This involves the processing of grants to some 27,600
students per year, amounting to in the region of €160 million in grants.
Local authorities receive an allocation from the Department of Education
and Skills for Higher Education Grants, but this allocation relates solely to
recoupment of grant payments made to eligible applicants – no allocation is
made by the Department to local authorities for the overheads associated
with carrying out this work. Some 90 local authority staff are involved in this
area, and in 2010 the budgeted operating costs of processing Higher
Education Grants ran to almost €3 million.
13.2.3 The current moratorium on local government staffing means that the
number of staff available for this function is likely to be constrained, while
CAO trends indicate that the number of applications for Higher Education
Grants is increasing and is forecast to increase into the future. This poses
particular problems as demand for this service tends to peak at certain
points in the year.
13.2.4 The Student Support Bill 2008 contains provisions to consolidate the four
existing schemes into a unified grant scheme, as well as allowing the
164

Minister for Education and Skills to aggregate the administration of Higher
Education Grants into Vocational Educational Committees (VECs), or local
authorities, or to outsource parts of the service. An online application
process is also currently being developed, and greater use is being made of
EFT (electronic funds transfer) rather than issuing cheques for grant
payments. These developments would be expected to substantially
increase the efficiencies and reduce the overheads associated with this
service. There is also a case for undertaking this payment function on a
shared service basis using an existing public service provider.
13.2.5 Nevertheless, irrespective of a Government decision on the future of Higher
Education Grants, and pending a possible transfer of functions in this area,
the Group considers that local authorities should be reimbursed for the
administrative overheads associated with this work as long as they continue
to be responsible for processing Higher Education Grants on behalf of the
Department of Education and Skills.
13.2.6 The same principle should equally apply to agency services carried out by
local authorities for other Government Departments (such as civil defence,
coroners, etc.). The Group recommends full cost recovery for all services
carried out by local authorities on behalf of central government, provided
these are being managed efficiently.
13.2.7 In 2010, local authorities also budgeted to make a contribution towards the
cost of VECs of almost €2 million. The Group considers that this
contribution should be ceased as soon as possible. The necessary
legislative changes should be progressed accordingly.
13.3 Rationalisation of Provisions on Charging, Penalties and Revenue
Collection
13.3.1 The total amount of arrears due to local authorities from housing rents and
loans, commercial water charges, commercial rates and waste charges in
2008 was just under €410 million. This figure does not include development
levies due to local authority capital accounts.
13.3.2 The Group suggests that a more efficient approach to revenue collection of
social housing rents would be for the Department of Social Protection to pay
the rents due to local authorities directly to the local authorities concerned
instead of the social welfare recipient. The current system involves the
State making payments to social welfare recipients who are also in receipt
of social housing support, only for another public body to have to seek to
recover a proportion of many of these payments in social housing rents, and
ultimately on occasion through the Courts. This is an inefficient and
wasteful use of State resources. Direct deductions of rents at source, as
well as being a more efficient use of resources, would also streamline
processes for local authority tenants and reduce the time they have to
spend dealing with rent collectors. The new system would result in
considerable annual savings in the costs associated with rent collection, as
165

well as preventing the future accumulation of arrears in a substantial
proportion of cases. Further details on the Group’s proposals in this respect
are included in section 10.1.
13.3.3 For other areas of revenue collection, the Group considers that recent
systems introduced for new charges should be used as a model for existing
charges. The new annual charge on non-principal private residences
(NPPR) sets out a clear and simple process for dealing with non-payments
or late payments of the charge. Where payments of the charge are not paid
within a grace period of one month of the due date, a late payment fee of
€20 per month applies. The amount involved is cumulative from year 1 and
is significant if the liability is not discharged. For example, if no charge were
to be paid for five years after it first fell due, the amount owed would,
assuming the property continued to attract liability over the entire period, be
€4,300 (of which €1,000 would be the €200 charge over 5 years, and
€3,300 would relate to excess charges accumulating over the same period).
13.3.4 Local authorities may also take criminal prosecutions against owners that
fail to pay the charge. Prosecution is by way of summary jurisdiction and a
Court may impose a fine of up to €2,000.
13.3.5 A key feature of this model is that both the charge and any late payment fee
is a charge against the property – therefore, where a property liable for the
charge is being sold, any unpaid charge and late payment fee will pass to
the new owner of the property. This is the case with other property taxes
such as stamp duty, and can create difficulties for vendors in the sale
process where a purchaser’s solicitor can identify outstanding charges due
before a contract to sell the property can be executed, or where a solicitor
will seek some kind of legally binding undertaking that no liabilities are
extant on the property before contracts for purchase are executed. In
practice, this means that a property is unlikely to be conveyanced before the
discharge of any charge or late payment fee due in respect of it. Thus far
this system has proven its worth in creating a strong incentive for those
liable to the NPPR charge to pay it on time.
13.3.6 A comparable arrangement applies to tolls on the M50. Cars that are not
registered for electronic charging are liable to a €3 toll. Where the toll is not
paid on time, a penalty of €3 is added to the outstanding amount. If this is
not paid within the next 14 days, a further penalty of €40 is levied. Failure to
pay the full amount due within a further 56 days results in an additional €100
penalty. If the total amount due remains outstanding, legal proceedings can
be initiated.
13.3.7 The Group considers that this simple model of charging and imposing
appropriate penalties on late payments and debtors is an appropriate
incentive to pay on time. This model should be used as the basis for
penalties in other areas of local authority charging, such as commercial
water charges, as well as future revenue streams such as domestic water
charges. Legislation should be adapted to allow for this type of penalty for
the recipient of the service for non-payment or late payment. Existing
166

legislation provides that arrears of water charges can be made a charge
against the property where the recipient of the water service is the owner of
the property. However, the Group recognises that, as the majority of
commercial water customers are tenants or leaseholders, alternative
approaches are required for the late payment of charges by commercial
enterprises where the property concerned is a rented property. For this
reason, the incrementally increasing non/late payment penalty approaches
of the NPPR should be considered.
13.3.8 It is not possible at this stage to put a specific figure on the possible income
that would accrue to local authorities. However, given the considerable
arrears outstanding, if successful, such changes could lead to significant
savings for local authorities in terms of both arrears collected, and the costs
associated with revenue collection. The more that can be collected
automatically, or at source, the greater the certainty of revenue collection
and the lower the administrative cost.
13.4 Local Taxes and Charging
13.4.1 The 2009 renewed Programme for Government and the 2009 Commission
on Taxation report proposed both the introduction of an annual local tax on
residential land and the reintroduction of domestic water charges (see
section 4.3). The Commission on Taxation estimated that their proposal for
an annual tax on residential property would raise in the region of €1 billion
per year, although the exact figure would depend on the rate set. The
Commission further suggested that the levying of domestic water charges
could raise a further €450 million, although this did not take account of a
potential decision to allow domestic users to use a certain volume of water
free of charge.
13.4.2 In December, the Government gave approval in principle for the Minister for
the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to commence the
preparation of legislation to remove the prohibition on charging domestic
users for water services and to provide a legal framework for local
authorities to charge for the provision of water services. It is intended that
water charges will be based on volumetric usage, and will involve the
installation of water meters in households connected to a public water
supply.
13.4.3 It should also be noted that there could be a significant lead-in time before
both proposals can be implemented, particularly if the models of taxation
and charging adopted depend on property valuations and water metering.
Installing domestic water meters will also involve a significant upfront
investment. Proposals are currently being finalised on the delivery of a
water metering programme. Given the scale of the metering programme, it
is envisaged that it would take approximately five years to install water
meters in all households in receipt of public supplies. The cost of the
metering campaign is estimated to be in the region of €500 million based on
the recommended approach. The estimate does not include other costs
167

associated with the introduction of domestic water charges including an
administrative support structure to support domestic meter reading, billing
and customer services.
13.4.4 The operational costs associated with providing domestic water and waste
water services to over 1.1 million households in 2009 are estimated at €500
million. This does not take account of the capital investment in providing
new infrastructure which serves existing domestic requirements – this
capital investment is currently provided for in full from the Exchequer
through the Water Services Investment Programme.
13.4.5 The introduction of water metering and volumetric charges will provide a
significant incentive for households to reduce their consumption of water
and should as a consequence reduce both the operational and capital costs
for local authorities. In addition, metering would provide an opportunity to
address supply side leakage. The Greater Dublin Water Project estimated
that supply side leakage may be as high as 65 litres per property per day.
13.4.6 The Department estimates that investment in water metering will generate
operational savings (through reduced water demand) as well as reduced
future capital requirements. In summary, it is estimated that if metering
leads to a reduction in consumption of 10% per day of the estimated 1,670
megalitres/day treated for domestic consumption and if supply side leakage
could be reduced by 20 litres per property per day, savings in operational
costs with a net present value of €630 million could be achieved over a
twenty year timeframe. It is also estimated that the reduction would provide
savings on capital expenditure with a net present value of €151 million
leading to total savings of €781 million.
13.4.7 However, with more ambitious conservation targets, greater savings could
be achieved. For example, a reduction in consumption of 15% combined
with a reduction in supply side leakage of 40 litres per property per day
would provide savings in operational costs with a net present value of
approximately €980 million. The installation of water meters in households
would strengthen the capacity of local authorities to pro-actively manage
their water distribution networks and complement the significant
acceleration of Exchequer investment on water conservation measures
recently announced. The installation of meters in households would also
stimulate increased demand-reduction measures by householders as they
become aware of their consumption patterns and the associated costs.
13.4.8 The Group endorses both the proposal for an annual local tax and the
reintroduction of domestic water charges and suggests that from an
efficiency perspective they be implemented as soon as possible. It
considers them to be consistent with the need to ensure a relatively stable
and sustainable revenue base, a rational and responsible use of resources,
as well improving the accountability of local government and bringing Irish
local government into line with international norms.
168

Recommendations:
13.5.1 In summary, the Group considers that greater efforts should be made to
ensure that the costs incurred by local authorities in the provision of
services are passed on to the end-user. This applies to both economic cost
recovery for charging, and agency services provided by local authorities in
behalf of central government. A series of anomalies and exceptions in the
commercial rates base also need to be addressed on the grounds of equity,
fairness, and efficiency. Lessons can be learned from the effectiveness of
newer models of charging and dealing with late payments in limiting arrears,
and these should be applied to existing areas where charges are levied.
The Group agrees with the proposals both of the Commission on Taxation
and in the renewed Programme for Government on the introduction of a
local system of taxation and the reintroduction of domestic water charges.
13.5.2 Thus the Group recommends that:
• Cost recovery be attained in water services for non-domestic users
and in waste charges for both domestic and non-domestic users, in
line with Government policy;
• Cost recovery be attained in planning fees, and maximum fees for
large developments should be terminated;
• The wide variation across authorities in the level of development
contributions be examined by the Department of the Environment,
Heritage and Local Government to ensure that contributions provide a
meaningful contribution to the costs of the infrastructure needed to
support development;
• A series of exemptions to the commercial rates base be curtailed;
• Pending a decision over the future system of Higher Education Grants,
the administrative overheads associated with this area falling to local
authorities be fully recouped by the Department of Education and
Skills;
• Local authority contributions to Vocational Educational Committees
(VECs) to cease;
• Full economic cost recovery to apply to all services carried out by local
authorities on an agency basis on behalf of central government on the
basis that services are being run efficiently;
• Existing approaches to charging be adapted in line with the NPPR
model, particularly as regards dealing with late payments, and
providing for charges and late payment penalties to be a charge
against a property where possible;
• Social housing rents due to local authorities be deducted by direct
debit directly from social welfare payments to reduce overheads
associated with revenue collection in this area;
• Arrangements necessary to allow for the levying of local taxes and
domestic water charges be progressed as a matter of priority.
169

13.5.3 The total value of the savings and extra charges identified above is €95
million in a full year.
Financial Summary:
Through a combination of savings and measures a total of €95 million can be
achieved based on the following items
1. Cost recovery in water services for non-domestic users – €58 million
2. End a series of exemptions to the commercial rates basis – €27-37 million (as
the net saving to the state)
3. Local authorities to be fully recouped for administrative overheads associated
with Higher Education Grants – €3 million
4. Cease local authority contributions to VECs – €2 million
5. Adapt existing approaches to charging in line with the NPPR model,
particularly as regards dealing with late payments, and providing for charges
and late payment penalties to be a charge against a property where possible
– unspecified, but likely to be significant
6. Social housing rents to be paid directly to local authorities by Department of
Social Protection – (see section 10.1)
Total Amount: €95 million
170

14.1 Recommendations
14. Recommendations
14.1.1 This section lists the recommendations made in previous sections of the
report, including indicative timeframes and cross-references to the main
text. While the list of recommendations appended to the Executive
Summary is presented on a thematic basis, this section lists the
recommendations section by section.
14.1.2 Short-term timeframes are set for recommendations to be progressed in
2011. Medium-term timeframes indicate recommendations to be
progressed in 2012-2013. Long-term timeframes signify recommendations
that can be expected to achieve efficiency outcomes in the post-2013
period.
Organisational Efficiency Issues
1. Responsibility for planning, roads and housing functions should be transferred
from town councils to county councils (medium term – section 5.6);
2. County councils should be allowed delegate some local aspects of housing
service provision to towns where this is economically efficient (medium-term –
section 5.6.9);
3. Each county council should be allocated an urban grant for local urban roads,
with the county council determining the urban road spend across all towns in
its administrative area (medium-term – section 5.6.6);
4. The power to determine the annual rate on valuation should be removed from
town councils, and town charges be applied in the same manner as other
existing non-rating town councils (medium-term – section 5.6.13);
5. County council offices / area offices and town council offices should be colocated
(ongoing – section 5.6.10);
6. Joint drainage boards, joint burial boards, and other bodies should be
dissolved, and their functions transferred to local authorities or a ‘lead’ local
authority (short to medium-term – section 5.7);
7. The payments and expenses provided to local elected members should be
kept under review to ensure that they remain reasonable and proportionate
(ongoing – section 5.2).
Local Government Staffing
8. The number of county/ city managers should be reduced from 34 to 24,
representing a reduction of 30% (short, medium and long-term – section 6.4);
9. The number of directors, based on a standard template related to the size of
the local authority, should be reduced by at least 20% from 240 to 190 (short,
medium and long-term – sections 6.5 and 6.6);
10. The number of senior and middle managers (administrative and professional)
should be reduced by 15% (short to medium-term – section 6.6);
171

11. Ten joint administrative areas across 20 county and city council areas should
be established to pool corporate functions and other service areas, with each
joint administrative area under the responsibility of a single manager (short,
medium and long-term – section 6.4);
12. The number of corporate service staff should be reduced by 10% in the joint
administrative areas, and by 5% in several other local authorities (mediumterm
– section 6.8);
13. The number of planning staff should be reduced by 10% (medium-term –
section 6.10);
14. The number of roads staff should be reduced by 250, with an emphasis on
reducing numbers in certain local authorities (medium to long-term – section
6.9);
15. The staffing complements and number of senior managers in Dublin and Cork
cities should be independently reviewed, with a target of reducing numbers by
at least 15% (review carried out over a six-month period, with implementation
in medium to long-term – section 6.5).
Value for Money and Audit
16. The Director of Audit should produce an annual report, building on the
existing activity report, taking a more strategic overview of financial
management and audit across the local government sector (short-term –
sections 7.4.2 to 7.4.3);
17. The annual report should be sent to the Oireachtas Committee on
Environment, Heritage and Local Government which can be publicly
discussed with the Director and relevant local government representatives
(short-term – section 7.4.4);
18. The internal audit function in local authorities should be resourced by staff
with suitable professional qualifications and sufficient ICT skills to allow the
extraction and analysis of data from the financial systems (medium-term –
section 7.2.5);
19. Opportunities for exchange and secondment of audit personnel with the
private sector should be explored (medium-term – section 7.2.5);
20. The scope for sharing internal audit services between local authorities should
be pursued as a matter of priority (short-term – section 7.2.6);
21. The annual internal audit plan should be discussed with the local government
auditor and presented to the local authority audit committee before finalisation
(short-term – section 7.3.4);
22. Any value for money (VFM) studies or efficiency reviews carried out within the
local authority should be reported through internal audit. The role of VFM
officer within an authority could be assigned or extended to cover internal
audit (short-term – section 7.3.4);
23. Authorities should have local arrangements in place for the internal checking
of receipts, including motor tax. This work should be separate from internal
audit (short-term – section 7.2.4);
24. Regulations, as provided for in the Local Government (Business Improvement
Districts) Act, 2006 should be issued on the operation of audit committees.
This should include good practice as identified from experience to date
(medium-term – section 7.3.4);
172

25. Financial performance indicators should be verified as part of the annual audit
and reported on as part of the audit report, the annual financial statement,
and the publication of service indicators (short-term – section 7.5.6);
26. Local authority performance against national VFM studies, capital spot
checks, efficiency reviews or VFM follow-up reports should be considered by
the local government auditor. Local authority progress in relation to VFM /
efficiency reviews should also be discussed with the audit committee (shortterm
– sections 7.4.5 to 7.4.7);
27. An improved website area should be created for the Local Government Audit
Service, on which all audit publications, including the annual audit reports, as
well as information on local VFM studies, efficiency reviews and best practice
could be made available to the public (short-term – section 7.4.8);
28. Local authority elected members should receive quarterly reports at a
minimum on the financial performance of the council against the approved
budget (short-term – section 7.5.4);
29. All local authorities must meet the statutory deadline for preparation of the
draft annual financial statement (short-term – section 7.5.1 to 7.5.2);
30. Cash flow statements should be prepared at regular intervals and considered
by the local authority management team, with appropriate action taken (shortterm
– section 7.5);
31. The necessary remedial action should continue to be pursued intensively in
respect of the significant revenue account deficits in a number of local
authorities (short-term – section 7.6.4).
Shared Services
32. A uniform human resource and payroll system should be implemented for
local authorities (short-term – section 8.4.3);
33. All local government recruitment and promotion for clerical, administrative,
and professional staff should be conducted through the Public Appointments
Service (short-term – section 8.4.12);
34. The business case for a shared service approach between local authorities in
the fields of fire services, homelessness, building inspection, internal audit,
motor tax, and e-Government initiatives, either on a regional basis or on a
lead authority model should be evaluated, having regard to timescale, service
improvements and anticipated cost savings, as well as the proposed joint
administrative areas (short-term – section 8.5 and other sections throughout
the report);
35. Single, national ICT applications with common business rules for all local
authorities should be pursued wherever possible, as opposed to multiple and
duplicating local ICT applications (short-term – sections 8.4.4 to 8.4.11);
36. ICT infrastructure services across the sector should be consolidated and
delivered as a shared service by ‘lead authorities’ or the Local Government
Management Agency (short to medium-term – sections 8.4.4 to 8.4.11);
37. The ICT systems used by local authorities and those bodies to which they
report should be compatible (medium-term – sections 8.7.8 to 8.7.10);
38. The Regional Design Office model should be extended to other local authority
service areas, for example to the procurement, land acquisition, project
management through planning and construction, and asset management of
173

water and waste infrastructure, and public lighting (short to medium-term –
section 8.6);
39. Local authorities in specific regions should be obliged to negotiate a
framework agreement for the region every 5 years, which would include
assessments of shared service opportunities, and to encourage attention to
regional policy issues that transcend local boundaries (short to medium-term
– section 8.2.7).
Procurement
40. Procurement systems in operation in Dublin City Council, Clare County
Council, Longford County Council and LAQuotes should be reviewed within
12-18 months to establish which system can deliver the greatest cost savings
through aggregation – following this review, participation in an aggregated
sectoral procurement system should be mandatory for all local authorities
(short-term – section 9.4.12);
41. LAQuotes should be adapted to ensure that metrics are installed to measure
throughput in value terms, count the number of transactions and record the
transaction size, and identify the products and services being procured (shortterm
– section 9.4.10);
42. The procurement of road salt should be transferred to the National Roads
Authority to ensure that local authorities do not have to compete with one
another when there is a high demand for road salt (short-term – section
9.5.7);
43. Local suppliers should be encouraged to participate in the tendering process
– the underlying principle is clear that best value must be obtained in terms of
economy, but equally local authorities must enable local suppliers to
participate in the tendering process (short-term – section 9.4.8);
44. Each local authority should designate a contact point and resource to support
procurement (short-term – section 9.6.6);
45. Links should be formalised between the procurement officers in local
authorities to promote exchange of best practice and coordinate efforts at
shared procurement (short-term – section 9.6.7);
46. Regional procurement specialists from the National Procurement Service
should work with the Local Government Management Agency and a number
of local authorities in each region to encourage the identification and
exploitation of opportunities for more effective procurement co-operation and
co-ordination across local authorities and the broader public sector (shortterm
– section 9.5.12);
47. Cost effective training should be provided for all key participants in the
procurement process and should be developed and implemented across the
sector – the skills of participants should be enhanced to ensure adherence
with best practice in specific cases of procurement, but also the strategic
procurement skills to collect, aggregate and analyse high level spend data
through detailed spend analysis, market analysis, negotiating and contracting
skills, supplier and contract management, and supplier performance
management (short-term – section 9.6.8).
174

Housing
48. Housing sections within local authorities should be reconfigured to reflect the
more varied sources of housing supply, arising from a greater emphasis on
sourcing social housing units from the private sector through the Rental
Accommodation Scheme and long-term leasing (short-term – sections 10.1.5
to 10.1.6);
49. A single building inspectorate service could be established on a regional
basis to streamline the approach to the inspection of property. This should be
examined to see how a single inspection could serve most if not all purposes
across housing, planning, fire and other functions – this process should also
be facilitated through the establishment of joint administrative areas (mediumterm
– section 10.1.7);
50. The time needed to let and re-let social housing properties should be further
reduced to improve supply and reduce costs, and encourage a more efficient
use of housing stock (short-term – sections 10.1.8 to 10.1.9);
51. The use of the professional services that are available from in-house staff,
from other local authority staff on a shared service basis or from the new
Housing and Sustainable Communities Agency should be maximised to
support the procurement and management of housing projects (short-term –
sections 10.1.10 to 10.1.11);
52. Housing assessments carried out by one local authority should be valid in
others to eliminate duplicate assessments, and the possibility of establishing
specialist teams to carry out housing needs assessment on behalf of several
local authorities should be evaluated (short to medium-term – section
10.1.12);
53. Social housing rents due to local authorities should be deducted directly from
social welfare payments to reduce overheads associated with revenue
collection in this area and to substantially reduce arrears, as well as to
streamline processes for local authority tenants and avoid the accumulation of
arrears. This should also be a condition of new tenancies (medium-term –
sections 10.1.15 to 10.1.17);
54. Opportunities for partnership with other local authorities in the provision of
relevant services for the homeless should be explored to pool resources and
improve access, as appropriate, and partnership with the HSE should be
continued or enhanced where necessary, having regard to the respective
roles of the agencies (short-term – sections 10.1.18 to 10.1.19);
55. The dissemination of best practice across local authorities should be a central
element of the remit of the newly consolidated Housing and Sustainable
Communities Agency (short-term – section 10.1.23).
Roads
56. New tolling schemes on national roads (both new and existing) should be
introduced, based on an equitable distribution of tolling points across the
national roads network, with a dedicated proportion of revenue used to invest
in local and regional roads (medium to long-term – sections 10.2.5 to 10.2.7);
175

57. A greater community contribution should be secured towards the upkeep of
local roads serving a small number of households (short to medium-term –
sections 10.2.15 to 10.2.16);
58. The role of the Regional Design Offices (RDOs) should be extended to areas
such as the management of non-public-private partnership major projects,
strategic regional road projects, asset and network management, and
rehabilitation work, and the number of RDOs should be reduced (short to
medium-term – sections 10.2.8 to 10.2.11).
Water
59. An enhanced regional office approach should be developed at river basin
level for:
- Infrastructure delivery and implementation of the River Basin
Management Plans;
- Managing bulk purchasing (such as energy, chemicals), and externally
procured sampling and monitoring and to seek economies of scale in
contracts for equipment maintenance;
- Working with the Water Services Training Group (already regionally
based) to optimise training;
- Following further analysis, (a) delivering monitoring, authorisation and
licensing functions currently carried out by local authorities under a
range of legislation and (b) providing operational audits to identify
potential for savings (short to medium-term – sections 10.3.7 to 10.3.16).
60. The ‘agency’ working arrangements between Department of Agriculture,
Fisheries and Food and local authorities on inspections under the nitrates
regulations should be extended with a view to a more efficient use of the
overall inspection resource (short to medium-term – section 10.3.17);
61. Where appropriate, the necessary equipment should be installed to allow
remote operation and monitoring of water/ waste water facilities (short to
medium-term – section 10.3.20);
62. A concerted effort should be made to reduce unaccounted for water including
water leakage levels (short to medium-term – section 10.3.19);
63. There should be a continued emphasis on water conservation, instead of
schemes to increase capacity, leading to savings in operational costs and
deferred capital investment (short-term – section 10.3.19);
64. There should be continued use of Design, Build and Operate (DBO) and
bundling of operation and maintenance contracts (short-term – section
10.3.21);
65. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and
local authorities should further investigate ways to reduce input costs in areas
such as energy efficiency through carrying out energy audits and improving
operational and maintenance practices (short-term – section 10.3.22);
66. The IT-based Performance Management System should be implemented for
all water plants so that comparative data is available to establish
benchmarking for service delivery and inform savings measures (short-term –
section 10.3.23);
67. The review of laboratory services currently underway should be expanded to
include an examination, with a view to identifying efficiencies, of water
176

Planning
monitoring by other public agencies. This review should be completed within
6 months (short-term – section 10.3.24).
68. Planning fees should be increased with the aim of moving towards full cost
recovery over a 5 year period, and maximum fees for large developments
should be terminated (long-term – sections 10.4.8 to 10.4.22);
69. A range of efficiency measures should be introduced, such as:
- Over the counter validation of applications;
- Pre-application consultations on demand for significant development
proposals; and
- Regular information sessions or planning advice clinics (short-term –
sections 10.4.21 to 10.4.22);
70. The introduction of e-planning should be accelerated and business process
re-engineering exercises should be completed to strip costs from the system
(medium to long-term – sections 10.4.13 to 10.4.23).
Waste Management
71. The system of control for internal movement of hazardous waste within
Ireland should be consolidated into the national office within Dublin City
Council (short to medium-term – section 10.5.7);
72. The waste collection permitting role should be centralised, and if necessary
implemented through the network of Regional Waste Management Offices
(short to medium-term – section 10.5.8);
73. Local authorities should avail of opportunities to secure continued
rationalisation of activity in waste management services (medium term –
section 10.5.8).
Motor Tax and Driving Licences
74. The online motor tax system should be expanded to allow owners of
commercial and other vehicles to pay online (short-term – section 10.6.12);
75. A handling fee of €10 should be introduced to reflect the cost of processing
manual motor tax payments to reflect the additional costs involved and
encourage take-up of the online motor tax service (short-term – sections
10.6.8 to 10.6.9);
76. The ‘off-the-road’ facility allowing car owners to self-declare vehicles as not in
use should be removed, subject to exceptional and specified circumstances
(short-term – section 10.6.13);
77. The cost of a ten-year driving licence should be increased from €25 to €40,
and the cost of a replacement licence from €15 to €30 (short-term – sections
10.6.14 to 10.6.17).
Other Operational Efficiencies
78. Regular competitive tendering should be carried out for banking services and
overdrafts, and local authorities should use their purchasing power to procure
uniform overdraft rates at national level (short-term – section 11.1);
177

79. The best rates available should be obtained for investments/ deposits –
markets should be checked regularly to ensure best rates are being obtained
(short-term – section 11.1);
80. A treasury management best practice forum should be established (including
a mentoring system between local authorities geared towards those local
authorities that lack specialised skills in this area), while preserving financial
autonomy (short-term – section 11.1);
81. A specialist group should be established to examine the possibility of pooling
arrangements for surpluses/ overdrafts of local authorities and attempt to
match them, possibly through the Housing Finance Agency as host (shortterm
– section 11.1);
82. The approval period for overdraft sanctions should be extended as
appropriate from 6 months to one year to reduce repeat applications (shortterm
– section 11.1);
83. The development of online services should be intensified to improve both
efficiencies and service provision to the public (short to medium-term –
section 11.2.5);
84. Local authorities should be allowed to advertise statutory notices in summary
form, providing relevant links to pages on local authority websites to
encourage online consultation and reduce advertising budgets (medium-term
– section 11.3);
85. The amounts spent on professional consultants should be reduced (shortterm
– section 11.4);
86. GPS systems should be installed in all vehicles within the local authority fleet
(medium-term – section 11.5.3);
87. Each local authority should review the potential for rationalising and
consolidating the number of depots across different locations and across
different local authority service areas (short-term – sections 11.5.1 to 11.5.2);
88. An Innovation Fund should be established by the Department of the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government to incentivise innovation and
efficiencies in the operation and delivery of local government services, and to
incentivise joint public service delivery at local level – projects financed
through this fund would also be financed through a local contribution (shortterm
– section 11.6);
89. Service indicators should be more firmly embedded and used as part of the
efficiency agenda, for example by the performance of each local authority
being regularly reviewed by local authority management teams to drive
change and challenge existing approaches to service delivery, and by being
one of the considerations in the selection of issues for examination as part of
VFM studies. The potential also exists for service indicators to be used to
guide allocation of central government resources at local level in the future
(short to medium-term – section 3.5.4);
90. Local authorities must make greater use of available data in decision-making,
including in relation to the allocation of resources. This data includes service
indicators, financial performance, value for money reports, benchmarking
based on quantitative and qualitative information, and other metrics and
analysis available (short-term – section 3.5.5).
178

Local Government and the Wider Public Service
91. Local authorities should continue their role in promoting and leveraging
community actions and local innovation to improve local areas, for example in
the maintenance of local estates (short-term);
92. The consolidation of local development bodies should be intensified (mediumterm
– section 12.2);
93. The programmes and plans of local development bodies should be aligned
with those of the relevant local authorities to ensure maximum value for
money and a more focused impact on local communities (short-term – section
12.2);
94. The plans of local development bodies must be approved by their appropriate
county and city council, and these bodies should report on the progress made
in implementing these plans to local authorities at regular intervals (short-term
– section 12.2);
95. All new local development programmes should be placed under the care and
control of the relevant local authorities (medium to long-term – section 12.2);
96. County/ City Enterprise Boards should be integrated within their respective
county/ city local authority (medium-term – section 12.3);
97. The County/ City Development Board (CDB) Interdepartmental Group should
remain in place to strengthen and develop the CDBs including overseeing
relevant recommendations in this report (short-term – section 12.4);
98. CDB member bodies should be incentivised to share resources and promote
better co-ordination of publicly funded local services – this could be done
either by making a small percentage of budget allocations to relevant member
bodies conditional on the delivery of agreed joint service initiatives as
confirmed by the CDB, or by ringfencing a small percentage of budget
allocations to relevant member bodies specifically for the delivery of joint
service initiatives as agreed by the CDB (short-term – section 12.4);
Cost Recovery and Revenue Issues
99. Cost recovery should be attained in water services for non-domestic users,
and in waste charges for both domestic and non-domestic users, in line with
Government policy (medium-term – sections 13.1.3 to 13.1.8);
100. The wide variation across authorities in the level of development contributions
should be examined by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and
Local Government to ensure that contributions provide a meaningful
contribution to the costs of the infrastructure needed to support development
(short-term – sections 13.1.12 to 13.1.14);
101. A series of exemptions to the commercial rates base should be curtailed
(medium-term – sections 13.1.15 to 13.1.18);
102. Pending a decision over the future system of Higher Education Grants, the
administrative overheads associated with this area falling to local authorities
should be fully recouped by the Department of Education and Skills (shortterm
– sections 13.2.2 to 13.2.5);
103. Local authority contributions to Vocational Educational Committees (VECs)
should cease (short-term – section 13.2.7);
179

104. Full economic cost recovery should apply to all services carried out by local
authorities on an agency basis on behalf of central government on the basis
that services are being run efficiently (short-term – section 13.2.6);
105. Existing approaches to charging should be adapted in line with the model of
the annual charge on non-principal private residences, particularly as regards
dealing with late payments, and providing for charges and late payment
penalties to be a charge against a property where possible (medium-term –
sections 13.3.3 to 13.3.8);
106. Arrangements necessary to allow for the levying of local taxes and domestic
water charges should be progressed as a matter of priority (medium-term –
section 13.4).
14.2 Summary of Recommendations and Savings
14.2.1 This section presents a summary of the financial impact of the
recommendations presented above.
Table 14.1 – Financial Impact of Recommendations
€m (full year)
Staffing and General Efficiencies 113
Procurement 70
Efficiencies / Cost Recovery in Specific Programme Areas 233
(of which)
Housing 30
Roads 10
Water Services 35
Planning 38
Waste 5
Motor Tax 115
Other Cost Recovery and Revenue Issues 95
TOTAL € 511 million
14.2.2 While most of the recommendations concern efficiency savings, a number
of recommendations also extend to cost recovery and revenue raising, with
an emphasis on a more equitable distribution of the revenue burden. Of the
€511 million total, €346 million is made up of efficiency savings, and €165
million is accounted for through improved cost recovery and revenue
raising. These are full year savings that may take a year or more to
implement in full.
14.2.3 The figures above do not include amounts that could be raised for capital
expenditure, for example arising from new tolling schemes on national
roads, based on an equitable distribution of tolling points across the national
roads network.
14.2.4 It should be noted that the box above does not include those
recommendations where the Group could not quantify the savings
associated with the proposal. However, the Group would like to point out
180

that just because these recommendations do not carry a figure with them
does not imply that they are any less important. In some cases however the
Group is confident that these additional recommendations would lead to
significant savings, even if it was not possible to put a specific figure on the
savings involved. Other non-financial recommendations are also not taken
into account in the figures above, but would lead to significant
improvements in service quality.
14.3 Implementation Plan
14.3.1 The implementation and the timing of the implementation of the individual
recommendations contained in this Report are matters for the Government.
The Group has set out in respect of each recommendation, as appropriate,
an indicative timeframe for delivery and the associated efficiency gains and
savings that can be potentially achieved.
14.3.2 It is acknowledged that the implementation of some of the recommendations
within the envisaged timescales will be challenging and will require
determined engagement by the relevant interests involved. Nevertheless, it
is essential that the recommendations be carried forward without delay.
The Group therefore recommends that appropriate arrangements are put in
place as soon as possible to oversee and monitor the implementation of the
recommendations and to ensure that the efficiency gains and savings are
attained within the timescales identified. One possible approach is that a
small Local Government Efficiency Review Implementation Group is
established, with an independent chairperson.
14.3.3 An annual report on progress made in the implementation of the Report’s
recommendations and the attainment of the efficiency gains and savings
against the indicative timeframes should be made by the Implementation
Group to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
14.3.4 The Group further recommends that local efficiency review groups, where
they are not already established, be set up in each county and city council
(and where appropriate each joint administrative area) to drive forward the
implementation of the recommendations at the local level. These groups
should be appropriately represented by local authority staff with requisite
skills and seniority in the implementation areas concerned, and focus on
leading and nurturing an efficiency culture and awareness of the need for
efficiencies throughout the organisation.
14.3.5 The process should involve identifying efficiency measures that are already
being undertaken at different stages of implementation, and new efficiency
measures (including those proposed in the present Review) that will be
undertaken within the local authority, in particular those that will provide
measurable benefits with an emphasis on financial, staffing or resource
savings, and service improvements.
181

14.3.6 The full programme of measures developed at local level should be
presented to both the audit committee and the Corporate Policy Group of
the local authority, as well as the full council. Regular update reports should
be presented to both the audit committee and the CPG. Where savings are
achieved through flexibility and co-operation with staff and staff
representatives, this should be regularly highlighted through internal
communication arrangements.
182

Appendix 1 –
List of Submissions Received
1. Irish Business and Employers Confederation
2. Cllr Brendan Griffin
3. Department of Transport
4. Claremorris Chamber
5. Dublin Chamber of Commerce
6. The Society of Chartered Surveyors
7. Library Association of Ireland
8. Cllr. Peter Flynn
9. Irish Hotels Federation
10. Professor Yvonne Scannell
11. Engineers Ireland
12. Construction Industry Federation
13. Cllr. Tim O’Leary
14. Blantry Ltd
15. Temple Bar Cultural Trust
16. Brief Counsel Ltd
17. Experian
18. Brian Rickwood
19. Disability Federation of Ireland
20. Eugene Vesey
21. Rachel Maguire
22. National Disability Authority
23. Richard Burke
24. Thomas Heavey
25. Association of County & City Councils
26. County & City Managers’ Association
27. Chambers Ireland
28. South Western
29. Irish Farmers’ Association
30. Enterprise Ireland, Forfás and IDA Ireland
31. Ms. Patricia McCafferty
32. ISO Covers Limited
33. Nathean Technologies
34. IMPACT
35. Mr. Christopher O’Rourke
36. South Kerry Independent Alliance
37. Mr. Damian O’Regan
38. Vótálai (Unsigned)
39. Saoránach (Unsigned)
40. Local Authority Members’ Association
41. Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers’ Association
42. Irish Planning Institute
43. SIPTU / Chief Fire Officers’ Association
44. Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland
183

45. Joe McCarthy
46. Association of Town Clerks of Ireland
184

Appendix 2 –
Local Government Efficiency Review Group
Meetings with Stakeholders
• An Bord Pleanála
• Association of County and City Councils
• Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland
• County and City Managers’ Association / Local Government Management Agency
• Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs
• Department of Education & Skills
• Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation
• Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government
• Department of Transport
• Environmental Protection Agency
• Health Service Executive
• Irish Planning Institute
• Local Authority Members’ Association
• Local Government Audit Service
• National Roads Authority
185

Appendix 3 –
Local Government Income and Expenditure
Gross Current Income by Source and by Local Authority, 2010
Provision of
Goods and
Services
General
Purpose
Grants
Commercial
Rates to be
levied
Government
Total %
County Councils Grants/Subsidies
Income
Carlow 40.94% 20.94% 25.37% 12.75% 100%
Cavan 37.99% 18.79% 26.73% 16.49% 100%
Clare 32.72% 22.40% 11.43% 33.46% 100%
Cork 29.51% 27.82% 13.69% 28.97% 100%
Donegal 31.86% 29.13% 24.91% 14.10% 100%
Dún Laoghaire Rathdown 12.91% 24.63% 15.59% 46.87% 100%
Fingal 10.91% 29.17% 10.33% 49.60% 100%
Galway 41.68% 17.72% 23.94% 16.66% 100%
Kerry 38.26% 28.41% 19.50% 13.82% 100%
Kildare 21.79% 29.46% 17.61% 31.13% 100%
Kilkenny 35.13% 19.74% 27.56% 17.57% 100%
Laois 28.53% 32.82% 24.19% 14.47% 100%
Leitrim 40.62% 13.89% 34.03% 11.46% 100%
Limerick 28.99% 29.90% 17.92% 23.19% 100%
Longford 37.38% 21.80% 30.45% 10.37% 100%
Louth 34.34% 36.68% 17.11% 11.88% 100%
Mayo 40.03% 23.95% 25.41% 10.62% 100%
Meath 25.91% 25.24% 28.18% 20.66% 100%
Monaghan 45.61% 18.30% 25.34% 10.74% 100%
North Tipperary 33.79% 26.73% 28.01% 11.46% 100%
Offaly 20.56% 40.19% 24.54% 14.71% 100%
Roscommon 27.88% 28.41% 28.53% 15.18% 100%
Sligo 32.86% 29.83% 28.76% 8.55% 100%
South Dublin 14.84% 24.53% 8.19% 52.44% 100%
South Tipperary 33.27% 28.09% 28.34% 10.30% 100%
Waterford 31.19% 24.63% 33.36% 10.82% 100%
Westmeath 29.95% 29.41% 28.70% 11.94% 100%
Wexford 31.27% 33.54% 18.20% 16.99% 100%
Wicklow 33.87% 28.31% 19.35% 18.47% 100%
County Council Average 28.30% 26.66% 19.78% 25.27% 100%
Provision of
Goods and
Services
General
Purpose
Grants
Commercial
Rates to be
levied
Government
Total %
City Councils Grants/Subsidies
Income
Cork 19.01% 36.36% 10.79% 33.83% 100%
Dublin 19.06% 34.36% 8.86% 37.72% 100%
Galway 20.03% 33.68% 8.19% 38.11% 100%
Limerick 23.82% 23.40% 12.48% 40.30% 100%
Waterford 22.66% 36.18% 10.74% 30.41% 100%
City Council Average 19.62% 34.00% 9.46% 36.91% 100%
186

Gross Current Income by Source and by Local Authority, 2010
Provision of
Goods and
Services
General
Purpose
Grants
Commercial
Rates to be
levied
Government
Total %
Borough Councils Grants/Subsidies
Income
Clonmel 10.25% 40.03% 18.25% 31.47% 100%
Drogheda 5.62% 30.51% 16.28% 47.59% 100%
Kilkenny 2.66% 37.25% 12.39% 47.71% 100%
Sligo 11.41% 39.41% 13.91% 35.27% 100%
Wexford 7.28% 29.56% 13.32% 49.83% 100%
Borough Council Average 7.58% 35.02% 15.05% 42.36% 100%
Provision of
Goods and
Services
General
Purpose
Grants
Commercial
Rates to be
levied
Government
Total %
Town Councils Grants/Subsidies
Income
Arklow 2.75% 34.29% 22.85% 40.11% 100%
Athlone 5.84% 27.88% 16.21% 50.08% 100%
Athy 3.63% 36.32% 14.54% 45.50% 100%
Ballina 2.66% 25.66% 23.79% 47.88% 100%
Ballinasloe 3.90% 34.50% 19.88% 41.72% 100%
Birr 17.90% 12.76% 27.71% 41.63% 100%
Bray 5.37% 35.38% 24.38% 34.88% 100%
Buncrana 5.61% 24.97% 28.09% 41.33% 100%
Bundoran 5.22% 22.64% 25.77% 46.36% 100%
Carlow 3.48% 30.14% 15.64% 50.74% 100%
Carrick on Suir 11.20% 46.50% 24.88% 17.42% 100%
Carrickmacross 7.60% 12.60% 24.17% 55.62% 100%
Cashel 12.56% 41.68% 22.69% 23.07% 100%
Castlebar 7.49% 25.03% 13.46% 54.02% 100%
Castleblayney 8.15% 16.56% 26.99% 48.29% 100%
Cavan 3.57% 37.26% 16.73% 42.44% 100%
Clonakility 7.03% 18.27% 23.87% 50.82% 100%
Clones 9.17% 18.56% 40.43% 31.83% 100%
Cobh 5.39% 30.70% 36.36% 27.54% 100%
Dundalk 9.48% 24.01% 16.37% 50.14% 100%
Dungarvan 5.84% 33.78% 13.40% 46.98% 100%
Ennis 2.91% 31.81% 19.20% 46.08% 100%
Enniscorthy 3.68% 41.24% 22.54% 32.53% 100%
Fermoy 4.79% 38.03% 24.84% 32.34% 100%
Kells 17.19% 35.03% 19.05% 28.72% 100%
Killarney 1.61% 30.83% 12.53% 55.02% 100%
Kilrush 10.16% 25.76% 29.41% 34.67% 100%
Kinsale 8.15% 26.61% 16.89% 48.35% 100%
Letterkenny 5.10% 24.74% 13.05% 57.11% 100%
Listowel 5.05% 29.89% 20.21% 44.85% 100%
Longford 6.10% 34.56% 17.12% 42.22% 100%
Macroom 6.01% 23.79% 27.02% 43.18% 100%
Mallow 3.72% 33.76% 20.43% 42.09% 100%
Midleton 9.27% 13.50% 17.42% 59.80% 100%
Monaghan 2.52% 28.40% 17.40% 51.68% 100%
Naas 3.20% 26.96% 13.13% 56.71% 100%
Navan 4.54% 30.00% 6.18% 59.28% 100%
187

Gross Current Income by Source and by Local Authority, 2010
Provision of
Goods and
Services
General
Purpose
Grants
Commercial
Rates to be
levied
Government
Total %
Town Councils Grants/Subsidies
Income
Nenagh 2.89% 27.14% 17.14% 52.83% 100%
New Ross 3.87% 51.53% 19.62% 24.99% 100%
Skibbereen 6.77% 20.39% 21.57% 51.27% 100%
Templemore 8.21% 22.69% 43.12% 25.98% 100%
Thurles 6.03% 38.36% 16.70% 38.91% 100%
Tipperary 16.92% 36.97% 17.60% 28.51% 100%
Tralee 10.39% 39.41% 15.15% 35.05% 100%
Trim 8.00% 28.56% 25.28% 38.16% 100%
Tullamore 3.13% 25.01% 17.94% 53.93% 100%
Westport 3.75% 28.85% 14.72% 52.67% 100%
Wicklow 2.94% 38.13% 28.71% 30.21% 100%
Youghal 6.87% 32.72% 25.88% 34.53% 100%
Town Council Average 5.99% 30.80% 18.61% 44.60% 100%
Source: Local Authority Budgets, 2010
188

County Councils
Housing
and
Building
Current Expenditure by Programme Group and by Local Authority, 2010
Road
Transportation
& Safety
Water
Services
Development
Management
Environmental
Services
Recreation
and Amenity
Agriculture,
Education,
Health &
Welfare
Miscellaneous
Services Total
Carlow 15.57% 14.89% 16.39% 5.85% 13.48% 5.71% 18.57% 9.54% 100%
Cavan 7.39% 30.16% 18.37% 7.97% 13.48% 5.98% 8.00% 8.66% 100%
Clare 9.76% 23.12% 19.59% 8.78% 14.40% 6.89% 10.30% 7.16% 100%
Cork 13.28% 23.70% 19.35% 8.44% 17.41% 4.77% 8.36% 4.68% 100%
Donegal 9.82% 24.89% 18.03% 8.16% 9.36% 4.46% 12.34% 12.95% 100%
Dún Laoghaire Rathdown 16.36% 13.75% 16.36% 6.88% 21.56% 13.48% 4.00% 7.62% 100%
Fingal 15.80% 10.66% 18.13% 6.93% 21.90% 13.45% 7.21% 5.91% 100%
Galway 7.81% 26.27% 18.51% 5.65% 12.20% 5.52% 16.38% 7.65% 100%
Kerry 12.23% 27.92% 18.44% 6.28% 14.92% 3.94% 11.96% 4.31% 100%
Kildare 16.09% 18.54% 20.68% 8.03% 17.15% 6.48% 7.86% 5.17% 100%
Kilkenny 14.85% 22.18% 19.75% 8.26% 11.94% 5.42% 10.78% 6.81% 100%
Laois 17.09% 23.18% 15.44% 6.37% 16.14% 6.31% 8.19% 7.27% 100%
Leitrim 11.78% 32.54% 13.71% 7.62% 8.91% 7.75% 9.93% 7.77% 100%
Limerick 9.31% 20.38% 18.62% 5.69% 19.60% 4.87% 11.10% 10.43% 100%
Longford 16.09% 28.48% 16.15% 5.47% 10.57% 5.62% 10.36% 7.26% 100%
Louth 9.83% 18.56% 22.33% 9.34% 13.67% 5.05% 13.46% 7.75% 100%
Mayo 10.23% 26.43% 18.16% 4.82% 14.21% 5.65% 13.67% 6.82% 100%
Meath 10.49% 24.51% 23.57% 7.81% 13.10% 5.44% 8.08% 7.01% 100%
Monaghan 10.17% 28.65% 17.69% 9.17% 12.96% 5.49% 10.20% 5.67% 100%
North Tipperary 12.24% 28.62% 18.60% 6.67% 13.99% 3.84% 8.97% 7.07% 100%
Offaly 12.03% 20.93% 19.55% 5.93% 15.72% 4.97% 7.62% 13.23% 100%
Roscommon 9.55% 32.25% 14.87% 6.57% 13.80% 5.70% 9.78% 7.47% 100%
Sligo 11.53% 27.06% 21.35% 8.02% 10.79% 5.53% 9.77% 5.94% 100%
South Dublin 20.64% 12.07% 13.60% 5.27% 26.02% 13.01% 2.21% 7.17% 100%
South Tipperary 11.59% 33.44% 14.87% 5.60% 13.76% 5.12% 9.74% 5.89% 100%
Waterford 8.65% 27.56% 19.76% 5.72% 18.57% 4.03% 5.82% 9.91% 100%
Westmeath 12.62% 21.34% 18.86% 6.98% 11.79% 8.91% 9.34% 10.16% 100%
Wexford 14.10% 23.92% 16.74% 6.10% 19.24% 4.51% 7.90% 7.49% 100%
Wicklow 8.56% 24.65% 15.73% 5.90% 16.70% 5.45% 10.73% 12.29% 100%
County Council Average 12.89% 21.99% 17.99% 6.90% 16.56% 7.09% 9.10% 7.48% 100%
189

City Councils
Housing
and
Building
Current Expenditure By Programme Group and by Local Authority, 2010
Road
Transportation
& Safety
Water
Services
Development
Management
Environmental
Services
Recreation
and Amenity
Agriculture,
Education,
Health &
Welfare
Miscellaneous
Services Total
Cork 20.58% 14.67% 11.49% 4.68% 21.71% 11.73% 10.10% 5.03% 100%
Dublin 25.38% 9.34% 14.63% 3.39% 26.35% 9.40% 7.59% 3.91% 100%
Galway 20.76% 14.63% 13.15% 5.41% 16.89% 14.10% 7.82% 7.24% 100%
Limerick 18.41% 12.12% 16.63% 5.66% 21.62% 7.06% 8.51% 9.98% 100%
Waterford 20.55% 10.43% 15.26% 5.16% 21.37% 10.10% 12.15% 5.00% 100%
City Council Average 23.65% 10.73% 14.23% 3.96% 24.47% 9.94% 8.26% 4.76% 100%
Borough Councils
Housing
and
Building
Road
Transportation
& Safety
Water
Services
Development
Management
Environmental
Services
Recreation
and Amenity
Agriculture,
Education,
Health &
Welfare
Miscellaneous
Services Total
Clonmel 17.83% 23.01% 21.34% 5.71% 16.78% 10.67% 0.03% 4.62% 100%
Drogheda 18.95% 18.65% 16.01% 4.60% 20.75% 7.05% 1.12% 12.87% 100%
Kilkenny 10.26% 31.21% 0.38% 9.73% 15.62% 16.05% 0.10% 16.65% 100%
Sligo 32.91% 24.55% 0.00% 6.24% 5.81% 6.41% 15.03% 9.05% 100%
Wexford 28.87% 27.64% 1.07% 7.96% 12.79% 9.10% 1.79% 10.78% 100%
Borough Council
Average 21.71% 23.55% 9.69% 6.27% 15.19% 9.09% 3.74% 10.76% 100%
190

Town Councils
Housing
and
Building
Current Expenditure By Programme Group and by Local Authority, 2010
Road
Transportation
& Safety
Water
Services
Development
Management
Environmental
Services
Recreation
and Amenity
Agriculture,
Education,
Health &
Welfare
Miscellaneous
Services Total
Arklow 22.49% 22.47% 17.33% 6.76% 8.11% 8.65% 0.00% 14.19% 100%
Athlone 16.14% 24.74% 0.00% 10.73% 17.06% 12.85% 0.00% 18.48% 100%
Athy 17.21% 16.16% 21.58% 10.11% 7.07% 3.25% 0.00% 24.63% 100%
Ballina 14.66% 32.66% 10.45% 7.83% 10.47% 14.54% 0.11% 9.28% 100%
Ballinasloe 21.75% 20.36% 10.97% 5.17% 8.48% 13.24% 0.00% 20.03% 100%
Birr 16.40% 18.94% 19.33% 10.33% 15.50% 6.14% 0.14% 13.21% 100%
Bray 16.87% 24.39% 17.40% 5.37% 12.03% 12.96% 2.71% 8.27% 100%
Buncrana 9.15% 27.41% 11.77% 5.98% 4.00% 8.94% 0.00% 32.75% 100%
Bundoran 7.11% 24.26% 2.78% 16.89% 10.34% 21.80% 0.00% 16.82% 100%
Carlow 15.55% 27.68% 10.30% 8.63% 11.23% 15.04% 0.31% 11.26% 100%
Carrick on Suir 20.66% 16.91% 20.57% 4.06% 20.35% 9.60% 0.28% 7.58% 100%
Carrickmacross 11.97% 27.23% 23.80% 7.45% 7.49% 7.08% 0.09% 14.89% 100%
Cashel 12.33% 22.69% 18.10% 8.03% 18.17% 11.93% 0.04% 8.71% 100%
Castlebar 12.12% 28.31% 6.46% 9.97% 8.80% 13.71% 0.00% 20.63% 100%
Castleblayney 19.06% 16.78% 16.94% 5.61% 11.44% 5.59% 0.00% 24.58% 100%
Cavan 16.83% 32.57% 2.36% 4.60% 13.60% 15.30% 0.00% 14.74% 100%
Clonakility 16.49% 22.32% 21.29% 4.88% 10.75% 8.80% 0.00% 15.46% 100%
Clones 17.40% 17.86% 16.27% 5.53% 16.05% 2.81% 0.00% 24.08% 100%
Cobh 23.41% 23.60% 13.20% 4.58% 14.01% 8.39% 0.02% 12.80% 100%
Dundalk 24.25% 17.33% 13.52% 6.33% 15.44% 11.21% 0.14% 11.78% 100%
Dungarvan 14.68% 18.83% 4.02% 8.30% 23.61% 16.01% 0.22% 14.32% 100%
Ennis 17.32% 24.00% 0.87% 6.62% 12.20% 22.25% 0.00% 16.74% 100%
Enniscorthy 24.58% 23.80% 0.95% 13.25% 12.27% 12.19% 0.19% 12.78% 100%
Fermoy 11.09% 25.66% 0.65% 1.68% 13.20% 34.24% 0.00% 13.49% 100%
Kells 16.09% 30.86% 15.73% 6.27% 10.67% 8.81% 0.12% 11.45% 100%
Killarney 8.06% 16.99% 19.80% 5.13% 16.06% 11.71% 0.08% 22.18% 100%
Kilrush 24.06% 25.68% 2.36% 16.91% 10.21% 3.33% 0.18% 17.26% 100%
Kinsale 10.88% 20.54% 12.16% 8.89% 11.58% 13.55% 0.01% 22.39% 100%
Letterkenny 9.48% 30.18% 3.15% 6.67% 6.10% 34.03% 0.00% 10.38% 100%
Listowel 15.80% 21.15% 29.47% 4.94% 14.42% 4.56% 0.01% 9.66% 100%
191

Town Councils
Housing
and
Building
Current Expenditure By Programme Group and by Local Authority, 2010
Road
Transportation
& Safety
Water
Services
Development
Management
Environmental
Services
Recreation
and Amenity
Agriculture,
Education,
Health &
Welfare
Miscellaneous
Services Total
Longford 23.83% 34.15% 0.73% 11.16% 9.54% 7.19% 0.00% 13.39% 100%
Macroom 22.71% 19.26% 13.04% 9.63% 15.86% 5.47% 0.00% 14.04% 100%
Mallow 20.34% 28.28% 1.76% 5.59% 5.79% 28.29% 0.97% 8.98% 100%
Midleton 11.36% 29.66% 8.98% 7.78% 16.84% 10.51% 0.14% 14.73% 100%
Monaghan 14.97% 21.82% 25.26% 2.90% 8.65% 10.76% 0.00% 15.64% 100%
Naas 10.12% 28.58% 27.72% 15.31% 9.65% 5.16% 0.00% 3.46% 100%
Navan 13.28% 32.42% 9.12% 17.31% 9.04% 9.97% 0.48% 8.38% 100%
Nenagh 14.60% 21.38% 1.85% 9.03% 14.26% 20.67% 0.00% 18.22% 100%
New Ross 19.33% 19.48% 0.42% 8.39% 12.95% 30.83% 0.00% 8.60% 100%
Skibbereen 9.90% 29.92% 9.67% 5.99% 12.15% 15.84% 0.00% 16.52% 100%
Templemore 19.91% 20.19% 13.78% 7.18% 11.89% 13.19% 0.00% 13.85% 100%
Thurles 20.66% 16.15% 12.36% 6.45% 10.52% 17.29% 0.19% 16.39% 100%
Tipperary 21.52% 17.41% 16.21% 7.25% 20.36% 10.99% 0.00% 6.26% 100%
Tralee 15.53% 16.96% 24.87% 5.86% 12.87% 10.17% 9.60% 4.14% 100%
Trim 6.72% 42.81% 7.21% 5.77% 12.66% 8.74% 1.50% 14.59% 100%
Tullamore 26.37% 25.26% 15.47% 5.39% 9.18% 13.42% 0.41% 4.52% 100%
Westport 8.15% 21.18% 7.04% 8.57% 8.39% 35.36% 0.00% 11.29% 100%
Wicklow 16.66% 25.13% 20.70% 5.96% 9.16% 8.84% 0.09% 13.45% 100%
Youghal 13.62% 17.04% 8.21% 10.39% 14.77% 13.28% 1.05% 21.62% 100%
Town Council Average 16.78% 22.92% 12.70% 7.65% 12.54% 13.45% 0.88% 13.08% 100%
Source: Local Authority Budgets, 2010
192

Non-Rating Town
Councils (1)
Payments and Receipts by Non-Rating Town Councils, 2010
Payments Receipts
Local Authority
Housing Other (2) Total
Local Authority
Housing Other Total
Town
Charges
Ardee €0 €156,650 €156,650 €0 €123,875 €123,875 €32,775
Balbriggan €0 €226,000 €226,000 €0 €37,000 €37,000 €189,000
Ballybay €160 €36,567 €36,727 €2,703 €100 €2,803 €33,924
Ballyshannon €7,900 €125,750 €133,650 €11,650 €17,000 €28,650 €105,000
Bandon €0 €43,150 €43,150 €0 €0 €0 €43,150
Bantry €0 €41,320 €41,320 €0 €20 €20 €41,300
Belturbet €1,122 €42,322 €43,444 €3,250 €9,411 €12,661 €30,783
Boyle €5,500 €26,876 €32,376 €10,500 €7,035 €17,535 €14,841
Cootehill €5,000 €65,061 €70,061 €22,000 €10,000 €32,000 €38,061
Droichead Nua €17,000 €195,930 €212,930 €46,000 €200 €46,200 €166,730
Edenderry €0 €70,748 €70,748 €0 €43,210 €43,210 €27,538
Gorey €0 €115,407 €115,407 €0 €19,800 €19,800 €95,607
Granard €0 €53,400 €53,400 €0 €8,400 €8,400 €45,000
Greystones €0 €91,030 €91,030 €0 €0 €0 €91,030
Kilkee €2,519 €76,615 €79,134 €6,069 €450 €6,519 €72,615
Leixlip €0 €393,400 €393,400 €0 €110,100 €110,100 €283,300
Lismore €0 €25,900 €25,900 €0 €0 €0 €25,900
Loughrea €0 €84,912 €84,912 €0 €6,830 €6,830 €78,082
Mountmellick €260 €58,700 €58,960 €1,200 €18,445 €19,645 €39,315
Muinbeag €4,261 €52,355 €56,616 €4,000 €29,415 €33,415 €23,201
Mullingar €0 €135,008 €135,008 €0 €36,887 €36,887 €98,121
Passage West €0 €45,841 €45,841 €0 €3,530 €3,530 €42,311
Portlaoise €500 €98,850 €99,350 €7,000 €19,800 €26,800 €72,550
Shannon €0 €157,000 €157,000 €0 €41,500 €41,500 €115,500
Tramore €0 €66,704 €66,704 €31,770 €0 €31,770 €34,934
Tuam €67,164 €112,625 €179,789 €56,500 €21,346 €77,846 €101,943
TOTAL €111,386 €2,598,121 €2,709,507 €202,642 €564,354 €766,996 €1,942,511
(1)The payments and receipts have been incorporated in the Programme Group Summary (pages
14-17) as follows: LA Housing 1.1, Miscellaneous 1.8.
193
(2) Includes credit balances

2010 REVENUE PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS - OTHER BODIES (1)
Drainage District Joint
Committee
Payments
Receipts Burial Board or Cemetery
Receipts
Payments
Joint Committee
Contrib LA's Other Total
Contrib LA's Other Total
Ballinamore/Ballyconnell €34,304 €34,304 €0 €34,304 Dundalk €257,426 €140,926 €116,500 €257,426
Barrow €635,384 €625,284 €10,100 €635,384 Dungar €14,960 €5,960 €9,000 €14,960
Burrin €55,000 €55,000 €0 €55,000 Portarlington €26,750 €23,750 €3,000 €26,750
Fergus €49,500 €49,500 €0 €49,500 Rathdrum €122,699 €51,389 €71,310 €122,699
Goul €45,600 €15,600 €30,000 €45,600 St. Stephen's (New Ross) Jt.
Loughs Oughter/Gowna Cemetery Committee €50,100 €45,100 €5,000 €50,100
and River Erne €33,400 €33,400 €0 €33,400 Youghal €112,029 €98,029 €14,000 €112,029
Suck €235,000 €235,000 €0 €235,000
Total €1,088,188 €1,048,088 €40,100 €1,088,188 Total €583,964 €365,154 €218,810 €583,964
Regional Authority Payments
Receipts Receipts
Miscellaneous Body Payments
Contrib LA's Other Total
Contrib LA's Other Total
Border €741,983 €442,836 €299,147 €741,983 Tipperary Joint Library
Dublin €788,648 €459,648 €329,000 €788,648 Committee €3,509,235 €2,921,196 €588,039 €3,509,235
Mid-East €383,550 €330,250 €53,300 €383,550 An Comhairle Leabharlanna €3,851,688 €988,532 €2,863,156 €3,851,688
Midland €635,893 €476,574 €159,319 €635,893 Lough Corrib Navigation
Mid West €611,460 €414,716 €196,744 €611,460 Trustees €292,600 €291,600 €1,000 €292,600
South East €501,570 €360,370 €141,200 €501,570
South West €427,491 €422,491 €5,000 €427,491
West €524,900 €322,000 €202,900 €524,900
Total €4,615,495 €3,228,885 €1,386,610 €4,615,495 Total €7,653,523 €4,201,328 €3,452,195 €7,653,523
194

Regional Assembly Payments
Receipts Receipts
Total of Non-Rating Other
Payments
Bodies
Contrib LA's Other Total
Contrib LA's Other Total
Border, Midland and
Western €1,316,305 €834,305 €482,000 €1,316,305 Non-Rating Other Bodies €16,439,547 €10,854,832 €5,584,715 €16,439,547
Southern and Eastern €1,182,072 €1,177,072 €5,000 €1,182,072
Total €2,498,377 €2,011,377 €487,000 €2,498,377 Total €16,439,547 €10,854,832 €5,584,715 €16,439,547
(1) Payments/Receipts have been allocated to the Division Summary (pages 10- 13) as follows; Jt.Drainage Committees G, Burial Boards E, Jt. Library Committees F, Lough Corrib Navigation
Trustees F and Regional Authorities & Regional Assemblies D
Source: Local Authority Budgets, 2010
195

Local Authority Net Current Account Summary 2000-2010 (€’000)
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Expenditure €2,404.3 €2,813.2 €3,135.7 €3,234.5 €3,554.5 €3,783.0 €4,217.6 €4,576.4 €4,843.2 €5,036.5 €4,655.7
Financed By
Government Grants/Subsidies €646.3 €768.2 €866.4 €851.1 €891.5 €953.8 €1,107.7 €1,171.3 €1,192.5 €1,255.2 €1,105.4
Pension Related Deductions €78.9
LGF General-Purpose Grant €539.7 €485.3 €592.8 €623.5 €752.3 €816.6 €876.9 €948.6 €1,000.3 €937.3 €773.9
Goods/Services €689.1 €806.2 €928.3 €1,093.2 €1,167.9 €1,185.2 €1,279.2 €1,422.8 €1,444.8 €1,429.8 €1,324.8
Commercial Rates €587.4 €663.8 €751.2 €840.6 €944.3 €1,052.1 €1,191.6 €1,269.3 €1,358.4 €1,404.3 €1,358.7
Provision for Debit/Credit Balances €0.0 €0.0 €0.0 €0.0 €0.0 €0.0 €0.0 €0.0 €0.0 €8.6 €14.2
County Charge €2.2 €2.8 €1.9 -€0.8 -€0.2 -€3.0 -€1.5 -€1.7 -€2.0 €1.3 -€0.2
Total Receipts €2,464.6 €2,726.3 €3,140.6 €3,407.6 €3,755.7 €4,004.8 €4,453.9 €4,810.3 €4,994.0 €5,036.5 €4,655.7
Source: Data for 2000 to 2008 is derived from Local Authority Annual Financial Statements; Data for 2009 & 2010 is derived from Local Authority Budgets (Note: rounding may affect totals)
196

Local Authority Current Expenditure By
Service Division 2000 - 2010
Local Authority Net Current Expenditure by Service Division 2000-2010 (€’000)
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Service Division 1 - Housing and Building
Service Division 2 - Road Transportation
380.5 462.3 516.3 474.9 490.2 517.1 573.0 659.0 766.0 833.0 778.7
and Safety 769.5 870.5 917.3 981.7 1,003.0 1,050.1 1,200.7 1,261.1 1,122.8 1,142.5 919.3
Service Division 3 - Water Services
Service Division 4 - Development
271.0 307.3 346.1 381.5 442.2 479.9 568.6 645.6 699.1 752.9 722.3
Management 107.6 134.0 154.7 167.8 199.5 210.1 223.5 250.5 332.6 340.7 296.6
Service Division 5 - Environmental Services
399.8 480.7 565.5 597.5 654.9 711.1 758.7 796.2 842.6 880.7 804.3
Service Division 6 - Recreation and Amenity
Service Division 7 - Agriculture, Education,
205.5 234.8 252.1 262.4 286.0 311.7 342.0 377.9 431.3 444.6 396.8
Health and Welfare 135.7 149.9 172.1 194.8 244.4 262.8 285.9 313.1 340.4 349.9 406.2
Service Division 8 - Miscellaneous Services
Total
134.7 173.7 211.6 224.0 234.2 240.8 265.5 273.0 308.5 292.2 331.5
2,404.3 2,813.2 3,135.7 3,234.4 3,554.5 3,783.6 4,217.6 4,576.4 4,843.3 5,036.5 4,655.7
Source: Data for 2000 to 2008 is derived from Local Authority Annual Financial Statements; Data for 2009 & 2010 is derived from Local Authority Budgets (Note: rounding may affect totals)
197

Appendix 4 –
Local Government Population Size
City and County Council Population Size (Census 2006)
Local Authority
Census
Population 2006
Carlow County Council 50,349
Cavan County Council 64,003
Clare County Council 110,950
Cork County Council 361,877
Donegal County Council 147,264
Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council 194,038
Fingal County Council 239,992
Galway County Council 159,256
Kerry County Council 139,835
Kildare County Council 186,335
Kilkenny County Council 87,558
Laois County Council 67,059
Leitrim County Council 28,950
Limerick County Council 131,516
Longford County Council 34,391
Louth County Council 111,267
Mayo County Council 123,839
Meath County Council 162,831
Monaghan County Council 55,997
North Tipperary County Council 66,023
Offaly County Council 70,868
Roscommon County Council 58,768
Sligo County Council 60,894
South Dublin County Council 246,935
South Tipperary County Council 83,221
Waterford County Council 62,213
Westmeath County Council 79,346
Wexford County Council 131,749
Wicklow County Council 126,194
Cork City Council 119,418
Dublin City Council 506,211
Galway City Council 72,414
Limerick City Council 52,539
Waterford City Council 45,748
Total 4,239,848
198

Town Council Population Size (Census 2006)
Town Town Council Population Census Total
within Legal Environs Population
Boundary
2006
Former Former
UDC/Br TC
Drogheda • 28,973 6,117 35,090
Dundalk • 29,037 6,048 35,085
Bray • 27,041 4,860 31,901
Navan‡ • 3,710 21,141 24,851
Ennis • 20,142 4,111 24,253
Tralee • 20,288 2,456 22,744
Kilkenny • 8,661 13,518 22,179
Carlow • 13,623 7,101 20,724
Naas • 20,044 20,044
Sligo • 17,892 1,510 19,402
Droichead Nua • 17,042 1,478 18,520
Mullingar • 8,940 9,476 18,416
Wexford‡ • 8,854 9,309 18,163
Letterkenny • 15,062 2,524 17,586
Athlone • 14,347 3,197 17,544
Clonmel • 15,482 1,526 17,008
Balbriggan‡ • 6,731 8,828 15,559
Leixlip • 14,676 14,676
Portlaoighise • 3,281 11,332 14,613
Killarney • 13,497 1,106 14,603
Greystones • 10,112 4,457 14,569
Tullamore • 10,900 2,027 12,927
Castlebar • 10,655 1,236 11,891
Arklow • 11,712 47 11,759
Cobh • 6,541 4,762 11,303
Ballina • 10,056 353 10,409
Mallow • 7,864 2,377 10,241
Wicklow • 6,930 3,140 10,070
Midleton • 3,934 6,114 10,048
Tramore • 9,192 442 9,634
Enniscorthy • 3,241 6,297 9,538
Shannon‡ • 8,481 741 9,222
Longford • 7,622 1,214 8,836
Dungarvan • 7,813 549 8,362
Athy • 7,943 275 8,218
Cavan • 3,934 3,949 7,883
Nenagh • 7,415 336 7,751
New Ross • 4,677 3,032 7,709
Thurles • 6,831 851 7,682
Gorey • 3,479 3,714 7,193
Tuam • 2,997 3,888 6,885
Trim • 1,375 5,495 6,870
Youghal • 6,393 392 6,785
Monaghan • 6,221 489 6,710
Ballinasloe • 6,049 254 6,303
Buncrana • 3,411 2,500 5,911
Carrick-on-Suir • 5,856 50 5,906
199

Edenderry • 5,617 271 5,888
Fermoy • 2,275 3,598 5,873
Bandon • 1,721 4,101 5,822
Westport • 5,163 312 5,475
Kells • 2,257 2,991 5,248
Passage West • 4,818 385 5,203
Birr • 4,091 990 5,081
Tipperary • 4,415 650 5,065
Ardee • 4,301 393 4,694
Loughrea • 4,532 4,532
Carrickmacross • 1,973 2,414 4,387
Listowel • 3,901 437 4,338
Clonakilty • 3,745 409 4,154
Kinsale • 2,298 1,801 4,099
Mountmellick • 2,872 1,197 4,069
Macroom • 3,407 146 3,553
Bantry • 3,309 3,309
Castleblayney • 1,822 1,302 3,124
Cashel • 2,413 523 2,936
Muinebeag • 2,532 203 2,735
Kilrush • 2,657 37 2,694
Ballyshannon • 2,004 682 2,686
Boyle • 1,599 923 2,522
Templemore • 2,255 129 2,384
Skibbereen • 2,338 2,338
Bundoran • 1,706 258 1,964
Cootehill • 1,243 649 1,892
Clones • 1,517 250 1,767
Belturbet • 1,395 16 1,411
Kilkee • 1,325 1,325
Lismore • 790 450 1,240
Ballybay • 401 816 1,217
Granard • 933 933
Total 576,582 200,952 777,534
‡ Note that since Census 2006 Navan, Shannon, Balbriggan and Wexford town councils have each successfully
applied for a boundary alteration. The approximate populations of these towns within their respective boundaries,
as estimated at the time of the boundary alterations, are:
Navan 28,000
Wexford 18,800
Balbriggan 17,800
Shannon 9,500.
200

Appendix 5 –
Local Government Net Budgeted Expenditure Per Head of
Population, 2010
County Councils
2010 Net Budgeted
Expenditure per Head
of Population
€
Carlow County Council €1,717
Cavan County Council €1,230
Clare County Council €1,363
Cork County Council €1,118
Donegal County Council €1,312
Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council €1,008
Fingal County Council €1,100
Galway County Council €989
Kerry County Council €1,306
Kildare County Council €1,010
Kilkenny County Council €1,071
Laois County Council €1,394
Leitrim County Council €1,400
Limerick County Council €912
Longford County Council €1,821
Louth County Council €1,889
Mayo County Council €1,373
Meath County Council €783
Monaghan County Council €1,496
North Tipperary County Council €1,349
Offaly County Council €1,314
Roscommon County Council €1,213
Sligo County Council €1,405
South Dublin County Council €972
South Tipperary County Council €1,450
Waterford County Council €1,515
Westmeath County Council €1,538
Wexford County Council €1,227
Wicklow County Council €1,730
City Councils
Cork City Council €1,593
Dublin City Council €1,529
Galway City Council €1,192
Limerick City Council €1,469
Waterford City Council €1,343
Borough Councils
Clonmel €850
Drogheda €670
Kilkenny €466
Sligo €824
Wexford €543
201

Former Urban District Councils
2010 Net Budgeted
Expenditure per Head
of Population
€
Arklow €413
Athlone €497
Athy €484
Ballina €513
Ballinasloe €564
Birr €445
Bray €365
Buncrana €484
Bundoran €927
Carlow €360
Carrick on Suir €689
Carrickmacross €452
Cashel €870
Castlebar €482
Castleblayney €418
Cavan €431
Clonakility €437
Clones €639
Cobh €211
Dundalk €755
Dungarvan €565
Ennis €353
Enniscorthy €430
Fermoy €417
Kells €359
Killarney €784
Kilrush €563
Kinsale €449
Letterkenny €318
Listowel €659
Longford €610
Macroom €459
Mallow €340
Midleton €241
Monaghan €799
Naas €417
Navan €176
Nenagh €541
New Ross €487
Skibbereen €582
Templemore €523
Thurles €539
Tipperary €787
Tralee €691
Trim €223
Tullamore €395
Westport €860
Wicklow €431
Youghal €492
202

Former Town Commissioners
2010 Net Budgeted
Expenditure per Head
of Population
€
Ardee €33
Balbriggan €15
BallyBay €30
Ballyshannon €50
Bandon €7
Bantry €12
Belturbet €31
Boyle €13
Cootehill €37
Droichead Nua €11
Edenderry €12
Gorey €16
Granard €57
Greystones €6
Kilkee €60
Leixlip €27
Lismore €21
Loughrea €19
Mountmellick €14
Muinebeag €21
Mullingar €7
Passage West €9
Portlaoise €7
Shannon €17
Tramore €7
Tuam €26
203

Appendix 6 –
List of Value for Money Reports
Published by the Local Government Audit Service
• Purchasing (General)
• Advertising
• Insurance
• Parking Charges
• Photocopying
• The Machinery Yard
• Energy Efficiency in Local Authority Buildings
• Differential Rents
• Property Management
• Public Lighting
• Stores (Published July, 1996)
• Water Production and Distribution (Published November, 1997)
• Housing Maintenance (Published March, 1997)
• Debt Collection (Published July, 1997)
• Waste Collection (Published August, 1998)
• Treasury Management in Local Authorities (Published October, 1999)
• A Review of Performance Indicators (Published September, 1999)
• Comparative Data on Local Authority Revenue Collection Accounts (Published
December, 1998)
• The Machinery Yard – A Guide (Published September, 2000)
• Internal Audit in Local Authorities (Published December, 2000)
• Internal Audit Guidance Handbook for Local Authorities (Published April, 2001)
• Motor Tax in Local Authorities (Published December, 2002)
• Follow up report on the Development of Internal Audit in Local Authorities (Published
June, 2006)
• Financial Management Reporting in Local Authorities (Published September, 2007)
• Part V Planning and Development Acts 2000-2007 – Social and Affordable Housing
(Published October, 2009)
204

Appendix 7 –
Performance Indicators for Inclusion in
Annual Financial Statement
1. Ageing of debtors (due < 3 months, 3 - 6 months, 6 months - 1 year, >1 year);
2. Five year summary of deficit or surplus on the revenue account;
3. Five year summary of collection percentages on major collection accounts;
4. Five year summary of bad debt percentages written off on major collection
accounts, including planning;
5. Debt service ratio (rolled up interest as a percentage of total loans payable –
identify percentage of loans that are increasing incrementally year on year).
205

Appendix 8 –
Objectives of the Local Government
Strategy for e-Procurement
Overall Strategic Goal:
The overall strategic goal of procurement in the local government sector is to
ensure that the procurement processes, practices, organisation and technology
work in an integrated manner to deliver effective support for the provision of local
authority services to customers.
Primary Strategic Objectives:
• To ensure that the quality of the procurement service is sufficient to meet the
needs of users, buyers and suppliers;
• To make the most effective use of the funds available;
• To ensure compliance with relevant national and European procurement
legislation.
Secondary Strategic Objectives:
• To encourage the supply base in the adoption of eProcurement practices and
technologies;
• To improve service levels to buyers, suppliers and users involved in
procurement;
• To minimise the transaction costs associated with procurement;
• To develop a more integrated approach to procurement across local
authorities;
• To maximise value for money by enhancing the buying power of the local
authority;
• To promote competition among suppliers while maintaining reliable sources of
supply;
• To optimise inventory levels through the adoption of efficient procurement
practices;
• To make effective use of human resources in the procurement process;
• To improve the auditability of public procurement expenditures;
• To be progressive in the adoption of procurement Information and
Communication Technologies (ICT).
Source: Excerpt from Local Government e-Procurement Strategy Report, 2003
206

Appendix 9 –
Unaccounted for Water in Local Authorities, 2008
Local Authority
Unaccounted for water (UFW) as a
percentage of total volume of water
supplied under the water supply
schemes that the local authority is
responsible for
Carlow County Council 40.00
Cavan County Council 44.70
Clare County Council 35.47
Cork City Council 52.93
Cork County Council 44.40
Donegal County Council 43.34
Dublin City Council 36.00
Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council 29.00
Fingal County Council 21.61
Galway City Council 49.12
Galway County Council 49.46
Kerry County Council 47.98
Kildare County Council 26.37
Kilkenny County Council 56.79
Laois County Council 32.44
Leitrim County Council 36.51
Limerick City Council 47.89
Limerick County Council 16.83
Longford County Council 42.18
Louth County Council 44.19
Mayo County Council 43.00
Meath County Council 47.57
Monaghan County Council 43.27
North Tipperary County Council 49.52
Offaly County Council 50.87
Roscommon County Council 58.60
Sligo County Council 44.12
South Dublin County Council 19.79
South Tipperary County Council 55.43
Waterford City Council 43.60
Waterford County Council 31.83
Westmeath County Council 45.74
Wexford County Council 38.88
Wicklow County Council
Source: Service Indicators in Local Authorities, 2008
31.34
207

Number
Counter
Appendix 10 –
Motor Tax Transactions, 2008
Number
Postal
Number
Online
Total excl
online
%
Counter
%
Postal
%
Online
Driving
Licences
Westmeath 75,442 10,777 21,707 86,219 69.90 9.99 20.11 12,106
Roscommon 44,683 17,501 15,059 62,184 57.85 22.66 19.50 9,001
Laois 57,878 12,021 21,987 69,899 62.99 13.08 23.93 11,272
Meath 123,330 20,174 71,186 143,504 57.45 9.40 33.16 25,213
Offaly 56,668 12,323 21,858 68,991 62.38 13.56 24.06 10,933
Limerick 86,827 31,405 50,331 118,232 51.51 18.63 29.86 19,976
Waterford 57,971 7,409 19,546 65,380 68.26 8.72 23.02 9,670
Kilkenny 68,021 16,210 30,926 84,231 59.07 14.08 26.86 14,555
South
Tipperary 78,882 14,379 21,679 93,261 68.63 12.51 18.86 14,455
Cavan 49,640 13,887 18,999 63,527 60.15 16.83 23.02 9,945
Limerick
City 37,174 10,387 18,009 47,561 56.69 15.84 27.47 8,460
Donegal 142,921 7,060 26,030 149,981 81.20 4.01 14.79 20,241
Wexford 86,542 49,590 52,185 136,132 45.96 26.33 27.71 22,501
Louth 88,680 4,040 29,339 92,720 72.65 3.31 24.04 17,239
Kerry 81,481 44,314 48,555 125,795 46.73 25.42 27.85 20,796
Kildare 108,231 31,296 97,178 139,527 45.72 13.22 41.05 30,053
Clare 96,684 17,815 35,069 114,499 64.64 11.91 23.45 16,948
Leitrim 22,847 7,420 6,896 30,267 61.48 19.97 18.56 4,320
Longford 33,572 5,128 7,126 38,700 73.26 11.19 15.55 5,783
North
Tipperary 52,440 17,188 26,664 69,628 54.46 17.85 27.69 10,637
Galway 167,175 35,870 75,982 203,045 59.91 12.86 27.23 35,064
Wicklow 97,294 13,073 54,171 110,367 59.13 7.95 32.92 21,583
Cork 212,388 172,196 209,317 384,584 35.76 28.99 35.24 75,718
Waterford
City 38,111 4,748 15,228 42,859 65.61 8.17 26.22 8,356
Monaghan 50,001 8,377 11,469 58,378 71.59 11.99 16.42 8,706
Mayo 101,502 16,216 32,519 117,718 67.56 10.79 21.65 17,313
Sligo 53,359 8,793 15,628 62,152 68.60 11.30 20.09 9,161
Dublin 473,066 197,593 531,217 670,659 39.36 16.44 44.20 183,946
Carlow 53,707 10,561 17,637 64,268 65.57 12.89 21.53 10,379
2,696,517 817,751 1,603,497 3,514,268 52.69 15.98 31.33 664,330
Source: Service Indicators in Local Authorities 2008
208

Appendix 11 –
Membership of County / City Development Boards
Typical Make-up of a County/City Development Board
Sector Members Number
Local Government • Chairs of the local authority Strategic Policy Committees
• Cathaoirleach/ Mayor
• County/ City Manager
• Urban Representative(s) *
typically 8 †
Local Development Two representatives for each of the following types of local
development bodies:
• County/ City Enterprise Board
• Integrated Local Development Company or Urban Area
Based Partnership Company
4
State Agencies As appropriate:
• Health Service Executive
• FÁS
• Teagasc
• An Garda Síochána
• VEC
• Enterprise Ireland
• IDA Ireland
• Regional Tourism Organisations
• Department of Social Protection regional officer
• County/ City Childcare Committee
• SFADCo/ Údarás
typically 10
Social Partners • Employers and Business Organisations (one member)
• Trade Unions (one member)
• Agricultural and Farming Organisations (one member) ♦
• Community and Voluntary Organisations (two members)
• Environmental Pillar (one member)
6
TOTAL typically 28
*
Where there are two or more borough/ town councils within a CDB area, two representatives can be nominated, with one drawn
from those authorities that have planning functions.
†
This depends on the number of SPCs in the county or city and the number/ type of town or borough councils within the CDB area
(see also footnote above).
♦
In the five cities, where there is no Agricultural and Farming Organisations member on the CDBs, there will be an additional
Community and Voluntary Organisations member.
209