Proposed measures to reform local government are “very superficial” and are the "Achilles heel" of Fine Gael and Labour's Programme for Government, a group established to monitor all parties’ political commitments has said.
Reformcard.com, which rated the political reform proposals of each of the parties in advance of the election, today published its scoring assessment of the Programme for Government.
It was given a score of 68 out of 100 by the group’s panel of academics, based on five areas of proposed reform.
They were: the Oireachtas, elections, open government, the public sector and local government.
The rating compares to a score of 74.5 for the Fine Gael election manifesto, and a rating of 68 for Labour’s, highlighting key differences between the parties in a number of areas.
The panel noted a number of features of the manifestos that failed to make the programme for government, including Fine Gael’s proposal that the Ceann Comhairle be elected by secret ballot.
The major partner’s proposal for a reduction in the number of junior ministers to 12 was also dropped, as was its plan for an Open Data Bill to make government information open to the public.
“Proposals in the area of local government reform and in the area of elections remain weak, signalling a reluctance to take on the stronger reform proposals contained in the manifesto documents of non-government parties in these areas,” the organisation said in its latest review.
Member of the academic panel, Dr Eoin O’Malley of DCU, said the programme for government’s score on reforming the dominance of the executive was “particularly poor”.
“While several important measures such as enhancing the powers of Committees and the Ceann Comhairle to hold ministers to account are proposed, it is unclear if these institutions (which after all remain controlled by the government), will have any real incentive to do so.
“Also, there are few effective measures to empower the opposition parties,” Dr O’Malley said.
Dr Jane Suiter of UCC, who is also on the Reformcard.com panel, noted the “strong commitment” to a revised budgetary process as set out in the section on public sector reform.
“A new ministry of reform has been established which illustrates intent. There are strong proposals on hiring external to the civil service and to enhancing accountability and long-term planning - although proposals in this latter category are somewhat vague and seemingly uncoordinated,” she said.
But Dr Suiter said local government reform could be considered “the Achilles heel” of the Programme for Government, with a score of just 10.
“While some promising commitments are made, particularly in area of providing proper funding of local government through the introduction of a site valuation tax and enhancing the power of councillors to demand accountability from public servants, there are prominent weaknesses in the proposals.”
She said measures to enhance citizen participation “seem vague and measures aimed at consolidating our fragmented system of local government are very superficial”.
The panel said that apart from a proposal to sit up the www.fixmystreet.ie website to assist residents in reporting problems, there were no specific measures to increase citizen and community participation in local government.
Dr O’Malley said it was difficult to see “how the much heralded ‘new politics’ can be delivered if local government reform is not a centre piece of reforms”.
The panel said the programme for government contained “many rhetorical flourishes” in favour of reforming government and the Dáil and how the two relate. It said it was important that “credible institutional changes” be put in place, but added that the Dáil should not become a legislative chamber, proposing and passing its own laws.
“It would be one of the only parliaments in the world were it to do that.”
The panel also welcomed the decision to allow Dáil committees full powers of parliamentary investigation, but said it was not clear that such a reform required constitutional amendment.
“But one might question whether a Dáil committee is the appropriate vehicle for investigation is we want to find out what really happened - it might generate more heat than light. There are some positive signs, but some worrying ones too. While all five boxes [areas of reform] are ticked, the simple fact is that the document is far too short on detail,” the review document said.
Reformcard founders, Joe Curtin and Johnny Ryan, said they intended to track the progress or lack thereof of the reforms set out in the programme for government. They said a tool they were currently developing, dubbed a ‘pledge-o-meter’ would help to track progress.
“We therefore hope to maintain a focus on the reform agenda throughout the lifetime of this government.”
The academic panel is: Dr Elaine Byrne, TCD; Prof David Farrell, UCD; Dr Clodagh Harris, UCC; Dr Eoin O'Malley, DCU; Prof Gary Murphy, DCU; Dr Theresa Reidy, UCC; Dr Jane Suiter, UCC and Dr Matt Wall, Vrije University Amsterdam.
The panel and the organisers have been working on a pro bono basis. Further information on the review is available at reformcard.com.