Time well overdue to check errant local councils

It is a disgrace that a number of local councils are allowed to continue to operate in the slipshod manner in which they have now been running for years. There are many problems in the way of putting local government on a sound footing but the biggest difficulty is that, judging by what the Auditor General has just said in his latest report, it appears that few of the councils really care.

The Auditor General’s report put to shame not only the councils in default but also the government, which is supposed to oversee their work and take remedial action at appropriate times. And should not the Public Accounts Committee of the House of Representatives also step in and see how it can help resolve such blatant disregard to transparency and accountability in local government?

It will be most interesting to see how the political parties will react to the report. Will they close both eyes and act as if nothing is happening?

For 2010, the year which the report covers, the government allocated €30 million of taxpayers’ money to the local councils. The public ought, therefore, to show greater interest in how the councils are run.

Incidents that come up from time to time do show neglect or lack of transparency or accountability but the latest report of the National Audit Office goes beyond such occasional incidents. It exposes an attitude that ought to be alien to the running of local councils, which are meant to serve the communities at local level. A number have done well but others are bringing the whole local government concept to shame.

Fewer councils may be running deficits (16 as compared to 22 in 2009) but what is absolutely unacceptable is the way some councils disregard regulations. Councils in default are told of shortcomings in what the office calls management letters but, as at June 13, 2011, only 27 out of 66 local councils had sent in a response to such formal notices as required by regulations and 24 exceeded the stipulated deadline.

No fewer than 15 councils did not even bother to reply in time at all. In the words of the Auditor General, this indicates “a total lack of willingness on the part of these local councils to address the shortcomings identified”. Very often, he said, the same irregularities were being highlighted in management letters year after year “without any apparent remedial action being taken. This has also been reported upon in the preceding year and is definitely not acceptable”. Indeed, it is not.

The Auditor’s report is littered with remarks that clearly indicate that local government is in a bad state. The remarks deal, for example, with such matters as the poor quality of a number of financial statements presented for auditing.

Weaknesses have also been identified in the tendering procedures, with the Auditor noting that the majority of local councils are not always adhering to the rules.

To what, exactly, is the negligence shown by a number of local councils attributed? Is it sheer disinterest in complying with the rules or could it be lack of sufficient preparedness in handling council work? More to the point, what action is being taken to put errant councils on the road to proper local council governance?

The time is well overdue for swift action to be taken to avoid seeing some of the councils degenerate into a mess greater than that in which they are wallowing at present.