Notes on the Front

Not quite.  But in Portugal the Carnide local authority, a small suburb in Lisbon, is offering a dog walking service for older people who can’t come out due to the coronavirus crisis.   The local authority is also training teenagers online to talk with elderly people who are alone at home and who feel the need to talk by telephone.  In addition, the elderly or chronically ill may request delivery of products from the pharmacy or grocery shopping and the local authority organizes orders and pick-ups. 

These are the stories throughout countries undergoing Irish-style lockdowns.  However, the structure of local government in Portugal has an advantage (shared by many other EU countries but not here):  a structure which is neighbourhood based.  This is part of a multi-layer decentralised system.

There are 18 districts in Portugal.  Below that are over 300 municipalities.  And below that are over 3,000 civil parishes (or Junta de Freguesia).  These civil parishes average have an average population of around 3,400 – though in the urban areas they are likely to be larger while in the rural areas much smaller.  These are no so much local authorities as neighbourhood authorities.

These small civil parishes have elected councillors, offices, employees and a budget (funded by the municipality, of which property tax and national grants are a major revenue source).  Their powers revolve around support for the population in their area and physical improvements (street repairs, cemetery upkeep, etc.).

However, they are in a strong position to help mobilise, organise and support civil society initiatives.  For instance, the dog-walkers in Carnide are local volunteers, organised through the neighbourhood authority. 

Imagine if we had a network of such neighbourhood authorities which could help create networks of cooperation and support – and not just through the bad times.  For instance, my local street held annual festivals – with food (prepared by the residents) and games for children.  However, this relied heavily on the work of one or two people and the organisation was considerable.  A neighbourhood authority could lift some of the burden and expense of organising these and other events.

There are a range of recreational, cultural, musical events that could be held at neighbourhood level.  Training support for young people, local clean-ups, childcare services, supports for small local businesses and cooperatives, sporting initiatives – there are any range of activities that could be initiated by people, using the neighbourhood authority to help them organisationally and financially.

But Ireland doesn’t do well in the local government stakes.  We have the weakest local government system in Europe bar Moldova.  Portuguese local government expenditure is twice the level of Ireland.  In places like Denmark and Sweden, local government expenditure exceeds central government expenditure.  In Ireland, on the other hand, local government makes up only 10 percent of central government expenditure.

Imagine if we had a tier of local government situated at the neighbourhood level – a public authority for every 3,000 to 5,000 residents – which could work with civil society (both organisations and individuals) on any range of activities that boost life quality and social capital, creating layers of support and networks of mutual assistance.

There are many lessons to be drawn from this crisis.  One of them is the capacity of civil society to respond with collective action.  We should reform government structures that provide a stronger foundation for civil society initiatives, working in partnership at neighbourhood level.