The package of proposals contained in Putting People First document, the Report of the Local Electoral Area Boundary Committee and the Final Report of the Local Government/Local Development Alignment Steering Group, taken in conjunction with the introduction of the Residential Property Tax and the incorporation of enterprise development bodies in local government represent the most significant set of local government reforms articulated by an Irish government since the introduction of the city/county manager system. In particular the focus on making local public policy making more democratic and accountable is particularly noteworthy. The implementation of these policy initiatives has now commenced with the publication of the Local Government Bill, 2013. Ireland is not unusual in seeking to radically reform the operation of the state at local level. Andrews and Boyne (2012, 297-298) note that policy makers across the world continue to debate the merits of alternative local government structures in terms of their consequences for local service costs and performance. In recent years several countries have enacted or considered reorganizations of local government on the grounds of efficiency. Examples include Denmark where the number of local government units was reduced from 270 to 98 in 2007, and there is further ongoing discussion about another reduction. Similarly, in Australia and Canada, debates have long raged about the amalgamation of local governments (Vojnovic 2000; King et al. 2004, Dollery et al. 2009). At the same time, it seems likely that the current era of fiscal austerity will increase the pressure on governments to reform and/or reorganize local government. Tis article proposes that the implementation Irish local government reform programme should take heed of previous and similar reform processes in order for the changes it proposes to be embedded and successful (Wollman 2008). In additions it suggests that the reforms may have very significant implications for planners, the planning process and the planning system. Tis is particularly the case in relation to the proposals that seek to improve the rather limited democratic 1 Lowndes and Pratchett (2012, 22) suggest that the Conservative-Liberal Democrat reforms do “show traces of an ideological commitment to localism and a new understanding of local self-government”. In addition, they note that there is “an ideological agenda which has the potential to deliver a radically different form of local governance” (ibid.). However, the reform process is far from coherent and the potential for radical change is heavily constrained by a number of factors, including: The conflicting ideologies of both parties, e.g. one-nation Conservatism, new right post-Thatcherism and a distinctive blend of liberalism and community politics; The political expediency of budget cuts aimed at changing Britain’s economic position before the 2015 General Election. This expediency promotes a short-termism that is not necessarily compatible with the publicly stated longer term goals of local self-government. Pleanáil: Journal of the Irish Planning Institute. Issue 19, Winter 2013 18 legitimacy of Irish local government. The article itself is divided into three parts. The first provides a rationale for Britain as a comparator and the choice of the 1996- 2010 period, as well as a brief introduction to the terms used in the article. Tis is followed by an examination of the British case and an analysis of the evidence to date on the implications that arose for the planning process and planning system in Britain. The final part of the article provides an overview of the pertinent lessons arising from these reform processes.