Could a mayor for Dublin be bad for public transport and cycling?

monument

Could an elected mayor for the Greater Dublin Area, or even just Co Dublin, be bad for public transport and cycling?

It's a thought I had before but I only seen a firm example while reading this about the downfall a Toronto's mayor and the city's problems:

...The province paved the way for political conflict in 1998 when it merged the city of Toronto with six surrounding municipalities. The effect was to set councillors like Mr Ford (the mayor who is been ejected) from sprawling suburbs, where the car is essential, against inner-city politicians who want more public transport and bicycle lanes, according to Robert Young, a political scientist at the University of Western Ontario. The lack of parties means that the 45-member council struggles to reach agreement. Mayors have profile but little power, a source of Mr Ford’s frustration.

At least some of the suggested ideas for an elected mayor were for s/he to be elected and have power over the Greater Dublin Area -- and like in Toronto, the counties around Dublin which are a part of the GDA (Wicklow, Meath, Kildare) are more car focused and car dependent than Co Dublin it self. And the same is true to a lesser extent of Co Dublin compared to Dublin City.

bk

Well I don't think we would have to issue if we had a Mayor of just Dublin, rather then the GDA. I would imagine it would be more like the mayor of London.

coylemj

'Mayors have profile, but little power' is the key term here. I was glad that the proposal to elect a Dublin mayor was dropped because it would be a recipe for disaster. Imagine an elected 'personality' like one of the Greens trying to get Dublin Bus, Irish Rail, the Luas people and the four local authorities around the table to agree to anything.

Just look at the disjointed mess that is the Leap card system, that's what happens when you get a bunch of unwilling participants forced to sit down together against their will to implement something for the benefit of their collective users.

Even an elected Mayor of Dublin city would have little power because it's the officials who run the city, not the councillors. Out in Dun Laoghaire you have a manager who is anti-car and despite all the lobbying by local businesses to the councillors, he is still answerable to nobody.

AlekSmart

coylemj wrote: »

Out in Dun Laoghaire you have a manager who is anti-car and despite all the lobbying by local businesses to the councillors, he is still answerable to nobody.

+1 to that...one only needs to inspect the dangerous,highly questionable carry-on out in Sandyford Industrial Estate to underline this !

icdg

The plan as it existed for a directly elected Mayor of Dublin is more or less dead, though Phil Hogan's local government reform paper leaves open the possibility of re-opening it. However, he plans to run a referendum on it in 2014 - at the same time as re-electing the existing authorities for five years. This would mean the new mayor wouldn't take office any earlier than 2019. He's also very hazy on the powers the mayor would have.

The thing is that the Government is very reluctant to grant any new powers on local government - in fact its doing the opposite and taking powers away. It is also very reluctant to abandon the management system which restricts what elected local authorities (including any directly elected mayor can do). In this environment councils are very reluctant to hand any powers up to a directly elected mayor. The Gormley plan would have grafted a Regional Authority on top of the existing structure - the Hogan paper really only says that there will be a plecite on having a directly elected mayor without saying what powers or practical arrangements there would be and, in fact, basically making an argument against the creation of the office at all.

With regard to the OP though, one thing both the Gormley and Hogan plans have in common is that they are restricted to the historical county boundary. To me this is bad thinking, as it excludes places like Clonee, Leixlip, and Bray that are essentially integral parts of Greater Dublin now while including places like Swords, Balbriggan, and Newcastle that are part of County Dublin but outside of the built-up city. The only reason I can think of for this is the usual one, the GAA. What sports team you support should have no bearing on how local government is organized but in Ireland it seems to be key to the process.

monument

coylemj wrote: »

'Mayors have profile, but little power' is the key term here....

Or you can have directly elected mayors with power and money to spend, like London, New York, etc.

coylemj wrote: »

Even an elected Mayor of Dublin city would have little power because it's the officials who run the city, not the councillors.

It can be structured what ever way those setting it up want.

coylemj wrote: »

Out in Dun Laoghaire you have a manager who is anti-car and despite all the lobbying by local businesses to the councillors, he is still answerable to nobody.

...or just a manager follower the policies set by elected councillors, and/or often also following national policy.

Councillors are great ones for agreeing to plans and policies and then distancing them selves when the resulting on the ground actions start to happen. Watching how councils operate, my sympathy for councillors' lack of powers drops a bit when councillors act or are clueless to a high-level policy document they agreed to.

AngryLips

Dublin doesn't need a mayor, we can't give those barbarians beyond the M50 another reason to hate us

Cookie_Monster

he could hardly do much worse than the current setup

DrumSteve

Do we not have a mayor already?

markpb

DrumSteve wrote: »

Do we not have a mayor already?

Each of the Dublin counties has a Mayor except for Dublin city which has a Lord Mayor. The position is head of the council, elected by other councillors eah year. I don't think (but could be wrong) that they have any extra authority or power although they do sit on various subcommittees so they have more influence over policy.

The idea that the Greens (and probably others) had was one directly elected Mayor for the four counties of Dublin. They would also have more control over taxation and spending.

AMontague

We already have a Lord Mayor for Dublin City Council. It's just that the Lord Mayor is elected by the Councillors and not by the public. Why shouldn't the public choose their Mayor?

An elected Lord Mayor, would gain in power, by virtue of having a mandate.

Of course, a directly elected Mayor, should be in power for longer than the current one year. A five year term, to match the term of the council would make sense to me.

Jawgap

It depends on the mayor, the powers associated the office (assuming its an executive role) and - most importantly - the discretionary budget that goes with it.

I think Dublin badly needs an executive mayor, but given that it would mean a shift in power I can't see it being implemented or - as is usual in Ireland - it'll be implemented in a half-hearted way, so you end up getting an executive mayor who has little discretion over how budgets are spent and is unable to introduce or pursue policies outside those laid down by the Department of the Environment.

coylemj

An elected mayor would make no sense unless he/she had sweeping power to overrule the councillors and the officials. In effect what you need is a dictator free to do what he/she chooses, otherwise you will get someone sitting on their arse for five years unable to do anything because they will be blocked by a coalition of opposing forces on the council and by the officials dragging their heels every time the mayor tries to do anything that varies from the status quo.

It's all or nothing and do away with that silly horse-drawn coach.