Cork Mayoral Plebiscite

Brussels Sprout

On the same day as the local and European elections next month (May 24th) Cork City voters will be asked if they would like to have a directly elected mayor in the future. Here are some details:

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar said the policy paper on the new powers, which will be published soon, outlines the nomination process, which Varadkar said is similar to that of someone running for the Dáil.

The powers of the directly elected mayors involves a “significant transfer of powers” to the elected mayor from the council.

The newly-elected mayors, if the public decide to vote for such a change, will be able to bring forward the council budget and development plan. However, individual decisions on planning will remain with the chief executive.

The relationship between the mayor and the council CEO is similar to that which exists between a Secretary General of a government department and their line minister.

The first election will be held in 2021 and the mayors will sit for a two-and-half year term with five-year term kicking in from 2024

link


I'm not sure what to make of this to be honest so I'd like to hear other people's opinions on the matter. What are the pros and cons of this?

flo8s967qjh0nd

Here's a link to the government document outlining the proposed roles, duties, powers of the proposed new directly elected mayors
https://www.housing.gov.ie/local-government/governance/directly-elected-mayors-executive-functions

Overall, I see it as a positive move and am broadly in favour.

Treehelpplease

Definitely in favour of it, at least they can be held accountable. I would prefer keeping it to two and a half years (or three), though. Five is a bit long..

Roger Hassenforder

I think its a crock of shît. A sop to calls for proper reform of local government, without doing anything meaningful.

Seems to be an upgrade and expansion of the role of the City CE, (who will still be thete) and subject to plebiscite, rather than a political appointment, with a downgrade of the Councillors, albeit who can remove the Mayor.

Could also be to the detriment of those outside the Metro area, why would potential FDI talk to a mayor on a 1 year cycle, when theres a paid City Mayor to talk to with more powers. We're politicizing one public service job who will be prioritising the metro area. No incentive to look after that outside. Maybe a mayor of all Cork would make more sense.

Also, invest too much power in one person may lead to impropriety or misconduct.

"Yea but london has one"..I'd prefer to see some proper devolution of powers from central government. Give LAs decent powers but make them more accountable. We've also too many national bodies active at a local level, but not accountable to anyone. Less parish pump politics in the dail, and a local council who can do something.

Not convinced.

mire

Anything that enhances local democracy is to be welcomed. Ireland is a hyper centralized state and city and county management is really an extension of Custom House rule. This is quite a radical reform of urban government because it involves a significant transfer of power from the executive to an elected office. This can only be good for democracy and accountability. In my view we should have elected mayors for every jurisdiction in the state. Every city and every municipal district.

For Cork City, this is proceeds, it would be a progressive move; the city needs civic leadership and much more effective strategic political direction. The mayor however will only be responsible for the city and will therefore only be leading part of the metropolitan area.

Overall, I think that city mayors should be elected rather than selected.

snotboogie

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I think its a crock of shît. A sop to calls for proper reform of local government, without doing anything meaningful.

Seems to be an upgrade and expansion of the role of the City CE, (who will still be thete) and subject to plebiscite, rather than a political appointment, with a downgrade of the Councillors, albeit who can remove the Mayor.

Could also be to the detriment of those outside the Metro area, why would potential FDI talk to a mayor on a 1 year cycle, when theres a paid City Mayor to talk to with more powers. We're politicizing one public service job who will be prioritising the metro area. No incentive to look after that outside. Maybe a mayor of all Cork would make more sense.

Also, invest too much power in one person may lead to impropriety or misconduct.

"Yea but london has one"..I'd prefer to see some proper devolution of powers from central government. Give LAs decent powers but make them more accountable. We've also too many national bodies active at a local level, but not accountable to anyone. Less parish pump politics in the dail, and a local council who can do something.

Not convinced.

And this is the first and only step on offer, I see no other option but to take it and subsequently use the office as a launch pad to push for more powers locally.

Roger Hassenforder

snotboogie wrote: »

And this is the first and only step on offer, I see no other option but to take it and subsequently use the office as a launch pad to push for more powers locally.

What powers will this role actually have?
My understanding is very little. Its a figurehead to "add value".

Ireland signed up to the subsidiarity directive years ago. Nothing.
They abolished town councils which Howlin admits was a mistake.
LAs have to go cap in hand to central government for most things.
So we elect TDs to a dail to sort out medical cards and pot holes.
The dail should be for legislation and national issues, not local issues.
The last FG attempt at government reform (Seanad) failed.

Ive no trust in any party to initiate proper reform, i just think this is more of it.
Unconvinced.

Roger Hassenforder

mire wrote: »

This is quite a radical reform of urban government because it involves a significant transfer of power from the executive to an elected office. This can only be good for democracy and accountability. In my view we should have elected mayors for every jurisdiction in the state

Im not sure what exact power the executive of an LA has? (other than a waste management plan).
CDP- adopted by resolution
Budget- adopted by resolution
Theres SPCs and PPNs to beat the band.

Executive staff dont develop policies on their own initiative. All regulations enforced and implemented other than the odd bylaw are grounded in EU/National.

rebs23

I see this as a role to push Cork City and the region generally, make sure we are getting the funding required from national government. One small step but a step worth supporting.

snotboogie

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

What powers will this role actually have?
My understanding is very little. Its a figurehead to "add value".

Ireland signed up to the subsidiarity directive years ago. Nothing.
They abolished town councils which Howlin admits was a mistake.
LAs have to go cap in hand to central government for most things.
So we elect TDs to a dail to sort out medical cards and pot holes.
The dail should be for legislation and national issues, not local issues.
The last FG attempt at government reform (Seanad) failed.

Ive no trust in any party to initiate proper reform, i just think this is more of it.
Unconvinced.

The powers are linked above and policy making is included. Again this is a step away from the issues you mention, I can’t understand why you are against this. You don’t like how government works so you vote against change because you don’t trust the government. In that case how can anything get done?

Roger Hassenforder

snotboogie wrote: »

The powers are linked above and policy making is included. Again this is a step away from the issues you mention, I can’t understand why you are against this. You don’t like how government works so you vote against change because you don’t trust the government. In that case how can anything get done?

I didnt realise we have to agree!
Maybe im just thick!

Spell it out for me, what exactly are these powers, being removed ftom the executive?
Bare in mind, anything the executive is doing, is either national policy or something the members voted for. E.g. planning decisions based on the members own policy.


The only major difference i can see is the mayor is now elected by the people (ok with that) rather than a yearly "who's turn is it lads" by the Councillors, and a nebulous "Programme for office" which will be a mish mash of aspiration, dreams and kowtowing to Central Gov for the money to deliver it.
Think Event Centre with a cherry.

Whats good about people disagreeing is sonetimes it can throw up a "jeez, never thought about that". But to me, this is just optics. Not reform.


Possible advantages and disadvantages of having a directly elected Lord Mayor with executive functions
The full consequences of introducing a directly elected Lord Mayor with executive functions
are not completely clear.
Possible advantages of having a directly elected Lord Mayor with executive functions
 The Lord Mayor would be directly and democratically accountable to the people of
Cork City
 The mayoral election campaign could raise awareness of and increase public debate
on local government policy options in advance of decisions being made
 Increased visibility of local government and the role of Lord Mayor in Cork City
 A directly elected Lord Mayor could advocate for increased functions for Cork City
Council
There may be other possible advantages that are not listed in this guide.
Possible disadvantages of having a directly elected Lord Mayor with executive
functions
 Increased power in a single elected individual and their office
 Negative impact on the powers and standing of existing elected members
 Increased costs for the council
 A more complicated process for the council to make policies and decisions
There may be other possible disadvantages that are not listed in this guide.

snotboogie

It’s a totally different office to the Lord Mayor. The full description is in the link above.

Roger Hassenforder

snotboogie wrote: »

It’s a totally different office to the Lord Mayor. The full description is in the link above.

Ive read the description. Several times.
Its totally different? Its a mishmash of the current CE/mayor with an added political element and a wish list. But largely impotent, if they dont have the funds. Our centralised government wont relinquish powers easily.

& You've yet to tell me what the powers will be.
What will this new role be able to actually do? That a LA is unable to do.
Genuinely curious, if im expected to get on board the project as you're excoriating me to do so.

MrDerp

I’m against it, I don’t see the benefit of a politician in a CEO role, and I believe that the actual executive power will be embellished beyond recognition in a popularity contest.

An election for this office, in this country, will be full of ‘characters’ promising the sun moon and stars for Cork, and may serve as a distraction form the real business of running a city, possibly with an over focus on vanity projects.

I take the points on being a focal point for FDI etc, I just don’t believe it’s what our esteemed electorate will vote for, they’ll vote for someone promising to spend public money in their areas, rather than someone who can drive the local economy.

In short, I’ll vote against a directly elected mayor, because I think Irish people are too easily bought on promises which lack the funding to back them up.

marno21

Cork City has been taken for a ride when it comes to funding in recent years. There are an endless list of projects to be advanced, everything from roads to public transport, and having an extra bit of clout when it comes to seeking funding for these would be more than welcome.

mire

By the way, does anyone know whether the idea of the elected mayor can progress if it is passed in less than all three plebiscites? Say for instance that limerick and cork voted yes but Waterford voted no, does the proposal fail?

I really hope it passes. Anything that improves local democratic leadership and accountability is an enhancement. It would be good for these cities as they have no urban leadership capacity at present. Chief executives do not lead. They manage the local authorities and were introduced in 1929 as a way for custom house to control the untrustworthy localities because of the centralizing impulses of government.

By the way, the argument that we should not have elected mayors because the people might elect an idiot is simply an argument against democracy.

Ludo

mire wrote: »

By the way, the argument that we should not have elected mayors because the people might elect an idiot is simply an argument against democracy.

hmmm...with recent events (think Trump, Brexit, etc, etc) this is not necessarily a bad thing :-)

WoolyJumper

Personally I'd vote yes. I hope this issue get a proper debate because it is a big change. I worry that because this is not a national issue it will fall under the radar and people will just write this off as more "jobs for the boys" and vote no. I already see that the salary is enough to convince people to vote no without any consideration to what the benefits might be.

MrDerp

mire wrote: »

By the way, the argument that we should not have elected mayors because the people might elect an idiot is simply an argument against democracy.

It’s actually the opposite, I believe that people are idiots and open to concentrating power in the hands of whomever promises them free stuff paid for by others.

Executive powers + elected individual = less democracy, not more. A council of peers is a better proportional representation of interests. Whether they are sufficiently holding the executive to account is another matter, but not one that I believe is resolved by handing it over to a popularity contest.

The same argument would be that government fails because they don’t reach a consensus and they’re full of gombeens not holding senior civil servants to account, so we should put more power in the hands of the president to get things done, or have a directly elected Taoiseach or whatever.

Every dismantled democracy starts with claims that government have become anti-democratic, stalled in buerocracy, and despots slide in on the back of a wave of ‘change’. The role will be full of empty promises of whatever the populist issue of the day is.

‘I will build 10000 social houses, not next to anyone who doesn’t want them, but either way they will be reserved for Irish people who can trace their roots back to Niall of the 9 hostages, and these houses will be equidistant between the new translatlantic airport and high speed rail to Dublin, with easy access to the motorway to wherever you live and the new state of the art hospital. And your neighbour who earns more than you will pay for most of it, not a penny cost to your good self, and we’ll make Dublin pay for the rest!’

Concentrating power as an answer to democratic disillusionment? Give me a break.

Squatter

mire wrote: »

By the way, the argument that we should not have elected mayors because the people might elect an idiot is simply an argument against democracy.

In that case, it's an exceptionally strong argument. Remember - it was your cherished democracy that gave us the Healy-Raes and Ming the Mindless.

QED.

Brussels Sprout

WoolyJumper wrote: »

I hope this issue get a proper debate because it is a big change.

Very much so. I also hope that for the "No" side they don't wheel out some contrarian "No to Everything" character a la John Waters (or at least a Cork version of him).

I'd like to hear a factual debate of the pros and cons from both sides.

Roger Hassenforder

Does anyone know how the current SPC "mode"l will change?

Currently SPCs develop local policies, bring them through for ratification by the Council. NGOs, sectoral interested groups, social partners etc. all contribute to the various SPC.
If approved, and subject to a budget being found, the executive then implement it.

Will responsibility for this local policy development now be vested in one person, the mayor? E.g. who approves the County Development Plan? LAP Zoning/rezoning? If one person is responsible for this, rather than an elected group, there is a significant risk of impropriety.

Anteayer

My view is it is that it’s a significant step in the right direction. It isn’t perfect but it’s more accountable and has more ability govern than anything we have at present in local government.

I will definitely be voting in favour, but I don’t see it as a solution to all things in local government.

Cynically shooting it down because it’s not absolutely perfect will just send a signal to central government that there’s no demand for reform and we’ll be back to stagnation.

There’s a long way to go to be anywhere near normal continental or American style urban governance but as least it’s some degree of change and a start of a debate.

If an elected mayor turns out to be a positive thing, I can see this leading to sane local government in the future.

Roger Hassenforder

Jeez, not exactly inspiring confidence in the process.

Maybe City Hall could be the Apple Hall, Patrick St. be named Idaho Avenue

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/City-council-has-no-idea-how-directly-elected-mayor-role-could-be-financed-5ce73e1a-8ac5-4633-8bd1-b827abd33fbe-ds

namloc1980

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Jeez, not exactly inspiring confidence in the process.

Maybe City Hall could be the Apple Hall, Patrick St. be named Idaho Avenue

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/City-council-has-no-idea-how-directly-elected-mayor-role-could-be-financed-5ce73e1a-8ac5-4633-8bd1-b827abd33fbe-ds

Not a chance this passes. People will read articles like this and think "jobs for the boys" and vote No. Shame.

Roger Hassenforder

namloc1980 wrote: »

Not a chance this passes. People will read articles like this and think "jobs for the boys" and vote No. Shame.

Its the "just shut up and vote for it" that has me not sold on it yet.

Government are doing little to sell it other than vague platitudes about expanded powers, all of which a local authority has anyway, just vested in either the executive or the elected members.


Mire(?) asked a question a while back, Ive still no idea of the answer, despite reading whats available.
Does the plebiscite have to pass in all 3, or is it a majority of the total 'electorate' in the 3 that decides.

350125GO!

Could someone tell me why this is just for the Munster regional cities?

i.e. Why not Galway?(which is bigger that Waterford) ...or are they voting at a later date???

Also would any of you be of the opinion that would be better if one Munster region Mayor / Governor was appointed/elected. - A political figurehead to promote and represent the 3 cities as one unitary block.

That way the Munster cites (acting as one economic & political identity) could compete more successfully as an equal economic counterbalance to Dublin.

Munster Enterprise Panel, Transport for Munster, Munster Housing Strategy, Munster Airport Authority, etc.

Just a though.

Roger Hassenforder

350125GO! wrote: »

Could someone tell me why this is just for the Munster regional cities?

i.e. Why not Galway?(which is bigger that Waterford) ...or are they voting at a later date???

Also would any of you be of the opinion that would be better if one Munster region Mayor / Governor was appointed/elected. - A political figurehead to promote and represent the 3 cities as one unitary block.

That way the Munster cites (acting as one economic & political identity) could compete more successfully as an equal economic counterbalance to Dublin.

Munster Enterprise Panel, Transport for Munster, Munster Housing Strategy, Munster Airport Authority, etc.

Just a though.

Galway was left out because theyre merging?
(Or was that shelved?)

The regional cities are effectively impotent. Its cap in hand to Dublin for anything. The whole local government/subsidiarity is a joke.

Anteayer

Galway was removed by a Fianna Fail sponsored Seanad amendment because of concerns about the merger. As far as I remember it was also supported by SF and some independents.

Dublin is complicated by the fact that it straddles 4 local authorities.

Limerick and Waterford has their mergers with their county councils while Cork City was significantly extended rather than merged.

It's likely Galway's mayor situation would probably be dealt by a separate bill with whenever Dublin is doing a plebiscite.

Brussels Sprout

Seems to be a bit of confusion about whether the money for this will be coming from central government or not. John Paul Phelan tweeted that the money would be and has already been accounted for but I'm not sure if Varadkar has confirmed this.

razorblunt

Everyone should get a shot at the role.

Nice chance to build up the Air Miles with a sojourn to San Fran, China, and Knocka.