Cork Mayoral Plebiscite

Roger Hassenforder

razorblunt wrote: »

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.

What we need is a Cork celebrity to get the gig. Someone popular the masses will love.
Get him/her on a party ticket, someone that'll really drive Cork forward, someone immune to political machinations, someone that knows what Cork needs and can deliver it...

This is going to be a 5yr 120k/year popularity contest for one of the lads/lasses, to siphon off public money on vanity projects proposed by their backers.

namloc1980

Last thing we need is some populist promising all sorts of nonsense.

Brussels Sprout

namloc1980 wrote: »

Last thing we need is some populist promising all sorts of nonsense.

I suspect the previous poster's post may have been facetious.

razorblunt

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

What we need is a Cork celebrity to get the gig. Someone popular the masses will love.
Get him/her on a party ticket, someone that'll really drive Cork forward, someone immune to political machinations, someone that knows what Cork needs and can deliver it...

This is going to be a 5yr 120k/year popularity contest for one of the lads/lasses, to siphon off public money on vanity projects proposed by their backers.

I accept your offer.

Roger Hassenforder

razorblunt wrote: »

I accept your offer.

If its a house for everyone beside their ma, two weeks holiday in Santa Ponsa, a motorway between the two new airports, and a retractable dome over the city, I'll vote for you.

namloc1980

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I suspect the previous poster's post may have been facetious.

Indeed. But I'm sure you'll agree we don't need a populist spoofer in that role.

Roger Hassenforder

namloc1980 wrote: »

Indeed. But I'm sure you'll agree we don't need a populist spoofer in that role.

My fear is this is what we'll get

snotboogie

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

My fear is this is what we'll get

I don’t think it will pass, the echo have wound up most of the city over the salary

Roger Hassenforder

https://twitter.com/CorkGreens/status/1124402420321222656?s=19

Dog shįt Cycle paths Save Cork Trees policy Climate strikes

Seems to be the thrust of the argument in favour.

Anteayer

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

My fear is this is what we'll get

Well, it’s possible but we also don’t have the same kind of voting system as the US or UK that tends to lead to a split vote and someone coasting in on 35%

In a single seat election (eg the presidency) our proportional representation voting system turns into an instantaneous runoff, so unless you get more than 50% in first preferences, the second and subsequent counts matter and you get broader reflection of electorate.

I’m not saying we wouldn’t ever see a populist in power but they have to get more than half the votes to do so, even if the ballot is split the mayor will have to have a majority in terms of voter preferences.

Also I think the Irish electorate has been good at avoiding populists in the presidency, so I don't think they'll be much different in mayoral elections.

The council will also continue to exist so, it's not like you're electing someone who'll have absolute power. There'll be checks and balances.

I wouldn't think that fear of a self-inflicted populist would be much of a reason to continue with the joke of bland unaccountable mess that we have at the moment.

The system we have at present effectively has an unelected appointee (the City Manager), running the city with a very weak council acting as a policy forming and checking body. It's probably the least active form of local democracy in Europe and only barely qualifies as devolved power.

What's being proposed tips the balance back towards a genuine local democratic system. It's certianly not giving any new mayor absolute power, just creating an office that has real ability to get things done and to be publicly accountable for success or failure of policies.

Squatter

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

https://twitter.com/CorkGreens/status/1124402420321222656?s=19

Dog shįt Cycle paths Save Cork Trees policy Climate strikes

Seems to be the thrust of the argument in favour.

Right, just for fun let's look at the items on that list.

Dog sh1t: the Greens will employ ex Army Rangers to shoot any dog (and its owner?) seen crapping in a public place. Only biodegradeable bullets will be used and dog and owner corpses will be removed and incinerated free of charge. I'm all in favour.

Cycle paths: the Greens will provide free car parking areas all around Cork City where commuters can transfer to free buses/bicycles to complete their daily commute to the city centre. I'm in favour.

Save Cork: the kind of vapid, brainless, meaningless waffle that makes me hate the Greens.

Trees Policy: rather like the creatures in Orwell's Animal Farm, the Greens have a simplistic chorus that goes along the lines "all trees good, all developments bad". Infantile. Fact is that there isn't a political party or Council in Ireland that isn't pro-tree!

Climate Strikes: The right to strike is sacred so if the Climate wants to go on strike then the Greens have no right to stop it!

Summary: other than their imaginative dog shooting and free parking initiatives, the Greens's tweet isn't worth the minute area of cyberspace that it occupies!

Roger Hassenforder

Anteayer wrote: »

The system we have at present effectively has an unelected appointee (the City Manager), running the city with a very weak council acting as a policy forming and checking body. It's probably the least active form of local democracy in Europe and only barely qualifies as devolved power.

What's being proposed tips the balance back towards a genuine local democratic system. It's certianly not giving any new mayor absolute power, just creating an office that has real ability to get things done and to be publicly accountable for success or failure of policies.

We agree we've a shīt system of local government.

But seriously, what will be this ability to get things done? How?
Money: can they borrow, or will that be subject to resolution?
"Power". That which is devolved is always there.

We've had the Mahon tribunal into what goes wrong when elected members have authority to overturn executive decisions. So they executive is retaining planning function.

This is where i think the problem is, people not understanding how LA works, the lack of independence from central authority.
The LA executive isnt sitting in dark rooms devising policy. All Local Government policy was either originally developed in Europe/Oireachtas, or via the SPC/bylaw process. The executive doesnt develop policy. Ever.

So the big change will be an elected mayor will be able to implement policy... but thus was policy ever implemented, only, rather than a policy being adopted by majority resolution (of elected members), now it rests in the hands of one elected person? This is actually an erosion of democracy.

The greens ( who in fairness seem to be the biggest proponents of subsidiarity) used an example of a mayor could do something about bike lanes.
https://twitter.com/CorkMayor/status/1123916494272892928?s=19
They can do something about it as it is. Its already within the gift of the current system between the reserved and executive, if people would do their jobs.

Any thoughts of being suddenly accountable?
This is Ireland. No one is ever accountable.


However, when you find yourself on the same side as Solidarity cranks, it may be time to rethink ones position...
https://twitter.com/oliver_moran/status/1124718320899567616?s=19

Squatter

"This is about putting someone B]who may or may not be qualified, be intelligent or be competent[/B in charge of unelected B]but professionally qualified[/B officials. "

Predictable tripe from the Greens - the same bunch of "principled" gobsh1tes who tumbled into bed with Bertie as soon as he offered them a dog biscuit. Not forgetting that their leader is the same joker who, as Bertie's Minister for Communications promised us in 2010 that Ireland would have “broadband everywhere” by 2012.


Probably worth adding that, if the elected mayor starts acting the dick, the public service unions won't be long putting manners on him/her.

Brussels Sprout

Anteayer wrote: »

The system we have at present effectively has an unelected appointee (the City Manager), running the city with a very weak council acting as a policy forming and checking body. It's probably the least active form of local democracy in Europe and only barely qualifies as devolved power.

What's being proposed tips the balance back towards a genuine local democratic system. It's certianly not giving any new mayor absolute power, just creating an office that has real ability to get things done and to be publicly accountable for success or failure of policies.

This is all true. I'd just like to add though that sometimes having a position that is accountable to the electorate can lead to decisions that are not ultimately in the long term interest to the greatest number of people.

Basically I'm on about the classic "benevolent dictator" potentially being a good thing, although for every Paul Kagame or Lee Kuan Yew you get a Robert Mugabe or John Delaney!

pwurple

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

This is all true. I'd just like to add though that sometimes having a position that is accountable to the electorate can lead to decisions that are not ultimately in the long term interest to the greatest number of people.

I'll also add here, that a city manager or chief exec needs to be experienced in how the council and country works. It's the same in any industry, and you see it in corporates too... half the job is knowing how to pull the levers to get something done. That's very difficult to achieve in an elected person going in completely green, because you have that learning curve of figuring out how it all works. You're starting from scratch every time you get a newbie in there.

Take the example of the late city manager Joe McHugh, who made a massive difference to the city in the 80's, with a long term vision. Infrastructure projects like the ring roads and tunnel we have now, inner city development like the upgraded market and north main street, parks being developed.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/former-city-manager-a-catalyst-in-transform-ing-cork-1.1093130

That was over, what... 12+ years in the position, having come from a long council background. He clearly knew the system inside out and was able to get projects done during recession. It's almost impossible to get that sort of long-term work done in short stints like a mayor would be trying. Every long term project that starts, gets canned by the next kid on the block.

namloc1980

If this gets anything other than a resounding No I'll be shocked. Most of the discussion about is revolving around cost and nothing else. The Echo have everyone wound up about the salary and I'd say many people will vote no on the basis of cost and that's it. If it is a No the people of Cork will be giving a firm message that they don't really want evolution or improvement in local government.

marno21

namloc1980 wrote: »

If this gets anything other than a resounding No I'll be shocked. Most of the discussion about is revolving around cost and nothing else. The Echo have everyone wound up about the salary and I'd say many people will vote no on the basis of cost and that's it. If it is a No the people of Cork will be giving a firm message that they don't really want evolution or improvement in local government.

A half baked **** up would be par for the course for Cork these days to be honest. It isn't really surprising.

j8wk2feszrnpao

namloc1980 wrote: »

If it is a No the people of Cork will be giving a firm message that they don't really want evolution or improvement in local government.

Untrue.

namloc1980

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Untrue.

That's how it'll be interpreted and rejecting the elected Mayor is rejecting local government reform.

MrDerp

namloc1980 wrote: »

That's how it'll be interpreted and rejecting the elected Mayor is rejecting local government reform.

It’s not a rejection of reform per se, it’s a rejection of a proposed reform.

Ultimately councils rely on central funding mostly, and vote against property taxes which could increase their pot. I don’t see how having a mayor increases the available pot, and may dwindle it somewhat.

For me an executive mayor without local taxes is just concentrating the limited funds and will lead to vanity projects.

People constantly refer to US mayors here but ignore the fact that if we were in US we’d pay federal tax, state tax and local tax. Local tax gets increased to pay for projects, and wealthier areas enjoy better funding for schools etc by paying taxes. A mayor in a poor city has to beg for state and federal funds, and poor cities go bankrupt all the time raising bonds they can’t pay off.

Apples and Oranges

Roger Hassenforder

namloc1980 wrote: »

If this gets anything other than a resounding No I'll be shocked. Most of the discussion about is revolving around cost and nothing else. The Echo have everyone wound up about the salary and I'd say many people will vote no on the basis of cost and that's it. If it is a No the people of Cork will be giving a firm message that they don't really want evolution or improvement in local government.

Its a pity that its descended into a row about a few bob. Be much better if people would engage in a proper debate about local government, and what we want.

The pro keep taking about these mystery "powers" this mayor will have that councils currently dont. This disfunction/lack of autonomy is the issue for me.

Brussels Sprout

I think this could go the way of the Seanad referendum a number of years ago where the prevailing wisdom is that people voted against it, not because they were happy with the status quo but because they wanted a different option altogether on the ballot (in that case Seanad reform). The net result is that 6 years later the status quo prevails with no sign of any reform of the Seanad happening (aside: as a reminder that this is unlikely to happen anytime soon the 7th amendment to the constitution, which proposed opening up the Seanad electorate to non NUI & TCD graduates, passed in 1979 with 92.4% of the vote but still hasn’t been legislated for!)

If we vote No now on this then be prepared for the status quo to prevail for another 30 years.

Roger Hassenforder

Massive turn out in City councili the other night.

https://twitter.com/oliver_moran/status/1128406654972760069?s=19


Disappointing the level of engagement and interest in this. Most people I've spoken to dont give a toss.

pwurple

I definitely give a toss, but I also work, have kids and sick family, have community events and all sorts of other stuff going on in the evenings. It is busy times. From speaking to a councilor that meeting was going to be a power point version of the leaflet, with time for questions. What value is that?

I have read the proposal, I don’t have questions.

I am a firm no. It undermines qualified experienced roles to shoehorn in a populist.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

I'm strongly inclined to vote yes. There is too much power centered around Dublin as it is currently. Having a directly elected person from Cork advocating on behalf of the people from here would surely be a very positive thing.

The role of mayor is already there with all the bells and whistles. All this changes is that it will be directly elected by the people on a regular basis. As opposed to the parties getting to hand pick their own mayor of choice which is the case at present.

The role will be far more accountable to the people of Cork with a Yes Vote.

MrDerp

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

I'm strongly inclined to vote yes. There is too much power centered around Dublin as it is currently. Having a directly elected person from Cork advocating on behalf of the people from here would surely be a very positive thing.

The role of mayor is already there with all the bells and whistles. All this changes is that it will be directly elected by the people on a regular basis. As opposed to the parties getting to hand pick their own mayor of choice which is the case at present.

The role will be far more accountable to the people of Cork with a Yes Vote.

If what you said was true, I’d be inclined to vote yes. However it’s not, the role proposes to give chief executive powers to the mayor.

No issues with a directly elected advocate, however I don’t see how giving that person control over the council budget advances the case for a bigger budget, and it runs the risk of vanity projects being built to garner votes.

Please read the proposed role and powers before you make up your mind.

Roger Hassenforder

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

I'm strongly inclined to vote yes. There is too much power centered around Dublin as it is currently. Having a directly elected person from Cork advocating on behalf of the people from here would surely be a very positive thing.

The role of mayor is already there with all the bells and whistles. All this changes is that it will be directly elected by the people on a regular basis. As opposed to the parties getting to hand pick their own mayor of choice which is the case at present.

The role will be far more accountable to the people of Cork with a Yes Vote.

The executive is already accountable to the people of Cork. All the executive do is implement policies adopted by either Europe, the Oireachtas or local council.

This could actually be less democratic if certain power is vested in one person as opposed to the full Council.

And we'll still have a CE , in line for a big pay rise with the expanded city, but with less powers.

namloc1980

Depressing that the majority of the discussion on this issue has revolved around money. Voting No means the status quo of the annual ceremonial swapping of the chain remains. This is a chance to start to make local government actually matter.

Brussels Sprout

A lot of the arguments against this appear to be one of:

• I’m not happy with the salary that they will be getting
• It is unnecessary – we already have public servants carrying wielding the real power
• I don’t trust my fellow citizens not to elect a muppet

These arguments could be used against having any democratically chosen public offices such as councillors, TDs and the President.

What public offices should be directly elected?

Roger Hassenforder

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

A lot of the arguments against this appear to be one of:

• I’m not happy with the salary that they will be getting
• It is unnecessary – we already have public servants carrying wielding the real power
• I don’t trust my fellow citizens not to elect a muppet

These arguments could be used against having any democratically chosen public offices such as councillors, TDs and the President.

What public offices should be directly elected?

Yes and no, and youre right in some respects, wrong in others

My issue is the reasons/rational being provided simply arent true. Its clear, a lot of the argument in favour is from people who dont understand local government. I dont like being mislead. Others seem ok with it.

Should we have an elected mayor? Yes, if they have actual power. This one wont. Its a sop.
Is it better than nothing? Maybe/maybe not, I'm not sure. Ireland has an unusual political system, this may be ironically result in a less democratic system.

I think councillors should be better paid, but also that local authorities have greater powers. This isnt about money, its about reform. Maybe this is the first step? I dont know.