Fingal councillors play ball and block plebiscite

There were more obstacles put in the path of Dublin having a directly elected mayor than there are in the Grand National, so it was not surprising that the proposition fell.

Fingal County Council acquiesced to being the stalking horse for those who wanted to kill the mayoral proposal and block Dubliners from voting either for, or against, having a directly elected mayor.

Since the publication of the Local Government Bill last October it was clear the proposal was being engineered for failure. And as the months went on it became increasingly apparent that Fingal was expected to wield the axe.

Unexpected condition
Most of the focus of the Bill was on the scrapping of the town councils, the merger of local authorities and an overall reduction in councillor numbers in local authorities across the State. The Bill, as expected, also provided for Dubliners to vote on the mayor proposal at the same time as the local and European elections.

But there was an unexpected condition – the requirement for councillors to approve Dubliners’ right to vote.

The plebiscite could take place only if at least half of the councillors in each of the four Dublin local authorities voted in favour of holding it. This provision in the Bill came as a surprise to councillors both in favour and opposed to the new office. No councillor had sought the right to veto the plebiscite, and the forum tasked by the Minister to formulate proposals for the new office had never considered the notion.

Lord Mayor of Dublin Oisín Quinn, who headed the forum, said there was “absolutely no requirement” to have the intercession of councillors before putting the vote to the people. “I have not heard any explanation from the Government for this quadruple lock. Councillors have never been given a veto in relation to any other aspect of local government reform.”

Mandarins
It was his view that the mandarins in the Department of the Environment had put a hazard in the way of the vote going ahead because they didn't want a transfer of power from the permanent officials in government to the new mayor and councillors.

It could also be that some Ministers didn’t like the idea of a new office that would have had more authority than a Cabinet Minister and be second in terms of power only to the Taoiseach.

This idea was given some weight by Fine Gael councillor Tom O’Leary, a former personal assistant to Minister for Health James Reilly, who told yesterday’s meeting of Fingal council that he was aware the Cabinet “was not inclined to devolve powers down to a directly elected mayor”.

The assessment of John Walsh, a Labour councillor, might be nearest to the mark: "I think this has been deliberately set up to fail, with Fingal council set up as the scapegoat. We should ask ourselves who would be happy if this is rejected and the first person who will be celebrating will be Minister Hogan, because we will have let him off the hook."

Councillors made some attempt to soften the blow of their veto by passing two motions. One supported the right of the citizens of Dublin city to elect a mayor for the city council area only. The other proposed the Minister should hold a plebiscite on the mayoral issue at a later date. Neither is likely to come to anything.

In a statement issued soon after the Fingal vote Hogan said: “I gave the opportunity to the elected members to develop a proposal for a plebiscite. They have not achieved a consensus.”