Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage debate -
Tuesday, 21 Nov 2023

Consideration of the Citizens' Assembly Report on a Directly Elected Mayor of Dublin: Discussion (Resumed)

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

It is a great pleasure to welcome witnesses and members to our fourth meeting on the proposals of the citizens' assembly regarding a directly elected mayor for Dublin. This committee has been asked by the Dáil to consider if a plebiscite is needed and to consider the potential wording of such a plebiscite. We have already held three hearings on the matter, the first being with the current chief executives and cathaoirligh of the Dublin local authorities. The second meeting dealt with some of the agencies that are touched on in the report, although not all of them, and the third dealt with the public participation networks or the community representative structure in the city and the chambers of commerce. Deputy Higgins suggest that we invite the chair of the citizens' assembly, Mr. Jim Gavin, to be with us today. He is very welcome.

Everybody here is very appreciative of the work he did as chair and we look forward to getting into the detail of the report. I was referencing the citizens' assembly rather than the work Jim did with the Dublin football team, but that is taken as read. From the Dublin Citizens' Assembly, we are joined by Mr. Jim Gavin, the chair, Mr. Art O'Leary, secretary, and Ms Nicole O'Connor, a member. We are also joined by Dr. Bríd Quinn and Professor Deiric Ó Broin of the expert advisory panel. Members have been circulated with the relevant papers.

Before I begin, I want to read a note on privilege. I remind Members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the place where the Parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, to participate in public meetings. Witnesses attending in the committee room are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their contribution. This means they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at the meeting. Members and witnesses are expected not to abuse the privilege they enjoy and it is my duty, as Chair, to ensure this. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks and it is imperative that they comply with such a direction. Members and witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or any official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Opening statements have been submitted to the committee and will be published on the committee's web page after the meeting. I now invite Mr. Jim Gavin to make his opening statement.

Mr. Jim Gavin

Míle buíochas. I thank the Chairman for his kind invitation to attend this important meeting of the committee. It is a great privilege for me to be here to represent the 80 members of the Dublin Citizens’ Assembly. Dublin, Baile Átha Cliath, is a uniquely special place, a county and city full of beauty and charm, character and characters, rich in culture and history, sport and music, and a place for business and leisure, work and pleasure. Above all, Dublin is its people in all their diversity. Young and old, native and newly arrived, northsider and southsider, farmer and financier, teacher and tech worker, rural and urban. Dublin is bustling and thriving, gritty and glamorous, historical and modern, a place that its diverse citizens and residents are proud to call home, and a source of endless enchantment.

Does Dublin have world-class local government structures that support its continuous transformation and ensure it ranks in the premier league of capital cities and counties internationally? Does it have an elected leader of its own, someone to serve and stand tall for the city and county, to champion Dublin on the national and international stage? Does it have a person with the mandate, power and means to drive reform, co-ordinate strategy, implement policy, deliver services and ensure Dublin’s future is safeguarded? Does it have someone who is accountable to all of its citizens and who is in touch with the people and communities that are Dublin’s heartbeat?

Like all cities and counties of its size, Dublin faces major challenges. These include housing, homelessness, transportation, infrastructure, sustainability and a lot more besides. These challenges affect the daily lives of all who call themselves Dubliners. When I was approached to become chair of the Dublin Citizens’ Assembly, I accepted without hesitation. I can declare with absolute certainty that I have a vested interest. I am a proud and passionate Dubliner. I want Dublin to take its place among the great cities of the world, to be renowned for its quality of life, sustainable environment, cultural diversity and economic vibrancy. The Dublin Citizens’ Assembly has been an extraordinary exercise in deliberative democracy. It has placed the people of Dublin at the heart of creating a vision for how the city and county should be managed and governed to make it an even better place to live, work, raise a family, visit and enjoy. As I began this journey with the other members of the assembly in the historic grandeur of Dublin Castle, I did not fully appreciate just how momentous an initiative this would turn out to be. It has truly been a once-in-a- lifetime experience.

The assembly members do not pretend or claim to have found all the answers, but we have carefully considered the issues that affect the governance of our city and county today. We debated long and hard about the reform of local government that Dublin needs in the coming years and decades. The Dublin Citizens’ Assembly response to the mandate from the Houses of the Oireachtas is based on factual information and evidence from a wide range of experts, academics and practitioners, including local government specialists, political scientists, international mayors, serving and former politicians and the mayors and CEOs of the four Dublin local authorities. The assembly members pored over this evidence during many months of discussion, reflection and questioning and considered many complex issues from all perspectives. The result of this deliberation is a strong recommendation to create a powerful new mayor of Dublin as a substantial figure with wide-ranging political powers to lead, deliver, represent and be accountable for our capital city.

The assembly also voted to create a new vision for local government structures in Dublin that befits a modern, dynamic and diverse European and global capital. The members have spoken loudly and clearly about the need for reform, and their recommendations on a series of new structures to support the new directly elected mayor will represent a major change in how our city is run and will transform the shape and direction of local government in the city and county for generations to come. Responsibility for housing, homelessness, community healthcare, transport, the environment and emergency services were among the 15 areas recommended to be devolved immediately to the new mayor. Six other areas, including policing, water, and education, were recommended to be devolved after five to ten years. The assembly also recommended a series of new local government structures to support and sit alongside the new directly elected mayor.

We have delivered our report to the Oireachtas on time and on schedule. Our recommendations demand extensive legislative and administrative change and brave political leadership. They require significant financial resourcing and an ambitious and focused approach to implementation. As we concluded the work of the Dublin Citizens’ Assembly, we learned that Ireland sat, disappointingly, at or near the bottom of the EU local autonomy index. We need to be ambitious about changing this situation. As recently as October 2023, a Council of Europe report stated that although Ireland is a solid democracy, "it remains one of most centralised countries in Europe" and that "local self-governance in Dublin City is weak relative to the situation in other municipal authorities and capital cities in Europe". While acknowledging that reforms are on the way, such as the first directly elected mayor in Limerick, the report recommended that Irish authorities, in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity, transfer additional functions to local authorities, continue with reforms that increase elected members’ influence over executive matters in all local authorities, and enhance local democratic control over the administrative structures of local government. This is not going to happen easily. It is not going to happen without determination and commitment across the political system. I have seen what can be achieved in less than six months by a group of dedicated, committed members of the public who are willing to stick the course, debate, listen, tease out the issues and come up with workable solutions. I believe a directly elected mayor, along the lines recommended by this citizens’ assembly, will provide that leadership, enhancing political accountability and democratic engagement.

Finally, some closing words for the members of the Oireachtas and the Government. It is said a society grows great when people plant trees in whose shade they shall never sit. The Dublin Citizens’ Assembly has given our elected representatives clear direction and a vision for the future. Leadership is all about the capacity to turn vision into reality. We look forward to brave political decisions that will devolve power, embrace the principle of subsidiarity, empower local government, and provide for a directly elected mayor for Dublin.

In the words of the great Brian Mullins, an iconic Dubliner, who sadly passed away on the day of one of the meetings, "Stand your ground, don't give in and keep going". The committee's response to this report of the Dublin citizens' assembly will help to determine the future of this wonderful and special place we call home, Baile Átha Cliath, Dublin. We wish the committee well in its deliberations.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I also have an opening statement supplied by Ms O'Connor, a member of the citizens' assembly.

Ms Noelle O'Connor

When I first got the letter through my door about the citizens' assembly, I had no idea what a citizens’ assembly even was. To be honest, before the first meeting I still was not 100% sure what awaited me. It is an experience I take great pride in having been a part of. It was an opportunity to meet 66 other randomly selected citizens from diverse backgrounds and different walks of life, alongside 12 councillors, to discuss something that would impact Dublin for years to come.

We saw the assembly as an opportunity to have a say in what Irish politics could look like, namely more localised decision making which we felt could only be beneficial. Over the course of six months, we discussed the type of directly-elected mayor most appropriate for Dublin and the local government structures needed to support this new role. At the end of the six-month process, we recommended that responsibility for 15 specific areas, to include housing, homelessness, community healthcare, transport and the environment, should be devolved immediately to the new mayor. It was recommended that six other areas, including policing, water and education, be devolved over time.

As part of the process, we also recommend that a plebiscite take place regarding a directly-elected mayor for Dublin. We felt that much like we had been given the opportunity to debate the pros and cons of a directly-elected mayor and what devolved powers to the mayor's office may look like, other Dublin citizens should also have their say.

In conclusion, collaborating with an assembly of 79 other individuals, we seized the opportunity to shape the future of Dublin's political landscape through localised decision making. Our six-month dialogue came together in a set of recommendations, advocating for a directly-elected mayor with specific devolved responsibilities. We not only discussed the details, but also championed the democratic process by recommending a plebiscite, ensuring that the voice of every Dublin citizen could be heard in shaping the city's governance.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I thank Ms O'Connor.

Senator Mary Fitzpatrick

I thank the witnesses not just for coming here today, but for all of the work they have done on the citizens' assembly. I am a big fan of the idea of a directly-elected mayor and strong local government. Our local government is far too weak and we need to strengthen it. I was not at all surprised to see that as part of its recommendations the citizens' assembly did not deal solely with the role of the directly elected mayor but also the reforms that are needed at a local government level.

Our task is to come up with the wording for a referendum. If we are to put forward wording, we would like it to succeed. We would like the concept to succeed. I would like to see a strong political role for the city. When I say that, I do not want to take away from the almost 50 Deputies that represent Dublin or the hundred or more councillors. Everybody who puts themselves forward for any political role does so with really good intentions.

For the role to succeed, I would like to hear whether the witnesses would agree that we need to have a twofold referendum. We need to have a referendum on the reform of local government in Dublin and the role of a directly elected mayor. I do not think we would succeed if we did not have one without the other. If we ask the people to give us a vote on one without giving them a vote on the other, that is not much of an offering. That is only my own opinion. If any of the witnesses has a view on that, I would be interested in hearing it.

Ms Noelle O'Connor

In the assembly, when we talked about a plebiscite a lot of people discussed the powers we wanted to be devolved. We wanted people to have a say in that. A lot of people are not aware of what local government does or that representatives work part-time. We felt that by holding a plebiscite, we would give people the opportunity to be educated on that and see exactly what they vote for every couple of years.

Mr. Jim Gavin

It was an eye-opener for the 67 citizens of the assembly. There were 80 members, 12 of whom were councillors. They understood the political system and how local government works. I was the 68th member, the independent chair. We were all taken by the great work that councils do. We were surprised and aghast at how centralised local government is in Ireland. I understand there is a legacy to that and the reasons behind it, but we were all surprised by the lack of autonomy for councillors and that chief executives, who are not elected representatives and do not have a mandate, hold the executive power. That is something we all found surprising.

To go back to our terms of reference, we were not asked whether it was a good or bad idea, but it was obvious to all of us that we need a directly-elected mayor. We were asked what type of governance should sit around the directly-elected mayor and what type of powers the mayor should have. We were very explicit about what those should be.

The technical realities of how that is put together was not a matter for the assembly. It is the job of the Oireachtas, Government and professional civil servants to bring that together. Our job is to make recommendations regarding what powers the mayor should have. We were not asked whether there should be a plebiscite, but the members, as Ms O'Connor alluded to, felt that because of their experience and in order for the process to succeed citizens would need to have a vote. That is, however, a matter for the committee and Government to determine.

Mr. Art O'Leary

On that point, that crystallises the two issues we are asked to examine. First, we were asked what kind of mayor we wanted. We interpreted that as determining what kind of powers the mayor should have. That is how we approached it. We looked at the full range of power that mayors have in Ireland and internationally. When we decided on the breadth and depth of the role, we then examined what kind of structures were needed to underpin this particular role in order to support it and ensure that the person could deliver on their mandate. That is what is set out in the report.

The report sets out the powers we think a mayor should have and what the administrative structures might look like underneath that. We had a short few months to deal with this and none of us was an expert on the first day. Those of us in local government knew a lot more about it. The technical detail of how this might be implemented will remain with the Legislature in the Oireachtas and the expertise in the Custom House in terms of how it might be rolled out. The mandate was to define the breadth of the powers and talk about what we needed in order to be able to deliver it.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I thank all of the team and the participants in the assembly. I want to acknowledge the enormous amount of work people did because it is an intense process. It is very helpful to us.

I am a very strong supporter of a directly-elected mayor and, in fact, Cabinet-style accountable government at local authority level. Like the assembly members, I think a plebiscite is a useful way to generate public awareness of that prior to the votes. I welcome those parts of the report.

However, for some of us there is a terrible sense of déjà vu. I was on the mayoral forum that people will remember, under Phil Hogan, where the four local Dublin local authorities were asked to consider whether we should have a plebiscite. In south Dublin we voted in favour of the holding of a plebiscite in 2014. However, because of a lack of clarity on what we were voting on for, people in Fingal took a different decision and the plebiscite never happened.

Likewise, when the plebiscites in Cork, Waterford and Limerick took place, one of the great challenges for people in favour of a yes vote in those counties was that nobody knew what they were voting on. In fact, while Limerick got it over the line it was a hair's breadth of a margin. Cork and Waterford did not get it over the line. We are almost four years on from the votes and we still do not have full visibility on what the fully directly elected mayor will do because the legislation has not been passed and enacted. The vote for that mayor is only six months away.

If there is to be a plebiscite next year, and if the plebiscite is for a directly elected mayor, how important is it for the Government to clarify in clear terms, in advance of any plebiscite, what it is people are voting on, separate from what the powers are?

This would be separate to the question of powers, as none of us will decide those. Rather, they will be decided by the Government. I am looking for the witnesses to advise us. We can recommend whether to hold a plebiscite and its wording, but we can also make recommendations to the Government to ensure that those of us who want to see this get across the line achieve that. If the witnesses have other observations from their considerations on what went right and wrong in Limerick, Waterford and Cork, I would be interested in hearing them. We will get one shot at this in Dublin. If we have the plebiscite and it falls, it will be a decade or more before we return to this. I am interested in whatever advice the witnesses would give us to give the Government about the best way to proceed in advance of the vote.

Mr. Jim Gavin

We have experts from our expert advisory group with us – Professor Ó Broin and Dr. Quinn – and I might use their expertise to answer the Deputy’s question.

Professor Deiric Ó Broin

I understood the Deputy’s question to be about how detailed the referendum question should be.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

More specifically, how important is it that the Government be clear in advance of the plebiscite about the actual powers that are to be devolved to the office?

Professor Deiric Ó Broin

On a practical political basis, it is important that the Government be as clear as it can. The question would need to be clear. I have a mental image of a very long question. There needs to be a political balance, but there are people who are probably better placed to judge that.

Mr. Art O'Leary

I am here as a former secretary of the citizens’ assembly, but I also wear another hat these days as chief executive-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

We know. We look forward to seeing Mr. O’Leary in a few weeks’ time.

Mr. Art O'Leary

I came in with a mask today. The Electoral Commission has a role in encouraging turnout enhancement and public engagement in all electoral matters. The experience from the plebiscites in Cork and Waterford showed that people did not have enough information before they voted.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I will ask another question in the short time I have. A part of the problem is that a Government White Paper was produced prior to the plebiscites in Limerick, Waterford and Galway, but it was only aspirational. Would it be helpful for the Government to publish the general scheme of the Bill? How far do we need the Government to go prior to the vote for there to be clarity?

Mr. Art O'Leary

“The most information the Government can possibly give” is the answer. Irish people are used to this. During the referendum on repealing the eighth amendment, there was legislation that travelled with the referendum Bill so that people were fully informed and had access to the information. It is the not knowing that causes-----

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Would a general scheme, if not the full Bill, be helpful?

Mr. Art O'Leary

Correct. There should be as much detail as possible. That would not only be the recommendations, but also the powers, structures and supports that would be required and also possibly the cost. This is the minimum that should travel with any plebiscite, I would have thought. Our experience is that, if people do not know or understand or are not sure, they tend to vote no.

Deputy Emer Higgins

I thank the witnesses for attending and for the amount of time, energy and weekends they have put into this. Their expertise, everything they have learned and everything they have given to this process will help shape Dublin’s future. There are not many people who can say that, so well done.

Like Ms O’Connor, a close friend of mine was one of the 67. I knew many of the councillors involved. When I encounter people who have been involved in the citizens’ assembly, the passion they exude for it and, in particular, Dublin city is incredible.

As a member of this committee, I regret that we have not had the witnesses appear before us previously. This discussion would have set the tone for our meetings on the matter. To date, we have been operating in a vacuum. We have met the NTA, local authority chief executives and chambers of commerce, we have asked them loads of questions and they have all said that they did not know the answers because they had not been involved in the report. We now have before us the people who were involved in the report. I thank them for their attendance. We have with us the powerhouses of Mr. Gavin and Mr. O’Leary.

The question of power is one that has arisen time and again. The assembly has recommended a wide menu of mayoral powers for the short term as well as for the longer term. It is not the witnesses’ role to put together how those powers will function in practice, but I would like a sense of the vision and thinking behind these recommendations, particularly as they affect transport, education, planning and healthcare. In terms of transport, are we discussing the NTA or traffic management? In terms of education, are we discussing third level institutions, primary and secondary schools or childcare? In terms of planning, will the local authorities’ current planning departments be centralised into a new overall Dublin planning department that would work more collaboratively with the OPR?

The recommendations on councillors’ pay are great. Councillors from other jurisdictions are asking what the case will be outside Dublin. That is not a question for the witnesses, but I just wanted to put it out there.

What next would the witnesses like to see from us? The feedback I have heard from the advisory panel has been incredible. Mr. Gavin captured it when he spoke about facts, expertise and international experience. How can the Government continue to leverage that knowledge? Can the advisory panel continue to exist, even in a different format, and shape the work of this committee and of the Minister in order to get the right question to the people of Dublin and to make this happen?

I am sorry for taking so much time.

Mr. Jim Gavin

I will answer first, if that is okay. I thank the Deputy for her question.

As to what we would like to see next, we are looking for the committee to endorse the recommendations of the citizens’ assembly. That is what we want to happen.

I will give the committee my experience of dealing with the expert advisory group. I could not but recommend that the group use its experience to assist the committee, the Government or the civil servants in the Custom House. It was influential in upskilling us. All of our decisions were made autonomously by the members of the assembly, but the group’s advice was welcome in our discussions.

Regarding councillors’ pay, we learned a great deal about councillors and the role they fulfilled. It is a critical role for local communities, which is why the endorsement came from the floor. We were aghast that councillors were part time. We all thought they were full time, so that was a surprise. That is why we have taken this path. The recommendation was an endorsement by the assembly’s members of the importance of councillors to local government’s success.

Do Professor Ó Broin and Dr. Quinn wish to contribute on some of these points?

Professor Deiric Ó Broin

It strikes me that the role of the implementation committee in Limerick might be a model of providing ongoing support. That model might not be directly applicable to Dublin, but it could be amended. I am conscious that I am sitting beside someone from UL, so I should probably let her say something.

Dr. Bríd Quinn

As a proud Limerick woman, I was going to recommend that model. On the lessons learned, a large amount of work was done by the implementation advisory group, IAG, and the document produced is comprehensive. As the draft legislation has meandered its way towards completion, if I dare say that, many changes have occurred. Some of those are getting good publicity in Limerick and some are disappointing people.

Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? I have heard the Minister speak at a number of gatherings and he keeps coming back to the mandate, the means and the mechanism. People will have to work on all three together. The mandate is the electoral bit and resources are the means. From the international literature, Council of Europe reviews and so on, resourcing is a significant and serious element. The real question for Dublin is what mechanisms will be put in place, how will the four existing local authorities fit into those, etc.

We learned from the Limerick example that much of the criticism of the local government system criticised the lack of joined-up government. This is true of more than just Ireland. Some of the innovations in the Limerick model, for example, the consultation process with the national level, the advisory implementation group and the 2040 delivery board, bring together different aspects of local government.

If a mayoral model is to succeed in Limerick or Dublin, it must bring together the different actors in local government and State agencies and have them working together. Otherwise, it is doomed to a lack of success.

Mr. Art O'Leary

I will very briefly answer the question about the powers. The powers came from an examination of the challenges facing the people of Dublin such as transport, traffic, housing and homelessness, justice issues for policing and so on. That is where they came from. We did not get into the granular detail. We heard from transport specialists, people like Professor Brian Caulfield in Trinity, who spoke about examples from other cities. The granular detail the Deputy is looking for here as to how this is going to be implemented is not available in this report. It is probably for the next phase, the implementation phase. However, the powers stemmed from the challenges ordinary Dublin people encounter in moving around and living in the city and county. That was the starting point.

Professor Deiric Ó Broin

The Deputy mentioned centralising planning. It is worth noting that there is already a metropolitan area spatial plan for the four Dublin areas, which fits in under the Eastern and Midland Regional Assembly plan. Planners tend to talk about planning hierarchies and appropriate levels. I do not think there is any real issue regarding centralising planning. It is more about agreeing protocols about what works over the city and county area.

Mr. Jim Gavin

I am not avoiding the Deputy's question on transport. One of the powers the assembly recommend was a power for the mayor to convene. Henry Kissinger asked who he was to speak to when he wanted to speak to Europe. Who do you speak to when you want to speak to Dublin? There is nobody. It is about being able to speak to the mayor, let us say Mayor Higgins, who can convene all the stakeholders and players in the transport area both national, such as the NTA, which was before the committee last week, and local. The mayor would have the power to co-ordinate strategy.

Senator Victor Boyhan

I welcome Mr. Gavin, Mr. O'Leary and the team. They have done a lot of work and I thank them. The very professional way they laid out their report helps to communicate the message and to ensure it is not lost on people. We live in a very visual age and it is all about key messaging. People have to understand things pretty quickly.

I have a few things to say. I am in favour of any devolution of further powers and functions to local authorities. It makes sense. We have the most centralised government in Europe, as we know. It continues to be that way. We continue to remove our elected city and county councillors from State agencies and State bodies, which is very frustrating for many councillors. Like most people in this room, I have been a councillor and I have travelled that journey and seen the powers continuously eroded. I am a strong advocate for local government and a particularly strong advocate for our city and county councillors of all parties and none.

I will touch on three of the assembly's key recommendations. I will start with the last one first, recommendation 18, which is about the plebiscite. I have spoken to most of the councillors who were there. I would have liked to have seen more councillors on the assembly and I made a case for that in the Seanad, although that was rejected. However, those I did talk to were clearly exceptionally influential both in the formal deliberations of the assembly and in the tea breaks and so on. They had many a laugh and many a story about how they used their power of influence. I have no doubt that they had a great influence in this assembly. There were very few of them but they were very influential and let us not underestimate that. I have heard from the councillors, who comprised only a fraction of the total membership of the assembly, and from other members of the assembly because you come across these people. It is great to see Ms O'Connor here. I met a number of people on the assembly who had never spoken about local government who now attend public gatherings and meetings. That is empowering in itself and I am particularly chuffed at that. I hope some of them will consider running in our next local elections because they have had experience and have got a taste and feel for it. They have really bought into it. Are we clear that there was a very strong commitment in the conversation, forgetting about the percentages and the votes, to have a plebiscite first? Is that Mr. Gavin's understanding?

Mr. Jim Gavin

First, I compliment the councillors who took part in the assembly. There were 12 of them. It was not an assembly of councillors but a citizens' assembly. Mr. O'Leary will go into the process of how the assembly members were selected. However, it was important to have the councillors. They are the soldiers on the ground and understand the local issues. They were very balanced in the discussions. At no time did I feel they wanted to directly influence matters one way or the other. They just shared their own experience.

The question of the plebiscite went to a ballot. You can see in the report-----

Senator Victor Boyhan

I have seen that.

Mr. Jim Gavin

It was a fair ballot. Members' experience of the assembly probably influenced their decision. As I have said, Ms O'Connor and I would have had a lack of knowledge about local authority issues before. As Ms O'Connor said in her opening statement, the members felt that if this was going to really work, a plebiscite should go ahead.

Senator Victor Boyhan

I am conscious of time. Recommendation 10 acknowledges the existence of the four local authorities and says that they should be retained. This is one of the big issues. It should be remembered that councillors are on the ground right across local government. They want to feel valued and respected, to be appropriately remunerated and to be empowered to represent their communities. They are elected. I am constantly taken aback by questions of legitimacy and so on. As it stands, our councillors have legitimacy by reason of their electoral mandate. The powers, the functions and finance are of concern to councillors. I want to flag that because, at the end of the day, they will ultimately be advocates either for or against the assembly's recommendations. They are strong and influential. There is work to be done with regard to the existing city and county councillors, many of whom I hope will be back after the upcoming elections. Mr. Gavin might take that on board. I do not really want a response. I just want to flag it as an issue. There is more work to be done on current city and county councillors for Dublin.

I will wrap up with one more issue, the issue of remuneration. One of the things that really struck me, and which members will have heard about from their local councillors, is the issue of their remuneration and how Mr. Gavin and the members of the assembly were shocked by the remuneration and support councillors are given to do their job. The assembly has done a good job but there is quite a lot of work to be done with sitting city and county councillors if they are to be champions and advocates for a mayor for Dublin.

Mr. Jim Gavin

I would like to respond to the Senator. I might ask Professor Ó Broin or Dr. Quinn to come in after me. On the four local authorities, we got a briefing from Andy Burnham from Manchester. If you are familiar with the greater Manchester area, you will know it consists of 11 councils. We have therefore seen a similar model work. A directly elected mayor sits on top of the 11 councils in Manchester. Would Professor Ó Broin or Dr. Quinn like to jump in on any other issues regarding the model or the concerns regarding the four local authorities?

Professor Deiric Ó Broin

The councils remain as key parts of the infrastructure and will have a chair. The report recommends that the directly elected mayor would assume a number of the roles of the existing chairs but that each local authority would still have a cathaoirleach, which is critical in maintaining their separate identity. I do not want to cut across Ms O'Connor but I believe the assembly clearly recognised that there are roles and functions that need to be addressed at a city and county-wide level. That is where the role of the directly elected mayor, alongside a directly elected assembly, is really important.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I am conscious of time. The five minutes belong to individual members, who can use as much themselves and leave as little to the witnesses as they wish. The witnesses may want to roll any further answers into their contributions with other members. I will move onto Deputy Steven Matthews.

Deputy Steven Matthews

I join others in thanking the citizens' assembly. I am sure members of it are watching online today to see how the Oireachtas is going to dissect and look through the very fine recommendations the assembly made. I also acknowledge Deputy McAuliffe, who has chaired all of these sessions. As a former Lord Mayor of Dublin, he was the right choice for that.

I am the only representative from outside the Pale discussing the question of the Dublin mayor. I think the fact that I live in Bray means I am close enough to take a seat here. I am a firm supporter of a directly elected mayor. I am just not exactly sure what powers this mayor should have. That is the value of having this discussion and the work that assembly did as well. Ms O'Connor raised the point about many people being unsure of what a local authority actually does. It is one of the weaknesses in our local authority system that we do not produce enough information on a monthly or a six-monthly basis for general public consumption on the good work that local authorities do around the country. People often only engage with their local authority when they have a problem. They are not aware of the good stuff that goes on.

I am a firm supporter of decision making at the lowest effective level. I completely agree with the recommendations made on the issues of homelessness and housing. A directly elected mayor should have responsibility for those. Transport and the environment are two other areas, because the local authorities work on these areas as well. I am not sure the emergency services and community healthcare could immediately be taken under the aegis of a directly elected mayor. I will come to the reasoning on that in a moment.

The assembly gave scope to bring policing, water and education in over a five- to ten-year period. The committee recently engaged with the question of the Limerick mayor. We have just finished the Committee Stage debate on the Limerick mayor Bill. One of the discussions we had was on the extent to which we empower the mayor. There has to be a certain amount of ability to raise funding. They have to have the resources, and not just the decision-making power. Decision-making power without the ability to back it up with funding or be able to source one's own funding very much limits a mayor. That idea was countered with the need to get it right initially without rushing in and giving the mayor so many powers that it would almost set them up to fail. Those are the main challenges that I see in this process.

I will return to the question on the recommendation to hold a plebiscite. From my understanding, it evolved in the later stages of the assembly. How did that question come about or how did it evolve? The remit was to discuss the type of mayor and the powers they might have but not necessarily the plebiscite question.

Mr. Jim Gavin

I know the Deputy is from Wicklow. This is not Dublin going against Wicklow town, or Limerick, Cork or Waterford, or Donegal town or Belfast or anywhere else in between. This is about Dublin competing against Copenhagen, Madrid, Paris, you name it. That is what we are trying to do here.

In terms of the services, Ms O'Connor and I learned that local authorities provide more than 1,000 services. That is phenomenal work that we just did not realise went on.

Regarding the recommendations, I would compare it to us providing the parts of an aircraft - the wings, fuselage, horizontal stabiliser, and the pilot and copilot in the figures of the mayor and deputy mayor. It is up to the Government and the Civil Service to put it all together and get it flying. I cannot give any finer detail on that. I will hand over to Mr. O'Leary to talk about the plebiscite.

Mr. Art O'Leary

This was a very democratic process. The plebiscite idea emerged from table discussions. We did not put it on the table. The citizens themselves in the room put it on the table as well. Anecdotally, my understanding of it is that the citizens were on a journey. We surveyed them all the time and asked them lots of questions. On the first day we asked everybody in the room if they know the name of the mayor of their local authority and 70% of them did not. On the final day they were designing complex local government structures with a confidence and a flair that would make your heart sing, so they were all on a learning journey. This was one of the issues which emerged when they were trying to figure out what they would recommend. The only reason I have described the journey is that they wanted the people of Dublin to have the same understanding of what was possible and the vision for Dublin that they had for local government. That is where it emerged from. If the Government decides to move straight to legislation, I am sure the members of the assembly will understand that because the key questions relate to the powers and the structures. The idea of the plebiscite emerged, but it was not a driving force from the word go. If the committee agrees with the principle of a directly elected mayor, I suspect that the members of the assembly will not be too upset at that.

Deputy Steven Matthews

As a committee, we are tasked with considering the recommendations, which we have tried to do by engaging with various stakeholders, and with assessing if a plebiscite is required. I want to put a question to Ms O'Connor as a member of the assembly. What if we were to come back and say we support local democracy, empowering the mayor and giving people the option to vote for a directly elected mayor but we feel we could legislate for it, rather than organising a plebiscite? Going to a plebiscite would be a great opportunity to have a real information session for the public, along the lines of what the members of the assembly were able to avail of. The average general member of the public would not have time to do this. I can see pros and cons of both but what would the response of members of the assembly be? Would they feel that they had not been listened to or would they just accept it?

Ms Nicole O'Connor

I can only speak for myself and the conversations I had over the course of the assembly. The question of whether we would discuss a plebiscite was raised on the first day and grew legs from there. It seemed to constantly come up in conversations afterwards. Personally, I would not think that the committee had not listened to us on the question of a plebiscite. I think it would be the right thing to do and it would be a great opportunity to educate people. Many people's reasoning for the plebiscite was that they did not want to be the only people to have a say and also we did not want this to be a failure. We wanted people to want to go out and vote for a directly elected mayor. Without that push to educate themselves on what was going on, we were afraid it would ultimately be a failure and people would not get out and vote.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Thanks to everyone for all the work they have done on this. I have been a strong supporter of a directly elected mayor for Dublin. When the consultation was happening a number of years ago I was a councillor on Fingal County Council. I was one of the few councillors who voted for a plebiscite so that people could have a say in this. I was the only councillor in the Chamber who spoke in favour of a plebiscite. I am still in favour of the idea. It would be strange to have a situation where we start off having a democratically elected mayor for Dublin, strengthening local democracy but all that being done without actually asking people if they want it and starting off by giving it that kind of democratic legitimacy. Given the plebiscite results we have had in other cities, we cannot take it for granted that people want it.

On the point that Deputy Ó Broin brought up, for a plebiscite to succeed there needs to a lot of information. Ideally a general scheme of a Bill or more than that would be very useful so that people would know what they were voting on. That would mean we would not get to a plebiscite for a significant amount of time because of the work that would have to be done. In order to get this right, is it worth having a fairly fully formed proposal that goes to people? Is it worth waiting a year or more, which is how long it could take to get a general scheme prepared? It would be good to get a few different views on this.

Mr. Jim Gavin

I would be hesitant to have any further delay. We submitted the report last December and here we are 12 months later. The report requested that the committee consider it within six months. That has already been missed. I think the timeline is 30 December. The Oireachtas will probably be taking a recess fairly soon so the committee has a big challenge to get its report in on time to the Government. If there is to be a plebiscite, it will be with the elections in June. In the report I alluded to the fact that the members of the assembly are concerned that this report will be put on the shelf to gather dust, as happened in 2014, 2008 and 2000 and it will be another missed opportunity. There is momentum now. The members of the committee are giving their time to this. As elected representatives, I understand they are extremely busy and we appreciate the time given to us today. We would be very hesitant to delay this any more. If we can put a report together in six months there is no reason the experts in the Custom House cannot put it together in that timeframe as well and get it out for next June. I will open it up to the expert advisory group or anybody else who wants to contribute.

Mr. Art O'Leary

In an effort to be helpful, perhaps, and far be it from me to disagree with my glorious chairman, Deputy Ó Broin made a point earlier about the general scheme and what the powers are, what this means, what the structures are and what might they look like. If we are building a system of local government to last for the next 100 years, an investment of some time is probably worth it. I understand the urgency of the question which the chairman has spoken about. I have been a civil servant for a long time. I understand that big wheels occasionally move slowly, but they tend to eventually get there to do the right thing. A period of reflection and contemplation is very important. As the chairman said, this report is nearly a year old now. Some of that reflection and contemplation should already have happened. It would be great if everything was sorted for the local elections for next year, but I suspect that will not be the case. That is not a reason to put it away for another five years, so the work must go on.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

The witnesses both make very compelling cases. Would anyone else like to come in on that? I do not think any of us necessarily have the confidence that we are going to get a general scheme in the next few months, which would be delivered in time for June. Would a plebiscite in June be preferable or should we wait for a more detailed one a year later?

Ms Nicole O'Connor

In a lot of the discussions across the assembly, we felt that if there was going to be a plebiscite one, it should take place in the next elections. We were fearful that if it did not, and if it was ironed out, done perfectly and eventually did go out, we would not get the numbers to come out and vote. That was a big concern across the assembly.

Mr. Jim Gavin

Just to give context to Ms O'Connor's statement, that was in October 2022. At that time, we were looking at 2024, which was a year and a half away, and we thought that the Oireachtas would get its stuff together and get moving on it. The context was that we assumed there was 18 months to go to June 2024. There is not.

Mr. Art O'Leary

On that point, you do not have to run a plebiscite at the same time as the local elections. We have not had an election in this country since 2020. In the next 23 months, we will have every type of electoral event that it is possible to have. We could have up to a dozen electoral events in the next 23 months. That could be the time to do it. We could take some time to develop the general scheme and go with one of the other electoral events, because it is just a plebiscite for the people of Dublin, if it was felt that we needed the time to do this properly. As Deputy Ó Broin said, we will get one shot at this. It is very important that we get it right.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I want to come in now and continue the discussion. The majority of people in the room are strong supporters of the concept of the directly elected mayor. The question is what is the best chance of making it happen. I think the question a number of members have put to the witnesses essentially is whether we risk putting it to a plebiscite, given that it could fail and effectively we would have no local government reform for what I think would be at least ten years. A government would be slow to return to it. Do we ignore that recommendation on a plebiscite and say to the Government that most parties in the Dáil have this in their manifesto, the Members were all elected and there is a mandate already there, so it should be legislated for? That is the question. What a number of members are saying to the witnesses is that they are the chief champions of this project, and asking what road they would recommend that the committee recommends. Mr. Gavin has effectively said that he wants us to progress and legislate. Would that be fair?

Mr. Jim Gavin

Yes. As the independent chair of the assembly, I need to advocate for what members have said, and they have made these 18 recommendations. That is what I can speak to. It is in the programme of Government that Dublin will have a directly elected mayor. No reference is made to a plebiscite, so there is an option to crack on. The general feeling from the assembly members was that we should crack on. There has been enough talk about this. However, I do get the point about the risk of it failing, particularly on the narrative that can be spun around it. Getting the general scheme right is really important. There is a balance to be struck. The members understand the political landscape more than I ever will.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

How does Ms O'Connor feel about the committee recommending that the Government should just legislate for it?

Ms Nicole O'Connor

To be fair, not everybody in the assembly felt that it should go to a plebiscite; it was just a recommendation we made. Many of us felt like we just wanted this to progress. We knew, putting our recommendations forward, that not everything may be met. I would prefer not to have a plebiscite and know that we will be coming out with an end product that hopefully will be successful.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Mr. O'Leary has a lot of experience of how long things take.

Mr. Art O'Leary

Yes.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Sometimes pushing into the next stage delays things.

Mr. Art O'Leary

We were always very clear with the citizens, in relation to the recommendations, that the Government had to take many factors into account when it decided which recommendations to accept and which just simply were not possible. If the committee is saying that of the 18 recommendations, 18 is the one it has a difficulty with but the other 17 are fine, then I suspect the citizens would say that is a job well done.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

It is not that we do not want it to go to the people or that we do not want people to have an engagement. I think it is a recognition that this subject is an incredibly technical one. A bit like the witnesses have said, when you walk in on day one, it is very unlikely that any members of the general public are going to invest the time, energy or effort to read a general scheme, even if it is published. There is an argument to be had for legislating for it and having it dealt with in the Oireachtas, and parsed, discussed and debated. To be very honest, even with these public hearings, there is not an organised campaign group out there in favour of a directly elected mayor that has a very strong mandate across thousands of people in the city. We have not had many witnesses which we can structurally engage with. Many agencies are not organised on a Dublin basis. The fear would be that without that civic society structure, it may become a debate that will be dominated by other issues.

I have a second question. I am conscious that I have kept everyone else to time, so I have to keep myself in check also. I will throw some of the red herrings that may come up at the witnesses. I was disappointed that the report left some things in up the air, particularly around powers. For example, the assembly has recommended that education and transport would come under the remit of the directly elected mayor. What does that mean? Is the assembly proposing that teachers would be directly responsible to the office of a directly elected mayor? Would they be paid by the local authority? Would their reporting structure and salaries be done like that?

The NTA asked us a very good question. The assembly has suggested that transport should come under the remit of the mayor. Would the NTA second all of its staff dealing with Dublin projects to a directly elected mayor, and would they then be paid for by the office of the directly elected mayor within that structure?

On the final point, I will lean on Mr. Gavin's experience with the aviation authority. I imagine that if we gave, for example, aviation policy control for Dublin Airport to a directly elected mayor, that would have a very significant impact on the national policy framework. I am not asking the witnesses to speak specifically to that, but it is an example of how we almost have to be careful. We are only short of declaring independence in some of these things. The danger with that is that it throws up a lot of red herrings for people to object and we do not get the basic level of reform that we actually really need. That is the bit I would have liked to have seen more clarity on. That is what Government will have to bring. It would be interesting to get the witnesses' views on that.

Mr. Jim Gavin

I will let Dr. Quinn come in on some of those points. On the previous point made by the Leas-Chathaoirleach regarding on recommendation 18 and the plebiscite, it is important to point out that throughout the discussions and the discourse that we had in all the sessions, I was very clear on our terms of reference what we could and could not speak about in terms of the mandate we had. The plebiscite is outside the terms of reference, but I felt it was important for me to give a voice to the assembly members. Perhaps Dr. Quinn would like to respond on some of the transport issues.

Dr. Bríd Quinn

Running through most of the recommendations on the powers of the mayor was a desire for the ability and opportunity to tailor transport and education. It is stated in one of the documents that the curriculum, for example, would be set nationally. People were never thinking about teachers' salaries. I never heard anything about that. It was about the logistics of education, including where schools are, how they might be transferred and ensuring that transport is tailored to the needs of the people. It is not about somebody in a far away office deciding that the people of-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The mayor, then, would have influence rather than those who are in of the mayor's office.

Dr. Bríd Quinn

Influence yes, but influence that could be translated into action rather than being soft power. It would be hard power that would enable decisions to be made about where, for example, to funnel the money or whatever, but also to tailor services to the needs and priorities of the people. That is the difference-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

When we put that question to the NTA, it said that power will always rely on where the funding is.

Dr. Bríd Quinn

Yes.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

If the mayor does not control the overall transport budget for Dublin, they will not be able to direct it. The only way the mayor will be able to control the overall transport budget for funding is if we take it off the NTA and give it to them.

Dr. Bríd Quinn

We are back to concept of joined-up government. If there was a much better-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Is that what Dr. Quinn is proposing when she talks about powers? Is she talking about the large-scale separation of budgets from national agencies to the mayor's office?

Dr. Bríd Quinn

As I said, it would involved funnelling of some of those budgets to enable the services to be tailored to the needs of the citizens in those areas. Some of my colleagues want to come in on that, but I think that is the-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Does Mr. O'Leary see the challenge this will form in the context of the national structure?

Mr. Art O'Leary

Indeed. These are breathtaking recommendations. If you look at the breadth and the depth of what is being suggested here, it is hugely complex. This is why a period of reflection to look at why and how these might work would be beneficial. It will require central government to delegate authority. In the 100 years of the State so far, there has not been a great amount of evidence of a willingness to do that. It will require a step change in the way that Government thinks about it.

The point is that the citizens got an opportunity to do that and to speak to the mayors of Manchester, Paris and Boston. This happens all over the world. Is there something really unique about Dublin such that people say they know it works everywhere else in the world but it cannot work in Dublin? It requires significant Government willpower and commitment to make that happen.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Mr. Gavin and Dr. Quinn are both indicating. I have run way over on my time. I apologise for that.

Dr. Bríd Quinn

A chink in the centralisation armour is evident in part of the Limerick movement for the 2040 delivery body. Project Ireland 2040 will obviously be organised at national level, but there will be a delivery body in Limerick to ensure that what is delivered under Ireland 2040 will be tailored to the priorities and needs expressed in Limerick. As I say, there is a chink in the armour there. It is over now to the committee to widen that chink.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Do Mr. Gavin or Ms O'Connor wish to comment? No. I will invite Deputy Higgins to take the Chair. I call Deputy Ó Broin. he will be followed by Deputy Seery Kearney.

Deputy Emer Higgins took the Chair.

Senator Mary Seery Kearney

I thank Deputy O Broin for letting me in and I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach for the elevation. I am a mere Senator, but I will take that as future intent. We have already had Mayor Higgins.

I thank the assembly very much for its work. I find it inspiring. As a Dub, I feel we should declare independence. We are sick of Cork across all of these decades; let us just go with it. There is something in the identity of Dublin where if someone is living in south County Dublin under South Dublin County Council, and I have been a member of that council, that the identity of Dublin is wrapped up in the Mayor in the Mansion House. How do the rest of us own who our mayor is in our local authority?

One of the shocks for me on being elected to the local authority in 2019 was just how tiny our powers and influence were and how constrained we were. Here we had passionate people who wanted to give their time and energy to local government and you came away thinking that you had a whole heap of emails, work and everything else and asking how much you could actually deliver.

The idea is that we have an entity and a centre a power that presents Dublin as a cohesive entity or identity - a place for the people from all over the world who live in Dublin. There is a vision in this regard and I love that about the recommendations. Translating it into reality I find problematic and difficult. I am with the assembly all the way. We need a special Dublin police force to police the city. Our guest speakers referred to policing. I would take that further and say that we need policing for Dublin. Then we have to ask whether we recruit personnel and how would that affect the Garda Síochána? The ramifications of this are massive.

Do we need a plebiscite? Yes. Next June is probably too soon, but word has it that there will be a general election within 15 months. We have to have a general election, so the plebiscite could be held on the same day. There are days when this can be held over the next 23 months, as Mr. O'Leary has said.

We need an overwhelming indication from the people of Dublin to the effect that they want this and are behind it. That will send a message to the local authorities, both to those who are with us and those who are against the plebiscite.

In the context of packaging the plebiscite, the first point relates to who is selling it. Who is the relevant entity in this regard? There has not been a particular group involved in that regard. It is brilliant that the witnesses are passionately pleading with us to get on with it. . However, there is no responsibility entity and no momentum. The witnesses have experience. Dublin people all have experience of the fact that the minute someone starts winning, they are accused of being too big, too this or too that. I can see that happening here. At present, money that is collected by the Dublin local authorities is disbursed to other local authorities around the country. That would have to stop because they would need the funding kept in Dublin. There would have to be much more money from the Exchequer. In fighting and competing for that, that element would almost have to be visualised before the plebiscite because otherwise people would say that it is not going to happen.

Do the witnesses have any ideas as to how we package the plebiscite? Who should be presenting and advancing it?

Mr. Art O'Leary

The history of citizens' assemblies in this country is very good. Ireland is a world leader in deliberative democracy. I have spoken in 38 different countries in the past 18 months. Those countries were saying that they want to get their citizens involved in conversations, that Ireland does this very well and that they want to know how we do it. We have somehow managed, via the citizens' assemblies, to deliver constitutional change in marriage equality, repealing the eighth amendment-----

Senator Mary Seery Kearney

My apologies for cutting across Mr. O'Leary. Those are national issues that everyone around the country can own. This is about Dublin.

Mr. Art O'Leary

That is correct, but the principle is the same. The citizens' assembly was made up of representatives of Dublin people. This was Dublin in one room. This was the people of Dublin speaking to the Oireachtas and to the Government regarding their own vision for the city. The principle is the same and the process should be the same. The Oireachtas owns the report. It has a view on this and it will send it to Government. The Government then responds and says that these are all of the things we would like to do. Then, we all own it. The people of Dublin will ultimately decide on this. It requires momentum; the Senator is absolutely right.

Senator Mary Seery Kearney

I see what will happen with rural Independent Deputies down the road. This will go to the people of Dublin and they will vote in the plebiscite, which is great. Then there is the financing and everything which flows from that. My apologies for cutting across Mr. O'Leary, but then rural Independent Deputies will say "Look at the Dubs, they are getting everything for themselves", "Who are they?" and everything else. It will then become a political football. How do we overcome that?

Mr. Art O'Leary

Everything the Senator has said is absolutely right, but to deliver this transformational change is going to cost money and those in government are going to have to decide, one way or the other, whether they want to do it. The revenue-raising powers were discussed. The detail is not in the report, but the members looked at revenue-raising in the same way that cities do all around the world. There is the hotel bedroom tax where €1 or €2 could be added per bed night, for example. We have so many visitors using services to the city and perhaps this would be a way of independently raising revenue as well. There are ways of doing it.

One cannot get away from the fact that delivering transformational change which makes a real difference to people's lives will cost money. In the programme for Government, there is a commitment for directly elected mayors all over the country, so maybe this is a model that should be adopted all around.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Emer Higgins)

We are out of time. I know Mr. Gavin is keen to speak.

Mr. Jim Gavin

I thank Mr. O'Leary for sharing his passion for Dublin. I agree that people from Saggart do not say "I am from Saggart and south County Dublin"; they say "I am from Saggart and Dublin". People from Sheriff Street, in the Dublin City Council area, would say they are from Sheriff Street and they are Dubs. Part of this is about Dubliners taking back control of Dublin. I agree with Mr. O'Leary. Dublin should be the second city to have a directly elected mayor, with that principle of subsidiarity being put in place. We are following the lead that Limerick has given. It could be Limerick first, then Dublin, Cork and Sligo, and then other places throughout the country. In my opening remarks, I gave the example of the European Council, which has been very clear about the league table and where Ireland sits with the devolved powers that have been held centrally. This is not just about Dublin. It is a national issue that needs to be addressed.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I have three observations and questions. My view is that there should be a plebiscite next year. I see no reason it could not be held. I think some consideration needs to be given to what the right time for it is. We have almost fallen into a lazy assumption in the public debate that it has to be at a certain point. Local elections have a much lower turnout than general elections and, therefore, it might not be the most appropriate time. I am not making the argument that it is or is not, but we need to consider that. Given that we will also have local and European elections on the same day, would that mean the issue of Dublin's directly elected mayor gets lost? We could have a general election next year. Unpopular Governments can often lose referendums or plebiscites when they coincide them with the general election-----

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Emer Higgins)

I am sure the Deputy is not calling us unpopular.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

-----while the turnout is higher. That might not necessarily result in a win. There has not been careful consideration in the debate so far of when, next year, the plebiscite could take place. There could be an argument that it should be a standalone event where nothing else is interfering in it. We need to tease those things out. I am like Mr. Gavin and am not waiting for another year. If we do not get it next year, it will fall.

The second thing is an important observation on Limerick. It is the only one of the three cities that had a civil society organisation on the ground trying to run a campaign, albeit on a shoestring budget, in favour of the directly elected mayor. I am not from Limerick and did not spend too much time during the debate there. My read is that that was probably what made the decisive difference in the outcome of the vote. For all our talk of wanting directly elected mayors, the political system in Cork, Limerick and Waterford was not ignited around the public campaign. Councillors were too busy trying to get themselves re-elected to the councils. Therefore, I think consideration also needs to be given to what the best platform is. Mr. O'Leary is right that the referendums show the way. When there are broad-based civil society-led campaigns that have cross-party political backing, that works. Limerick is a small example of that. I think that is worthwhile.

We need to simplify this. The recommendations are ambitious. The Government is not going to give that list of powers in the plebiscite. We know that from what is in the Limerick Bill. Manchester in England is a good example of rolling devolution having real merit. If one takes a number of really big ticket items like transport, one could say that a directly elected mayor in Dublin is responsible for transport policy and that all the money that currently sits with different State agencies, coming from central government, is pooled in the office of the mayor. One of the functions of the mayor is to reach agreement with the four Dublin local authorities and providers of transport on policy. Then the money is distributed through the mayor's office. That is not extra cash for Dublin. It just puts all the cash that is going into Dublin in place. We are not changing who employs whom or who pays pensions. That all stays. One is giving the mayor a really powerful role, which is democratically accountable to elected members and which interfaces with service providers. If one crosses off two or three items from one's list, while that is a big ask in one's first five years as directly elected mayor, the promise is that if those items are delivered, the public can then come back for more.

To answer Senator Seery Kearney's question, I think some of our considerations in the committee should be about how we make it less daunting than what is in this report, but also how to keep open the ask in the report, which is for very substantial powers. The directly elected mayor worked well for transport in London. What Livingstone did with transport showed that. That is the conversation we need to have.

I ask the witnesses for a response to the three observations. Does anybody have a notion or any thoughts about when next year is the best time for the plebiscite? I think that is really important. If one was to start to move to strategic allocation of powers, which might be easiest to start with first? I am particularly interested in any observations Dr. Quinn has about Limerick and what happened during and after the plebiscite that we could learn from.

Senator Mary Seery Kearney took the Chair.

Mr. Jim Gavin

I thank Deputy Ó Broin. Does Mr. O'Leary have any thoughts on next year?

Mr. Art O'Leary

On when? The conversation so far has all been about the local elections, because people are focused on local government services and so on. Doing it outside of that time would require a specially designed engagement programme for the people of Dublin. Luckily, we have an Electoral Commission for that now. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that we could have it at any time. The national conversation in June of next year will be about local government services and about the European Parliament. That seems like the best time but the other is out of it.

Which powers would be provided remains a matter for the Oireachtas. The big issues that members identified were housing and homelessness, transport, and other services including planning, water and so on. If committee members look at the scale of the results, they will be able to prioritise internally the assembly's views on these matters. Maybe Dr. Quinn would like to talk about the Limerick experience.

Dr. Bríd Quinn

Some of the lessons to be learned from the Limerick experience include the effectiveness, as Deputy Ó Broin mentioned, of the pre-plebiscite campaigning, if one can call it that. Afterwards, as I mentioned, the implementation group was established and a range of people with different qualifications served on that group. Hand in hand with that, there were democratic efforts. For example, some of my colleagues in UL conducted Let's Talk About Our Mayor! to ascertain what the public would want from a directly elected mayor. Awareness and consciousness-raising went on to get people's positive and negative views, acknowledge them and make them public. There were 69 recommendations in the report from Limerick. Not all of the 69 came through in the legislation. Even some of those which were in the earliest form of the legislation have been watered down slightly as it has gone along. Because that has happened in Limerick, some of those lessons do not need to be-----

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Repeated.

Dr. Bríd Quinn

-----learned the hard way in Dublin. We are quite happy to share our learning. Such approaches were important.

With regard to the plebiscite, avoid having it so delayed that cynicism grows. There is a big risk that cynicism will grow. That is my foremost thought. In engaging in discussions, my personal view is that not enough emphasis has been put on the qualities and qualifications that whoever takes on the directly elected mayor role in any constituency needs. Celebrity and charisma are not the answer. It is a combination of political savvy, personal expertise, and all of those things together. It could be done.

Mr. Jim Gavin

On the question of when the best time is, I get the point that if there are European or other elections, the Government could be distracted. It is the Government's policy. It has stated that it wants a directly elected mayor.

Then let us see the colour of its money in terms of how committed it is to this. If it is an isolated event, it puts all the spotlight on the Government. If it is a Government policy - which it is, as it is in the programme for Government - and what we pick up from all political parties seems to be in alignment, then we have the weight of the Oireachtas behind this, and that is a huge tide.

On the recommendations regarding what should be devolved, the idea is that it could be on a phased basis. The Citizens' Assembly is recommending up to five years for the whole tranche but we would understand if the intent is for devolution to evolve over the lifetime of the mayor as an office, which we hope will be for hundreds of years, we might go for transport, economic development, infrastructure, roads, footpaths, arts, culture, sport, the night-time economy, tourism and marketing in the first five years. That would certainly be a significant statement of intent by the Government.

From our perspective, we have just made those recommendations. It is up to the Government to decide which ones it wants to prioritise. However, I agree with the concept.

Professor Deiric Ó Broin

I wanted to flag a couple of basic points that have been lost in some of the discussion. People talk about how audacious, brave or radical this is. We spend 8% to 9% of Government expenditure through local authorities. In many European countries it is 60%, so we have the narrowest range of competencies outside of Hungary and Moldova. They are our peers now, so we are really not in a great situation. It needs to get better.

What is being talked about here is actually quite incremental. It really is not that radical, and that is where I think the conversation needs to go. I am not qualified to talk about when a referendum should be held but the perfect is the enemy of the good. It is about having as much information as possible available, and as quickly as possible. I am taken with having the general scheme available but I think Dr. Quinn's point is very well made around the cynicism creeping in. There will always be actors and stakeholders who will push a very cynical line about change.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Some of this is me just teasing it out but given that the original decision to hold plebiscites in the other three cities was taken in 2018, and here we are five years on, it not that the quills move slowly, to use a very eloquent phrase that Mr. O'Leary used. It is about political will. One could have a general scheme in four months but it would require a Government to decide what is in the general schemes. General schemes do not take that long to write; it is the legislation and regulations that are time-consuming. Ultimately, this comes down to political will and to what the Government actually wants the directly elected mayor to do. That decision does not take very long. The reason Deputy John Paul Phelan's White Paper, which I thought was a very strong White Paper, has ended up with such weak legislation is that rather than the Government just deciding on it, it got lost into the system of civil servants, State agencies and the City and County Managers Association. They were all protecting their interests, and not wanting to devolve and change power. That is because the Government was not going to take a decision on it at the start.

The key thing is for the Government to decide as quickly as possible. To reassure Mr. Gavin, our hope is to get the report to the Government on time. Our job is not to repeat the work of the Citizens' Assembly but to make a number of very straightforward recommendations to the Government. We are hoping to settle that before the Dáil rises. Then it is up to the Government to decide early and publicly what it wants to do. Once that happens, everything becomes much easier. My fear, as we have learned from the process that brought us from John Paul Phelan's White Paper to Kieran O'Donnell's Bill, is getting the political decision is going to be the tricky thing. That is a separate day's craic.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Senator Mary Seery Kearney)

We will hand over to Dr. Quinn, if she would like any final words. I am conscious that Deputy Matthews would like to contribute.

Dr. Bríd Quinn

I want to respond on a not-so-little thing. In the budget this year, in the allocation for the directly elected mayor for Limerick, there is also an allocation for education, awareness and campaigning. That money has been set aside, so obviously we would expect something like that to happen in the Dublin case.

Mr. Art O'Leary

I would like to respond directly to the question. We always make time for the things we think are important, so Deputy Ó Broin is absolutely right. This will happen if the powers that be want it to happen. It is as simple as that.

Deputy Steven Matthews

In a similar kind of vein, we concentrate a lot on the challenges and the negativity with regard to something but it is important to acknowledge that the reward here could be huge if we get this right. I really admire the people of Limerick for taking that decision. There is an opportunity, with a really powerful mayor with real powers and resourcing behind them, to put Dublin on that stage where it competes internationally. If Dublin does well, the country generally does well, and I think we need to acknowledge that.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Apart from Gaelic football, of course.

Deputy Steven Matthews

Anybody who is successful in the mayoral election in Limerick is almost the guinea pig. They are going into something where they have got five years to make a mark. I know that if anyone wants to do anything that is significant, substantial and long-lasting, it is difficult to deliver it very quickly. There is always a demand for something quick and shiny to be delivered but if it is going to be long-lasting and significant, one has to dig those foundations and dig them well, and maybe let somebody else build on top of them. One has to that have that political maturity to know that one is digging the foundations but one will never be around when the capping stone goes on this. It is "cathedral thinking". I think that is what they call it.

I will mention transport as an example. Dr. Quinn referenced transport and education. There is a great opportunity in school transport for the Dublin area. That is something a mayor could really get their teeth into. School transport is actually in two siloed Departments at the moment, and it tends to be a rural issue. It is the Department of Education that manages that, whereas the Department of Transport manages transport. There is a real opportunity there.

I am concerned that local government is weak in Ireland. It is weak, and is internationally acknowledged as being weak. A very low percentage of spending goes on local government. We have quite a lot of people represented by one councillor. One of the worst steps we ever took was getting rid of our town councils. I was on a town council and I think it performed well. It had its difficulties like everything else. Town councils were taken out without a whimper or mention from anybody. There were bigger protests about local post offices going than town councils going. There was a kind of attitude of "It is just politicians; let us get rid of the politicians". I am concerned that if we go out on this, a plebiscite will be treated as a reflection on the Government of the day. It will depend on when it is in the general election or local election cycles, or whether the Government is successful of unsuccessful during that particular time. We could end up losing it, and I would not like that to happen. We need to be brave, have that vision and say that Dublin needs a directly elected mayor.

I do not think we will get it perfect in the first go. The first mayor will not get it perfect, and nor will the second mayor. Other jurisdictions like Boston were mentioned. I am sure the first mayor of Boston did not go out in a blaze of glory. I have no idea of the history of the mayors of Boston but I am sure that to take on a really significant role like that, one has to be prepared to dig the foundation and maybe not get any credit for it. That is the bravery that is required in this decision that has to be made. I have no questions, just statements on it.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

The issue of the referendum is the key thing here because we lost the referendum on the Seanad. Some people will say that was a good thing-----

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Senator Mary Seery Kearney)

I am among them.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

-----but that did have the vast majority of the political parties in the State supporting it. One can have all the parties in the State supporting it but if it is a civil society-led campaign, then it depoliticises the party politics. In our recommendations we need to think about that. Maybe, like the citizens' assembly, we can go outside our terms of reference if we think there is good logic in doing so.

Those issues are important. On paper, most of the political parties in the Oireachtas are in favour of directly elected mayors but that does not necessarily mean a referendum will be won. The timing aspect is important but I do not think that is an argument for delay. It is more about working out the right time to do it. I thank the witnesses for their time.

Deputy Steven Matthews

On a point of a clarification, although this report was published almost 12 months ago, I think it was only 20 June when it was passed by the Oireachtas, so by the time the Oireachtas committee received the order, we were almost finished that session of the Dáil. We only managed to get our teeth into this from September on, and we have to report on it by 31 December. I am not sure we can go outside the recommendations because it is an order from the Taoiseach.

It sets out quite clearly what we are to consider.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Senator Mary Seery Kearney)

We can do what we want like.

Deputy Steven Matthews

However, I am confident we will report before 31 December on the basis of the order. I thank the witnesses for their time.

Mr. Jim Gavin

On behalf of the assembly, I thank the committee members for their time, energy and enthusiasm. Their engagement, support and understanding of local government issues are very heartening. Of course they would understand local government issues because they are probably all former councillors. I wish them the best of luck. Beir bua.

Mr. Art O'Leary

Let me mention briefly the contribution of one of the members of the expert advisory group who cannot be with us today, Dr. Aodh Quinlivan from UCC. He is also an extraordinary talent in the local government area and we should acknowledge his contribution. He was fantastic, as were Professor Ó Broin and Dr. Quinn.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Mary Seery Kearney)

Would Ms O'Connor like to say any final words to finish off?

Ms Nicole O'Connor

Among the assembly members and any people I speak to, there is such a lack of awareness of the powers that local government representatives have and what they do from day to day. On the question of when there should be a plebiscite, the idea that many people about to vote in local elections have really no idea about the powers of local government was considered. However, it is worth bearing in mind, regardless of the form the recommendations take, that education will be of the utmost importance for people.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Senator Mary Seery Kearney)

That is great. I thank all the witnesses sincerely for their time, for all the work to get us even to today, and for the report.

The joint committee adjourned at 4.42 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 28 November 2023.