The Dublin City Council Labour Group has today continued to express its disappointment at the behaviour of the Greyhound Waste Management Company and Dublin City Council management and will be raising the issue at the Finance and the Environment and Engineering Committees tomorrow. The Group will also be meeting with the Dublin City Manager and other senior officials to seek the necessary changes.

“We are deeply alarmed with the requirement of customers to pay an up-front fee of €100 in order to have the service provided. Councillors had not been told about this in advance. Given that we are in the post-Christmas period, not least recognising the financial difficulties which many are already experiencing, we are calling for a change in the ways which people can pay. The City Manager must renegotiate the terms of the agreement, and allow residents to pay the standing charge in stages rather than a once off “up front” payment. Also methods of payment like Standing order must be made available to customers.

“We are puzzled by Fianna Fail councillors’ sudden eagerness on this issue. They appear to have forgotten that it was their own party in 2004 which stripped away powers from City Councillors to deal with waste management issues like this. The time for hypocritical political posturing is gone, we are now asking for proper dialogue to occur to solve this issue.

“The Labour Party Group is dedicated to working for real Local Government Reform. As local representatives we are asking for Dublin City Council management to engage with us so that a better, more transparent and user friendly service can be offered to the citizens of Dublin. We have also arranged a delegation to meet the City Manager on the issue also tomorrow, and we are hopeful that a resolution can reached. “

ENDS

For Further Information Please Contact:
Councillor Dermot Lacey -0872646960

29th August 2011

“The comments from the Fianna Fail Deputy Leader, Eamon O’Cuiv, regarding the new Septic Tank levy reflects a deep anti urban bias – in particular an Anti Dublin bias and coming from a Politician whose term in office was sustained by the millions poured into the Exchequer by Urban, primarily Dublin home buyers are both hypocritical and nonsense,” according to Labour Councillor and former Lord Mayor of Dublin, Dermot Lacey.

Contrary to the nonsense uttered by Deputy O’Cuiv, the truth is, that urban dwellers through the more costly property transactions in Dublin and other Urban areas and other taxes effectively subsidised and continues to subsidise rural Ireland and not the other way round. Eamon O’Cuiv should be careful in case he gets what he wishes for – Equality of contribution and distribution.

I would welcome such equality for Dublin.

Perhaps if Dubliners were reimbursed for the millions – approximately E500million for the period in which Eamon O’Cuiv was a Government Minister – in Commercial Rates, which his Government refused to pay to Dublin City Council. Perhaps if Dublin City Council was reimbursed for the excess in Motor Tax accounts paid into the Local Government Fund and redistributed to the rest of Ireland and there is more, Eamon O’Cuiv would have some moral authority to complain. However he never spoke up for such equality then.

Instead in his continuing search for a role as some sort of Rural Chieftain this former resident of Dublin 4 seeks to promote a stupid and outdated divisiveness that does no one any good except those in search of the local vote and cheap populism. We need to have an honest debate in Ireland about how we finance our Local Government system. I have been seeking this for years. Deputy O’Cuiv was a Government Minister for most of that time – he did absolutely nothing about it. I have no wish to penalise rural dwellers and am in favour of a balanced taxation and service charge approach which is fair to all. Perhaps Deputy O’Cuiv could now, in opposition, at least put his mind to that task. Simple Populism is no alternative to real ideas -unfortunately it still seems to be what some Politicians are at.

Despite the fact that they remain just proposals, there is a real need now to move the debate forward beyond the issue of expenses, the Mansion House and all of what we might call “the fripperies” accompanying the present post of Lord Mayor. I have already called for the proposed salary to be at least halved.

I have campaigned for the creation of this post now for many years. With the publication of the Draft Legislation I call on any of those considering contesting for this position to debate the issues facing our County. Let us all play a part in shaping the legislation as well as seeking to implement it.

I want to see an Executive Mayor for Dublin. In that respect I am not convinced that the merging of the historic role of Lord Mayor of Dublin with that of the new Mayor is the best way forward. I look forward to teasing that issue out over the next period of time.

There is now recognition that our current system of Local Government requires renewal and reform. The pity is that the debate did not occur prior to the Local Elections. Let us not make the same mistake again and proceed now with real reforms and real proposals.

While the detail of any reform is extensive, the essentials are not. If it is to be in any way meaningful reform must include:

• An Independent source of funding for Local Authorities and not subject to the whims of the Department of the Environment.
• Reform of the City and County Managers Act creating a new post of Chief Executive Officer – accountable to the relevant Local Authority and recruited by the Public Appointments Commission.
• A directly elected Mayor of Dublin with a five year term and accountable to an enhanced Dublin Regional Authority.
• Extending the role of the Dublin Regional Authority to include Transport and Planning and subsuming bodies such as the Dublin Transport Authority and the Affordable Housing Partnership.
• Real controls and limitations on electoral spending at local elections and an ethical framework that is robust and just.

Local Government is best placed to deliver real reform if let. It is time to stand up for better Local Government and long past time to “Stand up for Dublin”. I am ready to play my part.

“While the text of RTE’s submission to the Draft City Development Plan has been released following a formal request submitted by me that is all it is – a submission.

By and large the local community has accepted RTE’s expansion beyond the initial Montrose complex and despite the lack of any real neighbourly relationship the community has not in any way impeded RTE’s use of the site.

However the attempt to change the Zoning from Z15 Institutional and Community use to Z10 that would allow “for mixed use development on which office, retail and residential would be the predominant use” would be a major challenge to the interests of the local area and will have to be examined in huge detail before any such rezoning could be contemplated.

The current RTE complex covers the original Montrose House estate (once home to the Jameson Family and at one stage lived in by Marconi the reputed inventor of radio), the former Sports Grounds of St. Andrews College in whose outdoor Swimming pool I swam as a child and parts of the Belville and other lands.

Given the importance of the new City Development Plan for the future wellbeing of Dublin it is heartening to see the National Broadcaster take such an interest in this. It will be even more heartening if this is followed up by an ongoing coverage of the Development Plan process to facilitate the greatest possible engagement of the people of Dublin in developing the Plan”

Cllr Dermot Lacey, Labour Party City Councillor for Pembroke-Rathmines and former Lord Mayor of Dublin, has branded Minister John Gormley’s proposals to set the salary of the new Mayor of Dublin at the same level as that of a cabinet minister as disgraceful. He has also reiterated his challenge to Bertie Ahern to engage in a formal public debate as the only other declared candidate for the job.

“The proposed salary for the new Mayor of Dublin is disgracefully high. Setting the salary level so high smells suspiciously like a Fianna Fáil attempt to make the job more acceptable for their only declared candidate, who would surely not want to give up his salary, pensions and appearance fees for a ‘mere’ €100,000 or so.

“There is no need for a €200,000+ salary for the Mayor, just as in all probability there is no need for it for Government Ministers.

“In my view the essential financial element is that the Mayor would have the power and resources to do the job, and the commitment to do it effectively. Setting the salary at that of a Dáil Deputy or Senator would be for me a far more appropriate approach.

“Earlier this week I challenged Bertie Ahern TD to a debate on the Dublin mayoralty. Deputy Ahern and I are the only two people to have publicly declared our candidacies for our respective parties’ nominations. We need to have a substantial debate on the powers and resources the new Mayor will have before the legislation is set down. I will debate the issues with Deputy Ahern any time he likes.

“I’ve been campaigning for a directly elected Mayor of Dublin since I first got involved in politics twenty years ago. I’m still committed to making it happen. Dublin needs a Mayor committed to Dublin. I want to be that Mayor.”

“As he has declared his interest, let me declare mine and I challenge Bertie Ahern at this stage to debate the issues facing our County.

“However it begs the question why did he not do this when he could? More accurately, it begs the question, why did he allow Noel Dempsey to provide for this, in the Local Government Act of 2000 only to allow the more craven Martin Cullen reverse the legislation several years later.  I want to see a Mayor for Dublin and not a Lord Mayor of Dublin.

“As we approach the Local Elections there is an emerging recognition that our current system of Local Government requires renewal and reform.

“Having argued for this for years I would welcome the opportunity to publicly debate with the former Taoiseach the merits of such a new post.

“While the detail of any reform is extensive, the essentials are not. If it is to be in any way meaningful reform must include:

• An Independent source of funding for Local Authorities and not subject to the whims of the Department of the Environment.
• Reform of the City and County Managers Act creating a new post of Chief Executive Officer – accountable to the relevant Local Authority and recruited by the Public Appointments Commission.
• A directly elected Mayor of Dublin with a five year term and accountable to an enhanced Dublin Regional Authority.

“In that context I believe that Bertie Ahern is wrong to advance the case of a directly elected Lord Mayor solely for the City. It is the Dublin region that needs such political leadership.

• Extending the role of the Dublin Regional Authority to include Transport and Planning and subsuming bodies such as the Dublin Transport Authority and the Affordable Housing Partnership.
• Real controls and limitations on electoral spending at local elections and an ethical framework that is robust and just.

“Local Government is best placed to deliver real reform if let. It is time to stand up for better Local Government and long past time to ‘Stand up for Dublin’.”

In view of the clear rejection of the Mountbrook ( Sean Dunnes) proposal for Ballsbridge as being inconsistent with the Dublin City Development Plan it is imperative that a full investigation into the process that led to the original decision granting permission be initiated, according to the former Lord Mayor of Dublin, local Councillor, Dermot Lacey.

The original decision of the Planners in Dublin City Council to ignore and effectively defy the City Development Plan has imposed huge costs on residents and elected representatives who have sought to defend the integrity of the Development Plan as democratically decided by the elected Councillors.

It has also contributed to uncertainty amongst Developers as to what is permissable and what is not.Coming, as we are to the beginning of preparation of a new Development Plan it demands investigation as to how this was allowed to happen.

In order to achieve clarity I am tabling the following as an Emergency Motion to the meeting of Dublin City Council taking place tomorrow night Monday 2nd February. The motion is co-signed by my colleague Councillor Kevin Humphreys.

“This City Council calls for an Independent investigation into the process that led to the granting of Planning Permission for the Jury’s/Berkeley Court site in Ballsibridge given the strenuous assertion by An Bord Pleanala that it clearly contravened the City Development Plan”.

Ruairi Quinn TD and the Labour Team in Dublin South East – Councillors Mary Freehill, Kevin Humphreys, Dermot Lacey, Oisin Quinn and local representative Maria Parodi, have expressed their disappointment with the decision of the Environmental Protection Agency to grant a licence for the Incinerator in the Poolbeg Peninsula.

They called on the Minister for Environment, John Gormley TD, to fund a Judicial Review of the decision in the High Court.

“John Gormley needs to show his Green credentials and fund a Judicial Review on behalf of the local community in the High Court. He could have used his powers as a Minister to put a stop to the incinerator. This really is his last chance to act. If he doesn’t, he will be to blame if this incinerator is built.

“It is clear that the management of Dublin City Council has not gained the support of the local residents for the imposition of the incinerator in the midst of their community.

“We have great concerns about the number of trucks that will pass through the Poolbeg Peninsula to service an incinerator. There will be more traffic congestion and more pollution if this incinerator goes ahead”

“We have doubts about the cost of the incinerator. Dublin City Council has signed a contract to provide 600,000 tonnes of waste a year for this plant. There are serious concerns that the city will be unable to provide this much waste. If it can’t, all taxpayers will have to pay the owners of the incinerator. This is madness.

“An end needs to be put to this project.”

The President of the Irish Planning Institute should get some facts rights before taking cheap shots at elected Councillors according to the former Lord Mayor of Dublin, Councillor Dermot Lacey.

In my experience it has been Councillors and not the planners who have defended good quality planning and the City Development Plan.

So, before President Hind has another go at elected Councillors and seeks ignorantly to seek a further reduction in the powers of elected Councillors losing powers he might bear in mind some facts. In my own area of Pembroke-Rathmines it was Councillors who successfully blocked the building of 110 apartments on a floodplain at Milltown when, disgracefully, the much lauded officials justified it.

When the officials persisted and granted permission it was this Councillor, amongst others, who appealed that decision to An Bord Pleanala, at considerable financial cost and had that permission reversed.

Similarly, in order to protect the few remaining green spaces in our City it was Councillors who persisted in introducing the new Z15 category zoning to protect over-development of Institutional lands.

It was Councillors who amended the City Development Plan so that the flexibility previously allowing some limited residential development on Green spaces, including Floodplains, was removed following the elastic interpretation of that provision by the officials.

In recent months it has been Councillors who have persisted in defending the integrity of the City Development Plan when officials have used every trick in the book to facilitate over development in the Ballsbridge area. I could go on.

I have no difficulty in being “held to account” at the next Local Elections and would welcome President Hinds to meet with me and discuss how we can achieve good planning in this country. Cheap shots and media posturing do no one any good and he should engage with those of us at the coalface in the fight for good planning before sounding off again on something that I suggest that he knows less about than he thinks.

Video, courtesy of Jazz Biscuit:

His call comes in the wake of the statement by the National Council for the Blind in Ireland highlighting the safety issues in relation to these signs.  Cllr Lacey expressed his concern that visually impaired people
who have enough to contend with on the streets of Dublin, now find that they have to negotiate the major obstacles of the large Decaux signs.

In March of this year, An Bord Pleanala refused permission for each of the metoropole structures which were under appeal, citing public safety grounds. However only a small portion of the proposed Metropoles were
appealed to the Board.  In view of the Bord’s findings, Cllr Lacey called on the City Council to halt all works on the JC Decaux metropoles and to conduct a full and independent review of the health and safety
issues of the proposed sites, and report on the findings to this Council before any further work is carried out.

However, the Executive of the Council persisted with the erection of the signs, despite the fact that the safety concerns of Councillors were never fully addressed.

The problems posed in recent weeks to visually impaired people and pedestrians and the Council’s decision to remove the sign on Dorset Street last week is evidence that the signs are posing a danger to public safety as stated by An Bord Pleanala.  At the July City  Council meeting, Labour Councillors once again called on the manager to halt the work until a full safety audit had been conducted to no avail.

Cllr Lacey along with Labour colleagues has also called on Dublin City Council to produce a full report on the locations of the Decaux signs granted permission, a progress report on the promised “wayfindng” system
and “free bike scheme” which were supposed to be rolled out in tandem with the advertising, and a report on the number of billboards which have been removed as part of the overall package with J C Decaux.

It would appear to me that the people of Dublin are getting a raw deal on this. We have potentially dangerous and visually obtrusive street signs littering our footpaths on the one hand and none of the promised
benefits of these signs have yet been delivered.  Even the 500 bicycles promised have been reduced by 50, and still have not been delivered!

The whole scenario of course once again highlights the failure of this Government to adequately fund Local Government when local Councils are forced to enter into deals of this type in order to provide for what
should be basic services.
The work should now stop pending a full safety audit before any further signs are erected.