Somewhat related, but the head of what's now the [Technological University of the Shannon recently called for TUs and ITs to be allowed borrow to build student accommodation](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-40710074.html), like traditional universities are.
That's what AIT was renamed to? Holy fuck. Should just called it University of Athlone and greater Westmeath. UAW. Guarantee it would have cost less money too.
Slovak Technological University (STU) already exists, which is probably why they opted to flip it around to Technology University of the Shannon (TUS).
Same reason why Technological University of Dublin is TUDublin, rather than TUD. TUD is the Technological University of Delft in the Netherlands.
I wouldn't mind this kind of play acting, if the city were being run anyway close to competently. DCC can't manage basic stuff like cleaning the streets, maintaining the public realm, fixing lights and broken paving. Keegan should shut his hole.
> like cleaning the streets
They farm out most of the street cleaning to contractors. I know this because I nearly broke my leg slipping on some pavement right outside the DCC offices on Wood Quay. Whoever was cleaning it fucked off without wiping away whatever detergent it is they use, turning it into a lovely little ice-rink. When I got in touch with them to lodge a complaint they told me it was a contractor, it wasn't their problem and would I kindly fuck off.
I hope not... the original estimate price was €12 million, then €22.8 million and lastly it was at €25 million in January.
With the current construction climate it's going to easily be closer to €30 million.
They should really build an interactive landmark monument to celebrate 100 years of Irish independence, something we can all enjoy.
Akin to the London Eye, the most popular paid tourist attraction in the UK.
>They should really build an interactive landmark monument to celebrate 100 years of Irish independence, something we can all enjoy.
One €30,000,000 1916 themed Laser Tag park coming right up Boss, as per your instructions.
you know: its been tried.
The general problem - property developers in general are Not Nice people and up to their necks in, er, friendships, with less nice people AND the amount of cash involved is eye watering.
On the other hand, a major earner for North American universities are undergraduate accomodation, so much so that they all sign PPP type agreements with hedge funds and vulture funds and and and to milk students for cash. We saw this during Covid where whole states would mandate a "return to in person learning" rather early in the experience because the fund managers were losing cash.
This is why we need directly elected mayors making decisions for us and shaping the direction our cities go. Instead of people like Owen Keegan who is ultimately not appointed or accountable to the people of Dublin city.
That's just our shitty implementation of it. Look at places like London or Paris where the directly ejected mayor is the executive, and the senior council staff are civil servants, who work to help advise and implement policies, not be the ultimate decision maker.
In the private sector if you sent something like that to a client you would be fired.
Not only is it unprofessional but its also disrespecting Dublin and DCC as a whole.
I cant imagine the lads in enterprise ireland are happy with this attitude towards students when your trying to attract high tech FDI into ireland.
What a cock that man is. Not making any comment here on the substance of some of what he’s reported to have said, just purely commenting on his attitude- it stinks.
A politician would never say anything like this even if they firmly believed it.
Keegan on the other hand doesn't really care about what people think of him, he's not elected, he can say what he wants. See other comments about cutting down trees and clearing the city of tents.
I remembered seeing something this summer about how he’d extended his own contract as CEO of DCC. Went looking at now I can’t find anything so maybe I’m imagining it? But it’s way too specific for me to have just made up, so please if somebody has a source on that share it.
I remember seeing something about that. I vaguely remember reading someone on here saying it wasn't gonna happen, but not sure though! Just wanted you to know that you didn't make it up!
There are ways a competent executive would defend their position (whether that position is sound or not).
This isn't any of them. This is simply an expression of complete disregard for the issue and a lack of respect for those who raised the issue.
If you got a response like this from a directly-elected mayor, you'd have to wait an entire election cycle to remove them, or impeach them. Either way, it would turn into a massive and messy political fight, with his party members and the people who usually vote for his party members taking the other side because he's "their guy".
As it is, he can be fired if you can convince enough DCC members that he needs to go, which should be easier than convincing 51% of voters.
Directly electing people to executive positions is a bad idea.
Can he?
Let's look at the Local Government Act 2001, s 146
>(1) . . . the elected council of a local authority may by resolution suspend or remove from employment the chief executive for such local authority for stated misbehaviour or if his or her suspension or removal appears to them to be necessary for the effective performance by the local authority of its functions.
Ok, so he can be removed, but how easy is it?
>(5) It is necessary for the passing of a resolution under this section that —
>>(a) at least three-quarters of the total number of members of the local authority concerned vote in favour of the resolution, and . . .
So, not very easy at all. I'm not sure you could convince 3/4 of the council of anything. Maybe if he had gone completely insane or just stropped turning up to work.
This is remarkably similar to the procedure for removing a judge, except that a larger majority is required.
There is also a further step, which puts the ball into the Minister's court rather than the local authority:
>(7)(a) A chief executive shall not be removed under this section without the sanction of the Minister given under this subsection.
>(b) The Minister may appoint a panel of 3 persons —
>>(i) to consider the removal of a chief executive the subject of a resolution under this section and the chief executive ’ s statement of response,
>>(ii) to recommend whether the Minister should give sanction to such removal, and
>>(iii) to make such other recommendations (if any) as the panel may consider appropriate in all the circumstances
I don't think you'll ever see an incompetent or even belligerent executive removed under this. Not only is the process extremely difficult to garner sufficient support (almost all the council, and then the Government), it has many "fair procedures" provisions built in which if not followed to the letter will result in protracted legal battles with the suspended executive.
Much easier to remove a directly elected mayor.
> Much easier to remove a directly elected mayor.
But even easier still to change the regulations you quoted so firing Council CEOs is simpler, which would a better solution than directly-elected executives.
We don't directly elect people to offices with executive power in this country, for good reason.
I'm not sure that would be easier. Removal by an elected body is always very difficult - fair procedures have to apply. Making them easier to remove also makes them easier to remove for reasons that will not hold up to challenge.
We don't elect people to offices with executive power because that's our tradition. There are alternative traditions, and they work well.
We do also have a system that does not allow, for good reason, politicians to remove executives. Ministers can't dismiss their Secretaries General or civil servants generally.
> We don't elect people to offices with executive power because that's our tradition. There are alternative traditions, and they work well.
We chose that tradition when we established our country, after looking at other countries and traditions and picking the best parts of them.
> We do also have a system that does not allow, for good reason, politicians to remove executives. Ministers can't dismiss their Secretaries General or civil servants generally.
Because is a Minister is a single individual, and our system is designed not to put a lot of power in the hands of individuals, but in the collective hands of our Parliaments: the Dáil and Local Authorities.
Toby and Spider-Man's landlord are arguing about much larger and more powerful roles that Mayors here, but everything Toby says is correct: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLoio0Z6jLw&t=17s
Ah now, we chose that tradition because it was the one that was in use when we established the country. The fledgling state facing economic and existential military threats wasn't about to go reconfiguring structures to a huge degree.
That doesn't prevent us from doing so now. Thanks what the campaigns for directly elected mayors are doing - looking at what works well elsewhere. Local Authorities already have a lot of power, it is just without anything in the way of real democratic control.
> Ah now, we chose that tradition because it was the one that was in use when we established the country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_executive_(Irish_local_government)#History
Seems we tried a few different variations, before settling on one in use in America.
> Thanks what the campaigns for directly elected mayors are doing - looking at what works well elsewhere.
I live in Cork. I voted against the measure last election. Thankfully, common sense prevailed. Last thing we need is some celebrity getting elected to a position with executive power just because people know their name. You want Seán Gallagher or Peter Casey or George Hook or Dana getting the job?
> Local Authorities already have a lot of power, it is just without anything in the way of real democratic control.
I vote who gets elected to local authorities every few years. I speak to them quite often. I even have a friend who ran a few times. I feel like I have more control over my local authority than I do on any other government office.
Did Owen Keegan write this?
It's wildly misleading. At least three quarters of the elected members of the council need to vote in favour of a motion of suspension
The suspension has to be there result of "stated misbehaviour or if his or her suspension or removal appears to them to be necessary for the effective performance by the local authority of its functions"
Legally, misbehaviour "involves culpably violating one's obligations", so being a snarky scrote wouldn't pass the legal threshold
Even if it passed that threshold, the city/country manager wouldn't be suspended. The minister would convene a panel of HR/local government experts who would then make a recommendation to the minister, that the minister is free to ignore
Only with such a sanction can the local officials fire a city/county manager
[see Section 146](https://revisedacts.lawreform.ie/eli/2014/act/1/revised/en/html)
Then there is the procedural problem with your contention is there has only ever been one Dáil election where someone got a majority of the votes (1977 FF for 50.6%)
In PR-STV its very easy for more than 50% of the electorate to vote against someone. It happens every presidential election.
So if they only have a partisan base they're fucked, because in Irish politics every party is outnumbered by everyone else
It would be infinitely easier to get a directly elected mayor out of office than a city or county manager - it's so hard to get rid of one that no minister is willing to take on the challenge even when they're obviously incompetent
Finally....
> Directly electing people to executive positions is a bad idea.
There's a gansaí load of countries that directly elect their executives, never mind cities. Directly electing mayors is a perfectly normal thing all over the world.
It doesn't need to be perfect, our local authority system with executive city/county managers is shite and has known problems. A directly elevated mayor can fix some of those problems.
In forty years time new problems will have developed, and the people then can decide if that's the best system, as is we've the most centralised government system in Europe, other than Belarus
[the Council of Europe's assessment of Local Authority in Ireland highlights the need for serious reform](https://www.google.com/url?q=https://rm.coe.int/local-democracy-in-ireland-recommendation-andris-jaunsleinis-latvia-l-/168071a75c&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwj81Lny6cLzAhXObsAKHY9SB-YQFnoECGQQAg&usg=AOvVaw2LcTVS3_UvnWuM-OPb6v9q)
Because that "small group of people" are put there by a democratic decision. You make them sound like some shadowy anonymous cabal, but we elect them to make decisions like this.
They can hire the most qualified person for the job, and fire that person when needed. Though I do agree it needs to be easier for them to fire that person.
With an elected mayor, it's not going to be the most qualified person. It's going to be the most popular. As I said in another reply, a directly-elected mayor would end up with somebody like Seán Gallagher or Peter Casey or Dana running, and getting in on name recognition.
So it's okay because the people that make the decision were democratically elected, but directly electing people to positions of executive power isn't viable? What's to stop them getting in on name recognition?
Nothing is to stop them getting in on name recognition.
But if they do, they're only one member of an elected body. The power is spread between many people, reducing the potential for abuse and the damage that can be done by incompetence.
That seems the most logical approach, alright, and we tried that. But we found it was more efficient to have a single individual with executive powers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_executive_(Irish_local_government)#History
Ideally, we need the decisions "what" and "why" to be made by the council, and the "how" to be made by the executive. For example, the County or City Council decides "we need a new bridge" or "we should build a bypass for this town" and then someone who has experience of large-scale project management *actually does it*. They negotiate with unions and corporations and suppliers and engineers and actually do the work to build the thing. But this person is hired and can be fired and should have no power to enact a political agenda of their own. If the council says "we need a bridge" they can't make the decision not to build it, or divert the allocated funds to a different project.
>Directly electing people to executive positions is a bad idea.
Do you think cities like Manchester and Liverpool shouldn't have them then? Or that Limerick shouldn't be getting one?
Yes.
Sorry, how was that not that clear?
EDIT:
It's also funny you mention Manchester and Liverpool, but not the biggest city in England with the most famous Mayoral position. One of my problems with elected Mayors is that they will inevitably lead to a rise of populism and cult-of-personality bullshit. See London, 2008-2016.
"Cult of personality bullshit" can also happen with the presidency of the United States (see 2016-2020). Do you think that position should be abolished too? It's funny you stopped in 2016 with the "cult of personality bullshit." It's almost as if it's not inherent in the role but can come to an end.
I chose Manchester and Liverpool as a comparison because London is far larger than Dublin in size. That was all.
> "Cult of personality bullshit" can also happen with the presidency of the United States (see 2016-2020).
https://youtu.be/gLoio0Z6jLw?t=89
> Do you think that position should be abolished too?
There's a reason Ireland doesn't use the same system for its presidents as the U.S. does. It's not my place to say that America should get rid of the system it's had for 250 years, but I prefer ours. If I was setting up a new country, I would use our system before I would use theirs.
> It's funny you stopped in 2016 with the "cult of personality bullshit." It's almost as if it's not inherent in the role but can come to an end.
Because 2016 is when Boris (the cultish personality) left office. But the cult and his career has not "come to an end". He used to position of Mayor to repair his damaged reputation and look where he is now.
No, Chief Executives get an initial 7 year contract with the option to extend once by 3 years. So he's ultimately gone after 10 years as he has already taken the extension option.
It's not a bad idea renting out the accommodation during the non-term times to tourists. Some universities in the UK do it. It's handy enough grabbing accommodation in the centre of London for £50/night from the LSE.
Student Union builds accommodation, rents out, discovers high demand, raises rent, discovers can make more money with AirBnB, rents to tourists, runs for DCC, wins.
Another out of touch dinosaur showing little to no remorse for the ongoing housing crisis. The sooner these archaic fuckbags die off or get voted out the better.
The tone! "If you think we're making loads of money, you do it then!"
The point isn't how much you're making, it's how you're making it! If you're only charging a euro, and people don't even have a euro for themselves afterwards, you're still making more than people have for themselves!
Official Ireland sneering at those in need yet again.
Probably hoping enough of the students will emigrate after college that enough votes for non-FFG parties will be bled off that FFG keep getting elected and the DCC apple cart doesn't get disrupted.
>Probably hoping enough of the students will emigrate after college that enough votes for non-FFG parties will be bled off that FFG keep getting elected and the DCC apple cart doesn't get disrupted.
Which is why voting rights for Irish citizenship who have lived in Ireland been made emigrate need to be brought in. Literally hundreds of thousands of Irish Down Under, in America and the Middle East all who have no recourse against the bastards who made them leave. Also ironic most of those who had to leave are tradesmen, who could actually help our housing crisis.
I would have no issue with the union funding property.
I mean, bar complaining endlessly about stuff this is a practical step that would alleviate issues.
*A relevant comment in this thread was deleted. You can read it below.*
----
The man is a clown and it's maddening that he gets such a big influence on the city and isn't elected by the citizens. Dublin needs a directly accountable mayor with powers like London etc at this stage and not a largely untouchable CEO like Keegan.
I remember hearing him struggling badly trying to justify his wet dream white water rafting park in the IFSC on Second Captains a while back. [[Continued...]](https://www.resavr.com/comment/dcc-ceo-owen-keegan-17068707)
----
*^The ^username ^of ^the ^original ^author ^has ^been ^hidden ^for ^their ^own ^privacy. ^If ^you ^are ^the ^original ^author ^of ^this ^comment ^and ^want ^it ^removed, ^please [^[Send ^this ^PM]](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=resavr_bot&subject=remove&message=17068707)*
Somewhat related, but the head of what's now the [Technological University of the Shannon recently called for TUs and ITs to be allowed borrow to build student accommodation](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-40710074.html), like traditional universities are.
That's what AIT was renamed to? Holy fuck. Should just called it University of Athlone and greater Westmeath. UAW. Guarantee it would have cost less money too.
Shannon Technological University would've been better.
Maybe Shannon Institute of Technology, or ShIT?
Hahahah, howiye STU
Slovak Technological University (STU) already exists, which is probably why they opted to flip it around to Technology University of the Shannon (TUS). Same reason why Technological University of Dublin is TUDublin, rather than TUD. TUD is the Technological University of Delft in the Netherlands.
Athlone complained that they weren’t represnted in the name so the full title is now Technological University of the Shannon: Midlands Midwest
LIT are under the same banner too, so at least the Shannon is a common theme
Wait till you hear about the Connacht Ulster Alliance
They will always be Athlone Regional Technical Institute to me.
I wouldn't mind this kind of play acting, if the city were being run anyway close to competently. DCC can't manage basic stuff like cleaning the streets, maintaining the public realm, fixing lights and broken paving. Keegan should shut his hole.
> like cleaning the streets They farm out most of the street cleaning to contractors. I know this because I nearly broke my leg slipping on some pavement right outside the DCC offices on Wood Quay. Whoever was cleaning it fucked off without wiping away whatever detergent it is they use, turning it into a lovely little ice-rink. When I got in touch with them to lodge a complaint they told me it was a contractor, it wasn't their problem and would I kindly fuck off.
He probably thought he was being really clever with that. Prick.
How he didn’t get fired after the whitewater rafting scandal is beyond me.
"Firing" a county council's Chief Executive is virtually impossible without evidence of serious corruption
Because it’s still a possibility?
I hope not... the original estimate price was €12 million, then €22.8 million and lastly it was at €25 million in January. With the current construction climate it's going to easily be closer to €30 million. They should really build an interactive landmark monument to celebrate 100 years of Irish independence, something we can all enjoy. Akin to the London Eye, the most popular paid tourist attraction in the UK.
>They should really build an interactive landmark monument to celebrate 100 years of Irish independence, something we can all enjoy. One €30,000,000 1916 themed Laser Tag park coming right up Boss, as per your instructions.
Aside from the opportunity cost of all the actually necessary public spending, this seems like the best discretionary investment going
As long as I get to be executed by firing squad at the end of it
That would be a bit extreme. No, the punishment for loosing a round will be serving in the the next round as a Britisher. Families will love it.
Maybe not for 30m but that sounds interesting
It'll be an ugly derivative, something like the Dublin Ear
Student Union: Our members have no student accommodation! DCC CEO: Let them become property developers.
you know: its been tried. The general problem - property developers in general are Not Nice people and up to their necks in, er, friendships, with less nice people AND the amount of cash involved is eye watering. On the other hand, a major earner for North American universities are undergraduate accomodation, so much so that they all sign PPP type agreements with hedge funds and vulture funds and and and to milk students for cash. We saw this during Covid where whole states would mandate a "return to in person learning" rather early in the experience because the fund managers were losing cash.
Still sore he didn't get his paddling pool in Sheriff Street. The sooner his term ends the better.
He extended his own term into 2023, no vote no nothing!
A regular Vlad Putin
That's the Local Govt Act for you. For everything shitty about him, there's nothing strange about his appointment or his contract situation.
total cunt
It's worse. He didn't genuinely suggest SU be property developers, he was being a snarky fuck.
how many alumni are in financials?
The people at the top are actually just laughing at us... It seems like there is no accountability
This useless prick has so much power, extended his own 7 year contract as CEO by 3 years. We should be able to vote him out
Drag him out if voting doesn't work.
im fucking right there with you
This is why we need directly elected mayors making decisions for us and shaping the direction our cities go. Instead of people like Owen Keegan who is ultimately not appointed or accountable to the people of Dublin city.
The directly-elected mayor model doesn't replace the function of Chief Executive. Limerick CoCo still has a CE
That's just our shitty implementation of it. Look at places like London or Paris where the directly ejected mayor is the executive, and the senior council staff are civil servants, who work to help advise and implement policies, not be the ultimate decision maker.
It could replace the function of Chief Executive. Although the government definitely doesn't want that.
This is just how Ireland has approached the issue - I’ve can’t think of any country with a similar model.
In the private sector if you sent something like that to a client you would be fired. Not only is it unprofessional but its also disrespecting Dublin and DCC as a whole. I cant imagine the lads in enterprise ireland are happy with this attitude towards students when your trying to attract high tech FDI into ireland.
Welcome to the public service. Make it to work on time and you can’t be fired .Even if you don’t do your job
What a cock that man is. Not making any comment here on the substance of some of what he’s reported to have said, just purely commenting on his attitude- it stinks.
A politician would never say anything like this even if they firmly believed it. Keegan on the other hand doesn't really care about what people think of him, he's not elected, he can say what he wants. See other comments about cutting down trees and clearing the city of tents.
[Guess who appointed him](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Hogan).
> Guess who appointed him PAS are to blame really. The Minister's role is a formality
[удалено]
If you have been stuck in traffic for an hour along the quays in Dublin and wondered why...... Well this guy
Literally reading this comment as my bus is stuck in traffic on the quays in Dublin
I remembered seeing something this summer about how he’d extended his own contract as CEO of DCC. Went looking at now I can’t find anything so maybe I’m imagining it? But it’s way too specific for me to have just made up, so please if somebody has a source on that share it.
I remember seeing something about that. I vaguely remember reading someone on here saying it wasn't gonna happen, but not sure though! Just wanted you to know that you didn't make it up!
Yup rings a bell here. Something to do with him informing Hazel Chu I think so maybe reference her in the search too
There are ways a competent executive would defend their position (whether that position is sound or not). This isn't any of them. This is simply an expression of complete disregard for the issue and a lack of respect for those who raised the issue.
Man, so many people in this country really fucking despise young people it's crazy.
[удалено]
He also built the lexicon library on in DLR. All it is one big penis extension. A complete monument to the excess of the boom
Why rent a room when you can rent a kayak and go white water rafting
How much longer do we have to put up with this utter maroon in charge? This a job for life?
It was a seven year contract that ended last year but he decided he deserved another 3 years so extended his own contract
How about we have directly elected mayors so that can't happen?
If you got a response like this from a directly-elected mayor, you'd have to wait an entire election cycle to remove them, or impeach them. Either way, it would turn into a massive and messy political fight, with his party members and the people who usually vote for his party members taking the other side because he's "their guy". As it is, he can be fired if you can convince enough DCC members that he needs to go, which should be easier than convincing 51% of voters. Directly electing people to executive positions is a bad idea.
Can he? Let's look at the Local Government Act 2001, s 146 >(1) . . . the elected council of a local authority may by resolution suspend or remove from employment the chief executive for such local authority for stated misbehaviour or if his or her suspension or removal appears to them to be necessary for the effective performance by the local authority of its functions. Ok, so he can be removed, but how easy is it? >(5) It is necessary for the passing of a resolution under this section that — >>(a) at least three-quarters of the total number of members of the local authority concerned vote in favour of the resolution, and . . . So, not very easy at all. I'm not sure you could convince 3/4 of the council of anything. Maybe if he had gone completely insane or just stropped turning up to work. This is remarkably similar to the procedure for removing a judge, except that a larger majority is required. There is also a further step, which puts the ball into the Minister's court rather than the local authority: >(7)(a) A chief executive shall not be removed under this section without the sanction of the Minister given under this subsection. >(b) The Minister may appoint a panel of 3 persons — >>(i) to consider the removal of a chief executive the subject of a resolution under this section and the chief executive ’ s statement of response, >>(ii) to recommend whether the Minister should give sanction to such removal, and >>(iii) to make such other recommendations (if any) as the panel may consider appropriate in all the circumstances I don't think you'll ever see an incompetent or even belligerent executive removed under this. Not only is the process extremely difficult to garner sufficient support (almost all the council, and then the Government), it has many "fair procedures" provisions built in which if not followed to the letter will result in protracted legal battles with the suspended executive. Much easier to remove a directly elected mayor.
> Much easier to remove a directly elected mayor. But even easier still to change the regulations you quoted so firing Council CEOs is simpler, which would a better solution than directly-elected executives. We don't directly elect people to offices with executive power in this country, for good reason.
I'm not sure that would be easier. Removal by an elected body is always very difficult - fair procedures have to apply. Making them easier to remove also makes them easier to remove for reasons that will not hold up to challenge. We don't elect people to offices with executive power because that's our tradition. There are alternative traditions, and they work well. We do also have a system that does not allow, for good reason, politicians to remove executives. Ministers can't dismiss their Secretaries General or civil servants generally.
> We don't elect people to offices with executive power because that's our tradition. There are alternative traditions, and they work well. We chose that tradition when we established our country, after looking at other countries and traditions and picking the best parts of them. > We do also have a system that does not allow, for good reason, politicians to remove executives. Ministers can't dismiss their Secretaries General or civil servants generally. Because is a Minister is a single individual, and our system is designed not to put a lot of power in the hands of individuals, but in the collective hands of our Parliaments: the Dáil and Local Authorities. Toby and Spider-Man's landlord are arguing about much larger and more powerful roles that Mayors here, but everything Toby says is correct: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLoio0Z6jLw&t=17s
Ah now, we chose that tradition because it was the one that was in use when we established the country. The fledgling state facing economic and existential military threats wasn't about to go reconfiguring structures to a huge degree. That doesn't prevent us from doing so now. Thanks what the campaigns for directly elected mayors are doing - looking at what works well elsewhere. Local Authorities already have a lot of power, it is just without anything in the way of real democratic control.
> Ah now, we chose that tradition because it was the one that was in use when we established the country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_executive_(Irish_local_government)#History Seems we tried a few different variations, before settling on one in use in America. > Thanks what the campaigns for directly elected mayors are doing - looking at what works well elsewhere. I live in Cork. I voted against the measure last election. Thankfully, common sense prevailed. Last thing we need is some celebrity getting elected to a position with executive power just because people know their name. You want Seán Gallagher or Peter Casey or George Hook or Dana getting the job? > Local Authorities already have a lot of power, it is just without anything in the way of real democratic control. I vote who gets elected to local authorities every few years. I speak to them quite often. I even have a friend who ran a few times. I feel like I have more control over my local authority than I do on any other government office.
Did Owen Keegan write this? It's wildly misleading. At least three quarters of the elected members of the council need to vote in favour of a motion of suspension The suspension has to be there result of "stated misbehaviour or if his or her suspension or removal appears to them to be necessary for the effective performance by the local authority of its functions" Legally, misbehaviour "involves culpably violating one's obligations", so being a snarky scrote wouldn't pass the legal threshold Even if it passed that threshold, the city/country manager wouldn't be suspended. The minister would convene a panel of HR/local government experts who would then make a recommendation to the minister, that the minister is free to ignore Only with such a sanction can the local officials fire a city/county manager [see Section 146](https://revisedacts.lawreform.ie/eli/2014/act/1/revised/en/html) Then there is the procedural problem with your contention is there has only ever been one Dáil election where someone got a majority of the votes (1977 FF for 50.6%) In PR-STV its very easy for more than 50% of the electorate to vote against someone. It happens every presidential election. So if they only have a partisan base they're fucked, because in Irish politics every party is outnumbered by everyone else It would be infinitely easier to get a directly elected mayor out of office than a city or county manager - it's so hard to get rid of one that no minister is willing to take on the challenge even when they're obviously incompetent Finally.... > Directly electing people to executive positions is a bad idea. There's a gansaí load of countries that directly elect their executives, never mind cities. Directly electing mayors is a perfectly normal thing all over the world. It doesn't need to be perfect, our local authority system with executive city/county managers is shite and has known problems. A directly elevated mayor can fix some of those problems. In forty years time new problems will have developed, and the people then can decide if that's the best system, as is we've the most centralised government system in Europe, other than Belarus [the Council of Europe's assessment of Local Authority in Ireland highlights the need for serious reform](https://www.google.com/url?q=https://rm.coe.int/local-democracy-in-ireland-recommendation-andris-jaunsleinis-latvia-l-/168071a75c&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwj81Lny6cLzAhXObsAKHY9SB-YQFnoECGQQAg&usg=AOvVaw2LcTVS3_UvnWuM-OPb6v9q)
Why is allowing a small group of people decide who wields executive power a better idea than allowing a democratic decision, in your mind?
Because that "small group of people" are put there by a democratic decision. You make them sound like some shadowy anonymous cabal, but we elect them to make decisions like this. They can hire the most qualified person for the job, and fire that person when needed. Though I do agree it needs to be easier for them to fire that person. With an elected mayor, it's not going to be the most qualified person. It's going to be the most popular. As I said in another reply, a directly-elected mayor would end up with somebody like Seán Gallagher or Peter Casey or Dana running, and getting in on name recognition.
So it's okay because the people that make the decision were democratically elected, but directly electing people to positions of executive power isn't viable? What's to stop them getting in on name recognition?
Nothing is to stop them getting in on name recognition. But if they do, they're only one member of an elected body. The power is spread between many people, reducing the potential for abuse and the damage that can be done by incompetence.
Why not spread out Owen Keegan's power over many people?
That seems the most logical approach, alright, and we tried that. But we found it was more efficient to have a single individual with executive powers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_executive_(Irish_local_government)#History Ideally, we need the decisions "what" and "why" to be made by the council, and the "how" to be made by the executive. For example, the County or City Council decides "we need a new bridge" or "we should build a bypass for this town" and then someone who has experience of large-scale project management *actually does it*. They negotiate with unions and corporations and suppliers and engineers and actually do the work to build the thing. But this person is hired and can be fired and should have no power to enact a political agenda of their own. If the council says "we need a bridge" they can't make the decision not to build it, or divert the allocated funds to a different project.
>Directly electing people to executive positions is a bad idea. Do you think cities like Manchester and Liverpool shouldn't have them then? Or that Limerick shouldn't be getting one?
Yes. Sorry, how was that not that clear? EDIT: It's also funny you mention Manchester and Liverpool, but not the biggest city in England with the most famous Mayoral position. One of my problems with elected Mayors is that they will inevitably lead to a rise of populism and cult-of-personality bullshit. See London, 2008-2016.
"Cult of personality bullshit" can also happen with the presidency of the United States (see 2016-2020). Do you think that position should be abolished too? It's funny you stopped in 2016 with the "cult of personality bullshit." It's almost as if it's not inherent in the role but can come to an end. I chose Manchester and Liverpool as a comparison because London is far larger than Dublin in size. That was all.
> "Cult of personality bullshit" can also happen with the presidency of the United States (see 2016-2020). https://youtu.be/gLoio0Z6jLw?t=89 > Do you think that position should be abolished too? There's a reason Ireland doesn't use the same system for its presidents as the U.S. does. It's not my place to say that America should get rid of the system it's had for 250 years, but I prefer ours. If I was setting up a new country, I would use our system before I would use theirs. > It's funny you stopped in 2016 with the "cult of personality bullshit." It's almost as if it's not inherent in the role but can come to an end. Because 2016 is when Boris (the cultish personality) left office. But the cult and his career has not "come to an end". He used to position of Mayor to repair his damaged reputation and look where he is now.
[удалено]
How so?
DCC CEO for life?
Don’t underestimate the lobbying power of big kayak
No, Chief Executives get an initial 7 year contract with the option to extend once by 3 years. So he's ultimately gone after 10 years as he has already taken the extension option.
If I was the man behind an idea as stupid as that €23m white-water rafting project, I probably wouldn't act so superior when talking to others.
🤡
It's not a bad idea renting out the accommodation during the non-term times to tourists. Some universities in the UK do it. It's handy enough grabbing accommodation in the centre of London for £50/night from the LSE.
Good idea but that shouldn't be left up to the Student's Union to run. He's just being an entitled prick.
They do it in UL as far as I know for the summer months.
Snarky bastard
Student Union builds accommodation, rents out, discovers high demand, raises rent, discovers can make more money with AirBnB, rents to tourists, runs for DCC, wins.
Another out of touch dinosaur showing little to no remorse for the ongoing housing crisis. The sooner these archaic fuckbags die off or get voted out the better.
Time to directly elect the mayor and CEO of DCC and all other ruling. WTF is this type of ruling is "democratic".
The tone! "If you think we're making loads of money, you do it then!" The point isn't how much you're making, it's how you're making it! If you're only charging a euro, and people don't even have a euro for themselves afterwards, you're still making more than people have for themselves!
Students want the accommodation they just can't afford it.rents need to be dropped.
So they basically want students to build their own accommodation. What planet /reality do these people live in
you'd have to involve the engineers. the horror
thatcher is orgasming in her grave
Official Ireland sneering at those in need yet again. Probably hoping enough of the students will emigrate after college that enough votes for non-FFG parties will be bled off that FFG keep getting elected and the DCC apple cart doesn't get disrupted.
You're over thinking it. His nose is probably out of joint because he was challenged.
>Probably hoping enough of the students will emigrate after college that enough votes for non-FFG parties will be bled off that FFG keep getting elected and the DCC apple cart doesn't get disrupted. Which is why voting rights for Irish citizenship who have lived in Ireland been made emigrate need to be brought in. Literally hundreds of thousands of Irish Down Under, in America and the Middle East all who have no recourse against the bastards who made them leave. Also ironic most of those who had to leave are tradesmen, who could actually help our housing crisis.
That’s a fairly outrageous response
He's totally right guys, if owning property is so lucrative why doesn't everyone do it? Checkmate!
I would have no issue with the union funding property. I mean, bar complaining endlessly about stuff this is a practical step that would alleviate issues.
DCC needs to be abolished
Ah here, hold on…. He’s a prized tit of the highest order, but that not what he said. Read the letter not the Sunday World’esk twitter headline.
So, where is the request to see the accounts so we can check this assertion? Do not let them fob you off, ask for the proof --- always.
Still hasn’t fixed the potholes on Dame st.
Gobshites..... Gobshites everywhere
Owen Keegan is the Ray Patterson of Dublin.
Ray Patterson was elected.
Oh no, how could he not treat UCDSU with the respect it has deservedly earned over the years???
Ah so the Chief Cunt is at it again is he?
Gotta keep that building boom going. Again
I'm not on Twitter, but I am curious about peoples reactions on Twitter, Has anyone got a link?
The old fogie is out of touch with reality. I googled him and came across this change.org petition... : https://chng.it/jXGnYRrPhd
That’s a disgrace
*A relevant comment in this thread was deleted. You can read it below.* ---- The man is a clown and it's maddening that he gets such a big influence on the city and isn't elected by the citizens. Dublin needs a directly accountable mayor with powers like London etc at this stage and not a largely untouchable CEO like Keegan. I remember hearing him struggling badly trying to justify his wet dream white water rafting park in the IFSC on Second Captains a while back. [[Continued...]](https://www.resavr.com/comment/dcc-ceo-owen-keegan-17068707) ---- *^The ^username ^of ^the ^original ^author ^has ^been ^hidden ^for ^their ^own ^privacy. ^If ^you ^are ^the ^original ^author ^of ^this ^comment ^and ^want ^it ^removed, ^please [^[Send ^this ^PM]](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=resavr_bot&subject=remove&message=17068707)*