Paul Murphy: Council blocked from voting on huge rent hike
Paul Murphy questioned the Taoiseach about local democracy after South Dublin County Council sought to raise rents for 20,000 households without a councillor vote. He asked whether councillors should be allowed to call a special meeting and whether the Chief Executive is legally required to increase rents.
Paul Murphy sets out a specific case: South Dublin County Council reportedly moved to hike rents for council tenants, HAP tenants, homeless HAP and AHB tenants by an average of 1,000 euros, and attempted to implement the change as an executive decision rather than through a budget vote.
Eleven councillors signed a motion to demand a special meeting and a section 140 motion to pause the rent increase until the previously agreed consultation could occur. Council management has ruled the motion invalid and refused the special meeting, arguing the motion would prevent a function the Chief Executive must perform.
The Taoiseach questioned the paradox of raising concerns about low local autonomy while asking central government to intervene in council business. He said he did not have the specifics and urged cooperation with the chair, resisting a direct takeover of local authority powers.
Murphy frames the exchange as a test of local democracy and accountability - whether elected councillors can convene and vote on a major policy affecting thousands, and whether unelected executives can bypass local decision-making. The exchange raises questions about autonomy, procedural fairness and who holds power over local housing decisions.
What happened
Paul Murphy sets out a specific case: South Dublin County Council reportedly moved to hike rents for council tenants, HAP tenants, homeless HAP and AHB tenants by an average of 1,000 euros, and attempted to implement the change as an executive decision rather than through a budget vote.
Councillors' response
Eleven councillors signed a motion to demand a special meeting and a section 140 motion to pause the rent increase until the previously agreed consultation could occur. Council management has ruled the motion invalid and refused the special meeting, arguing the motion would prevent a function the Chief Executive must perform.
Taoiseach's reply
The Taoiseach questioned the paradox of raising concerns about low local autonomy while asking central government to intervene in council business. He said he did not have the specifics and urged cooperation with the chair, resisting a direct takeover of local authority powers.
Why it matters
Murphy frames the exchange as a test of local democracy and accountability - whether elected councillors can convene and vote on a major policy affecting thousands, and whether unelected executives can bypass local decision-making. The exchange raises questions about autonomy, procedural fairness and who holds power over local housing decisions.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Other speeches
Tego samego dnia All speeches from this day →
Carol Nolan
Carol Nolan: Accuses Sinn Féin of Moral Incoherence
Cian O'Callaghan
Cian O'Callaghan: Questions €1,500 gifts at Rotunda
George Lawlor
George Lawlor: Ask on AI Observatory and Jobs Protection
Tom Brabazon
Tom Brabazon: Backing Bill to Speed Access to Digital Evidence
Danny Healy-Rae
Danny Healy-Rae: Make Electronic Evidence Mandatory to Tackle Drug Gangs
Joe O'Reilly
Joe O'Reilly: Include Addison's Disease in Long-Term Illness Scheme
Transcript
Taoiseach, I wonder have you had any discussion about local democracy with your European counterparts and the fact that Ireland has the lowest levels of autonomy and local democracy in all of Europe. I'll give you a dramatic illustration of this. I've raised before with you the attempt by South Dublin County Council to massively hike the rents for 20,000 families council tenants, HAP tenants, homeless HAP, AHB tenants, an average of 1,000 euros. They're trying to do this without a vote. So they didn't include it in the budget, then they tried to say it's going to be implemented from the 1st of July because it's an executive function, we'll just set it. The councillors, 11 councillors signed a motion to say to call a special meeting to hear a section 140 motion to stop this rent increase going ahead until the previously unanimously agreed consultation would take place. Just yesterday council management have ruled that out. The motion is considered invalid and the request for a special meeting of the council is not being granted. One of the reasons they do so is because they say the motion is effectively seeking to prevent the performance of a function which the Chief Executive is required by law to perform. The Chief Executive is not required to increase rents. Can you confirm that and do you agree that the councillors should be allowed to meet and should be allowed to vote? Deputy Murphy on a separate question as well as the issue of autonomy. It's kind of a paradoxical proposition you've put to me because you've said we have the lowest level of local autonomy and at the same time you're asking me to intervene in what the council are doing. Deputy, we have 10 others to come in. Please co-operate with the chair. We can't have it both ways and we tend to have it both ways. We just had a debate earlier this afternoon in terms of derelict sites and everybody saying it's all your fault. You can't have it both ways and then say in respect of this that we should intervene and essentially take over the powers of local authority executives or indeed councillors for that reason. I don't have the specifics of it Deputy. Deputy Murphy, you know you're working against the chair. I'd ask you Deputy to co-operate with the chair. I'm asking that to co-operate with the chair on behalf of your colleagues to get an answer. But you want me to intervene.