Junior minister accused of ‘Fine Gael dog whistling’ over Dublin transport plan

Labour leader Ivana Bacik has accused Minister of State Emer Higgins of engaging in “Fine Gael dog whistling” over her intervention in the proposed Dublin City Council Transport Plan.

Ms Bacik described Ms Higgins’ comments as “a really inappropriate intervention by a junior minister seeking it seems to derail the traffic plan agreed for Dublin City Council by councillors”.

Taoiseach Simon Harris said, however, that Ms Higgins’ intervention was “entirely appropriate”, adding that “when you become a minister you don’t lose your right to speak up or to speak out in relation to issues”.

[ Watered-down Dublin traffic plan should allay traders’ fears ]

A senior council official confirmed on Monday that Ms Higgins has joined some traders in seeking a delay until at least 2025 in the implementation of the changes because of concerns about the impact the plan could have on jobs and retail sales in the city.

The plan was intended to come into effect on August 1st and is designed to tackle the city’s worsening traffic congestion.

It aims to “remove traffic that has no destination in the city”, with almost two out of every three motorists passing through rather than stopping in town.

The measures do not ban motorists from crossing any Liffey bridge currently open to cars, and the council said access to city car parks will be maintained.

Ms Bacik said Ms Higgins’ intervention “sounds a bit like Fine Gael dog whistling to me”.

“This does raise concerns about local democracy about the appropriateness of ministers intervening where decisions have been made at local government level,” she said, adding that “we’ve seen international reports noting just how weak our local government system is”.

[ Some free advice for Fine Gael on Dublin’s transport plan ]

But describing Ms Higgins’ action as entirely appropriate, Mr Harris said she was “sharing the views of the business representatives with the City Council”.

He said the minister had been “very clear in all her public commentary … that it is a matter for the City Council to decide”.