Advertisement
Private Profiles - an update on how they will be changing here
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.

"Europe to investigate unauthorised change of ownership of N8"

  • 12-05-2009 7:25pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 Amtmann


    So says Kathy Sinnott's website, dated 25 April 2009:
    EUROPEAN Commission officials have agreed to investigate further the controversial change of both use and ownership of the 10 km N8 Watergrasshill Bypass.

    A delegation of local people from Watergrasshill travelled to Brussels this week to present a petition on the matter with the European Commission on the invitation of Vice President of the Petitions Committee, Kathy Sinnott MEP for Munster.

    Local man and petitioner Denis Dineen illustrated how, in 2006, 2.4km of public road, a section of the N8 Watergrasshill bypass, was confiscated under Public Private Partnership agreement to funnel drivers, who wish to bypass the village of Watergrasshill, into the toll.

    "Users of this stretch of road have no option but to pay the toll; there is no turning back,” explained Mr. Dineen.

    "In addition the private company have erected their own road signage, for example when they are doing maintenance on the road, cutting the grass or gritting the once public road. All this blatantly constitutes a change of ownership and use of the road."

    Hosting MEP to the petition, Kathy Sinnott said that the road has been stolen from the people for private profit.

    "This is unacceptable; this particular stretch of road belongs to the people as it is publically funded. Under EU law, within five years of EU money being spent on a European road, no change of use or ownership can be undertaken without the express permission of the EU in advance of the changes. It is clear that this has been violated as the Commission had no prior knowledge of granting permission for such a change when I contacted them in 2006."

    In their response, the Commission revealed that they have carried out extensive dialogue with the Irish Government who denies that an unauthorised change of use and ownership has taken place. However, they admitted that there are still questions to be asked as evidence to the contrary was presented.

    “I hold the Commission to account and ask them to pressurise the Irish Government and the NRA into explaining the issue fully. There are specific rules in place. The Commission needs to follow their own rules. This behaviour shows a pattern of disregard for the people and I invite the Commission to visit the area, travel this road and talk to the residents whose lives are being affected by this instead of accepting the word of the national authorities."

    Following the hearing of this petition, the European Commission have informed the petitioners that they will be visiting the area but the date is still to be determined.

    Thoughts?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,082 Chris_533976


    Thoughts: She's behind the times and hasnt taken the time to notice that the self same thing will happen with the M7/8 scheme once the Culahill roundabout gets removed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,093 Amtmann


    Out of curiosity, is this purely an M8 phenomenon? What about the M6 and M7 - will public sections of those motorways be subject to toll eventually too? Take the M7 for instance: will a section of Nenagh to Castletown also be incorporated into the M7/M8 sheme?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,045 AugustusMaximus


    Wait for this one.

    Kathy Sinnott wanted an at-grade roundabout to be installed to link the end of the 2.6KM of road to the old N8 road North of Glanmire.

    Kathy Sinnott is a fool and worse than that she likes to claim expenses fraudulently.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,219 invincibleirish


    Excellent electioneering by Sinnott, thats the crucial Watergrasshill/maligned commuter vote sewn up. What she & residents must realise when they talk about the road belonging to the people is that it does not literally belong to them, the WGH locals.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,010 Tech3


    That article doesnt explain the situation clearly. Why not just travel along the R639 to avoid the toll?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,219 invincibleirish


    Thats the residents problem, why pay the toll when you can take the cheap option of the R639 through WGH and its charming Traffic Corps presence, its what lots of motorists & HGV drivers do.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,045 AugustusMaximus


    Thats the residents problem, why pay the toll when you can take the cheap option of the R639 through WGH and its charming Traffic Corps presence, its what lots of motorists & HGV drivers do.

    You don't have to go through Watergrasshill after the road was realigned.

    There is also the factor that the traffic lights at the end of the village are setup to give very little time to the option of driving through the village.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,638 Zoney


    Awkward as it would be to arrange any solution, they probably have a technically valid case.

    The inherent problem of course is direct tolling of critical national infrastructure - none of our motorways are really "optional" routes despite parallel old N roads - these are in some cases poor quality even for an R road, the class they now belong to.

    Motorists do pay a substantial amount in taxes - and while I'm not against some part of this revenue being used to contribute to general expenditure, I am quite against our inability to properly fund the state in general (and I do not consider the consumption taxes that came rolling in during the boom years a suitable or adequate means for raising revenue for the state - the most equitable and progressive tax is income tax).

    Apart from anything else, direct tolling is a woefully inefficient means of raising revenue (the M50 shenangans bring this to new heights though).


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,389 ✭✭✭ jhegarty


    tech2 wrote: »
    That article doesnt explain the situation clearly. Why not just travel along the R639 to avoid the toll?

    The government + eu paid for a bypass (the n8).

    Then a private company said , we will have that , and it's now can't be used for anything except accessing the toll road. There is no longer a bypass.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 78 ✭✭✭ rekrow


    Furet wrote: »
    Out of curiosity, is this purely an M8 phenomenon? What about the M6 and M7 - will public sections of those motorways be subject to toll eventually too? Take the M7 for instance: will a section of Nenagh to Castletown also be incorporated into the M7/M8 sheme?

    The problem appears when there is no junction at the beginning or end of a PPP scheme. The same occurs on the M4 coming from the west. There is a stretch of road before the M4 starts that can only be used if you continue onto the private road. My big issue is that the tolls are being strategically placed that in places that are awkward to avoid. For instance if the M50 toll had been placed between the N4 and N7 junctions it would be easier to bypass via Clondalkin/Liffey Valley. If the took the approach that the full length of the N8 was tolled then the idea of going through villages to avoid a single point of journey toll would be removed. I was in Canada last year and the toll road around Toronto was great you paid for the length of your journey along the route but the drive saved a good deal of time and was worth paying for.

    I am sure the biggest problem that the watergrasshill residents have is not the ownership of the road or the change of use but the fact that Dublin Cork motorists especially HGVs are avoiding the toll and still going through their community, which I agree is unfair when other towns along the route have a free route.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,979 ✭✭✭✭ AlekSmart


    It`s all about Political scams.....;)

    If we take,for example,the nightmare scenario (for the Prvate investors) presently unfolding whereby the actual count of vehicles passing through their "Facilities" is decilining rapidly then we can imagine the nature and content of the telephone conversations with Noel Dempsey......."Where`s all the traffic you PROMISED us Minister ?"........."Eh ...oh yea...urm...ah....just hang on a bit till I get rid of 300 CIE Buses,that should get a few oul motors back out there eh ??"...... :D

    PPP......Its the way forward !!


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,698 ✭✭✭ D'Peoples Voice


    Furet wrote: »
    So says Kathy Sinnott's website, dated 25 April 2009:



    Thoughts?
    fop her off for two more years, then the 5 years will be up,
    then simply apply for change of ownership.
    The EU will see the sense in approving such a request.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,781 ✭✭✭ Carawaystick


    AlekSmart wrote: »
    It`s all about Political scams.....;)

    If we take,for example,the nightmare scenario (for the Prvate investors) presently unfolding whereby the actual count of vehicles passing through their "Facilities" is decilining rapidly then we can imagine the nature and content of the telephone conversations with Noel Dempsey......."Where`s all the traffic you PROMISED us Minister ?"........."Eh ...oh yea...urm...ah....just hang on a bit till I get rid of 300 CIE Buses,that should get a few oul motors back out there eh ??"...... :D

    PPP......Its the way forward !!

    wow that's so cynical it might just be true! lol!


Advertisement