Article: An Taisce complains to European Commission over road projects

Tech3

AN TAISCE has made a formal complaint to the European Commission that plans for a highway between Dublin and Derry involve a “transboundary breach” of the EU’s directive requiring strategic environmental assessment (SEA) of major projects.

It also claims that the directive is being breached by the National Roads Authority (NRA) in pursuing plans for more motorways and dual-carriageways and seeks “compliance action” on an alleged breach of the Habitats Directive by the planned New Ross bypass in Co Wexford.

Describing this bypass as “the largest single intervention in an area of sensitive ecology and landscape”, the complaint notes that it would include a high-level bridge 4km south of New Ross in place of an original, more modest route immediately adjacent to the town.

The bridge “cuts through the hill at Camlin on the Co Wexford side and passes over the river Barrow, candidate Special Area of Conservation (SAC), to the Pink Rock in Co Kilkenny within sight of the area around the President John F Kennedy family farmstead at Dunganstown”.

It notes that a legal challenge to An Bord Pleanála’s approval of this scheme failed in the High Court on March 2nd and says the judgment of Mr Justice Hedigan failed to have regard to the review terms of the EU directive on environmental impact assessment.

An Taisce claims the NRA “has been given virtually autonomous legal status by the Irish Government to plan, seek consents for and funding for motorway/dual-carriageway schemes, both contained in the National Development Plan and even not”.

These included the Atlantic motorway/dual-carriageway from Letterkenny, Co Donegal, running via Sligo, Knock airport, Tuam, Ennis, Limerick, Mallow, Cork and Waterford, connecting with the New Ross bypass, with a new N30 link to the N11 bypassing Clonroche, Co Wexford.

Further sections of the N11 and N2 were to be upgraded to motorway standard. “As in the case of New Ross, a genuinely needed bypass is being used as the pretext for constructing massive inter-regional motorways or dual-carriageways”, An Taisce says.

In a letter to EU environment commissioner Janez Potocnik, it notes that Co Meath alone would have four motorways running through it.

“The Irish Government is also already committed to making extensive contribution to a new dual-carriageway running through Northern Ireland from the Monaghan border to Derry and the upgrading of the Belfast-Larne link,” An Taisce writes.

“The NRA is at advanced contract negotiation for the 80km Tuam to Crusheen sections of the Atlantic Corridor, and the New Ross bypass” it says, adding that plans for the M20 Limerick-Mallow-Cork section had been lodged with Bord Pleanála along with the Cork to Killarney N21.

Rather than scaling down schemes to reflect the lack of exchequer funding, the NRA and Minister for Transport Noel Dempsey were “actively working on a mechanism to subvert Government borrowing limits in finding a means to proceed with the road programme”.

This was to be achieved through either public-private partnerships (PPPs), “the plundering of the National Pension Reserve Fund or some sort of special dispensation from the European Central Bank through the European Investment Bank . . . The energy and resources being devoted to proceeding and securing funding for these road schemes and the secrecy with which it is being conducted and the lack of media or public awareness of the issues is astonishing”, it says.

Proceeding would “create a debt mountain for the next generation on top of that already incurred through the Irish banking and property collapse . . . at a time when the decarbonisation of power generation and transport ought to be the greatest priority”.

A contract for Crusheen-Tuam? Did they not know that the Gort-Crusheen contract was signed 2 years ago.
link

L1011

They;'re still banging on with the "4 motorways in meath!!!!" bull**** I see.

Yes, there'll be 4 motorways in Meath.

Two of which glance off it on their way somewhere more important. One of which terminates there and goes nowhere else.

There will only be one proper strategic motorway SERVING Meath. Christ, I hope the commission show An Taisce where 1956 is and ask them to stay there.

mysterious

MYOB wrote: »

They;'re still banging on with the "4 motorways in meath!!!!" bull**** I see.

Yes, there'll be 4 motorways in Meath.

Two of which glance off it on their way somewhere more important. One of which terminates there and goes nowhere else.

There will only be one proper strategic motorway SERVING Meath. Christ, I hope the commission show An Taisce where 1956 is and ask them to stay there.

The M3 was a horrific plan imo. Will lead to more urban sprawl and bad planning again.

It could of been planned better. Been correct about two only going alongside the county. In the UK you wouldn't have 4 motorways passing into one county in the same Northerly and westerly direction. M3 and M2 wouldn't even get off the ground in planning in the UK either. Look at the distance between, the M1, M11, A1(M) sections...

While I think this report is just more gossip central, there is some truth to this madness of just buildnig motorways for the sake of building them.

BluntGuy

mysterious wrote: »

While I think this report is just more gossip central, there is some truth to this madness of just buildnig motorways for the sake of building them.

There is a degree of that.

But An Taisce seem to be diametrically opposed to any motorway development and don't recognise the safety element brought by DC

munchkin_utd

An Taisce seem to be way off the scale here.

They are an organisation established to protect irelands heritage.
But they are waffling on about the cost of motorways warning that :

Proceeding would “create a debt mountain for the next generation on top of that already incurred through the Irish banking and property collapse . . . at a time when the decarbonisation of power generation and transport ought to be the greatest priority”.

Now. What has that got to do with preserving irelands natural and built heritige??
If they want to claim that a specific motorway or road will spoil the view from some derelict castle or endanger a rare nettle then fair enough.

But this here is a heritige organisation dabbling in politics, eco-warriorism and economics in an effort to scupper road building at any cost.

If this is their position, then anything An Taisce say from now on against road building has to be considered in the light that no matter what the merits are of a project are, no matter how non-threatening it is to heritage issues, their starting point before even considering heritage issues is that roads are wrong so you will never get a neutral, balanced and objective standpoint from them.

darkman2

They are serial objectors.

munchkin_utd

There is a difference though between being serial objectors because they feel that schemes can be improved to be less damaging to the habitat and heritage of the country, and being serial objectors because they think roads are inherently evil and that taking 6 to 8 hours to get across the tiny island is infinitely preferable than building roads and by passes.

An Taisce seem to fall in the second (road are evil) camp. Which was news to me!

antoobrien

Rather than scaling down schemes to reflect the lack of exchequer funding, the NRA and Minister for Transport Noel Dempsey were “actively working on a mechanism to subvert Government borrowing limits in finding a means to proceed with the road programme”.

That one line tells you the story - a recession is the perfect time to do this kind of work for several reasons:
1) Creates employment (or keeps some, take your pick)
2) Costs are lower (labour, materials, equipment hire, land, etc)
3) While capital spending is an immediate cost, it is a long term investment in the economy to be recouped over many years, not an instant return

These people must subscribe to dev's vision of Ireland being self sufficient by every household being able to grow it's own food and not have any necessity for industry, tourism and recreation. It's like they want the country to sign up to a national economic and cultural suicide pact in order to save their vision of the country's heritage (which can't be saved if we don't have an economy)

KevR

BluntGuy wrote: »

But An Taisce seem to be diametrically opposed to any motorway development and don't recognise the safety element brought by DC

They will have blood on their hands with all the delaying of important road projects.


I really wish the government would take them to task on their serial objecting which is highly costly to the state. Usually, they are objecting to things which the vast majority of people want - do we live in a democratic country or not? It really doesn't seem like it when a small minority can cause so must disruption to the wishes of the majority.


When my exams are over I will be looking into the possibility of joining An Taisce. I will join if I will be able to vote against proposals for lodging pathetic objections.

BluntGuy

It's such a pity that An Taisce continue to make so many people bitter towards them, because we DO need a group like them. A group that does look out for our heritage and our environment, but is sensible in the way they go about it. Blanket objection isn't sensible.

123easy

******* eco terrorists. If they had there way no road would have been built in the last 15 years.

They are basically a very small minority of dry *****s & unemployable headbangers trying to forcefully impose their silly narrow minded views on the silent majority. Its high time they were told go **** off to the land they came from

Zoney

In fairness they have been among the few to speak out at some developer-planned heritage destruction schemes of the Celtic Tiger too. A pity their reputation is hurt by this kind of poorly informed and anti-roads agenda.

Judgement Day

123easy wrote: »

******* eco terrorists. If they had there way no road would have been built in the last 15 years.

They are basically a very small minority of dry *****s & unemployable headbangers trying to forcefully impose their silly narrow minded views on the silent majority. Its high time they were told go **** off to the land they came from

Is that you Bertie?
What an enlightened FF backwoodsman type comment! It's attitudes like this that have the country in its present state. Perhaps anybody who cares about the environment should go off and commit suicide?

wellbutty

BluntGuy wrote: »

It's such a pity that An Taisce continue to make so many people bitter towards them, because we DO need a group like them. A group that does look out for our heritage and our environment, but is sensible in the way they go about it. Blanket objection isn't sensible.

Agree we need them but their stupid statements are getting everyone's backs up. As has been said, there's effectively only 2 motorways in Meath. Meath is the county bordering the capital city of this country, infrastructure is needed. We can't stop things being built because there might be another pickaxe handle buried deep in the ground.

This comment is a joke:

The bridge “cuts through the hill at Camlin on the Co Wexford side and passes over the river Barrow, candidate Special Area of Conservation (SAC), to the Pink Rock in Co Kilkenny within sight of the area around the President John F Kennedy family farmstead at Dunganstown”.

123easy

Judgement Day wrote: »

Is that you Bertie?
What an enlightened FF backwoodsman type comment! It's attitudes like this that have the country in its present state. Perhaps anybody who cares about the environment should go off and commit suicide?

Got it in one dude! well done. At last a positive contribution to the state from the eco nutters brigade

Judgement Day

123easy wrote: »

Got it in one dude! well done. At last a positive contribution to the state from the eco nutters brigade

Still feeling sore about having to give back your pension?

123easy

someone has to fund all these legal objections you know! you hardly expect the objectors to pay for them especially when they keep losing them;)

Irish and Proud

An Taisce is a waste of public time and money IMO. They obviously don't serve the interests of the country's infrastructure needs, but they also don't serve the interests of national heritage either - by getting peoples backs up and turning them off heritage. An Taisce seem to be doing a great job there! :rolleyes:

I'd say, scrap An Taisce - as a country, we simply can't afford this bull. To protect our national heritage, we need a credible body that puts forward reasonable observations. Now, we know about the M3 routing etc, but An Taisce (as many here say) are just serial objectors - they serve neither our country or its heritage.

I am starting to wonder if they are just trying to look as if they are doing something in order to avoid An Bord Snip!

Regards!

Alun

Irish and Proud wrote: »

I'd say, scrap An Taisce - as a country, we simply can't afford this bull. To protect our national heritage, we need a credible body that puts forward reasonable observations. Now, we know about the M3 routing etc, but An Taisce (as many here say) are just serial objectors - they serve neither our country or its heritage.

I agree, they're largely a waste of space, and money. When I'm over in the UK I sometimes visit National Trust properties, and always get the whole "It's cheaper if you're a member" spiel when I pay for an individual ticket. When I then say that I live in Ireland and not the UK they then try and tell me that I'd get a cheaper rate if I was a member of An Taisce, and try to convince me that it's Irelands equivalent of the NT. While on paper that may be true, they're not even remotely in the same league, and I make sure they know my opinions on them.

L1011

Cheaper? It used to be free at virtually every site if you were a member of the NT, which I still am come to think of it...

baalthor

An Taisce are a private organisation. If they were a goverment agency no doubt the director would be someone like Tom Parlon who would take a more um.. nuanced view of the balance between infrastructure and the environment :-D

Wild Bill

An Taisce are middle and upper-class elitists with quasi-religious notions about "the environment". All very amusing except they are an organization which by legislation has some statutory powers to indulge their fetishes.

Reference to them should be immediately removed from all legal instruments in the light of their entering the political fray in areas unrelated to their "environmental" agenda.

I'm not much impressed either by some who argue that "in England" you'd not get four motorways in one county etc.

Firstly - the fact that it is "in England", a country with the second worst infrastructure in Northern Europe (after us) has nothing to do with the debate here.

Secondly - the quasi-mystic "environmentalism" that folk like An Taisce parrot came from England. They lifted policies which have some support in the most crowded place on Earth (Southern England) and plonked them lock, stock and barrel into Ireland, one of the least crowded places in Europe. "Inappropriate" would be their own snooty term for the introduction of such a non-native species of religion.

Thirdly - The green agenda is such in England that they build de-facto motorways but are afraid to call them "motorways". The A14 and the road from Hollyhead to Chester across North Wales being two examples that spring to mind.

If you count all the HQ type dual-carriageways in England you'll find that four motorways touching Meath is certainly NOT something that "wouldn't happen" -it's just brain-dead anti-roads sloganeering.

:cool:

DWCommuter

munchkin_utd wrote: »

An Taisce seem to be way off the scale here.

They are an organisation established to protect irelands heritage.
But they are waffling on about the cost of motorways warning that :

Now. What has that got to do with preserving irelands natural and built heritige??
If they want to claim that a specific motorway or road will spoil the view from some derelict castle or endanger a rare nettle then fair enough.

But this here is a heritige organisation dabbling in politics, eco-warriorism and economics in an effort to scupper road building at any cost.

If this is their position, then anything An Taisce say from now on against road building has to be considered in the light that no matter what the merits are of a project are, no matter how non-threatening it is to heritage issues, their starting point before even considering heritage issues is that roads are wrong so you will never get a neutral, balanced and objective standpoint from them.

They are trying to cash in (excuse the pun) on peoples mentality towards the economic problems.

Its pathetic really.