Lorry ban sought as plan for Slane bypass rejected

The Irish Times – Thursday, March 8, 2012

A BYPASS of Slane village is unlikely to be built for at least a decade following yesterday’s refusal of planning approval by An Bord Pleanála, Department of Transport sources have said. The new road would have bypassed the existing Boyne bridge and N2 road through the Co Meath village. In its refusal yesterday, the board said the proposed 3.5km bypass, which was to be located 1.1km to the east of the current bridge, was within the “viewshed” of the Brú na Bóinne Unesco world heritage site, which includes the neolithic monuments of Newgrange, Knowth and Dowth. It said the scheme “would be acceptable only where it has been demonstrated that no appropriate alternative is available”.

Campaign group Save Newgrange which opposed the bypass immediately called for a heavy goods vehicle (HGV) ban in the village, while the Slane Bridge Action Group said it was “devastated” by the refusal and expressed scepticism that a HGV ban could or would be enforced. The Slane Bypass Group also expressed disappointment. Minister of State and local TD Shane McEntee said planning for an alternative route for the bypass should begin immediately. However, the National Roads Authority (NRA) said the board’s decision “rejects any proposed bypass of Slane and is focused on a traffic-management solution”. This was “disappointing especially for the people of Slane, but the NRA accepts the decision”. The NRA was told last year to finish planning on all current road schemes and it does not have a budget to prepare a new route.

A Department of Transport spokesman said: “The Minister has asked the NRA to review the matter and return with recommendations in the near future on how to proceed”. But sources said the decision, taken in the current economic context, effectively meant the bypass “will not be built in the next decade at least”. Speaking to The Irish Times, John Ryle of the Slane Bridge Action Group said the locals were “shattered”. “We don’t see why aesthetics, a view, should take precedence over people’s lives.” Mr Ryle said there were already extensive traffic-calming measures in Slane and a 30km per hour speed limit leading to the bridge, “but nobody obeys it”. “What respect does a runaway truck have for a speed limit, whether it is 30 kilometres or 100 kilometres an hour?” He recalled the death of local toddler David Garvey (2) on the bridge in recent years, and said this had been one of 22 fatal crashes he could recall. He did not want to be a “prophet of doom” but he believed there would be further crashes on the existing route in the absence of a bypass.

Save Newgrange spokesman Vincent Salafia said the group urged Minister for Transport Leo Varadkar, Meath County Council and the roads authority to immediately implement a HGV ban in the village “in order to protect drivers, villagers and the heritage value of the village”. The bypass decision was “a huge victory for heritage and sustainable development in Ireland”. “The Unesco world heritage site is our most popular tourist attraction, which will play a key role in our economic recovery, and it deserves the highest level of legal protection.”

Slane bypass plan rejected

Letter to the Editor – The Irish Times – Friday, March 9, 2012

Sir, – After the decision to route the M3 close to Tara when a viable alternative existed, I doubted that the proximity of a Unesco world heritage site to the proposed N2 Slane bypass would influence the planners, whatever about the NRA and Meath Co Council officials.

Happily I was mistaken (Home News, March 8th). It is worth citing part of An Bord Pleanála’s judgment to drive home this point: “The board considers that the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the rural character, landscape setting, cultural amenity and archaeological heritage of the Brú na Bóinne archaeological complex, and would be contrary to the heritage protection provisions of the [County Meath] Development Plan. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area”.

An important question remains. Why won’t the NRA and Meath Co Council implement a heavy goods vehicle ban to address the genuine and important safety concerns of local residents? After all, the distance between Dublin Port and Ardee is 73km via the M1 and 74km via the N2. – Yours, etc,

Dr JARLATH MOLLOY,
Rue Fabre,
Montreal,
Quebec,
Canada.

SAVE NEWGRANGE – PRESS RELEASE – 7 March 2012

‘Group Welcomes An Bord Pleanala Decision on Slane Bypass – Calls for HGV Ban’

Save Newgrange welcomes the announcement today that An Bord Pleanala has refused planning permission for the N2 Slane Bypass, in County Meath – and calls on the Minister for Transport, the NRA and Meath County Council to immediately implement a HGV ban of the village.

The group had launched a Facebook campaign, after the route, which was proposed to pass within 500m of the Newgrange/Bru na Boinne UNESCO World Heritage Site, was announced by Meath County Council , in December 2009.

Extensive legal submissions were made by members of the group, to An Bord Pleanala, and numerous high-profile archaeologists, such as Professor George Eogan, Professor Emeritus of Archaeology at UCD, objected to the plan.

The 3.5km bypass was to be part of the larger M2/A5 Dublin to Derry road upgrade, which is still in planning in Northern Ireland, and which is to be the longest road project ever built in Ireland. It had been mooted as part of the St. Andrews Agreement.

Other objections were voiced, regarding the design and funding of the bypass, by Dr. Edgar Morgenroth, Transport Economist with the E.S.R.I., who called it “idiotic.”

Campaign spokesperson, Vincent Salafia, said:

“This is a huge victory for heritage and sustainable development in Ireland.

“This UNESCO World Heritage Site is our most popular tourist attraction, which will play a key role in our economic recovery, and it deserves the highest level of legal protection.

“We urge the authorities to immediately implement a HGV ban in the village, in order to protect drivers, villagers and the heritage value of the village.

ENDS

Contact: Vincent Salafia 087-132-3365

NEWS STORIES:

- The Irish Times – Breaking News – Planning refused for Slane bypass
- RTE News: – Permission refused for proposed Slane bypass
-The Irish Independent – Slane bypass plan rejected as “too close to heritage site”
- BBC News – Slane by-pass planning permission refused

The Sustainable Revolution;

Radical Constitutional and Institutional Change in Ireland

By Vincent Salafia,B.A., J.D., LL.M (TCD)

Sligo Sustainable Futures Conference – IT Sligo’s Hume Hall  – 6 March 2012

Revolution! Vive la revolution!

That is the cry we associate with people like Che Guevara and Fidel Castro, or expect to hear within the Occupy Movement or the Arab Spring.  So it was somewhat extraordinary in January 2011, when none other than the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon called for a “revolution” -  and even more remarkable when he did it inside the World Economic Forum, in Davos, Switzerland.

The Secretary-General was addressing a session on redefining sustainable development, and said we need to revolutionise how the world defines prosperity and its relationship to nature, based on the twin pillars of a sustainable development; a relationship to that breaks with the profligacy of the past; one that is based on an equality that embraces empowerment for all.  He said that the 20^th century model of development, based on mining our way to growth and burning our way to prosperity, is a recipe for national disaster – a ”global suicide pact.“

Collectively, we Irish believed in consumption without consequences. The arrival of the IMF/EU/European bank troika shattered that belief, and we woke up to find we had entered a national suicide pact – and that we now lived in a failed State. Our form of development, which went into a frenzy over the last ten to fifteen years, is now the model of unsustainable development.

I welcome the Secretary-General’s call, and am delighted to be given this opportunity to explain why.

Good morning ladies and gentlemen. My name is Vincent Salafia . Firstly, I’d like to thank our host, Dr Liam  Leonard , for giving me this opportunity to take part in such a critically important conversation – which he has fostered . I would also like to thank him for his tireless work in terms of comprehensively, and accurately documenting the environmental movement here in Ireland. He himself deserves an award for all of his invaluable work.

Currently, I am Guest Lecturer in Environmental Legislation and Planning and Risk Assessment, in the Management School at Queen’s University Belfast. I hold a BA in Political Science, a Juris Doctor in American law, and an LL.M in Environmental Law, from Trinity College Dublin.  I am also currently conducting research into sustainable development and human rights at the Law School, Trinity College Dublin.

Ireland

Here in Ireland, we are in a unique situation, when it comes to revolution. We are the children of the Revolution that took place in the early 20^th century, almost 100 years ago, and then resurged again in the late 20^th century. It has been described by Judge and author, Mary Kotsonouris, as an unfinished revolution, which is true in many ways, though it certainly took a big step backwards when we were bailed out.  I would posit that we can and must finish it, using the ideas and principles of sustainable development, which already has a statutory foothold here, but which has been frustrated at every step, in terms of implementation.

To answer the General-Secretary’s call, and properly implement sustainable development, we have to radically overhaul our Government institutions; by increasing checks and balances, and enshrine a higher duty of care in the Constitution. In civil society, we need to radically change the way NGOs, political parties and professional associations operate – particularly those that have been directly involved in regulating the past two decades of unsustainable development.  We also need to empower citizens to bypass NGOs and political parties, when necessary, and engage directly with Government, by vesting them with substantive and procedural rights, also enshrined in the Constitution.

Sustainable development as a revolutionary concept

Sustainable development is itself a revolutionary concept, and while it has not fully ignited here, we in Ireland have been armed with one primary weapon of the revolution – environmental impact assessment or EIA – for over 25 years now. EIA requires public participation, independent assessment and access to justice – forcing openness, transparency and accountability on the part of the authorities. It entails a fundamental shift in power, between citizens, NGOs and Government institutions.

Modern Ireland has been a reluctant revolutionary in this regard, with one of the worst records of implementation of EU law, and one of the highest number infringement proceedings in the EU.  Our lack of compliance in risk assessment standards extended beyond our environmental practice, into the financial domain, resulting in an institutional change that has dramatically and suddenly replaced our sovereignty with foreign oversight.  We must now alter our Constitution and institutions just as dramatically and suddenly, in order to reclaim our sovereignty, turn the economy around, and begin to develop in a sustainable way.

THE FUTURE OF GOVERNMENT

While the Government is celebrating its first year in office, it is worth examining some of their proposals over the last year, in order to see what exactly needs to be changed.

Cuts to the Museum and other heritage/environmental bodies

The Government moved quickly to transfer heritage functions from the former Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, to the Department of Arts, Heritage and Gaeltacht. The first item on the agenda was the cut – including a proposal to merge the Heritage Council with the Department.

The effects of cuts that have already taken place were clearly evident when the Director of the National Museum, Dr Pat Wallace,  announced his early retirement last month. He claimed that he was being forced out, under new retirement scheme, under the imposition of a crude rule. In traditional Irish style he said it amounted to:  “go and fuck off out of here”

He also complained about a proposal to start charging an entrance fee into the Museum, which seems crazy when we are currently experiencing a rise in cultural tourism for the first time in years.

Delisting post-1700 monuments

The next red flag came in September 2011, the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht announced it is seeking to exclude all post-1700 archaeological and historical structures and sites from the national Record of Monuments and Places (RMP), thus removing their statutory protection. The move has been sternly opposed by the Institute of Archaeologists of Ireland (IAI), amongst many others. Again, this is primarily done under a cost saving rationale.

The proposal is a breach of the duties imposed on the State by the National Monuments (Amendment) Act 1994, Section 12.—(1) which states:

The Commissioners shall establish and maintain a record of monuments and places where they believe there are monuments and the record shall be comprised of a list of monuments and such places and a map or maps showing each monument and such place in respect of each county in the State.

The proposal blatantly breaches international legal obligations under the European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage, The Valetta Convention, Article 2(1) which states:

Each  Party  undertakes  to  institute,  by  means appropriate to the State in question, a legal system for the protection of the archaeological heritage, making provision for the maintenance of an inventory of its archaeological heritage and the designation of protected monuments and areas;

The Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, the UNESCO Convention. Article 4:

Each State Party to this Convention recognizes that the duty of ensuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations of the cultural and natural heritage referred to in Articles 1 and 2 and situated on its territory, belongs primarily to that State.

It also flies in the face of obligations, under Article 5 of the UNESCO Convention, which requires States -

(d) to take the appropriate legal, scientific, technical, administrative and financial measures necessary for the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and rehabilitation of this heritage;

Only by giving protection to such sites in the Constitution, and granting exercisable rights in citizens to have such sites protected, can we guard against retrograde legislative proposals such as this.

The Sale of State Assets

Agreement between the Government and the Troika on a plan for sale of State assets was announced on Wednesday 22 February. State assets, allegedly worth up to €3bn, due for the chopping block include Bord Gáis Energy and the power-generation capacity of the Electricity Supply Board.

The Government also stated it “will consider” disposing of some of its forestry firm Coillte, but not its lands, which comprise 7% per cent of our national land cover. In other words, they want to lease our carbon sink. What will this do to our ability to keep our commitments under Kyoto?

The idea that you can separate the land from the trees is nonsense. They are not selling the land; they are giving it away free with the trees. The lessee will be free to fence off and exclude the public from these areas – essentially giving them legal rights over it.

This is not simply land, but landscapes, national monuments and historical sites that lie thereon. They are also leasing, habitats, special conservation areas, natural heritage areas, and areas of outstanding natural beauty. What does this transfer mean for the International and European legal requirements of maintenance of these areas?

This decision, to alienate such a substantial amount of priceless Irish heritage is not being forced by the Troika. It is being voluntarily made by Government, without any public consultation, and under questionable advice. It is a decision that must be reversed, but is unlikely to be, unless citizens have the power to challenge such decisions, under the upcoming new Constitution.

Granting constitutional rights to citizens, and imposing constitutional duties on the State, concerning the protection of Irish cultural and natural heritage, seems to only way to insure against such prospects.

The Heritage Council

Last Friday the Heritage Council launched its latest, and possibly last, five-year Strategic Plan, for 2012-2016. It is the first major statement of policy from the new Government in relation to sustainable development and natural and cultural heritage. However, there lessons to be learned from the inadequacies in this document which expose how Government agencies fall short in their approach sustainable development.

Firstly, there was no formal public consultation process used to develop the Plan as a whole. This runs contrary to the spirit and letter of the Rio Declaration, Principle 10, which states:

Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level.

Ironically, the very first such Plan, published by the Heritage Council for the period 1997-2000 made much of the Rio Declaration. But ten years on, it is clear that something went badly wrong along the way, and few of the lofty goals were achieved.

The New Strategic Plan 2012-2016

Goals

The Heritage Council’s new strategic plan makes no reference to Rio.  However, the three stated goals are again directly related to sustainable development.

Goal i  is: “To increase the understanding of the contribution that heritage makes to our identity, well-being, health and to sustainable development.”

That is pretty straightforward, and primarily educational in purpose, as is

Goal iii: “To promote and facilitate knowledge, appreciation and enjoyment, of our heritage.”

However, Goal ii of the Plan: “Managing and conserving for sustainable development”, cuts to the heart of the problem here.

Strategies

Three related Strategies are for achieving Goal ii are given:

-         1. Propose and communicate on policies and priorities for the identification, protection, preservation and enhancement of heritage

-         2. Fulfil the Heritage Council’s role as a prescribed body

-         3. Improve management, curation, accessibility and use of heritage data, particularly through new digital technology.

Strategy 1 claims that the Council will:

“Propose and communicate on policies and priorities for the identification, protection, preservation and enhancement of heritage”

The Actions that are proposed by the Council, which are designed to implement Strategy 1 – and ultimately Goal ii of the Plan, “Managing and conserving for sustainable development”, include:

-         “Review existing legislation and policies to improve consideration of heritage within.”

• Such review of policy and legislation should trigger public consultation, under RIO, and indeed some EU directives and International Agreements, such as AARHUS.

-         “Maintain links with NGOs, communities, stakeholder organisations etc. to inform policy advice development.”

• ‘Maintaining links’ is not the same as ‘consulting’
• NGOs are under no legal obligation to engage with the public in consultation. In fact, in many cases, they are simply not equipped to fulfil this role.
• ‘Communities’ and ‘stakeholder organisations’ are not the same as ‘the general public’.

Another proposed Action is:

-         Communicate with key stakeholders on such policy advice and submissions.

• “Communication” is not the same as ‘consultation’, since communication can be one way, and does not implicitly depend on considering a response, if any, in a meaningful way.

Finally, the other relevant Action proposed for fulfilment of Goal 2 is:

-         Encourage the drafting of a new National Heritage Plan and the establishment of a widely constituted implementation group to assist with its delivery.

• An “implementation group” is not the same as a consultation body.

The “Related Key Objective” for most Actions in Strategy 1 is Key Objective 14:

Develop and encourage innovation in heritage by providing an integrated framework for the management of our heritage assets particularly through the use of IT and through promoting the establishment of a Landscape Observatory for Ireland.

The other is Key Objective 13, which is actually an exact duplicate of Key Objective 14  - is presumably due to a typographical error. So we are missing some key information here.

Finally, Potential Partners in achieving these Key Objectives, and the goal of “Managing and conserving for sustainable development” are listed as:

-         Communities

-         Nongovernmental and voluntary organisations

-         Other state agencies and departments.

Communities v the public

There is no mention of the public in the Heritage Council’s document, in relation to any of its goals; only that word ‘communities’.

It is interesting that the former DOEHLG is now the Department of Environment, Community, and Local Government.

The only place the word ‘community’ appears in the EU Public Participation Directive, or the EIA/SEA Directives, is in relation to the ‘European Community’.

The word ‘community’ does not appear anywhere in the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters,

And the only place ‘community’ appears in the RIO Declaration is in relation to the ‘international community’.

Community participation is not public participation, within the meaning of the planning acts, or the EU directives. A community is ultimately something that is closed, and contained, albeit in a loose fashion. It usually entails having some kind of informal internal structure, with a representative, sometimes facilitating, but at other times inhibiting, direct public involvement. What are meant to be linkages between Government and the citizenry are often barriers.

Overall Assessment of the plan

The goals of this plan are worthwhile, but limited. By excluding the public from the development of the plan, the chances of implementing it are hugely lessened.  Now that the plan has been published, the Council should begin wide public consultation, and alter it accordingly, before attempting to implement it.

There needs to be definite powers, and clear guidelines given to all departments , so that the public can be involved in generating strategic plans. These should be enumerated in the constitution.

NORTH/SOUTH SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

On an all island basis, the inter-Govermental institutions need to radically change their approach to public consultation, if the peace is to be kept, and development is to become sustainable.

John Gilliland – Sustainable Development Commissioner for Northern Ireland, made an  Intervention at the 14th Session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. New York, 2006, and said:

“In any lasting peace, the principles of Sustainable Development must be embedded within both Central and local Government.”

This statement echoes Principle 25 of the Rio Declaration, which states:

“Peace, development and environmental protection are interdependent and indivisible.”

The Peace Process in Northern Ireland came about as a result of a process of sustainable development – involving restorative justice, and respect human rights and the rule of law, by all sides.

In recent times, the Slane bypass / Dublin to Derry road issue has highlighted the unfinished nature of the Peace Process, and the lack of full implementation of sustainable development.

There has been little or no cross-Border public consultation, which is strange, given that this is essentially a ‘peace road’. The plan for this road was hatched as part of the St Andrews negotiations, and both Governments committed to sharing the cost. This lack of consultation not only breaches the EIA and SEA Directives, as well as the Espoo Convention and SEA Protocol, but it breaches the St Andrews Agreement itself – by denying citizens on both sides of the border to participate fully and equally.

The result is that support for and opposition to the road has divided almost clearly along sectarian lines. The pervading attitude of the Government towards public consultation is an absolute lack of good faith, in terms of giving any meaningful consideration to the public submissions. The public are clearly seen as the enemy.

This is contrary to Principle 19 of the Rio Convention, which requires that: States shall consult with other states in “good faith” on the transboundary environmental effects of proposed projects, as well as Principle 27, which requires that “States and people shall cooperate in good faith and in a spirit of partnership in the fulfilment of the principles embodied in this Declaration and in the further development of international law in the field of sustainable development.”

How does one instil good faith into an institution? How do we legislate for good faith? Human rights, entitling citizens to fair procedures and meaningful consultation is one way. Another is constitutionally empowering citizens to take legal action, and challenge process and the resulting decision.

Representative v Direct Democracy

The financial collapse in Ireland showed that our form of representative democracy has largely failed, and is continuing to fail us. By moving from representative to direct democracy, we can make Government more responsive, transparent and accountable. That is essential to the sustainable revolution.

For too long representative bodies like NGOs, political parties, and even watchdogs, have stood between the public and Government, and chosen to further their own goals, rather than the public interest.

All the while, citizens have been forced to watch from the sidelines, powerless to act.

An Taisce

Placing new duties on both Irish Governmental and cross-Border institutions, and forcing radical reform in their methods is essential for implementing sustainable development. But this must also happen in NGOs.

The main NGO, which represents civil society in heritage and environmental matters, as part of the sustainable development formula in Ireland, is An Taisce.

An Taisce was founded on lofty ideals, and sound principles, in 1948. Its stated goals are worthy and admirable, and there are a lot of great people within it working tirelessly to achieve them.

So, what is the problem then? Why has it only managed to reach a membership of 5,000 – when environmental and heritage concerns are so high on the public agenda? Why doesn’t it take more lawsuits? And why does it settle so many of the lawsuits it does take?

The problems with An Taisce are mainly constitutional in nature.  There has been a certain dishonesty in its legal status, ever since its inception.  From its formation, the organisation named itself “THE National Trust for Ireland.” However, it has never been legally organised or officially recognised as such. However, the Irish Heritage Trust was actually granted that status in 2006.

An Taisce Submission to the UN – October 2011

An Taisce, made a submission to the United Nations in October 2011, as part of a public consultation on Ireland‘s progress since the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.  It raised the need to give sustainably legal effect in the Constitution and legislative remit of Government departments and State agencies and companies.

The ironic thing is that An Taisce itself has not given sustainability legal effect in its own Constitution – its Memorandum and Articles of Association. The term ‘sustainable development’ is nowhere to be found in them. In addition, it does not behave in a sustainable fashion.

Its structure is not open and transparent, which has led to small membership – and this less revenue. Therefore, An Taisce has been and will remain completely underfunded, and often incapable of efficiently performing its essential functions.  The UN submission is one example.

It contains a long litany of abuses, which took place during the Celtic Tiger. However, nowhere in this submission does it even mention cultural or built heritage, or historical sites, which took a real beating during the last decade, as did the legislation protecting them.  There can be no doubt that heritage sites play a key role in sustainable development. The failure of An Taisce to raise the mistreatment of our heritage, and heritage regulations, in such a document, is unforgiveable.

Settling three Judicial Reviews of permissions associated with the Corrib Gas Pipeline

One key area in which An Taisce needs reform is the area of taking lawsuits, which is one of the functions listed in the Memorandum of Association. Despite the obvious barrage of bad planning applications, and dodgy decisions, during the Celtic Tiger, An Taisce took a tiny number of lawsuits. Of those that it did take, many were settled.

In order for sustainable development to be properly implemented, there must be a constant testing of Government legislation and decisions through litigation. Sporadic, underfunded lawsuits taken by An Taisce do not fulfil the access to justice mandates of the AARHUS Convention, and fail Ireland.

I myself took lawsuit against the Government, over the M3 motorway, in an individual capacity. I was persuaded to settle it on the explicit understanding that An Taisce would take up a fresh case. However, An Taisce waited for over a year, allowing the M3 contract to be signed, before going to court. When they did go, they did not go on heritage grounds, but on matters relating to toll booths. They lost their case in the High Court, and then settled. And that was that.  In hindsight, I should have battled on on my own.

Another example of An Taisce’s weakness in undertaking litigation was highlighted in the Corrib Gas field controversy, where it took a case, allegedly on behalf of the community, but ended up settling the case without consulting the community.

There are many constitutional and institutional issues within An Taisce that need examining. Its provision for a Management Committee, that operates like a politburo. Its acceptance of corporate donations, even from organisations it is objecting against. Its lack of transparency, when issues of misuse of funds are raised, like with the ‘Green Schools’ funds scandal. But the biggest one is how decisions are made in relation to public interest litigation.

The settling of the Corrib Gas judicial review has raised many questions.  An Taisce claimed to engage in this litigation on behalf of the Rossport community, and collected donations locally to pursue it.  However, the community was not consulted before this settlement was made, resulting in general outrage.

Volunteer Lawyers for the Environment

If An Taisce does not reform itself, as would be ideal choice, an alternative will have to be found, to ensure that cases that need to be taken are taken, and taken well.

While I lived in the United States, I worked with an organisation called Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts, which was founded in New York in 1969.  VLA delivers legal services and legal information to thousands of members of the arts community each year.

Lawyers work for free and receive pro bono credits with their bar associations. Law students get valuable experience, and in some cases, college credits for their work. Everybody wins. Such a model could be used to establish a Volunteer Lawyers for the Environment organisation in Ireland, which would greatly increase our chances of achieving sustainable development, and protecting citizen’s rights

POLITICAL PARTIES

In addition to NGO reform, political party reform is essential, in order for sustainable development to become a reality in Ireland. The Green Party claims to represent the Irish public interest, in environmental matters. However, the party has been washed out, since its time in Government, and The Sunday Times-Behaviour & Attitudes poll (26th February 2012) put national support levels for the Green Party at 2%, meaning the Greens would not win a single seat in the next general election.

The Green Party brand is toxic, and beyond redemption, to the point that they now stand as an obstacle to political representation for the public interest in the environment, social justice and sustainable development.

Fia Nua, on the other hand, is a new all-island federated party, with a political structure that seeks to bring together under one umbrella all those disaffected with the corruption in politics and Government and who feel they have been left without a voice within the political arena in Ireland.

This is an honest, grassroots political force, with an inspiring new manifesto and constitution clearly available on their web site. The federated structure is as open and inclusive as is possible for a political party, and I would encourage you all to read it.  But the Greens must go the way of the PDs, and allow others to speak, and be spoken for.

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

All of this brings me to one conclusion. The upcoming Constitutional Convention is absolutely critical if we are to achieve radical institutional and constitutional change, and realise the sustainable revolution.

Aristotle described two types of political revolution:

-         Complete change from one constitution to another

-         Modification of an existing constitution.

The Constitutional Convention is yet to be formally established, but already there are grave concerns that the terms of reference will be unduly narrow, and that we will not have proper public consultation on this critical matter. Even if such consultation does occur, there has been little or no debate on what constitutional changes must be made, which is even more troubling.

We must demand Bill of Rights, which contains environmental rights.

Substantive Environmental Rights

The Irish Bill of Rights should contain substantive constitutional rights, such as:

-         The right to a healthy environment. This is a right that already exists in human rights law, but it should be clearly defined in the Constitution.

-         A constitutional right to enjoy our natural and cultural heritage. The Dunne case, from Carrickmines, resulted in the recognition by the Courts that there is a “constitutional imperative” on the Government to protect the cultural heritage of Ireland.

• The new constitution should flesh out the constitutional imperative to protect heritage, and also contain a corresponding  constitutional right to have sites of natural, cultural and historical importance protected
• It would contain a prohibition against the sale, alienation, or transfer of possession of important cultural and natural sites, resources and assets, to a private party, without public consent
• It would require that when national law is found by an international court, to be in breach of European or international law, new legislation is immediately drafted to fix it.
  •  This would apply to both the Planning Act, and National Monuments Act, which have been found to be in breach of the EIA Directive by the ECJ, to be properly amended.
  • An Bord Pleanala is currently deciding the fate of our finest World Heritage Site, Newgrange, using outdated, and illegal legislation, more than one year on from the ECJ decision.

Procedural constitutional environmental rights

Procedural rights also need to be enumerated, so that citizens have the ability to exercise their substantive rights, including

-         The right to participate in decision-making, by being involved in policy and legislative consultation – forcing State bodies to hold public consultation during strategic planning

-         The right to freedom of information. Which would enshrine EU access to information rights, and protect our national Freedom of Information Act from the type of butchery it received in the Tiger years

•  It would have forced Leo Varadkar to revel exactly how much roads programme want over budget, since the 2000 NDP. Instead, he recently responded that it was impossible to calculate the figure, in response to a PQ from Maureen O’Sullivan.
•  It would place an active duty on Government to widely publish information that concerns public development. The NRA would have been forced to reveal to the public that it intended to sign a PPP contract with the M3 tolling company, which granted a minimum traffic guarantee, and the public would have had an opportunity to object.

-         There also needs to be a constitutional right to challenge Government decisions in the Courts, which includes protection for litigants against awards when acting in the public interest.

These rights already exist, in lesser and limited form, in International and EU law, as well as in Irish statutes and case law – mostly relating to environmental impact assessment, and sustainable development.

In fact, in order for Ireland to fully implement the AARHUS Convention, it is necessary that each of the rights contained in that Convention are enshrined in the new Constitution – and are directly linked to the corresponding human rights.

Constitutional duties

While rights are critical, the Constitution must contain a new set of duties, indeed active duties, to be placed on the State. We need clear standards care, and a Government that is truly accountable to the will of the people at all times, rather than just at Election time.

Constitution of the Irish Free State

These ideas are not new. In fact, they were contained in the 1921 Constitution – but never implemented, as promised. It contained innovative provisions for direct democracy:

Veto of legislation: In the original constitution, once a bill had been approved by the Oireachtas, its enactment into law could be suspended if, within seven days, either a majority of the Senate or 40% of all members of the Dáil so requested. It could also be reject ted if a percentage of voters decided

Initiative: Ordinary citizens should have the right, through an initiative process, to draft both constitutional amendments and ordinary laws, and insist that they be submitted to a referendum, if a certain amount of signatures are collected.

Checks and balances;

In addition to rights and duties we need additional checks and balances within Government, and between Government and the people.

Recall; One other possible mechanism that could be introduced into our new Constitution is the power of recall, If an elected representative acts beyond their powers, outside the law

The Senate; Reform is needed, but the Senate should be empowered, not removed, as it is an important watchdog on the Dail.

CONCLUSION

The Constitutional Convention offers an opportunity for truly radical institutional change, achievable in a short space of time. It also offers an opportunity for changing how citizens interact with those State institutions.

Only by arming our citizens with a range of constitutional rights, which empower them to participate actively in society, and imposing a higher set of duties on our Government, can we essentially create a new cause of action – acting contrary to sustainable development.

The sustainable revolution that Ban Ki-moon is calling for can only take place if it receives popular support. It can only receive popular support if it is visualised, debated, and demanded by the environmental movement itself, as part of that Constitutional Convention.

Public opinion must be canvassed, from the very outset, and all options must be on the table. Member organisations of the environmental sector must also be willing to radically change, if they are to expect Government and State bodies to do the same, and certainly if we are to truly sustainable development. That will take some time.

What must be done immediately is that the environmental sector in Ireland must seize the initiative and begin its own convention and consultation process, in order to generate a set of solid proposals that the both the Constitutional Convention and the public can consider, rather than sitting around waiting for what might or might not be offered by Government.  I hope this event, and this presentation, can help kick-start that process.

Thank you.

I am reposting this release from Andew St Ledger at the Woodland League. This has to be stopped.

Seeing The Land For The Trees

Hidden beneath the proposed sell off of  PUBLIC FOREST TREES is the loss of  SOVEREIGN LAND which the trees are growing upon. Do not be fooled by Politicians weasel words, while OUR PUBLIC ASSETS are being gutted, gift wrapped and prepared for delivery into the hands of PRIVATE INVESTORS . These lucky purchasers may include the bondholders about to receive €3.1 billion of Irish peoples money on  the 31^st March, 2012. The very fabric of Irish Society is being destroyed to make this possible.

This money that THEY LOST!!! can then be used to buy the very same PUBLIC ASSETS the Politicians claim they have no choice but to sell. This is to pay the debts incurred by the gambling of our unregulated banks. This was encouraged by the same Political mindset which is now proposing to sell OUR PUBLIC ASSETS. These same parasitic PRIVATE INVESTORS also fund political parties for their mutual gain.

They say “ We are only selling the trees with harvesting rights, not the land “ , when it is obvious that the land will be next. Whosoever becomes the owner of the trees will have a monopoly on the land and, in effect, OWNERSHIP RIGHTS!! All true wealth comes from the land, this is particularly true of well managed forests, and access to land is the key for any people who wish to AVOID SLAVERY.

They say “ We have two valuations that are poles apart. But we will establish the position and then do whatever makes economic sense. We are going to progress this quite quickly “ , a comical quote from The Minister of Agriculture, Simon Coveney. This speaks volumes regarding the true nature of these vested interests  pushing for the sale of PUBLIC ASSETS operating in the shadows.

They do not know the TRUE VALUE of what they are selling and giving 90 years harvesting rights as well? The irony of this being the same time span, Ireland has had its Independence. It also means this PUBLIC  LAND is of no use to the PEOPLE OF IRELAND especially when it is fenced off by the new PRIVATE OWNERS for full exploitation.

Ninety years is a long time, Politicians will come and go, the land will remain in PRIVATE hands to remind the IRISH PEOPLE of this dark period in IRELANDS HISTORY. Who will explain to our children and grandchildren as to how such a travesty was allowed to happen in a SO CALLED DEMOCRACY or should we refer to it in the future as the great  DE-MOCKERY.

IT IS NOT TOO LATE TO AVERT THIS IMPENDING CRIME AGAINST THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND.

ASSERT YOUR RIGHTFUL OWNERSHIP, SIGN THE PETITION, CONTACT YOUR TD, LOCAL MEDIA, WALK YOUR FORESTS ON THE 4^th MARCH .

Visit our website for more information at www.woodlandleague.org

Join us on facebook

Save Ireland’s Forests petition

 Contact Andrew St. Ledger (P.R.O. The Woodland League) on 0879933157, or e-mail stledgerwood@gmail.com

Balance in the budget

Letter to the Editor – The Irish Times - 28 October 2011

Sir, – With the presidential election debate all but concluded, we can now get back to the pressing matter of the upcoming budget. It is heartbreaking to read of cuts to essential public services, while grandiose, multi-million infrastructure projects, such as the new Dublin to Derry road, proceed.

Age Action is appealing to the Government to reverse fuel cuts, which “is literally a life and death issue for hundreds of older people . . .” (Home News, October 26th).

“Health authorities are cutting funding for homeless services in parts of the capital by up to 10 per cent over the coming winter months, despite growing pressure on services.” (Carl O’Brien, October 26th) Yet, “Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore has reaffirmed the Government’s commitment to cross-Border infrastructure programmes, including . . . the main Dublin to Derry road. Mr Gilmore said the Coalition would stand by spending commitments in Northern Ireland estimated at some €466 million.” (Home News, June 4th). This completely contradicts Labour’s pre-election promises. Joe Costello, Labour’s former transport spokesman told concerned groups in January that “Labour would draft a new national development plan if it entered government and every current infrastructure project would be reviewed, ‘no matter what stage of planning it is at’.” (January 14th) He also promised that hearings would be held in the Transport Committee, into the Dublin to Derry road.

But there has been no new cost/benefit analysis of roads projects done, and no hearings in the Transport Committee.

Minister for Transport, Leo Varadkar, should examine lower cost alternatives to building a brand new road from Dublin to Derry, like he did with the Metro and Dart. Upgrading the existing road and improving rail is the obvious thing to do.

The lives of our citizens, especially the most vulnerable should be at the top of our Government’s agenda, as we head into the cold winter months.

– Yours, etc,

VINCENT SALAFIA,

Mary’s Abbey, Dublin 7.

PLEASE WRITE TO lettersed@irishtimes.com

(Left – right) Ciaran McClean , Aoife Power and Vincent Salafia at a protest outside Leinster House, Dublin against the proposed new 1 billion Euro Motorway A5/M2 between Dublin and Derry.

From there we went to Dame St, and showed our support for Occupy Dame Street.

Then we continued on to the GPO were Martin McGuinness was campaigning on the Presidential trail. Laura Grealish challenged him about Sinn Fein’s failure to object to the Slane bypass, in contrast with their opposition to the M3 at Tara. The story was picked up by the Guardian:

“On Friday afternoon, outside Irish republicanism’s most sacred spot – Dublin’s General Post Office, where the 1916 Easter Rising began – McGuinness was confronted, not for the first time, by members of the public opposed to his politics. On this occasion, the subject was not his record with the IRA, nor his alleged role in several high-profile atrocities. A cross-community group of environmental activists from Northern Ireland interrupted his canvass on O’Connell Street to object to Sinn Féin support for a new Dublin/Derry road link, which they say will mean the destruction of homes, farms and businesses. One of those who accosted McGuinness was Ciaran McClean, son of Paddy Joe McClean, a prominent activist in the Northern Ireland civil rights movement who was tortured by the British army in 1971.

“I ambushed McGuinness outside the GPO. I asked him why he supported taking half a billion euros out of the Irish economy for a road. His heavies [security guards] weren’t too pleased,” McClean said yesterday.

On behalf of Save Newgrange, I would like to thank all our thousands of supporters for helping persuade the Government that the Slane Bypass is not a viable economic project. Please join is in demanding the HGV ban is immediately implemented in Slane. The story was on RTE Radio One Drivetime yesterday, and is featured in the papers today, below:

Lobby group welcomes decision to suspend Slane bypass project

The Irish Times – Wednesday, August 10, 2011
By Fiona gartland

A GROUP which lobbied against the Slane bypass because of its impact on the Brú na Bóinne heritage site has welcomed a decision by Minister for Transport Leo Varadkar to suspend its development. Mr Varadkar recently said no new road projects were to start in 2012, 2013 and 2014 and only six projects already under way would be completed this year. The Minister has instructed the National Roads Authority to bring all road projects in planning to the end of their current planning stage and then suspend them with a view to reopening them in the future.

Only the N25 Cork SRR interchanges, the N3 Belturbet bypass, the N5 Longford bypass, the N22 Tralee bypass, the N4 Downs Grade Separation and the N52 Carrickbridge to Dalystown will go ahead this year. The Slane bypass had been the subject of an oral hearing and is currently under consideration by An Bord Pleanála. Local residents in Slane had lobbied for its construction because of the high level of road deaths on and around the town’s bridge. However heritage groups had expressed outrage at the choice of route for the bypass, which brought it close to Brú na Bóinne, a Unesco world heritage site.

Vincent Salafia, spokesman for Save Newgrange, said the group was relieved by confirmation that the Slane bypass was among the projects suspended. “The county council’s own expert, along with numerous internationally renowned experts, advised against the proposed route because of the damage it would do to the world heritage site,” he said. He called on Meath County Council, the National Roads Authority and the Minister to work together to implement a HGV ban in the village.In a statement yesterday, the Department of Transport said it would be “reckless and irresponsible to spend €20-€30 million a year” to bring roads projects on to their next planning stage when there was no money to build them and they were “struggling to find adequate funds to maintain existing roads”. The same decision was taken for the Luas BXD, Metro North and Dart Underground projects on which €200 million had been spent.

[Write letters to lettersed@irishtimes.com calling for HGV ban]

—-

Fury as bypass put on hold despite grim toll of 22 deaths

Irish Independent – Wednesday August 10 2011
By Breda Heffernan, Elaine Keogh and Paddy Clancy

RESIDENTS are furious that plans for a bypass of Slane have been suspended despite 22 people having lost their lives on a horrific ‘bottleneck stretch of road’. The Irish Independent revealed yesterday that a €50m project to bypass the Co Meath village would be suspended for at least three years due to government cutbacks. The project is currently before An Bord Pleanala which is expected to deliver its ruling before the end of the year.

Concerned residents yesterday said it was “devastating” to abandon the project at this stage. Niamh O’Broin, a local mother of two young children, said safety and preventing deaths is the sole reason for the bypass. “When people talk about this bypass, it is not about how many minutes you can save on your journey from Dublin to Derry. It is synonymous with safety and saving lives, not shaving off minutes in the car.”

Dangerous

The road through the village is particularly dangerous as it has steep inclines on both sides of the River Boyne with a sharp turn on to the bridge in between. Ms O’Broin was involved in a serious accident in March 2009 when a heavy goods vehicle lost control on the top of the hill, causing a nine-car pile-up. “The problems in the village have not gone away despite the 30km speed limit,” she warned. Michele Power, a spokeswoman for the Slane Bridge Action Group, said it would be “devastating” to have the plans shelved, adding, “it would be pennywise and pound foolish with people’s lives”.

Fianna Fail councillor Wayne Harding said it was extraordinary that local Fine Gael TD and Minister of State for Agriculture Shane McEntee, had joined residents on numerous marches demanding a bypass, yet was now part of an administration calling a halt to the project. “If this administration shelves this project, there is every possibility they will end up with blood on their hands,” he warned.

However, Mr McEntee yesterday insisted there was “no change” in the position of the proposed bypass. In a statement, Mr McEntee said the bypass would still be brought through An Bord Pleanala and, if approved, lands would be bought, bringing the project to “shovel ready” status. However, he failed to mention that the project would then be suspended along with dozens of others until funds become available, something Transport Minister Leo Varadkar has already confirmed. Based on current plans, no new road projects will be started between 2012 and 2014. The Slane bypass, a 3.5km stretch of dual carriageway, is estimated to cost up to €50m.

- Breda Heffernan, Elaine Keogh and Paddy Clancy

[Write to independent.letters@unison.independent.ie]

Statement by Shane MacEntee

‘There is absolutely no change in the position regarding a road bypass for Slane, in county Meath’, Shane McEntee TD has said. He continued: ‘I spoke this morning to the Office of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport and I have confirmed with them that there is no change in the progress of the bypass. This project is currently before An Bord Pleanala. It will be brought through An Bord Pleanala. If they approve it, there will be a requirement to start purchasing the necessary land within 18 months of approval being granted for a scheme. I have been assured that the project will be brought through the land purchase stage as well. This will bring the project to ‘shovel ready’ status’.

Shane McEntee also said: ‘Only three weeks ago Leo Varadkar’s Department met the National Roads Authority and confirmed to them that the Slane by-pass is among the ‘top five’ priority road projects to be completed by them, once planning approval has been received. The NRA has allocated €2 million to bring the project through to the next stages. These are the facts in relation to the bypass, contrary to the inaccurate report in today’s ‘Irish Independent’ and the opportunistic statement issued by Senator Thomas Byrne based on that report.’

Government Must Prioritize National Monuments Bill in Programme of Legislation

Save Newgrange is calling on the Government to add the National Monuments Bill to its list of 20 urgent Bills to be published by the end of the Summer Session on July 21^st. The call comes in response to first Programme of Legislation published yesterday, listing 105 Bills at various stages of preparation.

The Bill must be presented immediately, since last month, the current National Monuments Act was held in breach of the EU Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive, by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The Court found that the decision by former Minister for the Environment, Dick Roche, to demolish Lismullin national monument at Tara was illegal, since a new EIA was not required by the Act.

Save Newgrange had announced on Monday that it was staging a demonstration outside Dail Eireann on Friday, calling for the Bill to be passed before Summer, and before An Bord Pleanala decides whether to give planning permission for the N2 Slane Bypass, which is proposed to pass within 500m of the Bru na Boinne UNESCO World Heritage site. The proposal has been condemned by national and international experts. The demonstration will take place on Kildare Street, at 1.00pm on Friday.

A Save Newgrange spokesperson said:

“The Government is showing its colours, and they are not much different than the previous ones. It is now abundantly clear that there is the same disregard for heritage and the environment, coupled the same two-fingered approach to the European Commission’s Environment Directorate.

“This lack of priority for heritage in the Programme of Legislation also shows how weak Labour is in the coalition. It had been the most outspoken of Opposition parties against the M3 motorway at Tara.

“Eamon Gilmore had been highly critical of the 2004 Amendment to the National Monuments Act, brought in by Martin Cullen and now found to be illegal by the ECJ.

“If Eamon Gilmore wants to wash off the stain on Ireland’s international reputation, he should be trying to ensure that Bru na Boinne site does not suffer the fate of the Hill of Tara, and become the next great international embarrassment.

ENDS

Contact: Vincent Salafia 087-132-3365

The new Minister for the Environment, Phil Hogan, must act immediately to amend the National Monuments Act and the Planning and Development Act to comply with EU law and save our important cultural and archaeological sites.

The National Monuments Act of Ireland has been found to be in breach of EU law in two separate European Court of Justice (ECJ) rulings, and Ireland will face fines of up to €33,000 per day if it does not comply. National monuments and UNESCO World Heritage Sites are at currently risk after the ECJ found in March 2011 that the decision made by then Minister for the Environment Dick Roche, to demolish the Lismullin National Monument at the Hill of Tara in 2007 was in breach of EU law.

Save Newgrange is calling on Minister for the Environment, Phil Hogan, to present the National Monuments Bill 2010 to the Dail for passage. The Bill was approved by Cabinet not long before a General Election was called in 2010. The Bill had been drafted after extensive public consultation, which took place between 2007 and 2010, and it provides the level of legal protection required by EU law. However, Minister Gormley and the Green Party failed to present the National Monuments Bill 2010 to the Dail before they were removed from Government in the 2011 General Election.

The two European Court of Justice cases against Ireland, which require amendment to the National Monuments Act and the Planning and Development Act are:

Case C-50/09 – Commission v. Ireland (3 March 2011)

On 3 March 2011, the European Court of Justice ruled against Ireland in a case brought by the European Commission, which alleged that the National Monuments Act (2004) is in breach of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive, 85/337/EEC. The issues involved included: Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Obligation of the competent environmental authority to carry out an assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment – Need to ensure an assessment of the interaction between factors likely to be directly or indirectly affected – Application of the directive to demolition works.

In May 2007,works on the M3 motorway were halted after TaraWatch informed the National Museum that a major archaeological site had been discovered by the National Roads Authority (NRA) at Lismullin, close to the Hill of Tara. The 2,000 year old ‘henge’ site had not been previously detected, despite two major archaeological surveys of the route. Other remains, including spectacular rock art and ‘souterrains’ or underground dwellings were also discovered. The site was later be hailed as one of the Top 1o Most Important Discoveries in the world for 2007, by Archaeology Magazine.

On 12 June 2007 Minister for the Environment, Dick Roche, declared Lismullin a ‘national monument’, but gave directions under Section 14 the National Monuments Act for the site to be excavated and then demolished, to allow the M3 motorway to proceed. It was one of his last official acts, before handing over his office to the new Minister for the Environment, John Gormley of the Green Party, who immediately claimed that he could not undo the order.

In July 2007 EU officials called on Minister Gormley to halt to the works at Lismullin, but were ignored. Instead Minister Gormley proceeded to defend the Order, after the European Commission wrote a “reasoned opinion” to the Government in June 2007. The Commission warned the Government that the policy in relation to assessments was in breach of EU directives and demanded that an Environmental Impact Assessment be carried out on the site before any decision to demolish it was made.

The Petitions Committee of the European Parliament also visited the Lismullin site in June 2007, and in July wrote to the Irish Government, demanding an immediate stop to the M3 works at Lismullin. Minister Gormley ignored this demand, actually claimed that he didn’t even know that the Commission had ordered works to halt until he read about it in The Irish Independent on 30 August 2007. After salvage excavations were competed, the Lismullin national monument site was handed over to Ferrovial construction company in December 2007, and completely demolished shortly thereafter.

Case C-66/06 – Commission v. Ireland (Nov 2008 & March 2011)

The Commission won a case against Ireland, in the European Court of Justice, on 20 November 2008, on issues of: Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 85/337/EEC –Assessment of the effects of projects on the environment – Consent given without an assessment. The Commission had argued that the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001 (S.I. No 600/2001), as amended, was in breach of the EIA Directive, by failing to establish adequate thresholds, which require Environmental Impact Assessment to be performed on public and private developments. This resulted in natural and archaeological sites being damaged.

In February 2011, the European Commission petitioned the ECJ to impose fines on Ireland for failing to properly implement the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive. The Commission won the original case against Ireland, in November 2008, but then Minister for the Environment, John Gormley, failed to rectify the law before leaving office.

The Government is required under the directive on the assessment of the environmental impact of certain public and private projects to set up a system to decide whether an environmental impact assessment study is required before authorisation. Under the directive, the decision on when such an assessment is required can be made according to set thresholds, case-by-case analysis or other criteria in line with EU criteria. In its 2008 ruling, the Luxembourg-based court found that Ireland’s thresholds were too high for setting out when an environmental impact assessment is required for water management, irrigation and land drainage projects and the restructuring of rural landholdings, which was resulting in the loss of important natural and archaeological heritage sites.

Minister for the Environment, John Gormley, failed to change Irish law to comply with EU law, and the European Commission was forced to initiate a second law suit against Ireland, in February 2011, seeking fines against Ireland for it’s failure to implement EU Law.  In the new case against Ireland the commission will ask the court to impose a fine of €4,000 for each day since the court ruled against Ireland on November 20th 2008 and for each day until the court issues a new infringement ruling. Any failure to comply with a new ruling should be punished by a fine of €33,000 per day.

Minister Hogan called on to improve environmental protection

Since the new Minister for the Environment, Phil Hogan (FG) took office in February, 2011, community-based campaign groups from around Ireland have called on the Government to ratify a United Nations convention on public access to information, participation and justice in environmental decision-making – the AARHUS Convention, which links human rights and protection of the environment. Instead, the Minister is reportedly ‘reviewing’ changes made to the Planning Acts by the Green Party, that limited decisions to rezone land (see ‘Minister risks returning to bad old days of planning‘ – Irish Times – 31 March 2011.)

Save Newgrange and and TaraWatch are now calling on the Minister Hogan to immediately move to amend the National Monuments Act and the Planning Act, as required by EU law, before An Bord Pleanala makes a decision on whether or not to grant planning permission for the N2 Slane bypass, which is proposed to run 500m from the Bru na Boinne UNESCO World Heritage Site. A decision is expected from the Bord before the end of summer.

Links:

Ancient Tomb Art Found in Path of Irish Highway – National Geographic – 14 Jan 2008

Commission seeks fines against Ireland for not adopting legislation to protect countryside heritage – European Commission Press Release – 16 February 2011

State faces €3.2m fine over breach of EU ruling – The Irish Times – 17 February 2011

Farming – Opinion – The Irish Times - 21 February 2011

Europe ruling on planning directive welcomed – The Irish Times – 5 March 2011

Ireland in breach of EU law – Irish Examiner – 5 March 2011

National Roads Authority – Lismullin Excavation reports