Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

I will speak on my amendments in this group now as well. It has been well flagged to the Minister, before Christmas in the debate that took place in the full Dáil and in much of the correspondence that he would have received from residents who have studied this, that it is not appropriate that Fingal County Council would be responsible for monitoring and protecting residents in respect of noise. It is not even the councillors, by the way, who would have any oversight as members elected by the residents. It would be the CEO of Fingal County Council.

I will refer to some reasons for making this change, including the issue of expertise but also conflict of interest. The reality is that the rates base upon which Fingal County Council is reliant immediately means that it is loathe to challenge any major developments in the airport in the way that would be potentially required to protect residents from noise. The council is also reliant on development contributions and many of us who have been members of the council have seen that the airport is a major part of Fingal's overall development. Nobody is saying that the airport should not develop but it is necessary to have some independent body involved which is not linked to its development.

In terms of expertise, the Minister has received correspondence from residents. On 10 December, a presentation was made on the Dublin Airport noise action plan to the full membership of Fingal County Council, but that presentation did not even meet the requirements of the environmental noise directive. It was meant to be a graphical presentation and include maps disclosing the areas where the noise limits were exceeded. It is meant to show differences, the current position and the potential position if a new runway is built or an enhancement at the airport takes place, but none of that has been done. Planning permission was given for the north runway and the construction contract awarded. Therefore, at a minimum, one would expect the council to show difference maps and compare them with the existing position.

The other issue is that noise levels increased dramatically between 2006 and 2016, but there was nothing in the plan to suggest Fingal County Council had done or was going to do anything about it. It was very evident in the recent presentation that the council had taken quite a light touch regulation approach to noise issues at the airport. On there being a conflict of interest, when the council grants planning permission to Aer Rianta, it receives €21 million in development levies. One can see, therefore, that it is implicated. The authority that deals with noise regulation should be completely independent. I am open on what that authority should be. When I discussed the matter with some residents with whom I had been dealing, we felt the EPA would more be appropriate.

On that subject, it was stated at previous meetings of this committee that the EPA would not be considered because it had not shown that it could step up to the plate. It was also implied that it had indicated that it was not interested, which is completely untrue. A resident made a FOI request to try to delve into this issue and it emerged that the EPA had not even been consulted. No records showing that it had ever stated it was not interested were found in the trawl that took place. Therefore, misinformation was given to this committee ruling out the EPA as a factor. I can pass this information around if the Minister wants me to do so. What was said was that discussions with individual members of staff had been checked and that they could not find any record. All relevant persons in the EPA were asked if they had had any interaction on the issue and they had not. Why, therefore, did somebody from the Department say they had? It seems that residents are being given false information, for which the Minister should account.

The Minister needs to listen. Why would he not have the interests of residents at heart and appoint an independent body to regulate noise levels, rather than the planning authority which clearly has a conflict of interest and does not have the staff to do so? I do not know if it wants to do so, but it would need to recruit a whole department. I think it has enough on its plate in building housing during the worst housing crisis it has ever seen. It seems that the EPA would be more appropriate, but I am open to the others mentioned in the other amendments.