Declan Breathnach (Louth, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am under a little time pressure because I must attend another meeting so I will be as brief as possible. I thank the representatives from Transport Infrastructure Ireland, the county manager of Louth County Council and the chairman of Ardee municipal council for their presentation. It speaks for itself with regard to the issues that arise. It is important to welcome the concerned residents from the area.

I was a member of Louth County Council when the plan in question was adopted. Everybody hailed it at the time as a great project and some believed it might not happen. We have moved to a stage where money has been committed for it. The community, particularly in Ardee and its hinterland, welcome that and want to see the project completed.

To be fair, Louth County Council had a shovel ready project when the money was made available.

It is clear from the written presentation I have read that Transport Infrastructure Ireland is committed to the project. Reference has been made to the fact that the project was adopted in 2005 and that many things have changed in the vicinity of the proposed bypass since. As I said to several people before the meeting, I joined the council in 1991. Road developments, particularly of this nature, need to be cognisant of rural communities. In fact, I had prior dealings with Transport Infrastructure Ireland on two specific projects, one of which involved the provision of an underpass at Killkerly on the main M1 motorway that preventing the break-up of the parish community of Killkerly and Knockbridge. Subsequently, there was a problem on the N52 on the outskirts of Dundalk which was dividing Haggardstown and Blackrock, but a compromise was found by way of the provision of traffic lights, about which many complain to this day, including me. However, the important point is that the communities were facilitated to the best possible degree. The engagement that took place with the local authority is what helped us to find a solution, certainly in the case of the first junction. My specific question is: did it require having to go back to the drawing board? I firmly believe it did not and that we were reaching a compromise in the case of the second junction at Mullenstown. Ultimately, on a point referred to by Councillor Minogue, there is an interdependence between the people living in the urban area who want to see the project happen yesterday and the rural community who must also be taken into account.

This has been a live debate since the money was allocated. Concerns were raised about flooding which I understand were addressed by the diligent engineers of Louth County Council, with whom I have been proactively involved. I would like to see the project going ahead. The message needs to be sent loud and clear and I think I can speak for all public representatives and politicians of one hue or another within the constituency. No one wants anything other than what has been proposed at the two junctions and the issues are resolvable. The residents who have legitimate concerns are as anxious as anybody to see the project go ahead. I am not sure whether it is possible within the law, but we should stick to the confines of the proposal, even if there has to be compulsory purchase or there are other issues.

I understand the Chairman has tried to express a fear that we could lose the project, but that is not my reading of what Mr. Walsh said. I would like Mr. Walsh to confirm that no Government, regardless of whether the Government changes in the next 12 months, will change the fact that it is a live project and that, when the costings are made, it will be reviewed and be a rolling project. If delays into 2020 are inevitable, which is what Mr. Walsh seems to be saying, it is incumbent on all local public representatives and those dealing with the project to row in behind it to ensure the concerns are dealt with. I have attended many community meetings and the only issue raised was about flooding, a matter which I believe has been addressed. The message must again be sent loud and clear about the benefits of the project, not just locally but also regionally and the wider area. It is essential that it go ahead.