Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)

The Minister said he would like to facilitate constructive dialogue. What is he specifically doing about the matter? We need dialogue and negotiation because the situation is escalating. The Minister is the one with direct responsibility so what is he doing to facilitate dialogue?

Is the second QRA based on the work done by JP Kenny? If so, will the Minister insist that a totally independent QRA is commissioned before he gives his full and final consent?

Does the Minister accept that people have genuine concerns which have not been fully and properly addressed? He spoke of the prediction of risk to the public and that it conforms to international criteria. What does that mean exactly? If the pipeline is unique, to use the Minister's words, and if the location of bogland adds to that uniqueness, what international criteria are we speaking of?

What is Shell mandated to do at this time? What is it not allowed to do? I understand that it can mark way leaves and routes but not any excavation. Why is Shell pursuing the matter at this time if it does not have full consent? When does the Minister propose to make a final decision regarding the onshore pipeline? The Minister mentioned the work of the Council for the West. I reject the criticism of the council, which, on a voluntary basis, is making a quiet, sincere and genuine effort to try to resolve this very difficult situation.

Will the Minister ask Shell to temporarily waive its rights in this situation, allow the men out of jail and ask the company not to proceed until a full and completely independent assessment is carried out?

See this speech in context