Jerry Cowley (Mayo, Independent)

Two days ago there was a report by an independent American consultant conducted by the Centre for Public Inquiry. The report spelt out that to proceed with the Corrib Gas project as laid down would be hazardous and would pose too great a danger to those who live beside the pipeline. This is a narrow peninsula. Even taking into account any safe distances, clearly it is not safe for those people to live beside this pipeline. Given that the peninsula is narrow there is no room for the pipeline so near to the people in those houses. Something has to give. As envisaged, it is clear the two elements do not fit.

The independent consultant was employed to investigate the position and he did so. It is clear the pipeline rule is not safe. While the Government has said it would be safe and the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, has said on many occasions that it is safe to live within 70 metres of the pipeline. Even applying international standards, people living within 200 metres and 400 metres of these pipelines, but with much lower levels of pressure, have died, having been scorched totally. There are minimum safe distances but one cannot apply those distances to this narrow peninsula.

I ask the Minister of State whether there is any rationale in proceeding with the Corrib Gas project as envisaged. Nobody is against the gas coming in but surely people have a right to be safe in their own homes. Five people from Rossport spent 94 days in jail to protect their right to be safe at home. I am sure the Minister of State will tell me about all the investigations that took place. These quantitative risk assessments, QRAs, were based on historical precedent. However, no historical precedent exists for this pipeline. It is an exotic pipeline project that has never been done before. No QRA will assess the risk. I am sure the Minister of State will talk about the study by Advantica, commissioned by the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. However, this will not consider the consequences of a rupture to the pipeline. If that pipeline ruptures, the local people will be dead, as they know, which is why they were prepared to go to jail.

Someone wanting to build a house needs to get planning permission from the local authority and can then make an appeal to An Bord Pleanála. It can then be further appealed to the High Court on a point of law. However, this pipeline was exempted by the former Minister for Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Fahey. No proper planning for the pipeline took place. It was rushed through on the basis of ministerial consent.

The study points out that representatives of Shell met An Bord Pleanála. Shell and its partners, Statoil and Marathon, met the Taoiseach and the then Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Dermot Ahern. Certain assurances were given regarding the planning process. Four days later the full board of An Bord Pleanála met representatives of Shell, Marathon and Statoil. The rest is history. The project was passed by An Bord Pleanála following undue access to that board.

The oil and gas companies have been given latitude allowing them to hold a licence for 19 years and then walk away. I raised this matter with the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, and suggested he should restrict the licence to five years.

How can the project be allowed to proceed when a report by a reputable independent expert from America has made it clear that it poses too great a hazard to the people who will be obliged to live beside the pipeline?

See this speech in context