John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)

I am not in a position to outline for the Deputy the costs of the proceedings because, as he will be aware, they will take some time to quantify. This is a contentious point of law and we have to get it right because the habitats directive is extremely important. The case revolves around the interpretation of article 6 of the directive and involves the construction of a road through a special area of conservation, SAC. The road's footprint will comprise over 20 hectares within the SAC and will necessitate the destruction of a sizeable area of habitat, including limestone pavement, which is a priority habitat under the directive. I have dealt with this matter at length on a number of occasions because I regard it as highly important.

The board determined that the damage was not significant in the context of the overall site but my legal advice and the clear view of the Commission is that the board's interpretation is not consistent with the directive. I am advised that the board should have concluded that the damage constituted an adverse impact on the integrity of the site and that consent could only have been granted if the project met the requirements of the derogation procedure provided by the directive. Derogations are allowed where an overriding public interest can be demonstrated. It is crucial to point out that the board decided not to avail of this option. Commission officials have made it clear that if a remedy is not found to setting aside the board's decision, further action would be considered.

See this speech in context