Dáil debates

Wednesday, 7 July 2010

Compulsory Purchase Orders (Extension of Time Limits) Bill 2010 [Seanad]: All Stages

 

9:00 pm

Photo of Frank FaheyFrank Fahey (Galway West, Fianna Fail)

I welcome the agreement of the Opposition to the substantive issue, which pertains to compulsory purchase orders in general. The Bill affects the Galway outer bypass and is, as the Minister stated, to ensure the local authority will not have to waste considerable time and money by having to go back to the drawing board. As Deputy McCormack stated, a very large amount of money has been expended on the project to date. It has taken several years to get to this point and it would be very wrong for the Oireachtas to allow a waste of taxpayers' money. In that respect, this legislation is welcome.

This is not a question of whether the bypass should go ahead; it has no bearing on it. The bypass has been subjected to judicial review. The case has been before the High Court and Supreme Court and has now been referred to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary hearing. In this democracy, that is as it should be. Those who have objected have every right to do so. Those who are concerned about the process have every right to be concerned.

As Deputy Costello stated, the reality is that there are environmental issues to be considered. For his information, the priority one natural habitat area is for slender bog cotton. It is a very rare plant and quite different from bog cotton. There are approximately 2 hectares involved. The route of the bypass is to affect approximately 3.5 hectares of limestone pavement on the eastern side of the city. It is a priority one natural habitat according to EU specifications. As a proponent of the bypass, I accept fully these issues must be dealt with through the proper legal channels, as the Minister said. While this takes time, it is very important, for Galway and the rest of the country, that the issues be dealt with properly and to the satisfaction of everyone. That is why I have never been critical of objections. It is part of the democratic process.

The issue at hand does not concern whether the bypass should proceed; it is simply concerned with the need to ensure good practice. This legislation was passed by the Dáil last week. It was due to proceed to the Seanad this week and it was only because there were 100 amendments to the planning legislation, which the Bills Office could not process, that it was not possible to pass it in the House this week. This House is not passing any legislation that has not already been agreed by it. It was agreed that it would proceed to the Seanad. No amendments were tabled for the Seanad. Therefore, the legislation would also have been passed by the Seanad. It was intended that it would be passed by that House before the deadline pertaining to the Galway bypass.

Notwithstanding some of the points made by the Opposition, with which I disagree politically, I thank it for agreeing to the substance of the Bill. This legislation is in the best interest of the taxpayer and Galway. There are those with legitimate objections thereto and, as a democrat, I am prepared to recognise those. The European Court of Justice will now give its opinion on the case to the Irish Supreme Court. One could not have a decision made in a better way. I will be quite happy to accept that decision when made. My one appeal to the courts is that they make their decisions as quickly as possible.

I very much welcome the Minister's statement this evening that this matter is one of his priorities. Galway city centre is now the only city centre that 45,000 to 50,000 cars must enter unnecessarily each day. The M50 prevents their doing so in Dublin. The Waterford bypass, which was opened recently, achieves this objective, as will the Limerick tunnel, which is to open this month. The tunnel will open at a cost of €800 million. The Jack Lynch tunnel is in place in Cork. Every Friday evening, people are stuck sitting in their cars in Galway for an hour, the emissions impacting on the environment. It is commonsensical to move on and build the bypass while acknowledging people's right to object. Let the courts decide, but let us get on with the job and have a decision as quickly as possible.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.