Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

46. To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources when he will implement the motion regarding the North-South interconnector, which was passed on 16 February 2017; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22088/17]

Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When will the Minister implement the motion regarding the North-South interconnector which was passed on 16 February 2017? Will he make a statement on the matter?

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On 19 December 2016, An Bord Pleanála granted planning permission for the North-South interconnector project in Ireland. The decision concluded a lengthy planning process which included an oral hearing completed over 11 weeks from March to May of last year. The planning decision is currently the subject of judicial review proceedings. The planning process for the section of the project in Northern Ireland is ongoing, with an oral hearing concluding on 27 February 2017.

In light of the motions passed by Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann, I requested officials in my Department to prepare proposals for an updated independent study that will bring further clarity to the relative cost and technical merits of the overhead and underground solutions for the North-South interconnector. In preparing the terms of reference for this study and to fulfil the commitment made at a meeting held with public representatives and local community groups in Leinster House on 8 February, my officials held meetings with representatives of the North East Pylon Pressure Campaign on 28 March and the Monaghan Anti-Pylon Committee on 3 April. This engagement was important in facilitating local representative groups' input into the terms of reference drafting process. I have approved the terms of reference for the study and published them on my Department's website yesterday. Construction of the project is not planned to commence before 2018 and I intend that this study will be completed and published before the end of this year.

Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have had an opportunity to review the document and, in fairness, the Minister did give me advance notice of it. Unfortunately, however, as far as my party and I are concerned, as are those to whom I have spoken in the area, the terms of reference are not complete. It does not include the requirement as set out in the motion that was passed by this House on 16 February to "evaluate the potential impacts of both undergrounding and overgrounding the North-South interconnector on surrounding areas, considering such aspects as [the] impact on local tourism, health, landscape, agriculture, heritage, etc."

I understand the Minister has cited some concerns in the Office of the Attorney General in relation to same and some conflict that may arise between decisions that have been taken by An Bord Pleanála. I have had an opportunity to seek legal advice on behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party relating to such an adjudication. There appears to be no reason whatsoever the provision could not form part of the analysis the Minister proposes to undertake. The role of An Bord Pleanála relates to any planning request or application that has already been adjudged. That is fine. If a decision is ultimately taken to put an application forward to underground a project, An Bord Pleanála can or may wish not to take into account any information that would arise from this particular exercise.

The Fianna Fáil Party does not accept the Minister's decision to exclude the provision I have already outlined. I ask the Minister to reconsider that in the spirit of the decision that was taken in this House on 16 February.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The terms of reference fulfil the central point of the motion that was passed in the House, which was to "examine the technical feasibility and cost of undergrounding the North-South interconnector, taking into account the most recent developments in technology and experience gained from existing projects abroad". As the Deputy knows, at the meeting on 8 February, an example was given relating to the project from Aachen to Liège. We are now looking at that. The terms of reference are an exact transcription of what was passed by both Houses. The second aspect is also being taken on board. The third aspect, which the Deputy is raising, is to "evaluate the potential impacts of both undergrounding and overgrounding the North-South interconnector on surrounding areas, considering such aspects as ... local tourism, health, landscape, agriculture [and] heritage".

As the Deputy knows, the issues relating to the visual impact of the proposed development and the concerns relating to health and impact on residential property in proximity to the route and so forth were all taken into consideration by An Bord Pleanála. It stated, "Whilst the landscape and visual impacts of the development, and the possibility of localised impacts on property, are acknowledged, having regard to the demonstrated strategic need for the development, the approach taken by the applicant in terms of route selection and detailed design of the development, which has sought to minimise landscape and visual effects, it is considered that the residual impacts which occur only in close proximity to the development are acceptable."

Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister stated that the central point to the motion was what it was and then he acted upon it. I put it to the Minister that it is not within his gift to decide the central point of any motion. The central point of a motion is the absolute and express provisions as set out in the motion in its entirety. If the Minister were to be genuine and honourable about this, he would respect the full extent of the motion that was passed democratically in this House and he would have, as he should have, transposed the motion in its entirety and let those provisions form the basis for the review. I still fail to understand why he is taking the approach he is taking. I do not accept, nor does the legal advice available to me suggest, that there is any necessity to exclude the provision the Minister has outlined which, in my view, is a central and important part of the motion. I fail to understand why the Minister did it. I certainly do not think there is any link whatsoever between the provision in this particular exercise and what decisions An Bord Pleanála has made or might make in any future application.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

An Bord Pleanála has made its decision and the Deputy is aware that there are a number of applications for judicial review - I am a named party in one of them - before the courts at the moment. It is not possible to quantify the impacts with any degree of certainty in relation to this and, therefore, it is a qualitative assessment. The statutory planning process, which includes An Bord Pleanála, is the appropriate method by which such impacts are assessed and evaluated. I have an overarching duty, unless lawfully challenging a decision, to respect the decisions of the lawfully established bodies, which is An Bord Pleanála in this instance.