Brendan Ryan (Labour)

I want to give an example of what developers can do. The issue of noise arose on a project around Cork Harbour. A background test and an assessment of the increased level of night-time noise were carried out. The noise level was said to increase from 14 to 15 decibels, which sounded like a minuscule amount. However, the scale is log long which means 15 decibels is ten times higher than 14. Neither was that critical and it has not caused a huge problem but they omitted to refer in the EIS to the fact that the scale was log long and that one increment actually represented a tenfold increase in the same way that the Richter scale for earthquakes is log long. Therefore, a Richter scale measurement of 8 is ten times larger than a Richter scale measurement of 7. That sort of judgment will be nuanced when the person giving it is in the employ of the developer. When I spotted this in the particular case, I noted that they were telling the truth but that it was nuanced.

The problem arises where a local authority is the planning authority and in favour of a particular development, to which there are local objections. Can I mention Carrickmines Castle without causing enormous repercussions? I do not want to talk about the particular case which is before the courts. However, in such a project how can people be happy that there is an element of independence in the evaluation of the impact on the environment if, for instance, the local authority is in favour of what is happening?

While he Minister will not accept my amendment, he has responded reasonably to it. I will find other fora in which to pursue it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.