Seanad debates

Tuesday, 28 June 2005

Grangegorman Development Agency Bill 2004: Committee and Remaining Stages.

 

4:00 pm

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent)

I support the amendment, which is also in my name. Senator Ulick Burke and I were both briefed by the local people in the Grangegorman area. It is important that we include the residents of the Grangegorman neighbourhood if the plan is to be representative, which is the Minister's intention. I was lobbied by people from this area. Being a practical politician — I am sure the Minister will appreciate one must be fairly efficient — I e-mailed them, asking them to explain the reasons for the amendment, the effect of the amendment and the outcome of the amendment. I am happy to place their reply on the record of the House. It states:

Reason: The section is about the strategic plan, which the Agency is charged with developing after its establishment. The residents are excluded from the list of interested parties to be consulted for developing the plan.

Effect: Excluding the residents from the process would obviously lead to a deficient plan and certain problems for the future.

Outcome: The amendment would result in a more inclusive and therefore more relevant plan for the area.

If we want consultation, not to have the local residents involved in this consultative process from the start would be regrettable. As the lobby has come from these people, it should be actively considered by the Minister. I support Senator Burke's amendment, which I am happy to second.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.