David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Second, that letter from the council states: "Further, Fingal Council does not have the requisite competencies available within the Council in areas of aviation operations, noise, including contour mapping, and economic feasibility assessments for the purpose of determining the cost-effectiveness" and so on. First, it is not independent and, second, it does not have the capacity or the capability to do this.Of course there is a conflict. The council has a conflict of interest in that it is shaping the future of the airport via the Fingal development plan and the Dublin Airport local area plan, which are two of its reserved functions. It is responsible for determining planning applications at Dublin Airport, some of which may relate to caveats concerning operating restrictions there.

The letter acknowledges that Fingal does not have the requisite competencies in the area of "aviation operations, noise and economic feasibility assessments". The council receives €29 million in rates from the airport campus. It received a development levy of €21 million for the new north runway. What could be a clearer conflict of interest? The council has enormous economic interest in this.

Amendment No. 85, which the Minister has impugned, provides that "The competent authority shall direct the airport authority to ensure that average noise exposure is reduced below 45dBL, and night noise exposure below 40dBL". I note that the World Health Organization, WHO, has stated:

For average noise exposure, the GDG strongly recommends [not just recommends, Members will note, but strongly recommends] reducing noise levels produced by aircraft to below 45 dB L, as aircraft noise above this level is associated with adverse health effects.

Moreover, the WHO has stated:

For night noise exposure, the GDG strongly recommends reducing noise levels produced by aircraft during night time to below 40 dB L, as night-time aircraft noise above this level is associated with adverse effects on sleep.

With regard to night-time noise it states:

To reduce health effects, the GDG strongly recommends that policy-makers implement suitable measures to reduce noise exposure from aircraft in the population exposed to levels above the guideline values for average and night noise exposure.

Noise control maps around the airport are only produced from 50 dB upwards. Assistance with noise reduction measures, such as insulation, is only available in areas with a noise level over 63 dB. Although the difference may not seem that great, I must make a very interesting point. The average layperson will not appreciate that every increase of 10 dB represents a doubling of the loudness perceived by the human ear. Therefore 50 dB is twice as loud as 40 dB and 60 dB is four times as loud as 40 dB. My correspondent took measurements of noise levels with a calibrated sound monitor and recorded levels above 80 dB in a house where levels had been rated between 50 and 55 dB. The rating is based on an average. That means there is a peak of 80 dB, which is 16 times the loudness of 40 dB.

With regard to the question of people living in the area, I am astonished that they are still building new houses. It is an extraordinary abrogation of the planning process. One of my informants objects to Fingal County Council being made the competent body and talks about the victory it has had. She is the fourth generation of her family to live in the area.