TaraWatch

PRESS RELEASE – TARAWATCH – 9 July 2009

Responses to Parliamentary Questions by Ministers for Environment, Transport and Finance “Totally Unacceptable”

Responses to a series of 30 Parliamentary Questions (PQs), submitted to Ministers for the Environment, Transport and Finance, by Labour and Sinn Fein, have been made.  The PQs, relating to the Hill of Tara and the M3 motorway, were delivered to last week by a TaraWatch delegation to the Oireachtas. The questions related to:

-    The delay by the Minister for the Environment in nominating the Hill of Tara as a World Heritage Site

-    The delay by the Minister for the Environment in amending the National Monuments Act

-    The possible implications for the Ministers for Transport of case being brought against Ireland in the European Court of Justice over the demolition of the Lismullin national monument at Tara

-    The reasons why the Minister for Finance has not subjected the National Development Plan to Strategic Environmental Assessment, as recommended by the European Commission.

TaraWatch spokesperson, Vincent Salafia, said the group found the responses by the Ministers as “completely unacceptable”. “The answers reveal a startling contempt for Irish heritage, as well as for European and UN law, and show the Government has been systematically preventing the European Commission and UNESCO from protecting Tara and other important Irish cultural sites.”

The Minister for the Environment revealed that he began the process of nominating the Hill of Tara as a UENSCO site in December 2007. Yet, Tara will not now be nominated until July 2010, two and a half years later. It seems Minister Gormley has been delaying the UNESCO nomination on purpose, in order to facilitate the completion of the M3 first. Minister Gormley’s inaction has effectively prevented UNESCO from seeking a solution to the Tara problem, and we believe that is a violation of his legal duties to the people of Ireland, and to the global community.

Minister Gormley’s response to another PQ also revealed that the amendment of the National Monuments Act, which Gormley had promised to deliver last summer, will be over a year late. Mr Salafia said:  “Minister Gormley could also have drafted legislation to protect Tara, as part of the new National Monuments Act, but he has also delayed that process by over a year.”

TaraWatch also disputes the facts given by Minister for Transport, Noel Dempsey, in his response. The Minister claims that the Navan to Dublin railway preferred route is 7km to the west of Tara.  Mr Salafia said: “The railway route is less than 2km away from Tara, and it passes through the Tara complex, and the proposed World Heritage Site.”

Finally, TaraWatch does not accept the answer given by Minister for Finance that the NDP and Transport 21 does not need to be subject to Strategic Environmental Assessment. Mr Salafia said:  The European Commission has stated that the NDP should be subject to SEA, and we agree.  SEA would mean proper cost-benefit analysis and independent environmental testing, as well as public participation in decision-making in major infrastructure plans, which has never been performed.  If the NDP was put through SEA we wouldn’t have a toll road, a railway and power lines set to take three different routes through a proposed UNESCO World Heritage Site.”

PARLIAMENTARY QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

Question Nos. 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, 427, 428, and 430

Chun an Aire Comhshaoil, Oidhreachta agus Rialtais Áitiúil:

To the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government:

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the reason he did not submit the Hill of Tara and the entire revised Ireland’s Tentative List of UNESCO sites to UNESCO as promised, for the July 2009 thirty third Session of the World Heritage Committee in Seville, Spain.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the amount spent in hiring consultants and reviewing Ireland’s list of world heritage sites in the past two years.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government his plans in relation to revising Ireland’s Tentative List of UNESCO Sites.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the way he or his advisors made a determination of the ability of Tara to become a UNESCO site, before the advisors had visited the site or reviewed the M3.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if his attention has been drawn to the fact that an organisation (details supplied) nominated the Hill of Tara as a world heritage site, but only on condition that the M3 was rerouted, in view of the fact that it passes through the middle of the proposed world heritage site.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government his views on whether UNESCO will accept the Hill of Tara as a UNESCO site with the M3 passing through it.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he will define the area of the proposed Tara world heritage site.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government his views on the cost involved if UNESCO demands that Ireland move the M3 motorway, once Tara is declared a world heritage site.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he has included a consortium (details supplied), the M3 public private partners, in the consultation process for making Tara a world heritage site; and if so, their involvement in relation to same.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he has included Iarnród Éireann in the consultation process, in view of the fact that the preferred route for Navan-Dublin railway was announced in May 2009 and will be passing through the proposed Tara world heritage site.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he has included Eirgrid in the consultation process, in view of the fact that the Department of Transport has proposed that the north south electrical connector be placed underground along the M3 or the N3, thereby passing through the proposed Tara world heritage site.

- Aengus Ó Snodaigh.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he was scheduled to present a revised tentative list to UNESCO at the Seville World Heritage Committee Meeting; if not, when it is required to do so; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Joanna Tuffy.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the steps taken to have Tara considered a world heritage site; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Aengus Ó Snodaigh.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the position regarding the publishing of the list of potential sites for world heritage site nomination that was to have been published in Spring 2009; his views on the inclusion of Tara in this list; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Joanna Tuffy.

For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 8th July, 2009.
Ref Nos:   28622/09, 28623/09, 28624/09, 28625/09, 28626/09, 28627/09, 28628/09, 28629/09, 28630/09, 28631/09, 28632/09, 28693/09, 28694/09, and 28696/09

REPLY

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. Gormley):
I propose to take Questions Nos. 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, 427, 428 and 430 together.

I am aware of some misleading information in the media recently concerning the process of nomination for UNESCO World Heritage status and am pleased to have the opportunity to put the facts on record.

Ireland’s Tentative List of potential sites for nomination for inscription on the World Heritage List was last updated in 1992, and does not include the Hill of Tara.  Last year I directed my Department to review the 1992 list, and requested that the Tara complex, amongst other sites, be considered for inclusion on a revised list.  In December 2007 & April 2008

I arranged for Dr Jukka Jokileht to, a world heritage UNESCO expert, to visit a number of these sites to advise on their suitability for inclusion.

In October 2008 I established an Expert Advisory Group to carry out the review of the Tentative List; consultants have not been engaged by my Department on the review process. Total expenditure by my Department to date on the Tentative List Review is approximately €42,700.

The Expert Advisory Group (EAG) has completed extensive analysis of the sites on the current Tentative List.  Members of the public and interested groups were also invited to submit potential properties for inclusion on the new Tentative List. 31 such proposals were received and these were considered and assessed by the EAG.

On the basis of its own analysis, and consideration and assessment of the proposals received from the public and interested groups, the EAG has now finalised a draft new Tentative List which contains the details of the properties which the EAG considers are of outstanding universal value, meet the UNESCO World Heritage inscription criteria in terms of integrity and authenticity and have the best potential for future inscription on the World Heritage List. I expect to be in a position to publish this draft tentative list for public consultation before the end of the month, and I understand that the Hill of Tara is included in this list.

While it was initially envisaged that Ireland’s new Tentative List would be submitted to UNESCO in advance of the June 2009 session of the World Heritage Committee, this has not been possible mainly because the review process and World Heritage Committee requirements for the tentative list process have been more complex than at first envisaged.  It was also considered better to take more time in preparing a new Tentative List in keeping with UNESCO guidelines and best international practice. I will be forwarding the new Tentative List to UNESCO before the end of this year and it will then be presented at the 34th Session of the World Heritage Committee in 2010.

I am not currently in a position to process a nomination for the Hill of Tara for inscription on UNESCO’s World Heritage List as the property was not included on the 1992 Tentative List. Only sites that have been on the State Party’s Tentative List for a period of at least one year may be nominated for consideration by the World Heritage Committee for inscription on the World Heritage List.  In order to adhere to the very stringent UNESCO requirements concerning management of sites and other matters, in practice it usually takes a number of years following inclusion on a Tentative List before a site is considered suitable for inscription.

Questions Nos. 416, 417, 418, 419, 421 and 426

Chun an Aire Comhshaoil, Oidhreachta agus Rialtais Áitiúil:
To the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government:

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the reason he did not revoke archaeological licenses and halt excavations on the M3, in the Lismullin/Tara area, when the European Commission put him on notice that an environmental impact assessment was required.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the amount spent on outside legal counsel to defend the action in relation to the requirement for an environmental impact assessment for the M3 project in the European Court of Justice.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the consequences for capital infrastructure projects, already under way, if the European Court of Justice finds against Ireland in relation to environmental impact assessments.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the consequences for the National Monuments Act 1930, and archaeological codes of practice, if the European Court of Justice finds against Ireland.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the reason, in view of the legal action initiated by the European Commission, and his admission that there are gaps in the way archaeological finds are dealt with in certain circumstances, he is defending the environmental impact assessment case being taken against Ireland by the European Commission, rather than amending the Act to adopt the recommendations of the Commission.

- Aengus Ó Snodaigh.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the steps he has taken to comply with the recommendations of the European Commission in respect of the need for environmental impact assessments for works that affect national monuments; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Joanna Tuffy.

For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 8th July, 2009.

Ref Nos:   28633/09, 28634/09, 28636/09, 28637/09, 28639/09 and 28692/09.

REPLY

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. Gormley):

I propose to take Questions Nos.  416, 417, 418, 419, 421 and 426 together.

I understand that the questions refer to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) case C50/09, initiated by the European Commission, concerning Ireland’s alleged failure to properly transpose and implement certain provisions of Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment.

The Reasoned Opinion from the European Commission relates only to the excavations at the national monument at Lismullin and not to any other archaeological works along the route of the M3 motorway.

In the case of Lismullin, the vulnerability of the remaining fragile archaeological features required urgent steps to be taken, and although the question of an EIA did not arise, it would not have been practicable in any event.   Despite protective covering, heavy rainfall since its discovery had already significantly impacted on the site.  Urgent measures were needed to ensure that no further degradation occurred.

The option of preservation in situ had been carefully considered by the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.  The conclusion reached was that, because of the fragility of the features and the location of the site in a natural hollow, preservation in situ could not guarantee the actual preservation of the monument.

This conclusion was endorsed by the Expert Advisory Committee I appointed, on the advice of the Director of the National Museum, to advise on the conduct of the archaeological works.  The only viable archaeological option, therefore, was preservation by record, i.e. the full archaeological excavation and recording of the exposed features.

Ireland lodged a comprehensive defence in this case on 27 April 2009. The European Commission is required to lodge its response with the Court not later than 15 July 2009.

I am not prepared to speculate on the outcome or possible consequences of this case.

The engagement and remuneration of legal counsel to advise in this case is a matter for the Office of the Attorney General.

Question Nos. 420, 422 and 425

Chun an Aire Comhshaoil, Oidhreachta agus Rialtais Áitiúil:
To the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government:

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the reason he did not present a new National Monuments Act as promised in the middle of 2008.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the amount spent conducting a consultation for a revision of the National Monuments Act 1930, and archaeological policy.

-        Aengus Ó Snodaigh.

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the position regarding the promised National Monuments Bill; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Joanna Tuffy.

For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 8th July, 2009.

Ref Nos:   28638/09, 28640/09 and 28691/09

REPLY

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. Gormley):

I propose to take Question Nos.  420, 422 and 425 together.

The Expert Advisory Committee I established to review archaeological policy and practice submitted its recommendations on improving and updating national monuments legislation in February 2009, following which work began on the preparation of Heads of a Bill.  This is now at an advanced stage and I expect to circulate the Heads to other Departments for consideration shortly.

The Expert Committee met five times during 2008 and the related costs, along with the costs of information seminars held for other interested parties, amounted to €30,871.38.

Question No.         423

Chun an Aire Comhshaoil, Oidhreachta agus Rialtais Áitiúil:
To the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government:

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the reason he has agreed a code of practice with Eirgrid when it is based on the National Monuments Act 1930.

- Aengus Ó Snodaigh.

For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 8th July, 2009.

Ref No:   28642/09

REPLY

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. Gormley):

Codes of Practice, such as that recently agreed between my Department and EirGrid, provide a framework to enable infrastructure providers to progress their work programmes, while carrying out appropriate archaeological mitigation in accordance with an agreed set of principles and actions. They serve as operational guidance to ensure best archaeological practice in accordance with legal and other requirements and may be revised, as necessary, to reflect legislative change or other relevant developments.

Question No.         429

Chun an Aire Comhshaoil, Oidhreachta agus Rialtais Áitiúil:
To the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government:

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the steps taken to protect Lismullen, County Meath; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Joanna Tuffy.

For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 8th July, 2009.

Ref No:   28695/09

REPLY

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. Gormley):

The national monument at Lismullin has been included in the Register of Historic Monuments established under Section 5 of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act, 1987.  That portion of the monument encompassed by the M3 Motorway Scheme has been archaeologically excavated and recorded to achieve preservation by record.   Notice must be given to my Department no less than two months prior to the carrying out of any works to a registered historic monument.  In addition, no detection device may be used at, or in the vicinity of, such a monument without a licence from my Department.

DÁIL QUESTION
NO   171 & 172

To ask the Minister for Finance if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the European Commission has sent a reasoned opinion to the Government to the effect that the National Development Plan 2007 to 2013, containing Transport 21, is in breach of EU law, due to the fact that is has not been subject to strategic environmental assessment under the SEA Directive; and his response to the Commission.

- Aengus Ó Snodaigh.
*    For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 8th July, 2009.
Ref No: 28643/09

To ask the Minister for Finance the reason he continues to perform strategic environmental assessments on the National Development Plan and Transport 21.

- Aengus Ó Snodaigh.

*    For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 8th July, 2009.
Ref No: 28644/09

REPLY

Minister for Finance ( Mr Lenihan) :        I propose to take questions number 171 and 172 together.

To my knowledge, no reasoned opinion on this issue has been received from the European Commission by Ireland.

During the preparation of the NDP, the question of undertaking a Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) was considered by the Government.  The outcome of this consideration, which included taking legal advice, was that an SEA was not required.

In 2007, the European commission sent a Letter of Formal Notice seeking information on the NDP and its status as it was their opinion that the NDP appeared to be a plan or programme subject to the SEA Directive.        A reply was sent to the Commission setting out our position that the NDP is not subject to the aforementioned Directive.

The Commission sent a revised Letter of Formal Notice in 2008.  Ireland’s response confirmed our considered opinion that the NDP is not subject to the SEA Directive.

Issues relating to Transport 21 are a matter, in the first instance, for the Minister for Transport.

Dáil Question
No:  274

*To ask the Minister for Transport his views on the consequences, if UNESCO tells the Government to move the M3, the Dublin-Navan railway and the electrical connector; and if he has received advice on whether his proposal to run power lines along the M3 requires a new EIA.

- Aengus Ó Snodaigh.

*    For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 8th July, 2009.

Ref No:   28648/09     Proof:   258

Answered by the Minister for Transport
(Noel Dempsey TD)

REPLY

The nomination of sites for consideration as UNESCO World Heritage sites is a matter for my colleague the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.  The position on this matter is as set out in the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government’s response today to a Question from the Deputy on this subject.

As Minister for Transport, I have responsibility for overall policy and funding in relation to the national roads programme element of Transport 21. The construction, improvement and maintenance of individual national roads projects, including the M3, is a matter for the National Roads Authority (NRA) under section 17 of the Roads Act, 1993, as amended by the Roads Act 2007, in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. Work on the M3 motorway is well underway and is expected to be complete in 2010.

With regard to the proposed Dublin to Navan railway line, the preferred route for the line follows the existing disused railway track bed between Clonsilla (junction with the Maynooth line) and Navan. This route is approximately 7km to the west of Tara. This project will be the subject of an application to An Bord Pleanála for a railway order, and all relevant environmental and other issues will be addressed in its consideration of that application.

Issues relating to the north south electrical connector are a matter for my colleague the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources.

Dáil Question
No:  275

*To ask the Minister for Transport the reason, regarding the current case being brought by the European Commission against Ireland, in the European Court of Justice, for failure to implement the EIA Directive, he did not order the National Roads Authority to halt works on the M3, in the Tara area, when the European Commission put the Government on notice that an EIA was required; the amount spent on outside legal counsel to defend this action in the ECJ; the consequences for the M3 motorway if the ECJ finds against Ireland; the consequences for the National Monuments Act 1930 and the NRA codes of practice, if the ECJ finds against Ireland; the consequences for transport projects, already underway, if the ECJ finds against Ireland; the person who bears the costs if the EC orders a new EIA on the M3.

- Aengus Ó Snodaigh.

*    For WRITTEN answer on Wednesday, 8th July, 2009.

Ref No:   28649/09     Proof:   259

Answered by the Minister for Transport
(Noel Dempsey TD)

REPLY

As Minister for Transport, I have responsibility for overall policy and funding in relation to the national roads programme element of Transport 21. The construction, improvement and maintenance of individual national roads projects, including the M3, is a matter for the National Roads Authority (NRA) under section 17 of the Roads Act, 1993, as amended by the Roads Act 2007, in conjunction with the local authorities concerned.

The allocation of funding to individual national road projects, including the M3, is a matter for the NRA under section 19 of the Roads Act, 1993, as amended by the Roads Act 2007.

Ireland has been referred to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) by the EU Commission concerning Ireland’s alleged failure to properly transpose and implement certain provisions of Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment.

This is a matter for my colleague the Minister for Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Ireland is strongly contesting the Commission’s assertions and lodged a comprehensive defence in this case on 27 April 2009. The legal costs of contesting this case are a matter for the Office of the Attorney General.

The Court’s decision is not expected for some time. It is not expected to have any implications for the M3 motorway, work on which is well underway and is expected to be complete in 2010.

I am not prepared to speculate on the impacts (if any) of the Court’s judgement until its detailed decision has been published and carefully considered by the Irish authorities.