Commission issues EIA warning to Ireland
- This topic has 5 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 9 months ago by
admin.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
May 5, 2010 at 2:18 pm #711047
ac1976
ParticipantCommission issues EIA warning to Ireland
Wednesday, 5 May 2010 13:50
Ireland has received a final warning from the European Commission over its failure to comply with a Court of Justice ruling.If action is not taken quickly, Ireland faces the prospect of daily fines being imposed for its failure to amend laws on environmental impact assessments or EIAs.
The aim of the EIA Directive is to ensure that projects likely to have a significant impact on the environment are assessed before they are authorised so that people are aware of the possible effects.
AdvertisementThe original case which resulted in this warning dates back to November 2008 and related to fish farm developments.
EU Environment Commissioner Janez Potocnik said: ‘I urge Ireland to adopt the necessary improvements to its legislation as quickly as possible.’
Story from RTÉ News:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0505/environment.htmlMore from the Euro Commision
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/313&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=enWill any of this affect major projects such as those in transport21? (esp those being funded by the EC)
It seens to offer a legal stick to any opponents of major projects. -
May 6, 2010 at 4:35 pm #812684
admin
KeymasterTouchy subject this; on the one hand you need to protect the environment whilst on the other you want to have a planning system that doesn’t place barriers in the form of an excessive of amount of documentation prepared by expensive consultants being required to make the application in the first place. No doubt the judegment will outline the solutions.
-
May 10, 2010 at 1:18 pm #812685
Anonymous
InactiveAre you touchy about professionals earning their crust PVC King?
Isn’t this sort for forrmal study required to combat the “build and they will come” mentality?
I should have thought you’d be the very one bemoaning such maverick rezoning and permissions.ONQ.
-
May 10, 2010 at 1:24 pm #812686
admin
KeymasterFish farms can do significant habitat damage; they do however provide quite a few jobs as they are quite labour intensive. I look forward to commision being satisfied that a balance has been struck; but I don’t want to see natural spawning grounds destroyed for short term gain. I have made clients a lot of money suggesting retail changes of use; none of which harmed the environment.
-
May 11, 2010 at 3:02 am #812687
Anonymous
InactiveYes but I’m not talking about you personally.
Did you not see the Aftershock program on Sunday about Ghost estates?
We used to joke that National Multiples’ market shares were protected by planning laws.
That was because you had to show a local need before you could set up a competitor outlet.
If such requirements had been rigorously applied to Longford and Leitrim, would we have had Ghost Estates there?ONQ
-
May 11, 2010 at 8:38 am #812688
admin
KeymasterBack in the day when there were only 2 viable super-market groups selling largely the same products the ‘Local Need’ rule which no doubt involved a retail catchment assessment which would have made sense; otherwise each town would have had two fortified warehouses and the Main Street would have died. The entry of the discounters such as Lidl or Aldi really changed this in that just because a supermarket existed they had an argument for the first time that they had a different demand well which Dunnes or Tesco couldn’t satisfy.
On the Ghost estates where does one start? I think Frank Daly was spot on when he mused “one more baffling features of the boom was that banks seemed oblivious to other lenders who were financing similar developments in the same area.” Great if the area is South Greystones, Ballsbridge or Punchestown a little less so if it is Blacklion or Arigna; not a mistake anyone will make again this century.
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.