Mayo County Councillors voted for Shell road on the 10th March, 2008
At a Mayo County Council (MCC) meeting on the 10th March 2008, councillors voted against the wishes of a considerable number of the local residents of the area to allow the widening of a road specifically for the use of Shell Oil.
The motion was carried by 17 votes to 3 to allow the council to accept €3m from Shell, Statoil & Marathon to widen and strengthen a road from the Corrib refinery gates directly to the proposed landfall site.
The first to speak in support of the motion was Cllr Johnny Mee (Labour) who spoke of the need to facilitate job creation in Mayo and said that the road should go ahead in the quickest possible time. He stated that “it must be hard on the industrialists” given all the objections that seem to be going in about everything. He proposed the motion that the road be given council planning permission.
MCC Director of Services Peter Hynes then gave a brief rundown on the 32 submissions (involving over 140 people) that had been received regarding the road expansion. He stated that 3 of the submissions were for the road, and of the remaining submissions, half were over individual property concerns and the other half were environmental or safety concerns. It should be noted that among the submissions was one that was signed by 111 people from the area, which raised questions on the purpose, lack of consultation, safety and environmental impact of the road.
Mr Hynes stated that the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the Fisheries Board had addressed the environmental issues raised, while the individual property concerns could be dealt with as the project was going on. He also stated that this road was not “absolutely essential” to the Corrib Gas project and that the project could go ahead without the road upgrade. He stated that it was the council who convinced Shell that it would be preferable to upgrade the road rather than repair it.
The next councillor to speak was Cllr McGuinness (FG) who seconded Cllr Mees’ proposal “with gusto”. McGuinness spoke about how SEPIL (Shell Ireland) had initially handled the whole process badly by abusing people, trespassing on land and putting people into jail. However he said that "we [were] a Christian society", that the “perpetrators” had said they were wrong, and that "we should accept their act of contrition" as these things were in the past. He also stated that the Corrib Partners were now putting right these past wrongs.
Next to speak was Cllr Gerry Coyle (FG) from Belmullet, who spoke broadly in favour of the road but wanted it extended as far as Barr na Tra as at present “the road is totally for Shell”. He also stated that the pipeline or landfall facility had not yet received planning permission and so the road was pre-emptive. However he still subsequently voted for the road expansion. Three other councillors (including Cllrs McNamara & Holmes) spoke in favour of the road.
In the only speech in opposition to the motion Cllr Gerry Murray (SF) stated that he thought it very strange indeed to see “the Norwegian government funding roads in North West Mayo”. He also stated that, in order for Local Agenda 21 to be fully complied with, there should be proper consultation with the local people of the area. He said that while the people of Erris are pro-gas and pro-development, that the Shell spin is incorrectly characterising the concerns of the local people. He also stated that An Bord Pleanala Senior Planning Inspector Kevin Moore, who nobody could claim was anti-development, had initially found against the proposed Corrib Gas project. However it was only with the intervention of Bertie Ahern in favour of the resubmitted planning application that the project had been approved. Cllr Murray then called for the deal to be renegotiated, stating that while the “Norwegian government are stakeholders, our government are servant boys”.
Cllr Tim Quinn (FF) from Belmullet also spoke and stated that the number of submissions amazed him. He then put forward a motion to have the council delay its decision for a month in order for more consultation to be held with the local community as an act of good will and compromise. Cllr Chambers (FF) also spoke in favour of Cllr Quinn's motion saying that he didn’t think it was unfair to give another 4 weeks for consultation.
On this point Peter Hynes stated that he didn’t think a month's postponement would make any difference. He also said that his “understanding was that it [the funding for the road] might not be there” if there was a months delay, and that the delay could put the road project at risk. Mr Hynes also stated that he was offended with the assertion in some of the submissions that MCC would damage the environment and castigated what he called the “self appointed gurus” for their interference.
The vote then took place and was easily passed with only Cllrs Quinn, Murray and Chambers voting against.
Speaking after the meeting, local hostel owner Betty Schult stated that she "resented the previously public road being basically handed over to Shell for their personal use and using council workers as Shell subcontractors."
Mayo County Council's position now is that the funding for the road is coming from Shell and associates. However, this was not clearly stated at the outset. The source of the funding was not stated in any of MCC’s initial planning applications. The first place this was stated, was in Shell’s response to some of the submissions.
In response to one of the submissions Mayo County Council state “the regulations do not require the notice to state the source of the funding for a project”.
Peter Hynes also stated that they have been discussing the road expansion for nearly 12 months with Shell. The fact that the pipeline options were only publicly revealed in June 2007 indicates that council were discussing a road upgrade with Shell for a pipeline that not only had not gone through planning permission but for which the options had not been revealed to the public. The fact that not all of the pipeline route options in June went through Glengadserious questions about advance knowledge of the preferred pipeline route on behalf of Mayo Co. Council and Shell Oil.
The council also stated with regard to this application that they have “complied fully with the Aarhus Convention”. It appears that this may not be correct, as there is apparently little evidence of any dialogue with concerned people regarding this road.
It should be noted that last week over 100 people were let go from the Bellanaboy site. It seems that since Shell had their PR blitz about 2 weeks ago we are now into the decline phase of employment of Bellanaboy. Also according to a local councilor who made enquires, of the 25 long-term technical staff that are currently being trained only 2 are from the Erris region.
A gas explosion occurred recently at the Shell operated Bacton gas refinery in Norfolk, England. 46 workers were safely evacuated. This is one of the largest gas refineries in the UK, yet there were still only 46 workers on the refinery at the time of the explosion. The idea that has been put about by Shell and its advocates, that the Bellinaboy refinery will create substantial employment in the region, is a complete PR fabrication.
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/86638
Source (With thanks): by Rudiger
The motion was carried by 17 votes to 3 to allow the council to accept €3m from Shell, Statoil & Marathon to widen and strengthen a road from the Corrib refinery gates directly to the proposed landfall site.
The first to speak in support of the motion was Cllr Johnny Mee (Labour) who spoke of the need to facilitate job creation in Mayo and said that the road should go ahead in the quickest possible time. He stated that “it must be hard on the industrialists” given all the objections that seem to be going in about everything. He proposed the motion that the road be given council planning permission.
MCC Director of Services Peter Hynes then gave a brief rundown on the 32 submissions (involving over 140 people) that had been received regarding the road expansion. He stated that 3 of the submissions were for the road, and of the remaining submissions, half were over individual property concerns and the other half were environmental or safety concerns. It should be noted that among the submissions was one that was signed by 111 people from the area, which raised questions on the purpose, lack of consultation, safety and environmental impact of the road.
Mr Hynes stated that the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the Fisheries Board had addressed the environmental issues raised, while the individual property concerns could be dealt with as the project was going on. He also stated that this road was not “absolutely essential” to the Corrib Gas project and that the project could go ahead without the road upgrade. He stated that it was the council who convinced Shell that it would be preferable to upgrade the road rather than repair it.
The next councillor to speak was Cllr McGuinness (FG) who seconded Cllr Mees’ proposal “with gusto”. McGuinness spoke about how SEPIL (Shell Ireland) had initially handled the whole process badly by abusing people, trespassing on land and putting people into jail. However he said that "we [were] a Christian society", that the “perpetrators” had said they were wrong, and that "we should accept their act of contrition" as these things were in the past. He also stated that the Corrib Partners were now putting right these past wrongs.
Next to speak was Cllr Gerry Coyle (FG) from Belmullet, who spoke broadly in favour of the road but wanted it extended as far as Barr na Tra as at present “the road is totally for Shell”. He also stated that the pipeline or landfall facility had not yet received planning permission and so the road was pre-emptive. However he still subsequently voted for the road expansion. Three other councillors (including Cllrs McNamara & Holmes) spoke in favour of the road.
In the only speech in opposition to the motion Cllr Gerry Murray (SF) stated that he thought it very strange indeed to see “the Norwegian government funding roads in North West Mayo”. He also stated that, in order for Local Agenda 21 to be fully complied with, there should be proper consultation with the local people of the area. He said that while the people of Erris are pro-gas and pro-development, that the Shell spin is incorrectly characterising the concerns of the local people. He also stated that An Bord Pleanala Senior Planning Inspector Kevin Moore, who nobody could claim was anti-development, had initially found against the proposed Corrib Gas project. However it was only with the intervention of Bertie Ahern in favour of the resubmitted planning application that the project had been approved. Cllr Murray then called for the deal to be renegotiated, stating that while the “Norwegian government are stakeholders, our government are servant boys”.
Cllr Tim Quinn (FF) from Belmullet also spoke and stated that the number of submissions amazed him. He then put forward a motion to have the council delay its decision for a month in order for more consultation to be held with the local community as an act of good will and compromise. Cllr Chambers (FF) also spoke in favour of Cllr Quinn's motion saying that he didn’t think it was unfair to give another 4 weeks for consultation.
On this point Peter Hynes stated that he didn’t think a month's postponement would make any difference. He also said that his “understanding was that it [the funding for the road] might not be there” if there was a months delay, and that the delay could put the road project at risk. Mr Hynes also stated that he was offended with the assertion in some of the submissions that MCC would damage the environment and castigated what he called the “self appointed gurus” for their interference.
The vote then took place and was easily passed with only Cllrs Quinn, Murray and Chambers voting against.
Speaking after the meeting, local hostel owner Betty Schult stated that she "resented the previously public road being basically handed over to Shell for their personal use and using council workers as Shell subcontractors."
Mayo County Council's position now is that the funding for the road is coming from Shell and associates. However, this was not clearly stated at the outset. The source of the funding was not stated in any of MCC’s initial planning applications. The first place this was stated, was in Shell’s response to some of the submissions.
In response to one of the submissions Mayo County Council state “the regulations do not require the notice to state the source of the funding for a project”.
Peter Hynes also stated that they have been discussing the road expansion for nearly 12 months with Shell. The fact that the pipeline options were only publicly revealed in June 2007 indicates that council were discussing a road upgrade with Shell for a pipeline that not only had not gone through planning permission but for which the options had not been revealed to the public. The fact that not all of the pipeline route options in June went through Glengadserious questions about advance knowledge of the preferred pipeline route on behalf of Mayo Co. Council and Shell Oil.
The council also stated with regard to this application that they have “complied fully with the Aarhus Convention”. It appears that this may not be correct, as there is apparently little evidence of any dialogue with concerned people regarding this road.
It should be noted that last week over 100 people were let go from the Bellanaboy site. It seems that since Shell had their PR blitz about 2 weeks ago we are now into the decline phase of employment of Bellanaboy. Also according to a local councilor who made enquires, of the 25 long-term technical staff that are currently being trained only 2 are from the Erris region.
A gas explosion occurred recently at the Shell operated Bacton gas refinery in Norfolk, England. 46 workers were safely evacuated. This is one of the largest gas refineries in the UK, yet there were still only 46 workers on the refinery at the time of the explosion. The idea that has been put about by Shell and its advocates, that the Bellinaboy refinery will create substantial employment in the region, is a complete PR fabrication.
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/86638
Source (With thanks): by Rudiger
Labels: Corrib, Corrib Gas Terminal Mayo County Council, Mayo, Oil Corporations, Shell Oil
posted by Tara Foundation at
7:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home