asked the Minister for the Environment when he will confirm the special amenity area order for the Liffey Valley, for which a public local inquiry was held in September 1987.
63.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Liffey Valley Amenity Order.
15.
asked the Minister for the Environment when he intends to sign the special amenity area order for the Liffey Valley; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 15 and 63 together.
I am giving full and careful consideration to the objections made to the order, the evidence presented at the public local inquiry and the report of the person who held the inquiry. I will give my decision on the order at the earliest possible date.
Can the Minister assist the House by explaining how her senior Minister has had this order on his desk for almost two years? Would she say how this delay can be reconciled with the newfound concern for the environment within her Department? Furthermore, would she confirm that in the time this order remained on the Minister's desk a controversial development application was granted in respect of approximately 93 houses, the effect of which will be to despoil the valley and that, while the Minister continues to delay, another such application is anticipated?
I will endeavour to assist the House. I presume the reason for the delay is that the issues involved are complex. That is the reason the Minister for the Environment has not been in a position to take a decision before now. I understand he promised to visit the area. I have spoken to him about this matter. I am anxious that a decision be taken. Without indicating my view here I should say I did do so when the matter came before the local authority of which I am a member. Hopefully a decision can be taken very soon.
In view of the fact that two years and two months have elapsed since the public local inquiry was held would the Minister agree that while procrastination is the thief of time, there was a period during which theft of this magnitude would have merited at least transportation to Van Diemen's Land? Would the Minister explain to the House exactly what are the circumstances which preclude the Minister for the Environment from travelling the few miles down the Lucan by-pass to take a look at this site and say what are the real considerations which merit delay in arriving at a decision in relation to this matter?
I should not like to exaggerate what might happen to somebody who would delay on a matter such as this. I cannot explain the delay. The Minister is a busy man. I will endeavour to ensure that he visits the area as soon as possible.
As the original sponsor in November, 1983, advocating the special amenity order would be brought forward, might I urge the Minister of State to impress on her senior Minister that there is now great potential for the linear park development as a consequence of the toll bridge going over the valley? The council are putting together the various elements of the linear park so that a special amenity order would be effective and should be implemented as soon as possible.
I will certainly do that.
Would the Minister give the House the further assurance that applications similar to that at Riversdale — which got through the net since the local public inquiry was held — will not get through the net before a final decision is taken on this matter?
I cannot give the House that assurance. That would not be a matter for me but rather one for the relevant local authority. I will impress the urgency of this matter on the Minister when I next see him.
In view of the Minister's earlier comments, can she explain why the Minister for the Environment passes this area at least twice weekly and has failed within a two year period, to get out of his car to carry out his promised inspection?
By the time the Minister has travelled from Mayo he is environmentally exhausted.
I think it is important and I should like to ask the Minister, by way of a final supplementary, whether she agrees that the continued refusal of the Minister to sign this order invites more of the kind of ambivalence we have heard from Deputy Lawlor who spoke about initiating this order while, at the same time, promoting the development I have referred to in the Liffey Valley?
Let us have a reply to Question No. 16, please.
On a point of clarification——
Please, Deputy.
——neither of the Deputies knows that the application they referred to is not a special amenity order in the Liffey Valley. The manager and his professional planning staff strongly recommended the approval of the application so that the Liffey Valley could be pieced together. If the Deputies were more informed about what they are talking——
(Interruptions.)
We cannot debate this matter now.
(Interruptions.)
I have called Question No. 16.