Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 4 Nov 2003

Vol. 573 No. 3

Road Network.

Mr. McGuinness

Most road construction projects now attract a huge amount of opposition. They certainly attract a number of queries and create great concern in local communities. In fact, given their physical nature, they often divide local communities. As a result, there is serious tension during the planning process.

That is the situation with the scheme being undertaken on the N9 at Maddoxtown in Kilree. Tension has crept into the debate because of the role of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and the quarry located in the area. Local people are anxious to clarify the objections of the Department and the issue of the quarry. They want to know the argument being made by the Department to have the route removed and a new one established. The local community is also anxious to hear the Department's case about the compensation requested. It is unusual for the Department of Transport to undertake a road construction project only to have another Department object to the preferred route and demand a compensation package.

It is particularly important that the Minister outline the Department's case. As is the case with all such projects, there is a compensation issue. If the Department is responsible for moving the preferred route and has a compensation argument, that same argument could be taken up and used by all land users. They would have a legitimate right to use that argument because the same mineral runs under much of the land outside the quarry site.

The community has raised a number of questions with the Department. It is anxious that it state its case surrounding the Dunbell quarry; if it is likely that the quarry lease will be extended beyond 2008 and beyond the lands at the southern boundary of the site; if the lease will be renewed and if the Department has entered into negotiations about it. According to a note I received from the Department, the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources entered into negotiations with Kilkenny County Council and that is where the objection to the preferred route emerged. The note states the Department's exploration and mining division in January 2002 was in discussions regarding the 15 million tonnes of dolomite in the land affected. On 29 August 2002 the Department was formally objecting to the scheme. What meetings took place after that date? Has the Department made any effort with the engineers involved to deal with the problems emerging? Were there meetings between the exploration and mining division of the Department and Kilkenny County Council this year?

I am anxious that the Minister put the information surrounding these queries into the public domain. Perhaps he will use the opportunity afforded to him in this Adjournment debate to explain in detail the stance being taken by his Department.

Will the Minister of State attempt to allay the fears in that area regarding his objections to the preferred route in the first place? That information could perhaps be used by the landowners now affected on route number three to see if they have the appropriate minerals so that they can use the same argument. The issue should be dealt with in the context of compensation because what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. If a sizeable compensation package is there for the Department, the same figures can be used to compensate farmers and other landowners for the land they will have to dispose of for the construction of this road project. The Minister of State should use this opportunity to give a comprehensive reply to deal with the issues that have been raised by the community in that area.

Mr. T. O'Malley

The claim for compensation arose as a result of a section of a proposed roadway being routed through an existing dolomite mine and also through an area which included significant reserves of dolomite. Dolomite is a mineral for which a lease is required from the exploration and mining division of the Department before it can be extracted and the State receives royalties for each tonne of the mineral extracted. Dolomite is used as building stone and as a refractory for furnace linings. The claim for compensation is based on the loss of revenue from royalties as a result of the proposed road being routed through land which includes mineral deposits, thus sterilising exploitation and extraction of those minerals.

It is Government policy to promote investment in mining and in minerals exploration that is compatible with sustainable development. That compatibility is pursued by taking adequate measures to protect the environment, creating jobs, producing raw materials essential to modern lifestyles and industry at economic cost, and using some of the wealth generated by the extraction of minerals to support regional development and infrastructure.

County councils are requested to take account of Government policy in relation to mineral development in their county development plans. It is accepted that Kilkenny County Council's development plan complies entirely with Government policy on mining issues.

It is no secret that the mining industry is going through a hard time at present and there is a significant downturn in global exploration and mining. It is, therefore, all the more urgent to encourage environmentally sound mineral extraction and maximise revenue so that we can continue to market our services and attract inward investment in the industry.

On the actual road proposals, the initial preferred design was routed through an existing mine site at Maddoxtown, leased by the Department to a private operator. This lease expires in December 2008 and the likelihood is that the operator will seek a new lease in respect of the additional significant unexploited mineral reserves south of the existing mine.

The Department had notice of the proposals and was anxious to put its case to Kilkenny County Council for preservation of the valuable mineral deposits, which could exceed 30 million tonnes. To that end, a meeting took place in January 2002 at which the Department's statutory position and general Government policy on minerals extraction were outlined. Subsequently, the Department wrote to Kilkenny County Council in August 2002 formally objecting to any road proposals which would sterilise any present or future minerals development.

This was followed by several other meetings at which the question of compensation in respect of future royalties lost as a result of sterilisation of minerals was discussed. Kilkenny County Council and its consultants produced revised designs showing the proposed road avoiding the existing working mine but still running through future mineral reserves.

On this basis, the compensation claim would come to at least €2 million in a best possible scenario for Kilkenny County Council and the National Roads Authority. The figure could be higher with different road configuration and associated corridors. Kilkenny County Council unveiled a number of options for the proposed route at a public meeting on 22 October last and I understand that one of the options included a proposed route which completely excluded the mineral reserves area.

The overall goal for exploration and mining is to stimulate discovery of economic mineral deposits and to maximise the contribution of the mining sector to the national economy, with due regard to its impact on the environment. A claim for compensation for the loss of revenue as a result of sterilisation of minerals is well founded. Any sterilisation of minerals will result in a loss of future income to the Exchequer from its minerals estate and the loss should be reflected in the true cost of the road project.