JOINT COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT debate -
Thursday, 11 Dec 2003

Vol. 1 No. 19

Derrybrien Landslide Action Group: Presentation.

Chairman

Today's meeting has been called following requests to meet the joint committee by both the Derrybrien Landslide Action Group and the ICMSA following the landslide in Derrybrien last October. We have invited the two groups to attend today.

I welcome the Derrybrien Landslide Action Group on behalf of the joint committee. It is represented by its chairman Mr. Martin Collins and other representatives. We will hear from Mr. Collins and then take questions from members of the committee. I draw attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before it. Members are reminded of the long standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses, or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I believe part of Mr. Collins's presentation involves the showing of a video.

Mr. Martin Collins

We thank the committee for meeting our group. We will get straight into action by showing a video. With the permission of the Chairman, I will talk the committee through it. At its widest, the landslide is about 300m wide. A 100m wide section of an internal roadway on the wind farm was swept away. A smaller landslide occurred about a month before the main one. It was down to luck that it did not expand and create the same problems the larger one created. An excavation for a base took place at the top of the slide. The slide followed the course of a stream and a river.

I thank the committee for meeting with us today and allowing us to outline our position on the landslide that occurred on 16 October. We requested a hearing from the committee in order to seek an independent investigation into the planning and political processes relating to this wind farm development. Having conducted some research, we understand the committee is interested to establish where proper planning procedures and criteria were adhered to, and the nature of the social and environmental consequences of the disaster.

I will now refer to the Derrybrien wind farm project timeline. As members can see, the planning process commenced in 1997 when Galway County Council granted Saorgas Energy permission for two phases of this development. While the community group appealed the council decision to An Bord Pleanála, that organisation upheld the council decision. The application for the grid connection was granted. However, Galway County Council refused an application for a third phase. An AER V contract was given for the wind farm development. Correspondence between Saorgas Energy and Galway County Council sought change in turbine sizes. A formal planning application to change the size and type of turbine was lodged and the council approved it. Saorgas Energy and Hibernian Wind Power, a subsidiary of ESB, negotiated a sale in 2003.

Work started on the site on 2 July 2003. Around this time, Saorgas Energy received an AER VI contract from the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. The grant of planning was running out on two of the sites that had received permission in 1997. Saorgas sold the project to Hibernian Wind Power as an independent project called Gort Windfarms. Planning expired on 11 October 2003. The bog slide occurred on 16 October 2003 and Galway County Council granted an extension of time on 24 November 2003. As stated in our letter to the secretary to the committee, Mr. Brian Hickey, the landslide occurred on 16 October last, resulting in the movement of 450,000 cubic metres of peat. It caused a major fish kill, widespread concern in the community, environmental damage, road closures and contamination of water supplies. We may refer to the document although we will not repeat everything in it.

An extremely serious issue is raised in the last paragraph of document No. 2, which is a Galway County Council document. It states that the council met again with the management of Hibernian Wind Power and its related ESB companies on 6 November 2003. The council advised it that the preliminary findings of BMA GeoServices were that the ground conditions which exist in the area in which the landslide occurred on 16 October are replicated in a number of other areas on this site and that these areas require their immediate attention, which point says much about this issue.

Document No. 3 illustrates that the preliminary report of the Shannon Regional Fisheries Board states that a major fish kill occurred, the knock-on effect of which was the killing off of food for fish and the area's biodiversity along with the destruction of the spawning beds, which is a major issue for the future in regard to whether the river will restock itself with wild brown trout.

The Irish Peatland Conservation Council issued a press release which makes known its views of the effects of this type of activity on upland blanket bog. As we have seen to our cost, much of what it said has come true.

The three phases outlined are as follows: phase 1 ^ 97347023 turbines; phase 2 97365223 turbines; and phase 3 ^ 00458125 turbines. Phases 1 and 2 were granted permission by Galway County Council and phase 3 was refused. However, An Bord Pleanála granted permission for all three phases with what we describe as totally inadequate environmental impact statements. To our knowledge, no geo-technical surveys were carried out on any part of this 850 acre site. This underlines the seriousness of the situation. A survey was carried out by Michael Punch, an engineering company in Limerick, which showed that the area was seriously unstable and it had to abandon its archaeological survey, which is another serious issue.

Document No. 5 comprises pages from the environmental impact assessment in which a number of issues come to light and will give members an idea of the effects of the project on the environment, the rocks and the soil. There was no expectation that this type of event would happen and no proper research or investigations were carried out in this area even though the depth of blanket bog was 1.5 to six metres deep.

This environmental impact statement does not comply with EIA Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended by Directive 97/11/EEC. This was clearly pointed out by the planner in Galway County Council, who refused planning permission. In document No. 5 is Galway County Council's decision on the planning application. It states: "An EIS has been submitted with the application which is not of very good quality, is poor in detail and is very [I cannot make out the word] in relation to the effects of the development on the area". It refers to the quarry in the area and that it is a reinstatement as it is considered a temporary quarry. This is something which could be further perused but there is no point going into detail at this stage.

The planner who examined this site felt it constituted over-development and that the best thing to do was to proceed with 46 turbines and see what the effect would be on the area. He also felt the EIS was inadequate.

This site was the trigger for the landslide in the area. The local community, along with Dúchas, highlighted this danger among the other concerns we had at the time. To be fair, none of us thought that such a major landslide would occur. Dúchas wrote:

The information provided in the EIS for these proposals was insufficient to allow for a proper assessment of the potential impacts of these developments on the nearby Lough Cutra special protection area for the protection of wild birds and their habitat and on the candidate special area of conservation, No. 252, the Coole-Garryland complex.

There are potential negative impacts on these sites from the peat silt emanating from the works and entering the catchment of these lakes. More specific information regarding the mitigation measures to avoid siltation impacts is required.

Peat poses a threat to the flora and fauna of the streams and rivers in the catchment of these developments. They should be checked for Margaratifera margaratifera, and freshwater pearl mussels, a species protected under the Wildlife Act 1976 and which is also in annexe 5 of the EU habitats directive.

We also require information regarding birds of prey, in particular the hen harriers in order to allow for a proper assessment of the potential impacts.

We feel that our concerns were not properly addressed or were in fact ignored in respect of a letter which I posted to the enforcement officer on 29 July and I remind the committee that the construction work started on 2 July. I wrote that I had made several unsuccessful attempts to contact the officer since our telephone conversation on 24 July. In my letter I stated:

As you are aware from my initial contact with you on 16 July I am requesting information from the planning section of Galway County Council as to whether or not development works adjacent to windfarm sites at Derrybrien North, Toormacnevin and Bohaboy are authorised or unauthorised.

I added that it was my understanding that Galway County Council and An Bord Pleanála decided to "grant permission for the said development in accordance with the said plans and particulars subject to the conditions specified in the second schedule". I asked the enforcement officer if he could clarify whether the entry and exit roadway under construction approximately two kilometres north of the original access roadway, the quarry in operation and the site compound were authorised, and what was the status of the five year grant of permission - we already know the answer to that.

I also asked the following questions. What steps had been taken to monitor the water quality before and since construction and had the developers requested changes to roadways, control house or turbine locations since the grant of permission? Had the survey of hen harriers been properly undertaken and who was monitoring the hundreds of thousands of tonnes of excavated peat and rock which would be disturbed during construction? Was there a qualified archaeologist at all times on the site? Had the roads and bridges been upgraded where necessary? I felt the integrity of the planning and democratic processes was at stake and that it was critically important that the openness, transparency and accountability principles be rigidly adhered to. That letter was registered and to date we have not received any response.

Liam Gavin, the senior engineer with Galway County Council, wrote to Mary Nolan of Hibernian Wind Power on 9 October requesting information about a bond which was to have been lodged with the local authority prior to commencement of the work. This bond was intended to reinstate the site if it failed for any reason. It is extremely serious that the development went ahead without this bond being in place.

Chairman

What was the sum of the bond?

Mr. Collins

I am not aware of the sum. I did not see it documented anywhere.

Ms Kelly

One could not see it before the work commenced.

Chairman

Do we know what was agreed or was any sum agreed?

Ms Kelly

Nothing was agreed.

Mr. Collins

On 11 September Mr. Gavin wrote to Ms Nolan regarding 97-3470 listing several conditions which had not been agreed, namely 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10b, 12 and 13. That was for one development. He added that "The conditions as issued by An Bord Pleanála are the same on 97-3652 as they are on 97-3470. Again conditions 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10b, 12 and 13 had not been agreed with the Planning Authority, at the date of our meeting of 21 August." Similarly for planning reference 00-4581, conditions 2 and 3(a) were agreed, but conditions 3(b), 3(c), 4, 6, 7, 8, 9(ii), 10, 11, 12 and 13 were not. This letter shows the negotiations taking place in this regard. It mentions that "For the control of silt laden discharge the details submitted to satisfy condition 9 have been referred to the environment section for comment". Those conditions were to be complied with prior to commencement of planning. It also points out that a second cash deposit to protect the road infrastructure if and when damage was caused during the development was not agreed. The Galway County Council granting of permission states a number of requirements on this issue. Condition No. 6 states that "Before development commences, the developer shall lodge with Galway County Council a cash deposit, a bond of an insurance company, or other security" to secure the reinstatement of the project if it ceases.

Traffic management before development commences is also referred to in the planning schedule. In condition No. 7 a figure for this is stated. It also states:

Before development commences, the developer shall lodge with Galway County Council a cash deposit, a bond of an insurance company or other security, to secure the reinstatement of public roads which may be damaged by the transport of material to the site, to an amount of £100,000 coupled with an agreement empowering the council to apply such a security or part thereof for the satisfactory reinstatement of the public road.

The stipulations in An Bord Pleanála's grant of permission are similar to those of Galway County Council's. It is one thing for Galway County Council and for the developers to state that possibly at this stage they may now be in compliance with the conditions. All it can be compared to is being stopped on the road for not wearing a seatbelt when there is not much point in saying that in a couple of minutes it will be put on. They were not in compliance with the conditions and broke important procedures. Someone must be held accountable for this because it is sloppy work and should not be tolerated.

In our submission to a Galway County Council area committee meeting on 12 December 2003, we stated that the Slieve Aughties and south Galway region has been designated as a suitable wind farm location in the 2003 county development plan. We asked - yet we still do not have an answer - on what surveys and criteria was that designation based? We feel that it was suitable because of the region's prevailing wind speed and remote location. However, were there any proper surveys taken of the area? We are again making the point about the environmental impact statement and geological surveys. Is the wind farm in full compliance with the planning permission granted? Will Galway County Council confirm or deny this? If it is not the case, will Galway County Council obtain a high court order to prosecute the offenders?

We also argued that the extension of time should be put on hold. However, we were informed that the council felt obliged to give extension as a certain level of work had been carried out on the development. We felt that this was unfair on the community to grant permission in light of what had happened in the past. We also raised the lack of response to a letter sent to Mr. Noel Burke, enforcement officer. Do the county council and those in authority realise the effect and the trauma on the Derrybrien community? All work should cease until we are given categorical assurances that no further landslides will occur.

We made submissions to the 2003 county development plan but these were ignored. In our submission to the plan we clearly stated that with the level of development and forestry in the area we were under serious threat as a community. We are a small population and what can one do at that stage? We have made representations to the EU Environment Commissioner, Margot Wallstro1m, stating that the development needs to be investigated properly. Her office has responded to us stating that our complaint has been registered. It is one step along the road that we will pursue. In 1998, we made submissions——

Chairman

Perhaps, in the interests of time, you can conclude your presentation?

Mr. Collins

We have made it crystal clear that we are not opposed to wind generated electricity. However, we are opposed to how it is done and the way the system works. The current AER system exploits vulnerable rural communities and mountain upland areas. This needs to be addressed and changed or we will have a repetition of what happened in Derrybrien. The study of large scale offshore wind farms states that they are feasible and practical. A small scale, locally owned, co-operative based wind farm will benefit the local community. There are also other areas such as cutaway bogs; however this is open to interpretation. Wind turbines ought to be sited in their natural industrial home as windfarms are industrial developments. The future of the wind industry and that of alternative energy are at stake. This has to be taken seriously by everybody.

It is incomprehensible how 71 turbines could be built on blanket bog ranging in depth from one and a half metres to six metres, 1,200 feet above sea level without any geo-technical surveys.

There are two more matters to discuss. We want answers as to why the Derrybrien windfarm licence was discussed at three management committee meetings of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources where the advice of the Attorney General was requested on the Derrybrien wind farm licence. I hope we will get answers to that.

Safety and the well being of our community are our priorities. We are not hunting for compensation. We would refer the committee to the committee's own mission statement. We ask the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment and Local Government to request the ESB, Hibernian Wind Power ASCON, Saorgas Energy, Coillte, Galway County Council and An Bord Pleanála to account for their actions and furnish all relevant particulars to this project. The only way to alleviate our genuine fears is to give us a guarantee our tiny community with a population of 130 people has a future. I thank the committee and the Chairman for the opportunity to address the meeting.

Chairman

A number of members have offered to ask some questions. We will take questions together and perhaps the witness will respond to them.

Deputy McCormack

I welcome the submission made by the witness's committee and I sympathise with the trauma suffered by their community as a result of this landslide. I compliment the voluntary committee on putting together the extensive documentation which was presented to us today.

The witness posed one very serious question. In a letter to Galway County Council planning authority dated 29 July 2003, many questions were posed to the planning authority. Did I hear the witness correctly when he stated that he had not yet received a reply to that letter? If that is so, it is an awful indictment of the Galway County Council planning authority.

I note that a submission was also made to the Loughrea area councillor's committee on 12 November. Was that an oral presentation or was it a presentation with documentation? Have you received any response to that?

The witness dealt with the fish kill damage done to the spawning grounds and is seeking an independent inquiry into the planning process. What does your committee hope to achieve by the end result of such an inquiry? How else do you believe that this committee can help the community affected by this disaster? The last document referred to by the witness was a request to this committee that the various bodies ranging from the ESB to the Planning Appeals Board would co-operate with your committee by presenting all of the facts to it. Are you experiencing difficulty with all of those bodies mentioned in getting answers to your legitimate queries about the procedure at the Derrybrien wind farm.

Deputy M. Higgins

I appreciate the opportunity to ask some questions following the presentation by the Derrybrien Landslide Action Group. We should agree with what Mr. Collins suggests which is that we ask in the developers, the ESB, ASCON, Galway County Council and all the other agencies involved in the presentation to address the issues that have been raised. The committee should be in a position to agree to that. It is for the committee and yourselves to decide that.

As Mr. Collins presented it, a number of issues were raised. There are issues of adequacy and of compliance. A fundamental issue was raised in the beginning of the document as to the adequacy of the environmental impact surveys, the EIS. The documentation seems to suggest that the EIS was prepared by the developer. The question must then be asked whether the autonomy and distance between the developer and the independent agency is respected in this application in the preparation of the EIS. On the paper that is available under the Freedom of Information Act, or elsewhere, it would appear that this is not the case.

It starts with an EIS coming to Galway County Council which does not appear to follow the letter and spirit of the EIA requirements in EISs. One then takes the communication between Mr. Punch and Galway County Council where, on a series of trials when he abandons one of them, he speaks of the jelly like substance which is present and which has to be taken note of. If one looks at the Irish Peatland Conservation Council's observations on issues like this, one can see the immense danger that exists.

Returning to the county council, one must ask that if the county council could argue in another application appeal, as part of condition 9, that an archaeologist must be present on site, notably at the early stages of construction, one may ask why did they not place a similar condition on geological opinion being present? Was either observed in the detail?

As a former Minister with responsibility for heritage, someone whose decisions were not always greeted enthusiastically, I did not frame directives but I signed them into law. I do not see much observance of the birds directive. When Galway County Council and Dúchas come in, a question must be asked. It begs more than the circumstances of hen harriers. A further question that must be raised with these authorities concerns the planning application of 25 October 2001, PL07122803 where the planning inspector concluded that, because there has been degradation due to forestry, one can wave the application on. This seems to be an extraordinary kind of report.

I feel very strongly about this. While I am not in this constituency, I am in a neighbouring constituency. The Derrybrien community is a very small community and one gets the impression that very considerable gaps arise about the adequacy of the instruments, that is the EISs and others. There is a very serious question mark about compliance and an equally serious question mark about the role of some of the State agencies with statutory authority, such as Dúchas. It is very worrying that Coillte, a State body, is engaged with developers. It raises questions about Coillte and its impact on the area. When I read the inspector's report prepared for the county council in summary it stated that so much damage was done by Coillte that the area was visually degraded and there was nothing more to be lost. The inspector did not look at the soil structure and yet the soil structure was identified by an independent body as the problem. One must ask what protection was provided under Irish and European law and under the county council procedures to the people of Derrybrien. I conclude they have a case for explanation and after that it can be followed up by the committee. All the bodies with whom they dealt should be summoned before the committee and asked to respond in detail to these and other questions.

Chairman

Unfortunately, a vote has been called and we will have to suspend the sitting. This should provide Mr. Collins with time to gather his thoughts before replying.

Sitting suspended at 12.30 p.m. and resumed at 12.45 p.m.

Chairman

Before we resume our business I wish to point out that it is expected that another vote will be called in the Dáil Chamber at 1.30 p.m. and another meeting is due to commence in this committee room at 2 p.m. Therefore, I ask people, whether asking or answering questions, to be brief. Before we suspended, Mr. Collins was about to deal with questions raised by Deputies Michael Higgins and McCormack.

Mr. Collins

On the letter sent to Noel Burke, we have received no communication so far.

Deputy McCormack

Has Mr. Collins reminded him of its contents?

Mr. Collins

I have made a number of attempts to contact him. I called to the office on a number of occasions and I also attended an area meeting.

On the matter of the Loughrea submission, we received an acknowledgment in the past few days that our attendance was noted, but we have not yet had a detailed response on foot of that submission.

As regards co-operation from various groupings, there is limited co-operation. We have had meetings with the county council, ESB International and Coillte, but I question how productive they have been. Those whom we met talked about minor issues rather than the big picture or what is happening. We are being told they are waiting for the reports. That is the line on that.

What we hope to achieve, even from today's meeting, is that the truth of what happened in Derrybrien will come out of all of this. As some people stated, lessons must be learnt from Derrybrien. If lessons are to be learnt, we must know the facts and what happened. Until we publicly find out those facts, I do not think we can learn any real lessons. As to how we should go about it, we have said that we want an independent investigation and the reports also need to be assessed independently.

Deputy Grealish

I welcome the Derrybrien Landslide Action Group and compliment the members on their work. I visited the site last Sunday. There is a small rural community and the people have done tremendous work. I was surprised when members of the group told me on Sunday that when this event took place on 2 July no agreement had been reached with Galway County Council regarding the conditions that were to be put in place. When An Bord Pleanála granted the planning permission it stated that before any work commenced, agreement should be reached with the local authority and a bond put in place.

I got the letters from Mr. Collins on Sunday and on Monday I contacted Galway County Council to ask why these bonds and conditions were not adhered to and why Hibernian Wind Power had not entered into the agreement with the county council. This morning I received a phone call from the county council to confirm that it had now agreed all the conditions with Hibernian Wind Power and that the bond was being put in place. It is a case of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. Serious questions have to be answered about this and those questions should not be put to the representatives of the action group but to Hibernian Wind Power, the ESB, Galway County Council and An Bord Pleanála. It is an issue that must be addressed by this committee.

I have some questions for the action group. What controls have been put in place to ensure the landslide will not move again? Has any independent consultant been appointed by Galway County Council or the ESB to ensure it does not happen again? If one has been appointed, when is the report due? Was the blasting carried out in the quarry alone or also where the wind turbines were being installed? Do the members know who was the planner who refused the 004581? If they know, they could tell me after the meeting.

When one applies for an extension when planning permission expires, a substantial amount of work must be carried out. In the case of a house, for example, it must be built to roof level before an extension of planning permission will be granted, particularly by Galway County Council. What amount of work had been carried out when the extension was sought and granted?

The other groups involved should be brought before the committee to answer questions.

Deputy Callanan

I am delighted to welcome members of the action group and I compliment them on the great work they have done. They represent a small community and have been great leaders of that community. They have done a great deal of work to bring the investigation to this point. It is not easy to get information from so many sources.

What happened in Derrybrien was an environmental disaster. Local farmers were affected, there was a large fish kill and there is resultant pollution. An environmental impact study was carried out but how effective was it? I asked representatives of An Bord Pleanála who came before this committee if any structural survey was carried out. There appears to have been none. This is an area that, as far as I know, was never grazed. It is a type of jelly bog on the side of a mountain. Carrying out construction and installing that number of turbines in the area was a recipe for disaster. A huge amount of blasting took place as well, as we saw on the video. Was planning permission given for the blasting? People in Hibernian Wind Power would say they were allowed to blast to provide stone for the bases of the turbines, in other words, there was an allowance for that. Perhaps Mr. Collins could confirm if there was planning permission for it because that seems to be where the problem started.

I do not wish to be alarmist but we have enjoyed lovely weather since this landslide stopped. A lake near my home is nearly four feet lower than its normal depth. I fear that if we get the usual amount of rain and it occurs quickly, there could be further landslides. I hope the people investigating it understand this and realise what might happen. I accept the need for an independent investigation. On one side there is Galway County Council which is, hopefully, independent on this issue. On the other side is Hibernian Wind Power which, in fairness, is working on its own behalf. It plans to return to the site and to get the project up and running as fast as possible.

I am delighted to support the proposal that the other bodies be invited to come before the committee. This is the ideal venue to discuss the issue.

Deputy McHugh

I welcome the deputation. Its main proposal is that an independent inquiry be carried out into the development. I support that proposal. Many issues need to be resolved and the investigations that have taken place so far have not resolved them. These issues include planning, the input of An Bord Pleanála, work practices and procedures on the site and what will happen in the future if work is allowed to continue. Investigation of such issues can only be done by an independent body. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should initiate and co-ordinate that investigation. I hope a request will be put to him as a result of this meeting to initiate that inquiry.

The group members also stated that all the bodies concerned, Hibernian Wind Power, Saorgas Energy and so forth, need to answer questions about their involvement. Lessons can be learned for the future, not only for this site but also for other sites where developments of a similar nature might be proposed. It is vital, therefore, that the Minister be involved. We can learn how to avoid similar mistakes in the future.

Has the group sought or obtained any reports which the company might have on what happened?

Senator U. Burke

I thank the Chairman for allowing me to attend this meeting and I join my colleagues in their words of welcome and compliments to the action committee on its work to date. People have watched media coverage of this event but it is important to realise that the community in Derrybrien has suffered. It is anxiously waiting for whatever agency with responsibility in this area to take action and to come forward with the truth. That is all that is involved.

Deputy McHugh suggested that the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should take responsibility. I have raised this matter twice in the Seanad and the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and, last week, the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government have both said responsibility in all instances lies with the local agencies, that is, the county council and the ESB, for whom they have no responsibility. Frustration will creep into the action group which is only seeking the truth and safety. All the agencies with which it has been in contact have failed miserably. We have before us all the conditions Galway County Council made. It is important to state that initially Galway County Council, through its planner, refused planning permission. It took on board the anxiety and expertise of the local people who knew best and who knew about the sensitivity of this site and its suitability for the development of a wind farm. All these matters were set out on paper. An Bord Pleanála went on to grant permission with conditions but it failed to enforce them. Nobody has taken responsibility. The developers, Hibernian, ESB, Coillte, Dúchas and so on have highlighted the matter and have made statements but have walked away.

In such a situation, it is necessary that an independent group is established, as the Chairman requested on behalf of the local action group, to bring people together and to allay the fears of local people. This committee and other committees can ask that action be taken but if one looks at the agencies and the reports - two new reports are expected any day - we will get a concoction of words which allow somebody to escape the noose. That is a tragedy. I ask the committee and the Chairman to request that an independent group be set up to get answers and establish the truth.

This situation extends far beyond Derrybrien which is a small community that has suffered trauma we cannot understand. This situation will be replicated in several other communities. The developers, who disregarded the sensitivity of the site despite the fact it had been repeatedly flagged, must be taken to task. If the developers were not given guidelines or were not monitored, then there has been negligence, they must be brought to book and somebody must be made answerable.

Deputy Grealish mentioned that the county council has agreed with all those issues. It is fine to put it on paper but I would like to see a situation where there is a bond, that is, that money is put in place. I refer to the material excavated from the site. A bond of €100,000 was mentioned to remove that material from the site yet those concerned had no intention of removing it.

Senator Kitt

I join in the welcome to the Derrybrien action group and compliment it on the good work it has done. I fully support the call for an independent investigation into what has happened, including planning with Galway County Council and An Bord Pleanála and the developers, ESB and Hibernian Wind Power. This committee is ideally placed to decide on the way these people should be called in. Mr. Collins made the point about the shortcomings of this development. We have not been able to get answers but I hope these people will be able to give them. Mr. Collins made a good point about siting wind farms on these types of hills or mountains. I have heard him ask at public meetings why we cannot place them where there are solid structures - for example, offshore. Perhaps Mr. Collins will give us more information on the pollution caused by the environmental disaster. We know about the fish kills but there is also the question of water supplies. Remediation of those issues is important in the Derrybrien area.

I hope I get the opportunity to discuss these matters again. Our MEPs are in the Seanad today and I must go to that debate. I will raise this matter with our MEPs to see what they can do at EU Commission level about the serious implications to our environment. If, as the late Tip O'Neill said, all politics are local, then European politics should be local as well. I support what has been said about a proper investigation.

Deputy Gilmore

I join in the words of welcome to the group and compliment it on its detailed submission. There is an unusually lengthy report from the planning officer, namely, document No. 6, which is hard to read. The planning officer concerned should be complimented because many of the issues which emerged were flagged in that report. We should consider bringing in the appropriate bodies because apart from the issue of Derrybrien, there are two issues of interest to the committee arising from these discussion. One is the adequacy or inadequacy of environmental impact statements. Environmental impact statements are regularly produced for this type of development to befuddle people and to give the impression that the proposed development has been given the rubber-stamp from experts somewhere. It is not the first time we have found an environmental impact statement to be less than adequate.

The second issue is the practice, which is becoming more common, that when a planning permission is given, it is given with the requirement that the developer agree certain matters with the planning authority in advance of development taking place. That effectively constitutes a second planning permission but one to which the public does not have access because agreements are made with the planning authority and there is no appeal to An Bord Pleanála and there is no way to see it. This is a classic example where a large number of matters were to be notified to, or agreed with, the planning authority before development took place but that did not happen. There is no come back. I agree with the suggestion that we should bring in the county council. I do not know whether An Bord Pleanála will play ball with us because it tends not to respond to individual cases but the developer and the county council should be brought in.

Chairman

I thank colleagues for their questions and the points they made. Unfortunately, we do not have time for Mr. Collins to reply to all the questions but perhaps he might conclude in two minutes.

Mr. Collins

I will summarise quickly. I welcome the committee's support for our community and this submission. There seems to be a breakdown in the planning system and that needs to be investigated. The point about the Galway County Council planner is relevant and I have the name of the person concerned. That person looked at this in detail, saw what was happening, that this large project was going ahead and saw what was happening with the overall development.

I believe blasting took place only in the quarry. It did not take place in the bases. There is a question about the bases and the depth that developers had to dig to get stability. There is a lot of detail.

The impact statement is critical. If we do not have proper impact statements I cannot see how we can have a proper decision. If we have not a proper decision we do not have proper planning. One leads to the other. If anything is of critical importance it is the impact statement because that is the basis of the decision. I hope and expect that the powers that be will thoroughly investigate that and implement findings and that those findings are seen to be implemented. What can a small community do if the planning authority is not itself in compliance with regulations?

A small number of communities throughout the country are under serious threat. A number of them are those identified under the CLÁR and their depopulation levels recognised. Someone will need to look in more detail at what is happening within those communities because they are in danger of dying away. I appeal to the committee to look at those communities to see if they will survive. It is fine having CLÁR and other such programmes but what are they doing on the ground? Would it be possible for some body, such as the Tipperary Institute, to go into those communities, look at them in detail and make a report?

Chairman

We thank you, Mr. Collins, and your colleagues for your presentation and for dealing with the questions raised. Unfortunately, we have not had sufficient time to allow you to respond but we thank you nevertheless.