Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 2 Jul 1992

Vol. 133 No. 12

Adjournment Matters. - County Wicklow Interpretative Centre.

First, I ask the Minister not simply to read from a prepared script but to reply, specifically to some of my questions. I understand that Ministers do have prepared scripts for Adjournment Matters.

I ask him to consider some of my points and answer them specifically. I raise this matter because it is extremely urgent and relevant and because things are now happening at Luggala very quickly. I have reports today that there is at least one bulldozer with a crane on the site of the proposed interpretative centre. Perhaps it is testing for water at this stage or is starting the excavations but it is on the site. Maybe the Minister could let me know what it is doing there.

I raise this matter in the context of a statement issued by the Minister and the Office of Public Works on 24 June and the reply which was issued by Professor Phillips on 26 June. It is important to read into the record the Minister's statement and Professor Phillips's reply.

The Minister, when commenting on the announcement by the Office of Public Works that works were to start and that a contract had been issued, said:

The need for a National Park in Wicklow has long been recognised and the need for a proper Visitor Centre is also accepted. The debate about Wicklow has revolved around the choice of site. It has generated much heat and emotion, it has brought to the fore some ill-conceived reactions based on misconceptions about man's role and influence on the landscape. No credible arguments have been advanced nor has any scientific evidence been adduced to show that this site should be passed over and the Planning Authority agrees that this is the case. I understand that a recent report by TCD on interpretation in the Wicklow Mountains accepts the need for a centre in the Luggala area and saw merit in the site proposed by the Office of Public Works.

I would now call on all who care for, and value the Wicklow uplands to use this Centre to proclaim the message of conservation, particularly to the younger generations of Irish and European citizens who will come to visit the Wicklow Mountains National Park.

That statement by the Minister prompted what appears to be an extraordinary reply from Professor Adrian Phillips, the Director of Natural Resources Development Centre, University College, Dublin. It is extraordinary because Professor Phillips felt obliged to issue a statement before the publication of his report because of the action of the Minister and the Office of Public Works. If one reads between the lines it is a coded reply which is saying that the Professor is acutely embarrassed by the action of the Minister. It states:

In a press release dated 24 June 1992, the Office of Public Works announced that a contract has been placed for the new Wicklow Mountains National Park Visitor Centre near Luggala. The Minister was also quoted as saying "I understand that a recent report by TCD on interpretation in the Wicklow Mountains accepts the need for a centre in the Luggala area and saw merit in the site proposed by the Office of Public Works". We were astonished that such a gross misinterpretation of our report should have been conveyed to the Minister.

Those are very strong words. It continues:

The report, which is an interpretative plan for the whole County, was commissioned by the Wicklow County Councillors, who have yet to be given the opportunity of reading. It would be as inappropriate for us as it is for the Office of Public Works to comment on its contents until the Councillors have read it and then considered it at their forthcoming meeting on 13 July. In the meantime, misuse of our report does nothing to justify the Office of Public Works's decision to go ahead with the Visitor Centre near Luggala.

It is signed by Adrian Phillips and Gillian Binks.

It is quite obvious there is an extraordinary process and sequence of events going on which are rushing the interpretactive centre at Luggala. A report is due for the councillors of Wicklow County Council on 13 July, nearly two weeks away. Apparently the Office of Public Works, as far as one can interpret the Minister's statement, have already seen this report. How can we make objective decisions on environmental matters of such enormous importance when Wicklow County Council, which commissioned this report, has been bypassed? Have the Office of Public Works got a copy of this report and have they communicated the contents and interpreted this report to anybody in advance of those who commissioned this report because the timing of this announcement is insulting to those who commissioned the report. This announcement and the comment on the report is issued before those of us who are Wicklow county councillors have even been allowed to have a look at it. It seems to me that on a matter as important as this we are rushing the process in order to try to stifle the opposition. It is being presented by the Department and by the Minister as a fait accompli so that the opposition will be stifled.

The opposition to Luggala will not be stifled. Challenges will be made to this decision at every level and by every means, including legal means if necessary. What is the point of getting experts like Professor Phillips and others to issue reports when apparently the Office of Public Works, that undemocratic monster, over-rule the democratic wishes of the people of Roundwood, the environmental experts and other bodies and the wishes of the democratically elected county councillors? How can this body take a decision like this into their own hands? What is the hurry? Why can the Minister not wait two more weeks? Why can the Office of Public Works not wait two more weeks? It appears from what the Minister and the Office of Public Works say that they are making an interpretation of the Phillips report which is in direct contradiction of Professor Phillips' interpretation.

The Minister said the report accepts the need for a centre in the Luggala area and saw merit in it. I am sure there is merit in it but how much? Surely there is greater merit in putting it in at a different location. I guess — and it is not an inspired guess — that the report finds that a different location would be better than Luggala. What has happened is that we have been treated to selective leaks from the Department and the Office of Public Works and I am asking that we wait until the county councillors who commissioned this report have seen and debated it and a decision can then be made by the democratically elected representatives.

Is cúis áthais dom i gcónaí teacht go dtí an Teach seo agus, ar ndóigh, ar an ócáid speisialta seo, tá mé lánsásta eolas a thabhairt don Seanad faoin ionad atá á thógáil i gContae Chill Mhantáin.

The proposed visitor centre in Ballinastoe townland, near Luggala, is part of a broader conservation project concerning the Wicklow Mountain National Park. The Government's decision to establish Ireland's fourth national park in Wicklow was announced on 3 April 1990. At the launch a commitment was given to a park which could eventually cover 33,000 hectares of mountain land, resources permitting, and subject to the voluntary agreement of landowners to sell land, or enter into management agreements with the Office of Public Works. At the launch in April 1990, it was also announced that the Government had approved the construction of a visitor centre at the periphery of the target area which would be open to the public in 1993.

A lot of progress has been made on the park since the initial announcement in 1990. Eight staff have been employed, £150,000 was invested in an information office at Glendalough and thousands of school children have availed of the nature walks provided by the park rangers. The amount of land acquired for the park has been expanded and this year a further 1,214 hectares was added to the park. In addition, a number of proposals for large scale commercial afforestation in the heart of the mountains have been resisted to date.

All these initiatives have virtually gone unnoticed in the controversy over the plans to build the visitor centre which was, as I said, announced in 1990. That centre is being placed at the edge of the target area for the park in a commercial conifer plantation. Before the Office of Public Works acquired the site they approached the planning authority outlining the various site options they had considered in the county. The planning authority indicated that the site was acceptable in principle and so it was purchased by the Office of Public Works.

As soon as the Office of Public Works became aware that there were public misgivings at the location we commissioned an independent environmental impact statement which, contrary to some public statements by various critics, went into considerable detail on the effects of the proposed development, including a detailed assessment of traffic. The environmental impact statement was prepared by Brady Shipman Martin, reputable consultants with a recognised expertise and track record both at home and abroad. Their study concluded that the project would not have a significant impact on the environment. The public were then given an opportunity to comment on the statement. Not only was this direct public participation made available, but the Office of Public Works also accepted every invitation to meet opponents to the project and to attend public meetings. As late as Easter Monday last I spent four and a half hours dealing with protestors against this and other centres.

Sixteen submissions were received. Although the Office of Public Works were only obliged by law to have regard to these submissions, we went further and sent them to the planning authority together with a detailed assessment of the environmental impact study and public response. The planning authority subsequently confirmed their acceptance of the project. Following the planning authority's acceptance of the plans their elected representatives on the casting vote of the chairman asked on 20 January 1992 that the project be deferred pending yet a further study, this time an interpretation generally of County Wicklow. TCD were commissioned to prepare this study which was, I understand, to be completed by April 1992.

My predecessor in office, Deputy O'Donoghue, responded to the councillors' request and said that the project could not be deferred any longer given that three different competent bodies — including the officials of Wicklow County Council — had examined the plans, that considerable investment had already been made in the project and the fact that EC funding was conditional on the project being completed by 1993. No response was received from the council and I reaffirmed the position in March 1992. Subsequently, the EC Commission accepted our proposals last month.

I then authorised the placing of the contract with Ascon last week. I was fully aware of a Sunday Press report that TCD in their study had backed the visitor centre site. TCD, in fact, presented a completed version of their report to the Office of Public Works on 5 June 1992 and when I announced that the centre would be going ahead, I did say I understood that the TCD report accepts the need for a centre in the Luggala area and sees merit in the site proposed by the Office of Public Works. This resulted in a press release from Professor Phillips of TCD who said that the report had been misrepresented and stating that it would be confidential until discussed by Wicklow County Council.

I must reiterate that nothing I have stated is contradicted in the report and I was commenting in the light of previous public interest as shown in the Sunday Press article and the fact that the Office of Public Works had been given a copy of the final report. The Office of Public Works could comment in greater detail on the report but have and will refrain from doing so in deference to Professor Phillips' request until the members of Wicklow County Council discuss it.

An irrevocable contract has now been placed for the visitor centre and work has commenced on site which has been handed over to the contractors by the Office of Public Works. I look forward to seeing the centre open to the public next year. I hope that any divisions arising from the saga will be overcome when the centre is seen to be operating smoothly.

It is very important that the Office of Public Works continue dialogue with local community groups and landowners on the broader issues affecting the national park and in this respect I look forward to a further report from TCD on the management of the uplands. The report is nearing completion and is part funded by the Office of Public Works.

I hope this puts the matter in context, puts the facts on the record of this House and allays any fear the people of Wicklow have so that the great beauty and heritage of Wicklow can be interpreted for the people of Wicklow, for the people of greater Dublin who use it constantly, for the people of Ireland and for our European partners and the world at large.

May I ask the customary supplementary? The Minister has answered one of my questions about the Office of Public Works having received a report; I think he is incorrect. They have received a report but not from TCD. That is my interpretation.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Will the Senator ask his question?

I would like the Minister to answer a question. Why not wait and hold fire until everybody has had time to consider the Phillips report, particularly the county councillors because some people have been able to interpret it and county councillors and the democratically elected representatives have not been able to interpret it.

I am privileged to know yourself, a Leas-Chathaoirligh, for many years. I worked in public commercial life prior to coming into public life ten years ago and I pride myself in all my public utterances in giving the facts of every matter as I know them to be true and accurate. I categorically state once again that the Office of Public Works received this report not alone from TCD but it was presented personally to us by Professor Phillips. I further state that based on the decision of Wicklow County Council, on the decision of the European Commission and on the consultant's advice as interpreted by us, we have decided to proceed given the fact that three studies have already taken place and a fourth study is at present about to be considered by Wicklow County Council. I believe we have taken the right decision. The site has now been handed over to the contractor, the contract is irrevocable, it is proceeding, and as far as I am concerned the centre will be opened next year.

Top
Share