What happens when the Guards don’t support the Government and the media won’t report the Guards? One of the most frustrating and revealing aspect of the war over turf cutting – and there are many – was the media’s failure to report what actually happened on the night of Wednesday 20 June 2012 at Clonmoylan Bog in County Galway. According to the media ‘Protesters maintain officials from the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) yesterday tried to remove machinery belonging to turf cutting contractor Michael Darcy from a field outside the conservation zone. But when an excavator, worth about €60,000, was destroyed in a blaze after it was detained, Mr Darcy collapsed and was taken to hospital. A deal was brokered and a stand-off called off when it was agreed to return the remaining machinery to Mr Darcy.’ Sympathy for the turf cutters abounds in the national and international media. In countless rural papers we hear about ‘freehold’ and ‘rights’, as with this from the Galway City Tribune: ‘That disjoint is also responsible for the awful scenes on Clonmoylan bog over the last week, where ordinary people – law-abiding citizens – find themselves subjected to the full rigours of the law for continuing to do something that their fathers and forefathers did before them.’ What actually happened that night? Ming’s flash mob were called in – and there are hundreds on the text list – when the NPWS made an attempt to seize the machinery on the bog. The gardai could have prevented the crowd from assembling as the vehicle was being put on the lorry if they had stopped them at the top of the road – but instead they allowed them down to obstruct the vehicle leaving. NPWS Offcials were then trapped in their jeep all night, lights shone on them, sods of turf thrown at the car. And the Guards just walked away. The Offcials were actually trapped in the jeep when another machine went up in flames – much less being responsible, as one media report had it, from a botched hot wiring. Again and again the Guards have openly sided with the turf cutters, refusing to escort Rangers on site, making it clear where they stand. This is Government policy and the Guards are refusing to implement it. So we have mob rule. And imprisoning the NPWS Offcials in the car is kidnapping. The trouble with mob rule is that it turns ordinary law abiding citizens into criminals – and it denies us the right of protection for individual liberty and safety upon which any society rests. Ming, an elected TD, is well behind all this – and the media, who knew damn well what happened that night, never reported the truth. It’s sick. And its dangerous. =========== This Blog was revised on 12 July, 2012
Promoting the interests of corporations and the ultra-rich under the guise of concern for the poor is an effective public relations strategy – George Monbiot
It is estimated that there has been a 99% loss of the original area of actively growing raised bog in Ireland, and one-third of the remaining 1% has been lost in the last 10 years – Tony Lowes
The 90th anniversary of the blowing-up of the Public Records Office, 30th June 1922, calls for the National Archives Public Office to be rehoused – Arnold Horner
Government covering up for pulling of planning inquiry By John Gormley May 2012 Village “it was Phil Hogan who, even before he took office, told Village that many of the accusations contained in the files were ‘spurious’ I know how Tom Gilmartin must have felt listening to Pádraig Flynn speaking on the Late Late. You’ll recall that this was the evening that Pee just couldn’t stop talking about how difficult it was to keep three luxury homes and in the process also ‘dissed’ the developer, Mr Gilmartin, who had given him money. Gilmartin, who was described by Flynn as being “out of sorts”, took umbrage and decided to spill the beans to the tribunal. I can guess how Gilmartin felt because I had similar feelings of annoyance when a succession of government ministers decided to discredit my efforts to deal with the planning difficulties in this country. Claims that I hadn’t done “an ounce of work” on planning enquiries were repeated by Ministers Alan Kelly, Chief Whip Paul Keogh, Minister Phil Hogan and Minister Jan O’Sullivan, all of them perfectly on message, all of them equally misleading. Rather than let the sleeping dog lie, the government had decided to give this particular former minister an unmerciful kick. Did they really believe I wouldn’t react in any way? Listening to Phil Hogan talking on the issue on Newstalk one morning I tweeted that Minister Hogan “was talking bull”. That’s not exactly a revelation, you might say – Phil regularly indulges his penchant for talking twaddle. But this was different even by his own egregious standards. To turn a story completely on its head takes some neck. So, for the record, I’d like to list what I had done as minister on the planning inquiries and what exactly Phil Hogan had in front of him on taking office. When Minister Hogan took office he had: a) an extensive dossier prepared by planning officials in the Department following an internal review of the complaints (Nov 2009) b) a series of reports from the Managers in each of the local authorities submitted in response to a formal request from the Minister using his statutory powers under the Planning and Development Acts c) terms of reference for a panel of planning consultants to carry out independent reviews in the six local authorities d) a completed tender process to select this panel of consultants e) letters of appointment ready to be issued to the members of the panel And here’s the exact chronology of what occurred: 2007-2009: Various complaints received about planning practices in a number of local authorities. No process existed in the Department for dealing with such complaints and they were usually referred back to the local authority in question. 2009: I asked the Department to examine the complaints with a view to developing a more robust system of dealing with information brought to my attention concerning planning practices. September 2009: I requested a report from the Donegal County Manager under section 255 of the Planning and Development Acts, on foot of a complaint received. November 2009: An internal review of complaints against 11 local authorities was completed by planning officials. A dossier containing the Department’s analysis of each complaint was provided to me, as Minister. Late 2009/early 2010: I decided that further action was appropriate in a number of cases, including a review by independent consultants of planning practices in some of the local authorities. I then began work with Department officials to develop the most appropriate format for such reviews. 21 June 2010: I announced the commencement of the reviews. Using powers under section 255 of the Planning and Development Acts – for the very first time, I issued six local authorities with formal requests for reports on the issues raised: Dublin City Council, Carlow County Council, Galway County Council, Cork City Council, Cork County Council and Meath County Council. 16 July 2010: Reports are received from the Managers of each local authority. It should be noted that a report had already been received from Donegal County Council on foot of earlier request. 24 September 2010: Invitation to tender is issued by the Department for the appointment to a panel of expert planners to carry out independent reviews in each of the seven local authorities. 22 October 2010: 40 tenders were received from a large number of expert planners seeking appointment to the panel. November/December 2010: Department officials carried out assessment of tenders received. 12 January 2011: The Department recommended the appointment of 6 of the 40 applicants 17 January 2011: I approved the Department’s recommended panel and approved the issue of letters of appointment. 19 January 2011: The six successful bidders were informed of their appointment to the panel and asked to submit a tax clearance certificate. 22 January 2011: I resigned as Minister and the six successful bidders received no further correspondence from the Department And below is a list of the issues to be examined. Dublin City Council: Complaints from An Taisce that the City Council was not adhering to policies in its development plan, specifically in relation to tall buildings. Carlow County Council: Report from the Local Government Auditors highlighted weaknesses in the procedures followed by the planning department. Galway County Council: Complaints from An Taisce that the County Council was not adhering to policies in its development plan in granting planning permissions – a large proportion of permissions have been overturned on appeal to An Bord Pleanála. Cork City Council: Procedures around the holding of pre-planning consultations have been highlighted by the Ombudsman. Cork County Council: Complaints have questioned the appropriateness of a procedure of liaison between the planning department and councillors on specific planning applications. Meath County Council: Complaints received concerning adherence to development plan policies. Donegal County Council: Complaints received about processes followed in the planning department. I think it’s pretty clear from the above account that practically everything that could have been done was done in relation
