Environment

Random entry RSS

  • Posted in:

    The decline and fall of the Human Empire (June 2011)

    Humans don’t care about the planet and the future of their race. By John Gibbons Doomsday cults are as old as human civilisation. The Bible is a rich sourcebook for ‘End Times’ enthusiasts, who pore over Iron Age manuscripts purporting to pinpoint a particular day that heralds the Apocalypse. Another such date passed on May 21st last, with the ‘Rapture’ now rescheduled to October. But just because they’re crazy, doesn’t always guarantee they’re wrong. “An Armageddon is approaching at the beginning of the third millennium,” says celebrated naturalist Prof EO Wilson of Harvard. But, he adds, “it is not the cosmic war and fiery collapse of mankind foretold in sacred scripture. It is the wreckage of the planet by an exuberantly plentiful and ingenious humanity”. In the half a billion year history of complex life on Earth, five mega extinction events have been catalogued. The last one occurred around 65 million years ago, most likely triggered by rapid global cooling resulting from an asteroid strike. It brought the 160 million year reign of the dinosaurs to an abrupt end – along with around half of all other species. Their misfortune was to be our lucky break, as this calamity opened the evolutionary window for the rise of our ancestors, the early mammals. Today, what scientists have designated as the ‘Sixth Extinction’ is already in full swing, with an astonishing 50,000 species disappearing every year and the very face of the planet being re-shaped. For the first time in Earth history, the actions of a single species are threatening to overwhelm the entire biosphere. Homo sapiens is a young species, barely 200,000 years old. In the 10,000 years of human history for which some records exist, there has never been an age like the modern industrial era, and there has never been a century remotely like the amazing 20th century. My grandmother was born in 1901. Over the brief three-generation span from her life to mine, global population quadrupled, the world economy grew 14-fold, and industrial output shot up 40-fold. All this astonishing growth was fuelled by a 13-fold increase in energy usage, compared to the already industrialised 19th century. Along the way, we chopped down a quarter of the world’s forests, exterminating tens of thousands of species in a frenzied scramble to convert the natural word into saleable goods and lebensraum for people, our agriculture and our livestock. Two fifths of the world’s land surface has already been sequestered for the exclusive benefit of just one species. This human tsunami also unleashed a five-fold increase in air pollution, and a 17-fold increase in emissions of the critical trace ‘greenhouse’ gas, Carbon dioxide (CO2). This ongoing orgy of extraction, consumption and population growth was predicated on one key ingredient: cheap, plentiful energy. In the 20th century, humans employed more energy than in all the previous 1,900 centuries of recorded history combined. All these trends have accelerated through the tumultuous first decade of the 21st century, as China and India in particular have clambered enthusiastically aboard the ‘globalisation express’. The energy involved in reshaping the planet is almost unimaginable. Since 1970, the rate of energy building up within the biosphere is on a par with exploding 2.5 of the bombs that levelled Hiroshima every second, or 216,000 atomic bombs a day, every day, for the last four decades. Minus the radiation, of course. Another example that vividly illustrates the might and scale of human planetary reengineering is the Syncrude mine in Canada’s Athabasca tar sands. This one project involves displacing some 30 billion tonnes of earth – that’s twice the total tonnage of sediment carried down all the world’s rivers in a year. For better or for worse, man is now the dominant force of nature on this planet. As Brian Cowen reminded us, being in power should not be confused with being in control. “The human race, without intending anything of the sort, has undertaken a gigantic uncontrolled experiment on the Earth”, is how environmental historian Prof John McNeill put it. The bubble of spectacular affluence and comfort enjoyed by many of us in the Western world has been sustained by spending down the Earth’s finite natural capital and exhausting its ability to absorb wastes at an ever-increasing rate. The WWF’s Living Planet Index (which measures trends in biological diversity) found that between 1970 and 2007, global biodiversity had declined by an astonishing 30 per cent. “This global trend suggests we are degrading natural ecosystems at a rate unprecedented in human history,” says the WWF. The UN Environment Programme concurs, adding: “The world is currently undergoing a very rapid loss of biodiversity comparable with the great mass extinction events that have previously occurred only five times in the Earth’s history”. The mass die-off of the Sixth Extinction that has already spelled the end for vast swathes of the natural world has not – yet – impacted directly on human numbers. But since we are perched precariously at the apex of a global food chain that itself is a subset of a biosphere in freefall, this is no longer a matter of if, but when, and just how severe it will be. Not everyone is alarmed. “I think human beings are a failed species – we’re on the way out,” is the blunt assessment of Prof Michael Boulter of London’s Natural History Museum. “Our lives are so artificial they can’t possibly be sustained within the limits of our planet”. Looking down the road, he adds: “The planet would of course be delighted for humans to become extinct, and the sooner it happens, the better”. The Professor’s prognosis may be accurate, but that hardly makes it any less unpalatable to us humans. The scientific warning bells have been tolling ever more urgently recently. In May 2011 an expert group that included 17 Nobel laureates issued the ‘Stockholm Memorandum’ urging emergency action to reduce human pressures on the global environment. The language is plain: “Science makes clear that we are transgressing planetary boundaries

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Subsidies make unsustainable fishing viable (June 2011)

    Fuel aid is 31% of value of Irish fish landings. By Dara McHugh On May 12, the European Parliament voted 369 to 203 in favour of the ceiling for de minimis aid to individual fishing companies being doubled. De minimis aid is aid which can be granted by national governments without breaching the general proscription on state aid. The increased ceiling could, if endorsed by the Commission, be used to help the industry cope with higher fuel prices. This would be the second time that the de minimis ceiling has been raised; the Commission previously increased it by a scale of ten, from €3,000 to €30,000, in 2007. The argument for increasing the size of potential aid payments is fairly clear: the industry relies heavily on subsidies and would likely go under without them. For those vessels that use mobile gear (trawling, dredging, etc), fuel amounts to approximately 60% of operating costs, so assistance allows fishing that would otherwise be unprofitable, to continue. On the other hand, the industry’s problems do not stop at energy. The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates 85% of fish stocks are over- or fully- exploited, while European stocks are believed to be more than 70% over-exploited. Fisheries are, it is clear, on an unsustainable path. It doesn’t make sense, then, to increase subsidies that exacerbate the excess. The fundamental problem is over over-capacity; there is too much catching power and too few fish. A 2009 Green Paper on Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) Reform called fleet over-capacity “the fundamental problem” of the CFP, a view backed up by a recent report by the Chair of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Negotiating Group on Rules. This over-capacity is sustained by a poorly thought-out régime of subsidies. Both WTO and CFP reports focus on the role of subsidies, and particularly fuel subsidies, in maintaining over-capacity. Fishing vessels can avail of marked diesel, whose rate of excise is about 9% that of standard diesel; and since fuel is the biggest cost component, this support is crucial. In Ireland, the fuel subsidy is, according to recent research by Smart Taxes Network, approximately 31% of the value of landings. These subsidies worsen over-fishing, as they enable destructive and energy-intensive fishing methods to continue when they would not otherwise be economically viable. It doesn’t make sense for national or European subsidies to support the industry in destroying its own resource. Instead of responding to short-term economic demands, policy-makers should see subsidies as a tool for managing and protecting fish stocks and ecosystems. Stock recovery plans are an obvious starting point for this approach. Irish Sea cod stocks, for instance, despite over 10 years of rebuilding programmes, are showing no sign of recovery. A major factor is that derogations, sought by the industry, allow trawling to continue in the sea for other, less threatened species such as Nephrops, the Norwegian lobster. This non-selective fishing inevitably brings cod by-catch and undermines its recovery. Consequently, the EU cut cod quotas in December last year and Commissioner Damanaki has even threatened the complete closure of the Irish Sea to fishing if the situation does not improve. Ultimately, as long as non-selective fishing for other stocks continues in a recovery area, the threatened species will be caught and killed. Species-recovery requires that government direct subsidies to that end. Smart Taxes’ research proposes a simple mechanism for doing this: to disallow marked (subsidised) diesel to any vessel that is caught using towed gear in a recovery zone. Fuel costs are so substantial, and the marked diesel support so significant, that this would be a strong incentive for compliance. More broadly, instead of blind spending such as de minimis aid, subsidies should be used to help the industry reduce its capacity and adapt to biological reality. Other useful measures would include aid for implementing selective methods in recovery areas, so that only healthy stocks are caught, leaving the threatened species untouched. As the de minimis vote showed, the fishing industry is threatened by insolvency. Biological sustainability is being accorded lower priority than economic survival. The role of Government and European support is to ensure that the two imperatives overlap. Dara McHugh works for Smart Taxes

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Irish media failing over Corrib (2010)

    By Miriam Cotton In April 2006, life-long native of Erris, Co Mayo, Willie Corduff was honoured to go to California to accept the coveted Goldman Environmental Prize – awarded to him for his efforts to protect his community from environmental and other threats it faces from the proposed Shell/ Statoil/ Marathon Consortium’s Corrib Gas project. The Goldman is awarded annually to just six people from around the world. Here was a big story: a source of national pride, with international significance and full of human and social interest. Yet there was only a relatively low-key murmur about it in the Irish national media. Three years later almost to the day Corduff allegedly found himself attacked and viciously beaten by a number of men in balaclavas. By the early hours of April 23rd, 2009, Corduff had spent much of the previous day trying to prevent the erection with dubious permission of fencing for a Shell compound above Glengad Beach in Broadhaven Bay, by sitting under a Shell works truck and so rendering it inoperative. The sandy beach cliff at Glengad is home to a much-loved population of sand martins but it is also the proposed landfall site for the 92km, globally unprecedented, pipeline of highly volatile raw gas – from seven well heads out in the Corrib field. Having hit the landfall at Glengad, Shell say the pressure will, if the project goes ahead, be reduced from the extremely high 345-bar pressure to 144-bar via a ‘reduction valve’ and then travel a further 9 kilometers inland, criss-crossing the exquisitely beautiful Broadhaven Bay, to a proposed refinery at Ballinaboy. Following the alleged assault on Corduff, again, the national media have been strangely reticent in key respects. Most reports, at first, relied on Garda statements which focused on a separate allegation that earlier the same night ‘an armed gang’ had frightened off two Shell security men and taken down the fencing – ‘with paramilitary precision’– but omitting mention of any attack on Corduff or of the beating sustained by his brother-in-law, Pete Lavelle, who says he had tried to help Corduff when he was attacked. As other accounts of the incident began to surface from alternative sources, further Garda statements mentioned that an ambulance had been called for Corduff to take him to Mayo General Hospital because he had been ‘feeling unwell’. An RTE report on the 23rd April is typical. Brian Dobson in Dublin and Teresa Mannion in Mayo emphasised at every turn the removal of the fencing while noticeably understating what Corduff believes was a serious attempt on his life. His wife, Mary Corduff, has expressed her dismay at how her interview with Mannion was presented – most of her testimony edited out and chopped to imply that her husband had been happily sitting under the truck until, as then qualified by Dobson, he was ‘led by gardai’ to an ambulance. According to Corduff, unable to stand or walk, he was carried by paramedics on a stretcher. Corduff says of his attackers ‘they knelt on the side of my head and neck and on the side of my chest, my airways were constricted and I couldn’t breathe. One of them jumped repeatedly on the inside of one leg. Eventually, my tongue fell out of my mouth and when they saw that, they stopped. I think they thought I was gone.’ Corduff says he heard one of them say “ ‘Stop now lads, he’s nearly finished’. I could see two gardai mingling with the people who attacked me who were still wearing the balaclavas but none were arrested.’” For the first five or six years of the ten-year-old dispute in north-west Mayo the media reaction was mainly one of indifference. That all changed when, in 2005, four farmers and a retired school principal – ‘The Rossport Five’ – including Willie Corduff, were jailed for refusing to comply with an injunction by Shell requiring them to allow access to their land for works on the project. The story was iconic: five Davids were taking on three colossal Goliaths on points of safety, environmental, social and national economic principle. Support for the men poured in from all over the country. After toughing out the negative media onslaught for 94 days, Shell, the majority shareholder in the project, was effectively forced to concede the public relations disaster their injunction had generated – though a face-saving explanation was found for lifting it – a course of action they had been adamant they could not and would not take. Shell is to go on trial in the US on the 26th of May for its activities in the Niger Delta where Ken Saro Wiwa, was hanged with eight other men by the Nigerian government following his determined opposition to Shell activities there. In his book about Corrib “The Price of our Souls: Gas, Shell and Ireland”, Michael McCaughan, who often writes for the Irish Times, though not about Rossport, quotes the observations of Kevin O’ Hara, the founder of the Centre for Social and Corporate Responsibility in Port Harcourt, Nigeria about what he saw in Mayo: “I pulled up in my car and people jumped out at me and were taking photographs of me and my car and my number plate…I realized, oh boy, here we go again, Shell in Ireland…I was very saddened to see all of the same mistakes, a repeat of what I saw in Nigeria and it was happening in County Mayo, Ireland”. Was there a planned, behind–the-scenes campaign to smear the reputation of the community in response to the popularity of The Rossport Five? In October 2006, almost exactly a year after their release, a large force of gardai was sent to Ballinaboy where they began to physically engage with local people participating in the ongoing, non violent direct action to prevent the construction of an onshore gas refinery. A baton charge ensued and many people were injured. Since then, the victims have, in the media narrative, become the aggressors. Community

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Village will start a dedicated blog by Tony Lowes tomorrow. Here’s the first article.

    Green/FF Legacy on environmental funding Cuts, cuts, cuts…and apathy By Tony Lowes Of all the species, man is the most destructive to the environment. Almost everything we do damages air, water, or soil. And other species are disappearing at an astonishing rate as mankind proliferates. Our water quality continues to fall, costing the exchequer more and more to meet higher and higher European standards under the Water Framework Directive, whose deadlines are typically 2015. Assessments carried out by expert ecologists for the European Commission in 2008 found that only 7% of the Irish habitats examined are in good status, with 46% inadequate and 47% bad. Many habitats associated with water were considered to be in bad condition, the Report noting “Even moderate declines in water quality makes rivers and lakes unsuitable for many fish and invertebrate species”.  And unsuitable for human consumption without expensive Water Treatments Plants. Facing this seemingly inexorable tide stand an Irish Constitution which never uses the word environment  and an electorate of which a recent poll showed that only 4% consider the environment the most important issue. Even the Irish Times has now abandoned ‘Horizons’, its Saturday Heritage Review. The Irish Times used to have an environmental correspondent as well as an environment editor but now retains only the latter. Since the end of 2010, RTE has  no longer employed an environment correspondent. Is it any wonder then that under the National Recovery Programme, the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government’s budget will see a fall from €1601 million in 2011 to €1070 million in 2014 – a reduction of a third? In 2011 alone, the Heritage Unit, which has responsibility for protected structures (including world heritage sites like the Skelligs) will be hit by a 77% budget cut. 56% was sliced from the National Parks and Wildlife budget. Their responsibility includes the 14% of the land mass designated for protection under EU law – as well as running all our National Parks. Although some of these cuts were due to a transfer of salary payments to central funds, the recruitment embargo on civil service replacements over the past few years has hit this Service particularly hard on the ground, where Rangers – whose specialised roles can not easily be found through transfers – are missing in many areas of the country. There are increasing gaps in line-management and some rangers are now confined to desk duties instead of patrolling their beats. Although the level of staffing is less than that in 2002, the workload continues to increase as further areas are designated and new Protocols to protect the Hen Harrier and the fresh water pearl mussel now legally require consultation and inspection to prevent further decline. The far-seeing ‘Farm Plan’ programme which targeted farmers in designated areas since 2005 and assisted them in adapting their practices to protect these sites is no longer accepting entries. A Circular from the Department of Finance warned that “Opening hours of offices, parks and centres will be reviewed in 2011, in line with business needs”. Observers fear that cuts to the heritage sector combined with cuts in school trips mean that the heritage even as an educational resource is at risk. The Planning and Development Act 2010 imposes more responsibilities on Local Authorities to ensure that wide-ranging ‘appropriate assessments’ are undertaken not only of projects that might damage protected areas and species, but of their own County and Local Development Plans. These assessments require specialised expertise that Local Authorities do not have in-house and can no longer afford from outside consultants. The Heritage Council, whose role is to protect, preserve and enhance Ireland’s national heritage, suffered a 47% cut on top of a 30% cut in 2010. While €3 million has been recently restored after vocal protests, research grants will vanish, archives are at risk, programs to curtain invasive species will end, and 50% of the educational and outreach programme is to go, even threatening their flagship publication. The Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management recently wrote to Minister John Gormley to draw his attention to the OECD note in their 2009 ‘Environmental Performance Review’ that nature protection has “remained the poor relative of Irish environmental policy”, warning that the proposed budget reductions will make this situation worse. And none of this actually makes economic sense. An Irish 2010 study showed that in 2009 over three million overseas visitors engaged in cultural/historical visits – and spent an estimated €1.9 billion while doing so – almost exactly the same net benefit a study last year showed for Wales. John Gormley’s own ‘The Economic and Social Aspects of Biodiversity: Benefits and Costs of Biodiversity in Ireland’, published in 2008, estimated the current marginal value of ecosystem services at over €2.6 billion per annum – not including benefits to human health and well-being. In an attempt to shore up their budget, both the Department of the Environment and the Environmental Protection Agency (27% decrease) claim that the “The reduction in exchequer grant for 2011 is expected to be compensated by way of an increased allocation from the Environment Fund”. The Environmental Fund is fed by the plastic bag levy (€22 million) and landfill levies (€32 million). But it is already fully assigned with half of it going to fund waste-management and recycling and the rest meeting a rag bag of demands from EPA research to funding environmental goups (NGOs). Recently, it has been tapped to address cost overruns in Cork’s Haulbowline Island ‘clean-up’ – and the current toxic fire at the Kerdiffstown Landfill in Co Kildare. This year’s increased allocations are actually coming from some €40 million in reserves which has been carried forward for some years, allowing a once-off increase in the 2011 funding of 55%. Unfortunately, although allocations were arranged, John Gormley omitted to sign the necessary Ministerial Order before he resigned, leaving the final distribution in limbo. That may be just as well, as on February 4 the EPA released a report it had commissioned from SKM

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    United Ireland

    North’s planning and environmental protection as bad as Republic’s by Anton McCabe Environmental issues have been low in the North’s political agenda. They have, however, had political repercussions. First Minister Peter Robinson was perceived as close to developers in his East Belfast constituency. The main reason for his losing one of the safest seats in the UK Parliament after 31 years was the public perception that he and his wife, Iris, had been claiming excessive expenses; but a contributory factor was his support for building 300 houses on Knock Golf Club. Peter Carr from Dundonald Greenbelt Association said the grant of planning permission on this site was in breach of five major planning policies. “It was an extremely highly protected piece of land”, he says. “It was a ‘landscape wedge’ – higher than Greenbelt. It separates Dundonald from East Belfast. If that could be overturned, what was the value of any protection? Any green space in Northern Ireland was not safe”. Granting permission for such a large development in the North requires three senior planning officials to sign off on it. One of the three wrote that he was signing the planning permission under protest; this was unprecedented. The prurient aspects of Robinson’s wife, Iris Robinson’s, relationship with 19 year old Kirk McCambley, distracted attention from a more serious question. Two property developers had each paid cheques of £25,000 (€29,864.74) when she asked them Tillie and Henderson’s – mentioned in Das Kapital to assist McCambley. Clearly the developers believed it was useful to have influence with an MP and Assembly Member, whose husband was First Minister. The North’s planning system is, in many ways, even worse than in the Republic. It is biased in favour of developers. Objectors do not have the right of third-party appeal. The Planning Service, which is part of the Department of the Environment, is the North’s planning authority.  However, if developers are refused permission they have an automatic right of appeal to the Planning Appeals Commission. In the Republic both developers and third-parties can appeal. Thus, there is a perception that the Planning Service feels it is administratively easier to grant permission. To date, no planner in the North has ever been charged with, let alone convicted of, corruption. Rita Harkin of the Ulster Architectural Heritage Society said: “The Planning System has been so heavily weighted in favour of developers (with its established policy presumption in favour of development) that it might be argued that there was no need for corruption”. Politicians are active on planning issues; this is usually on the side of the developer. A briefing document from the NIPSA trade union said much time and resources in the Planning Service were taken up with “The political involvement in the process through lobbying by MPs, MLAs etc which is not a feature in planning authorities in Great Britain”, though it surely is in the Republic. The pro-development bias extends to politicians, across the spectrum. There have been 284 objections to a proposed quarry at Mullaslin, Co Tyrone. It has received one letter of support – from local MP Pat Doherty of Sinn Féin: “Given that the current economic climate and the fact that the applicant is a contractor employing numerous workers, I am requesting that you once again look at the application with a view to fast tracking it” – the characteristic dynamic mirrors that in the Republic precisely. One of the legacies of more than a generation of Direct Rule from Britain was that unelected officials gathered huge power. That has produced a culture of unaccountability at the top of the public sector. A new Draft Planning Bill, now going through the Assembly, will return planning powers to local councils. It is planned to cut the present 26 councils to 11. Despite all the difficulties seen with planning powers vested in local councils in the Republic, this will mean at least there will be some degree of accountability to communities affected by decisions. There will still be no right of third-party appeal against grants of planning permission. The Planning Service faces this challenge having lost 270 staff to downsizing. That represents about 40% of planners. Inevitably, it is facing workload problems. In a briefing document, the NIPSA trade union told the Assembly’s Environment Committee: “Importantly, despite the recent fall in applications, average annual caseloads continue to be well above that recommended for planning authorities in GB in the Addison Report, commissioned by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister”. Budgetary constraints have meant it has had to cut back on enforcement. NIPSA’s document said: “The perversity of the proposed cuts is that, in the absence of sufficient commitment to funding enforcement activity, this revenue generating aspect will be compromised”. This may also leave the North open to infraction proceedings from the European Union. Currently, there are two major planning controversies in the North. They are a planned incinerator at Glenavy, Co Antrim, and the proposed A5 dual carriageway. In August, environment minister Edwin Poots of the DUP announced he was ‘minded’ to giver permission for the incinerator. Danny Moore of CALNI (Campaign Against the Lough Neagh Incinerator) said Poots was under pressure from agri-business interests in DUP. At the time of writing permission has not been given. The incinerator is proposed for a rural area outside Glenavy, on the east bank of Lough Neagh in south-west Antrim. It proposes to burn wastes from the North’s poultry industry, and will generate electricity. The developer is Rose Energy, owned by three agri-business companies. Lough Neagh supplies drinking water for 40% of the North’s population. Randox Laboratories, one of the biggest employers in the area, said it is considering moving some of its manufacturing to Donegal if the incinerator is built. CALNI has run a vigorous campaign. Objectors sent 6,782 letters of objection to Planning Service. CALNI has garnered unanimous support from Lisburn City Council, and all the North’s political parties. Moore and CALNI question the economic viability of the project. He said there

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Unloved Epa

    The dysfunctional Environmental Protection Agency received cogent criticisms in a review that is taking too long by Tony Lowes Unless any of you have had to witness you ageing parents suffer with runny noses, respiratory infections and coughing, streaming eyes 14 hours a day 365 days a year. Unless you have had to endure the arduous, lengthy, irritating and annoying process which we have had to endure for almost 5 years you will NEVER know the pain of dealing with an agency like the EPA which lacks the basic courtesy of replying to a registered letter which was written by my 73 year old mother in the early hours of a November night in 2009 because she could not sleep with the pungent, noxious, odours. Kerdiffstown, Co Kildare resident The Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] was established in 1993 to protect Ireland’s environment and license potentially polluting activities. The EPA is responsible to no-one. Its Board of Directors includes no non-executive Directors to represent the public or ensure good governance. While the Minister for the Environment may make Regulations and issue Guidelines, the legislation makes it clear that “Nothing in the legislation shall be construed as enabling the Minister to exercise any power or control in relation to the performance by the Agency, with respect to a particular licence, of its functions”. Any appeals against EPA activities – or lack of them – are made to the EPA. The Ombudsman is barred by statute from considering activities undertaken – or not undertaken – by the Agency. An inexpensive ‘environmental court’, common in other EU states, remains a dream. The Green Party spent its years in opposition hammering the Agency, its activities, its Directors, and its Director-General, Mary Kelly. Mary Kelly is a former Assistant Director, with responsibility for environmental policy, of the employers’ group, IBEC.  She was reappointed Director-General this year in spite of the Green Party’s opposition to the initial appointment which was said to have come following an interview process which attracted an unusually low average calibre of applicant. At the time, Trevor Sargent publicly suggested that the appointment “utterly compromised” the EPA as she was “too close to businesses”. In a telling insight into the power of the Greens in Government, it’s said that the Greens approved the reappointment because they were afraid that someone worse would otherwise be selected. Village tried for more than six weeks to interview the Director-General – but one prevarication followed another. The offer is still open. In spite of being a central plank of the 1997 Platform for Government, it took John Gormley three years to announce – in February of this year – a review of the EPA. And the review, which was intended to take three months, will soon be celebrating its first anniversary with no sign of reporting. Meanwhile, the call for public consultation elicited more than 130 submissions from members of the public and agencies as varied as the Fisheries Boards, the Gardaí, the Presentation Sisters, and the County and City Managers Association (one significance absence was the Parks and Wildlife Service). The results are an astonishing catalogue of arrogant inefficiency in a dysfunctional State agency with 340 staff (including the proud beneficiaries of 44 doctorates and 100 masters degrees) which spends more than €60 million a year overseeing the deterioration of Ireland’s environment. Endeavours to support scientific research are of course praiseworthy, but the Trinity College Dublin submission suggests that much of the EPA’s research is in fact wasted because “there seem to be few, if any, officers with environmental policy, environmental economics or environmental studies expertise and so limited engagement with the project findings and therefore a lost opportunity to feed research results into policy frameworks”. IBEC’s submission coyly suggests that “a view exists that the system is overly bureaucratic, inefficient, inflexible, and process-focused rather than outcome-oriented”. It hammers “the framing of regulations, the practices of the EPA and duplication” – identifying ‘regulatory creep’ as a stumbling block to doing business in Ireland. The Health and Safety Authority draws attention to its experience of even small procedural matters requiring referral to the EPA board, resulting in ”delays in closing out issues”. Duplication appears even at the extremes of the EPA empire, with suggestions that offices like the Mallow hydrometric office could be amalgamated into the Cork office, the Donegal office into the Monahan one, and the Castlebar office into the Galway one. In fact, a high proportion of the Irish environmental complaints addressed by the European Commission – and subsequent EU Court judgments – relate to EPA failures. The normally discreet European Commission responded to the Review, noting the “limited scope” of the Agency and the “general tendency” to seek sanctions only at the District Court level, where the fines are limited to €5000. The Commission said while it was not its role to comment in detail on funding, it would like to remind the Agency of the fact that the polluter pays principle was part of both the waste and water EU Directives. Only a quarter of the Agency’s funding is derived from licensing fees with an insignificant amount coming from convicted polluters. Dan Boyle stated (before he joined the Government): “I believe that if we had a proper environmental body, a body in which the public had confidence and in which there existed a widespread belief that our environment was being properly protected, then many of our citizens should not feel the need of having to go outside and seek international support for the type of environmental protection we should be doing ourselves”. Yet even vested interests like IBEC, who might be expected to feel threatened, or at least challenged, by the EPA consider the penalty régime imposed in the Acts to be “proportionate” and “sufficiently punitive”. IBEC reproduces the oft-repeated litany presentations: that regularly infuriates environmentalists during EPA non-compliance is controlled by a company’s concern for its reputation. The first ‘systematic’ condemnation by the European Court of a member state’s environmental protection

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    The Poolbeg Incinerator: an essay in cynical lobbying

    by Michael Smith Poolbeg has been a costly and unpleasant PR battle. Gormley has faced an insidious onslaught from multiple quarters. Dublin City Council has claimed (in evidence to the Oireachtas Committee on the Environment in February 2010) that the ultimate cost for consultants’ fees in respect of the Poolbeg incinerator could be €50m, with approximately €25m having been spent to date. RPS RPS, infrastructure consultants, were appointed as client representatives (i.e. frontmen) to the City Council in 2001, winning a competitive tender with a value of €6m.  This contract has strangely never been re-tendered, but it seems that the total payments made to RPS exceed €20m. The ESRI Dublin City Council engaged the ESRI, at a cost of  €103,000, to prepare an alternative waste policy to that being developed by Government.  After an aggressive critique of the conclusions of this report by Dr Dominick Hogg, author of the Government’s review of Waste, the ESRI accepted some of its data were wrong. The most blatantly inaccurate presumption was that emissions from the Poolbeg incinerator would be included under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. This resulted in a significant underestimate of the costs of the facility. The Department of the Environment believes its own report, which included research from an array of acknowledged international academic leaders, was significantly better value at €200,000. MKC Stephen O’Byrnes is one of the most aggressive agents in the unregistered world of Irish lobbying.  He spent 15 years as a journalist with the Irish Independent, and at the Irish Press Group where he was Political Correspondent. Most significantly, in 1986 he was recruited as National Press Officer and Policy Director of the Progressive Democrats.  He was close to Michael McDowell who was unseated by John Gormley in Dublin South East at the last election following a fractions campaign and the infamous ‘Rumble at the Triangle’. In 1995, he left politics for  PR and ‘Public Affairs’ through a company called MKC.  At MKC he leads the company’s Public Affairs team on behalf of a range of clients including Bank of Ireland, ESB National Grid, the Institution of Engineers of Ireland, Google and Thornton’s Recycling. MKC clients also include the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland and Covanta, though since there is absolutely no system for registration in this country Covanta do not appear in the client list on the MKC website. O’Byrnes is also a member of the RTE Authority and contributes occasional pieces to the media, not untypical of which is an anti-Union diatribe published late last year in the Irish Times under the headline “Sense of victimhood won’t rescue us from this mess”. Among the other partners in MKC is Gerry Howlin, former special advisor to Bertie Ahern, MKC boast that it has “unrivalled experience in public affairs and lobbying….Public Affairs consultant Gerard Howlin and MKC partner Stephen O’Byrnes have worked at the highest political levels in the country”. Certainly MKC is well-got politically, having handled for example  the media launches of the new National Development Plan 2007–2013 and the Dublin Transportation Office’s plans for over €19 billion in investment. On behalf of his clients, Covanta, O’Byrnes deploys a devious device to take in journalists: instead of admitting to the amount of waste that the councils actually control, he issues press releases showing the total amount of waste across all four councils. Little wonder then that there has been hardly any press coverage pointing out how black bin waste is tailing off and that the councils are staring at a massive shortfall. O’Byrnes takes an understandably hostile stance on behalf of his clients to the implementation of discriminatory levies on incinerators like the Poolbeg facility. Stephen O’Byrnes is taking an effective behind-the-scenes role on the Poolbeg incinerator.  He is said to have briefed Stephen Collins before an unusual diatribe from the normally conservative Irish Times political editor in which he berated the Minister in intemperate and tendentious language for delaying issuing the foreshore licence that is needed for Poolbeg’s cooling process.  Collins wrote: “It is extraordinary that one Minister can simply block the project indefinitely, regardless of national policy, EU policy and legal considerations. Given his clear conflict of interest on the issue Gormley should never have been put in a position where through the exercise of his official functions he could simply hold up the project for as long as he remained in office. Either the Minister should have taken himself out of the equation in the exercise of his official functions on Poolbeg or the Taoiseach should have insisted that he do so. [The Greens’] legacy is in danger of being tarnished by the handling of one major project in the Minister’s backyard”. Collins has elsewhere been scathing about Gormley, on several occasions taking pot shots at him.  An editorial in the Irish Times also dismissed the row over the Poolbeg contract as a “Mexican stand-off” and stated that “whatever the outcome, it should not be driven by political ideology or administrative defensiveness but by hard-headed pragmatism and the need to meet EU environmental standards and to protect the public purse”. Gormley has also been assailed by vituperative coverage of the matter elsewhere.  Michael Clifford in the Sunday Tribune accused him of being a “NIMBY”.  More insidiously, MKC represents the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland which has taken a strong line in favour of Fairfield-New-Jersey based Covanta.  The American Ambassador has lobbied the Taoiseach on the matter. Perhaps MKC’s most abrasive manoeuvre was facilitating a complaint made by Phil Hogan, the blustery Fine Gael spokesperson on the Environment, in July, to the Standards in Public Office Commission about the Minister. The complaint says that Gormley has breached seven aspects of the code of conduct for office-holders and his actions about the incinerator “represent a clear conflict of interest”. Hogan says Gormley is not “promoting the common food fairly and impartially as required by the principles of ethical conduct”, that he’s being influenced by personal considerations and as a result is exposing the

    Loading

    Read more