Government should come clean on real story of M3
He also sought to put the issue into perspective because “some people who oppose this development have totally overstated and misrepresented the role of the European Commission in this matter”.
However, in doing so he himself overstates and misrepresents the key issues, and ignores the wider implications.
Mr Aylward described how on June 29, “the European Commission sent a letter by reasoned opinion to the Irish Government seeking an explanation as to why it did not carry out a second impact assessment when there was an archaeological discovery at Lismullen on the route of the M3 motorway in March”.
What he fails to mention is that the Government had already designated the discovery as a national monument “due to the unique size and nature of the royal ceremonial enclosure, or henge, before the decision was made by the former Environment Minister Dick Roche to “preserve by record”, ie, demolish it.
The EU environmental impact assessment (EIA) directive requires that a comprehensive study be carried out to determine whether there will be any significant effects on the environment as a result of “development consent” for construction of a project or a decision resulting in a material modification to an approved project. The study envisaged involves a process based on free access to information, public participation and an opportunity for independent expert advice.
Mr Aylward claims, erroneously, that the minister made his decision only “after independent reports from the director of the Irish National Museum were given to the Government”.
The director of the National Museum has no role in deciding the fate of a national monument discovered on the route of an approved road scheme other than to comment on the methodology of the excavations which will retrieve museum property, ie, the finds, should the minister decide to demolish the national monument.
Being a civil servant, like the chief state archaeologist, the role of the director is anything but “independent”.
The European Commission is of the opinion that the National Monuments Act 2004 is in breach of the EIA directive because it limits the minister’s consultation to the director and excludes any independent assessment or public opinion.
So, for example, a report by the US expert Dr Ron Hicks, who endorsed the nomination of Tara to the World Monuments Fund List of 100 Most Endangered Sites in June 2007, was not considered. Dr Hicks’s interpretation of the site in completely at odds with that of the National Roads Authority archaeologists, and claims that it is actually a robust amphitheatre, rather than a delicate series of stake-holes.
Part of the reason there may have been some confusion in media reports over the exact role of European Commission in this matter is because the Government has refused to publish the commission’s 20-page opinion, or its own response.
So not only did the Government exclude independent archaeological and public assessment of the effects on the environment, but they are now preventing independent public and legal assessment of the complaint being made by the commission.
Mr Aylward claimed the M3 motorway is 114 km long when in fact it is 62 km long.
The Irish people stand shamefully accused by the EU of illegally demolishing a national monument. The Government should stop blaming the people for being confused and publish all of the documents relating to the M3 motorway, particularly the commission’s reasoned opinion and the Government’s response.
We have a moral and constitutional right to know the exact nature of the charges being made against us, and the precise response made by the Government on our behalf.
Vincent Salafia
TaraWatch.org
22 Effra Road
Rathmines
Dublin 6
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
