Galway Harbour Seaplane

Storm 10

Just on Galway Bay news An Taisce have lodged an objection against Harbour Air launching a flying boat service from Galway putting the whole operation in jepordy.

Link: http://www.galwaynews.ie/10575-seaplane-project-may-be-shot-down

ronnie3585

Excuse my language, but what a shower of c*nts:mad:

Messrs Sweetman & Co seriously need to be taken to task. Talk about stifling any type of economic expansion while we are in the teeth of a recession. An Taisce are a clear threat to our economic survival.

I think I hate them even more than the GAAW.

ciotog

What's the basis of the objection? I wouldn't be so quick to write of An Taisce's objections - bear in mind we're now paying for ghost estates throughout the country which destroyed parts of local environments. At the time I'm sure lots of people thought they were great for the economy.

Head The Wall

The sooner this happens the better

Cowen hints at dilution of An Taisce's powers

?Cee?view

ciotog wrote: »

What's the basis of the objection? I wouldn't be so quick to write of An Taisce's objections - bear in mind we're now paying for ghost estates throughout the country which destroyed parts of local environments. At the time I'm sure lots of people thought they were great for the economy.

What have Ghost Estates got to do with an innovative proposed air service? Nothing.

What have Galway's an Taisce got to do with protecting the environment, or producing objections with a valid basis? Absolutely nothing, sweet F_ck All.

It's a bit rich to have these protectors of our heritage and environment objecting to development in Galway Bay when they and their fellow travellers were happy to keep the same Bay literally full of sh1t while they held up the development of a sewerage plant on Mutton Island for years. Personally, I'd love to see them swimming in the same sh1it rather than continuing to f_ck up Galway.

?Cee?view

Head The Wall wrote: »

The sooner this happens the better

Cowen hints at dilution of An Taisce's powers

Thank God. They've destroyed enough lives in Connemara, Cois Fharraige in Galway and throughout the rest of the country.

Finally Cowen is doing something positive. Never thought I'd see the day

Now let's just hope he follows through...

Storm 10

ciotog wrote: »

What's the basis of the objection? I wouldn't be so quick to write of An Taisce's objections - bear in mind we're now paying for ghost estates throughout the country which destroyed parts of local environments. At the time I'm sure lots of people thought they were great for the economy.

They want a study of the impact on the enviroment by the small Sea Plane for f sake

?Cee?view

Storm 10 wrote: »

They want a study of the impact on the enviroment by the small Sea Plane for f sake

Sweet Jesus, you couldn't make this crap up :eek:

I suggest that they are given this study on condition that they send their personal cheque to pay for it within five working days, and the report is produced ten working days after that. We'll see if Hambleton and Co. are so quick to ruin people's lives if they have to personally stump up to do so!

biko

Perhaps you can give us some background as to what the plane will be used for?
And how GAAW comes into this? I didn't hear the news and there's nothing on http://www.galwaynews.ie/galwaybayfm

ciotog

churchview wrote: »

What have Ghost Estates got to do with an innovative proposed air service? Nothing.

What have Galway's an Taisce got to do with protecting the environment, or producing objections with a valid basis? Absolutely nothing, sweet F_ck All.

It's a bit rich to have these protectors of our heritage and environment objecting to development in Galway Bay when they and their fellow travellers were happy to keep the same Bay literally full of sh1t while they held up the development of a sewerage plant on Mutton Island for years. Personally, I'd love to see them swimming in the same sh1it rather than continuing to f_ck up Galway.

I mentioned the Ghost Estates in the context of allegations that An Taisce are stifling economic expansion. The relevance of this point being that evaluating any development purely on short-term economic criteria is unbalanced. Yes, the economic benefits are important but as well as those benefits being genuinely sound you have to look at what you may lose long term. That's not to say that An Taisce's views should have greater weight than the other parties. Preserving small pockets at the greater expense of development that will improve quality of life for many isn't of any use either.

?Cee?view

ciotog wrote: »

I mentioned the Ghost Estates in the context of allegations that An Taisce are stifling economic expansion. The relevance of this point being that evaluating any development purely on short-term economic criteria is unbalanced. Yes, the economic benefits are important but as well as those benefits being genuinely sound you have to look at what you may lose long term.

Fair enough ciotog, my ire is reserved for An Taisce, not you, and apologies if it looked like I was having a go at you personally.

ciotog wrote: »

That's not to say that An Taisce's views should have greater weight than the other parties.

The problem is that they do have greater weight, protected by Statute. An Taisce can control its own membership, choosing only to admit who it wants to its ranks, yet it can screw things up for everyone!

?Cee?view

biko wrote: »

Perhaps you can give us some background as to what the plane will be used for?
And how GAAW comes into this? I didn't hear the news and there's nothing on http://www.galwaynews.ie/galwaybayfm

Well it's a Sea Plane, and Sea Planes have been used in the past to train fighter pilots. If GAAW were to follow their usual "logic" they should be objecting also to this proposed use of a War Machine*

*They would also have to object to the use of Microwaves, the Internet, GPS etc. if they follow their "logic" as well of course

Storm 10

biko wrote: »

Perhaps you can give us some background as to what the plane will be used for?
And how GAAW comes into this? I didn't hear the news and there's nothing on http://www.galwaynews.ie/galwaybayfm

It was the 2nd item on their news bulletins since 10 this morning dont mind the website, GAAW were brought in because they object to aviation in the City as well. There would be more pollution from a small speedboat dont mind a small Sea Plane which runs on floats and puts no oil etc into the water

http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2009/0910/ireland/harbour-air-plans-sea-plane-service-for-south-west-100553.html

ciotog

churchview wrote: »

Fair enough ciotog, my ire is reserved for An Taisce, not you, and apologies if it looked like I was having a go at you personally.

Cool, glad I held back on my own sarcasm

The problem is that they do have greater weight, protected by Statute. An Taisce can control its own membership, choosing only to admit who it wants to its ranks, yet it can screw things up for everyone!

Yeah, I think an organisation like An Taisce is needed but if it's too powerful (and as other threads have pointed out arbitrarily exclude/expel members) then it's just another example of a state-sponsored quango that leads to disjointed thinking we see on so many failed projects. We do need infrastructure projects to improve quality of life in Galway - I'd love to see the city centre become less congested and more people focused if traffic could be moved out onto something like the outer ring. That it can be held in limbo for years is an example of An Taisce holding back something without good reason. On the flip side I'm part of the Galway Cycling Campaign and see examples where pedestrians and cyclists (but particularly pedestrians) would be completely disregarded if An Taisce didn't get stuck in. So, they need to be a part of development but not dominating.

123easy

DICTATORSHIP = ''A type of government where absolute sovereignty is allotted to an individual or a small clique''

DEMOCRACY = ''majority rule: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group''

Do we live in a democracy or a dictatorship?

biko

Thanks for the link Strom. So it's to be used for tourism.
Now where does GAAW come in to this?


For everyone:
If anyone have difficulties doing a discussion without resorting to calling people or organisations bad names, stop posting now.
I'm fecking tired of users taking digs at GAAW or whatnot without adding to the discussion

?Cee?view

ciotog wrote: »

Yeah, I think an organisation like An Taisce is needed but if it's too powerful (and as other threads have pointed out arbitrarily exclude/expel members) then it's just another example of a state-sponsored quango that leads to disjointed thinking we see on so many failed projects. We do need infrastructure projects to improve quality of life in Galway - I'd love to see the city centre become less congested and more people focused if traffic could be moved out onto something like the outer ring. That it can be held in limbo for years is an example of An Taisce holding back something without good reason. On the flip side I'm part of the Galway Cycling Campaign and see examples where pedestrians and cyclists (but particularly pedestrians) would be completely disregarded if An Taisce didn't get stuck in. So, they need to be a part of development but not dominating.

You singing my song. It must be because we're both lefties!

I agree you need an organisation with a role similar to An Taisce - development can't be unfettered - but really it's not An Taisce and they're beyond redemption at this stage. The crank(s) that make up its local leadership really need to move on and let this town develop.

As for the cycling, do you not have O'Brolchain promising a cycle path from Oranmore to Galway? What more could you possibly need? Seriously, if you've an "in" with him through the cycling campaign, would you point out to him that Galway City Centre would be more pleasant for cycling, pedestrians, mono-rails and whatever else he wants, if cars were taken away from the Centre on...I don't know...a bypass. At this stage, the town is so clogged up that it'll be quicker to take the sea-plane as an escape route rather than face the traffic nightmare to get to the new motorway network. Maybe the sea-plane could do short hops from the Docks to somewhere just East of where the M6 starts???

?Cee?view

biko wrote: »

Thanks for the link Strom. So it's to be used for tourism.
Now where does GAAW come in to this?


If anyone have difficulties doing a discussion without resorting to calling people and organisations bad names, stop posting now.
I'm fecking tired of people taking digs at GAAW or whatnot without adding to the discussion

This thread is drawing attention to an organisation (An Taisce) which is damaging Galway (by objecting to pretty much everything), and appears to be dominated by one person (Hambleton) and his personal agenda.

The OP is comparing it to another "Galway" organisiation (GAAW) which is damaging Galway (contributing to the postponement of Galway Air Show, objecting to the sale of a book) and appears to be dominated by one person (Farrell) and his personal agenda.

It seems like a valid comparison?

Storm 10

Here is the link from the City Tribune put the link in my 1st post also

Link: http://www.galwaynews.ie/10575-seaplane-project-may-be-shot-down

?Cee?view

Storm 10 wrote: »

Here is the link from the City Tribune put the link in my 1st post also

Link: http://www.galwaynews.ie/10575-seaplane-project-may-be-shot-down

Hang on? Is this just the old story?

I know that An Taisce objected to the original planning permission, but have they now gone to An Bord Pleanala to appeal a decision to grant? It's just that this is unclear from the links posted.

biko

Storm 10 wrote: »

What a shower of Ass....s between the GAAW and An Taisce what a shower they are.

churchview wrote: »

It seems like a valid comparison?

That was a comparison? It was just giving out about GAAW that are not even connected to this issue (other than being professional objectioners).
The way I see it is that AT wants to make sure the impact of this plane isn't affecting the environment/fishing (which in fairness seems a bit ott)?
Are there plans to expand if these guys gets permission?

Storm 10

This news is on Galway Bay FM News all morning, they say no decision will be made by the planning board on the project until at least December thereby putting the whole thing in jepordy Not sure if Galway Bay have got their facts right now.

?Cee?view

biko wrote: »

..... not even connected to this issue (other than being professional objectioners).

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree, with the slight proviso that I agree that the language doesn't help, even if in the anger which An Taisce and GAAW engender in me, I sometimes resort to it as well.

Professional Objectors really seem to be the bane of Galway. It's a significant problem. The Bay was literally full of sh1t for years because of them. The town will be in no position to recover economically (or in any other way) when an upturn happens because its choked with traffic because of the lack of a proper road infrastructure. And one of the biggest tourist draws this area has ever seen and a really positive family day (the Airshow) was stopped by these professional objectors as well. I see a definite connection in that these people are literally causing chaos.

biko wrote: »

The way I see it is that AT wants to make sure the impact of this plane isn't affecting the environment/fishing (which in fairness seems a bit ott)?

If that were genuinely the case, they'd only need to look to other comparable areas rather than using this as an expensive delaying tactic (which incidentally the rest of us will pick up the tab for).

biko wrote: »

Are there plans to expand if these guys gets permission?

I certainly hope so. One of the articles linked says that they plan to expand to offering inter city routes. This would be a particular boon for Galway as it's virtually impossible to get out of the City.

biko

Personally I'd love to have a fleet of small planes shipping tourists around to the islands and whatnot.
I assume they'd make a killing shipping jackeens over for the races.

Michael Angelo.

biko wrote: »

Personally I'd love to have a fleet of small planes shipping tourists around to the islands and whatnot.
I assume they'd make a killing shipping jackeens over for the races.

There is already a small fleet of planes shipping tourists to the Aran Islands, I think your mixed up Biko, the service under discussion is a sea plane service with scheduled return flights from Foynes in County Limerick to Galway Harbour, from Galway harbour to Inis Mor, Aran Islands.

And connecting:

Mounthshannon – Galway – Aran Islands – Foynes. Cobh.

http://www.harbourflights.com/

Secondly it is my own opinion An Taisce should be radically scaled down, or disbanded. There "values" speak volumes about their organisation....

http://www.antaisce.org/Whoweare/OurValues/tabid/635/language/en-US/Default.aspx

biko

I know about the planes from Inverin to Aran, friends go on them (I prefer the ferry).
However, because of the drive out to Inverin I think being able to board a plane closer to town would be good business.

It seems a lot of people just think organisations like AT are there to stop progress and mess things up. Has it ever occurred to you they may be right in wanting to take it slow and not rush in to things?

So what if this business venture fails, for now? It's not going to be the end of the world for anyone, except a setback for a few investors.
I know you're all eager to get Galway back on its feet but these environmental concessions we make will not benefit our own pockets as much as the pockets of the investors. And once we've opened up a bit we can't easily go back again.

edit:Or maybe that's a discussion for another time,I'm not referring to this particular case now.

ciotog

churchview wrote: »

As for the cycling, do you not have O'Brolchain promising a cycle path from Oranmore to Galway? What more could you possibly need? Seriously, if you've an "in" with him through the cycling campaign, would you point out to him that Galway City Centre would be more pleasant for cycling, pedestrians, mono-rails and whatever else he wants, if cars were taken away from the Centre on...I don't know...a bypass. At this stage, the town is so clogged up that it'll be quicker to take the sea-plane as an escape route rather than face the traffic nightmare to get to the new motorway network. Maybe the sea-plane could do short hops from the Docks to somewhere just East of where the M6 starts???

No 'in' with him - the views/aims of the campaign sometimes align with his views on cycling but there are disagreements. Completely agree on how the city centre could be - that view gets expressed a lot to people, politicians too when they do come near us

?Cee?view

biko wrote: »

However, because of the drive out to Inverin I think being able to board a plane closer to town would be good business.

I fully agree. I think it would be a great success, but probably the last thing that Aer Arann need now!

biko wrote: »

It seems a lot of people just think organisations like AT are there to stop progress and mess things up. Has it ever occurred to you they may be right in wanting to take it slow and not rush in to things?

You're more trusting that many. It doesn't appear that An Taisce really do give a damn. If they did, they could be more constructive in assisting with applications rather than just objecting all the time. Submissions can be made as opposed to objections. I personally don't believe that they want to "take it slow". They just want to be objectionable.

biko

churchview wrote: »

I personally don't believe that they want to "take it slow". They just want to be objectionable.

Perhaps they just want to cover their asses, if things go pear shaped they can say "at least we tried to do something".

Robbo

biko wrote: »

It seems a lot of people just think organisations like AT are there to stop progress and mess things up. Has it ever occurred to you they may be right in wanting to take it slow and not rush in to things?

At this stage, no benefit of the doubt should be afforded to An Taisce in this part of the world. This is a relatively simple plan that has minimal impact and huge potential benefits, there's no need for this kind of wilful obstruction and orchestrated fillibustering. An Taisce are responsible for more frivolous appeals and abuses of process than an intercounty GAA player who was caught chinning an opponent.

In the Trib, the company reckon this delay is going to cost them €300k. I really resent the fact that a militant organisation which endures a special status in law but is answerable to no one) can cause this kind of loss upon a private enterprise but incur no risk themselves. You can pick any fight in the world if you know that there won't be any consequences to losing.

I'd like to see these things rebalanced in that the board/trustees of whatever chapter of An Taisce are appealing frivolously are forced to personally lodge a sum with An Bord Pleannala to cover costs when the appeal fails. This will at least stop them taking vexatious misadventures. Failing that, an Isaac Wunder order would be just the ticket.

Steyr

biko wrote: »

I'm fecking tired of users taking digs at GAAW or whatnot without adding to the discussion

With all due respect i believe they deserve to have "digs" given to them as they seem to have a problem with everything and anything.