Eirgrid cable case dismissed by court

SpatialPlanner

Eirgrid cable case dismissed by court

Wed, Aug 01, 2012

THE HIGH Court has dismissed a Co Dublin community group’s claim that the proposed east-west electricity interconnector going through the town of Rush will be operated in a manner not in compliance with planning permission.

Rush Community Council Ltd brought the proceedings against Eirgrid due to concerns about an association between electromagnetic fields generated by high-voltage power cables and childhood leukaemia.

Eirgrid insisted the interconnector would be operated in accordance with its planning conditions and would comply with international guidelines on electromagnetic fields.

In his judgment yesterday, Mr Justice Michael Peart said he was of the view the proceedings were “misconceived”. He also believed they had “wasted a lot of valuable court time, not to mention, I imagine, a great deal of money”.

Issues as to liability of costs of the action will be dealt with later.

<mod snip - too much of article quoted>

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0801/1224321232761.html

martinn123

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

Eirgrid cable case dismissed by court




In his judgment yesterday, Mr Justice Michael Peart said he was of the view the proceedings were “misconceived”. He also believed they had “wasted a lot of valuable court time, not to mention, I imagine, a great deal of money”.

Issues as to liability of costs of the action will be dealt with later.

Well the costs follow the case, so is this the end for Rush Community Council Ltd.

SpatialPlanner

martinn123 wrote: »

Well the costs follow the case, so is this the end for Rush Community Council Ltd.

I imagine it will be. Any expense incurred by Eirgrid will be coming from the public purse so I should think they will have to pursue costs. That being the case, it could spell the end alright.

Cardinal Richelieu

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

I imagine it will be. Any expense incurred by Eirgrid will be coming from the public purse so I should think they will have to pursue costs. That being the case, it could spell the end alright.

I hate to say it but I did predict this in the Eirgrid Thread sometime ago and asked the question who was funding the legal action and all the reports against the scheme. I rather the money was spent on Rush not paying for some lawyers property portfolio. Anyone that had bothered to read and research the topic rather than take the No Campaign objection points at face value knew that the No Campaign was flawed from the start but for some reason RCC set themselves on a road that they couldn't turn around on. It takes a brave and wise person to admit that they were wrong.

Whoever was RCC legal advisor should also take some of the blame. Perhaps some of the wealthy No Campaigners like James Reilly could give them a dig out? He certainly benefited in the last election by throwing his support behind the No Campaign. In fairness I am not a fan of Trevor Sargent as regulars would know but he took some abuse for backtracking on his support for the No Campaign which most likely cost him votes in the Rush area at the last GE.


P.S mods any chance of merging this with the Eirgrid thread?

SpatialPlanner

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

I hate to say it but I did predict this in the Eirgrid Thread sometime ago and asked the question who was funding the legal action and all the reports against the scheme. I rather the money was spent on Rush not paying for some lawyers property portfolio. Anyone that had bothered to read and research the topic rather than take the No Campign objection points at face value knew that the No Campaign was flawed from the start but for some reason RCC set themselves on a road that they couldn't turn around on. It takes a brave and wise person to admit that they were wrong.

Whoever was RCC legal advisor should also take some of the blame. Perhaps some of the wealthy No Campaigners like James Reilly could give them a dig out? He certainly benefited in the last election by throwing his support behind the No Campaign. In fairness I am not a fan of Trevor Sargent as regulars would know but he took some abuse for backtracking on his support for the No Campaign which most likely cost him votes in the Rush area at the last GE.


P.S mods any chance of merging this with the Eirgrid thread?

I've just read the judgement...WOW! It's scathing.

You're spot on. It beggars belief why anyone would pursue this case. There were many people in the town who would not support the No Campaign and were brushed aside by the "If you're not with us - You're against us" brigade. As for James Reilly's support, he gave a commitment in Rush Golf Club that if he was a Minister after the '11 GE, he would have the Interconnector rerouted. Talk about a hostage to fortune. Perhaps he should shoulder some of the blame for giving false hope to a campaign that could never succeed. That and the fact that one of his election campaign team members gave an opinion in his capacity as an academic that the Interconnector did pose a health threat.

Where will the money for costs come from? It may not be an issue if they wind up the Ltd company. The question is whether any subsequent Community Council will ever get off the ground amidst such fallout. Some legacy for the current members to leave behind them if it does come to that.

Wishbone Ash

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

Anyone that had bothered to read and research the topic rather than take the No Campaign objection points at face value knew that the No Campaign was flawed from the start

+1 - but they couldn't be told!

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

There were many people in the town who would not support the No Campaign and were brushed aside by the "If you're not with us - You're against us" brigade

When I informed campaigners that I had no objections they used to look at me as if I had three heads (and the Eirgrid line runs outside my door!).

Any chance that the leaders of the anti-Eirgrid campaign could be pursued privately for costs rather than place the consequences on others?

LeoB

So its time to draw a line under this and move on. As I stated way back I didnt support the No Campaign not that I met anyone totally against it but I did support the RE-ROUTE EIRGRID CAMPAIGN only as I felt EIRGRID were not fully up front and their P.R. was appalling when this campaign started. They gave plenty of fodder to people who wanted to object. Its hard to disagree with any thing The Cardinal, Spatial planner or Martin 123 has said but hopefully from the rubble we can and will move forward.

It did lead to some good debate on here and fair play to all for getting stuck in

As for Rush C.C. maybe they did go down the wrong road, they did. But in my little world this whole campaign motivated a community to get up of their backsides and get involved in the day to day commuity affairs of their town which is a good thing. In fairness there are some excellent workers on Rush CC who have done or tried to do good with little or no support before this campaign from us locals.

I would imagine Rush C.C Ltd will be wound up as a result of this ruling. It is then up to Rush people to decide how we move forward and what guise a new concil will take. There should be little fault pointed at community council and I would hope there will be no serious fallout that will effect our town. They got advice and I believe acted as best they could.

SpatialPlanner

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

+1 - but they couldn't be told!

When I informed campaigners that I had no objections they used to look at me as if I had three heads (and the Eirgrid line runs outside my door!).

Any chance that the leaders of the anti-Eirgrid campaign could be pursued privately for costs rather than place the consequences on others?

Dunno. It depends on what way the company is set up. Not all members of the Community Council are directors but formally voted at a meeting to pursue the legal action. Well, not all voted for it actually. If I was a member of the Community Council, I'd be concerned that it might happen. Although, knowing the senior members, I'd say that's pretty much sorted. That being the case, a wind up could be on the cards.

Maybe Rush Community Council should issue a formal statement to dispel any rumours or prevent speculation. That would be the most reasonable approach I'd say. Particularly as they say they are representing the community. Maybe they should report to the community as to what the future holds for the Community Council.

Cardinal Richelieu

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

+1 - but they couldn't be told!

But we were sheep! That was the frequent term used against people who hadn't a problem with Eirgrid. We were the dumb and confused that didn't know big business was walking all over us.:o I blame Michael Moore.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

When I informed campaigners that I had no objections they used to look at me as if I had three heads (and the Eirgrid line runs outside my door!).

Any chance that the leaders of the anti-Eirgrid campaign could be pursued privately for costs rather than place the consequences on others?

+1 I like you live on the route, its outside my front door but most of the most rabid protesters didn't even live on the route. I think some people lost their heads with all the excitement.

LeoB

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

+1 - but they couldn't be told!

When I informed campaigners that I had no objections they used to look at me as if I had three heads (and the Eirgrid line runs outside my door!).

Any chance that the leaders of the anti-Eirgrid campaign could be pursued privately for costs rather than place the consequences on others?

It was'nt anti-Eirgrid it was re-rote Eirgrid there is a big difference. As I stated above I supported Re-Route but had nothing to do with a No Campaign. I had a few good arguments with people from both sides but each had their views and I would respect that but yes their were a few right clowns involved who just felt it was their way or off with you.

As for privatley pursuing any member of Rush C.C. I think would be appalling. They were voted into office at an A.G.M for this town by some who were actually for the project but as we know this took on a whole life of its own and it was not entirely their fault.

Their is another whole debate to take place on how Rush C.C moves forward. I would favour a non-politically elected council of reps from each area to ensure we all have a voice.

Wishbone Ash

LeoB wrote: »

this whole campaign motivated a community to get up of their backsides

....2 years after the planning permission was granted!

Wishbone Ash

LeoB wrote: »

As for privatley pursuing any member of Rush C.C. I think would be appalling

In hindsight I agree my comment was harsh but it seems unfair that we may all have to contribute.

Cardinal Richelieu

LeoB wrote: »

It was'nt anti-Eirgrid it was re-rote Eirgrid there is a big difference. As I stated above I supported Re-Route but had nothing to do with a No Campaign. I had a few good arguments with people from both sides but each had their views and I would respect that but yes their were a few right clowns involved who just felt it was their way or off with you.

As for privatley pursuing any member of Rush C.C. I think would be appalling. They were voted into office at an A.G.M for this town by some who were actually for the project but as we know this took on a whole life of its own and it was not entirely their fault.

Their is another whole debate to take place on how Rush C.C moves forward. I would favour a non-politically elected council of reps from each area to ensure we all have a voice.

As your already a well know author when are you writing the book on this LeoB? The story has it all, big business, money, power, scheming politicians, riots, maybe not as much sex as Fifty Shades of Grey but sure to entertain and sell.:D

SpatialPlanner

LeoB wrote: »

So its time to draw a line under this and move on. As I stated way back I didnt support the No Campaign not that I met anyone totally against it but I did support the RE-ROUTE EIRGRID CAMPAIGN only as I felt EIRGRID were not fully up front and their P.R. was appalling when this campaign started. They gave plenty of fodder to people who wanted to object. Its hard to disagree with any thing The Cardinal, Spatial planner or Martin 123 has said but hopefully from the rubble we can and will move forward.

It did lead to some good debate on here and fair play to all for getting stuck in

As for Rush C.C. maybe they did go down the wrong road, they did. But in my little world this whole campaign motivated a community to get up of their backsides and get involved in the day to day commuity affairs of their town which is a good thing. In fairness there are some excellent workers on Rush CC who have done or tried to do good with little or no support before this campaign from us locals.

I would imagine Rush C.C Ltd will be wound up as a result of this ruling. It is then up to Rush people to decide how we move forward and what guise a new concil will take. There should be little fault pointed at community council and I would hope there will be no serious fallout that will effect our town. They got advice and I believe acted as best they could.

LeoB, I don't think it will be as easy as just forgetting about it and moving on.

As for motivating a community: The Rush National School rebuild has been thrown into flux by the Department of Education, the Garda Station has been closed and now AIB are closing the Rush branch. Where are the massive protests being organised by Rush Community Council to prevent any of these things happening? The fact is nothing was done to prevent any of this because RCC seemed to be preoccupied with taking up what we now see proven as a futile legal battle with Eirgrid and quite frankly it looks like they didn't see the merit in protesting against any of what I have mentioned.

In a nutshell, that is not representing your town or bringing cohesion to the community in the interest of the people. As for them winding up to get away from the legal costs: If that were to happen (and we don't know that it will), who do you think will pick up the tab for that? You and me LeoB and every other citizen, that's who.

LeoB

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

As your already a well know author when are you writing the book on this LeoB? The story has it all, big business, money, power, scheming politicians, riots, maybe not as much sex as Fifty Shades of Grey but sure to entertain and sell.:D

I will start typing now but really need to experience some of these shades of Grey so you arrange that for me and I will cut you in on the book deal.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

....2 years after the planning permission was granted!

Agreed. Were we really informed as to what was happening? My point earlier re the P.R done by Eirgrid

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

LeoB, I don't think it will be as easy as just forgetting about it and moving on.

As for motivating a community: The Rush National School rebuild has been thrown into flux by the Department of Education, the Garda Station has been closed and now AIB are closing the Rush branch. Where are the massive protests being organised by Rush Community Council to prevent any of these things happening? The fact is nothing was done to prevent any of this because RCC seemed to be preoccupied with taking up what we now see proven as a futile legal battle with Eirgrid and quite frankly it looks like they didn't see the merit in protesting against any of what I have mentioned.

In a nutshell, that is not representing your town or bringing cohesion to the community in the interest of the people. As for them winding up to get away from the legal costs: If that were to happen (and we don't know that it will), who do you think will pick up the tab for that? You and me LeoB and every other citizen, that's who.

We are picking up the tab for A.I.B, Northern Bank and a host of other things which had nothing to do with us.

I did point out, enquire or state in the A.I.B thread about the Rush C.C issuing a statment or protesting at this closure. There was a public meeting re the Garda station closing which was not heavily attended but at least we had people objecting on very solid grounds not people just ranting. I think had it been held in Community centre it would have had a huge attendance or a least a bigger attendance.

Im as guilty as anyone when it comes to getting involved in community council events. I simply didnt have time or in some cases make time to attend public meetings so I am not going to dance on anyones grave just yet. But to many of us took the view and I am sure you know this as the others on here "ah fcuk it sure they will look after it" or "I would not be wanted there its a clicque". Well I think in the near future we are going to have to step forward if we want Rush to move on and we cant bring baggage from this saga with us. Did his grace mention in a former life about learning from our past?

We know now it was a battle we could never win but serious issues were raised and dealth with. I for one and am sure there are many more who simply take with a grain of salt just about anything we hear from Goverment bodies, Eirgrid being just one.

On the school and Dept of Education If the previously mentioned A.I.B and other financial instutions had been ran properly we would be looking forward to our new school but now we are bailing them out. This is the main reason our school has hit a wall not because of Rush C.C. and its actions or lack there of.

SpatialPlanner

LeoB wrote: »

We are picking up the tab for A.I.B, Northern Bank and a host of other things which had nothing to do with us.

I did point out, enquire or state in the A.I.B thread about the Rush C.C issuing a statment or protesting at this closure. There was a public meeting re the Garda station closing which was not heavily attended but at least we had people objecting on very solid grounds not people just ranting. I think had it been held in Community centre it would have had a huge attendance or a least a bigger attendance.

Im as guilty as anyone when it comes to getting involved in community council events. I simply didnt have time or in some cases make time to attend public meetings so I am not going to dance on anyones grave just yet. But to many of us took the view and I am sure you know this as the others on here "ah fcuk it sure they will look after it" or "I would not be wanted there its a clicque". Well I think in the near future we are going to have to step forward if we want Rush to move on and we cant bring baggage from this saga with us. Did his grace mention in a former life about learning from our past?

We know now it was a battle we could never win but serious issues were raised and dealth with. I for one and am sure there are many more who simply take with a grain of salt just about anything we hear from Goverment bodies, Eirgrid being just one.

On the school and Dept of Education If the previously mentioned A.I.B and other financial instutions had been ran properly we would be looking forward to our new school but now we are bailing them out. This is the main reason our school has hit a wall not because of Rush C.C. and its actions or lack there of.

LeoB, I think you missed the point I was making. There was never the scale of motivated protest for any loss of social infrastructure for the town, at least on the same scale as what we witnessed with the Anti-Eirgrid protests. Sending a statement out for the closure of AIB or attending a public meeting to address the closure of the Garda Station pales in significance to the time and resources poured into the campaign against Eirgrid. I'm sure you recall the rally after Mass by the anti Eirgrid group where they stated there were thousands of people in attendance. I'm certain you didn't miss the protests on the Channel Road that had to have a Garda presence because of the aggressive nature of the protest. All of this didn't happen by accident, it was planned and orchestrated. To say a press release and a public meeting is comparable to that is incredible.

I agree with you, taking what Government bodies say with a pinch of salt is exactly what to do. You shouldn't just swallow what they throw at you.

However, when the said body carries out a proper public consultation process as they are compelled to do under legislation, namely the Strategic Infrastructure Act and the application is assessed by an independent planning authority, I think you can safely say that they are addressing the issues adequately. When they top that off with a health study that is not part of their process but is done to allay the fears of the community, I think it is reasonable to say they are going beyond what is expected of them. So it would seem unreasonable to me that Eirgrid are seen as trying to dupe the community.

I disagree with you about the school project being suspended or the closure of the Garda Station by the inaction of the CC. My point was that there was not the same attention given to the issues as there was afforded to the Eirgrid matter. Had the CC motivated the people in the same way, it may have had a bearing but we will never know because they didn't do it.

We have a Minister living in the town, apparently. Why aren't the CC banging on his door about all of this? It seems incredible that they are silent on the issues I have outlined. By silent I mean on the loss of social infrastructure for the town in comparison to taking a High Court injunction against Eirgrid who have gone through the proper planning process. Do you agree that there is at least the slightest bit of imbalance there or at least a minor suspicion as to why they are not taking the Minister to task on the matters outlined?

Just to address the Banks/School issue. Even when the country was "awash with money" they were putting temporary accommodation onto the RNS site. Again, I put this down to the lack of support from the group purporting to represent the people of the town. That's a conversation for when you're dropping a parcel into me.

LeoB

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

LeoB, I think you missed the point I was making. There was never the scale of motivated protest for any loss of social infrastructure for the town, at least on the same scale as what we witnessed with the Anti-Eirgrid protests. Sending a statement out for the closure of AIB or attending a public meeting to address the closure of the Garda Station pales in significance to the time and resources poured into the campaign against Eirgrid. I'm sure you recall the rally after Mass by the anti Eirgrid group where they stated there were thousands of people in attendance. I'm certain you didn't miss the protests on the Channel Road that had to have a Garda presence because of the aggressive nature of the protest. All of this didn't happen by accident, it was planned and orchestrated. To say a press release and a public meeting is comparable to that is incredible.

I agree with you, taking what Government bodies say with a pinch of salt is exactly what to do. You shouldn't just swallow what they throw at you.

However, when the said body carries out a proper public consultation process as they are compelled to do under legislation, namely the Strategic Infrastructure Act and the application is assessed by an independent planning authority, I think you can safely say that they are addressing the issues adequately. When they top that off with a health study that is not part of their process but is done to allay the fears of the community, I think it is reasonable to say they are going beyond what is expected of them. So it would seem unreasonable to me that Eirgrid are seen as trying to dupe the community.

I disagree with you about the school project being suspended or the closure of the Garda Station by the inaction of the CC. My point was that there was not the same attention given to the issues as there was afforded to the Eirgrid matter. Had the CC motivated the people in the same way, it may have had a bearing but we will never know because they didn't do it.

We have a Minister living in the town, apparently. Why aren't the CC banging on his door about all of this? It seems incredible that they are silent on the issues I have outlined. By silent I mean on the loss of social infrastructure for the town in comparison to taking a High Court injunction against Eirgrid who have gone through the proper planning process. Do you agree that there is at least the slightest bit of imbalance there or at least a minor suspicion as to why they are not taking the Minister to task on the matters outlined?

Just to address the Banks/School issue. Even when the country was "awash with money" they were putting temporary accommodation onto the RNS site. Again, I put this down to the lack of support from the group purporting to represent the people of the town. That's a conversation for when you're dropping a parcel into me.

Just a few points befor eI head out with my camera for an hour

I think thats my point viz the scale of protest. Too many of us never bothered. When I say a press release I would have meant a proper objection on the basis of whats going to happen while we wait for a new P.O. Do AIB have a duty of care to its shareholders? US.

I take your point on going through procedures but again the planning process appears to be flawed when you look at Priory Hall and estates built on flood planes which have had to tore down.

I thoyght our Minister lived in Tipperary? Was Rush not just a postal address to get a few votes? I do think they should be taking the minister to task, if they can locate him.

There is a school board of managment who could have spoken up and highlighted this issue. Maybe they did and people like me just didnt listen.

I still firmly believe Rush can move on from this. We have good people around the town and we must not let this issue stop our town developing and moving on.

I do think most of us are on the right track and the same track we just need to be brought together.

When I do call with a parcel a quic cuppa and 2 digestives would go down well, Good P.R for the company to have me communicating with my friendly customers.

SpatialPlanner

LeoB good banter is always healthy. If we all thought the same, it'd be a pretty boring World. Enjoy taking the few snaps. I'll keep me eye out for them on here. You never know, you might even get a snap of the Lesser Spotted Reilly around the South Beach!

LeoB

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

LeoB good banter is always healthy. If we all thought the same, it'd be a pretty boring World. Enjoy taking the few snaps. I'll keep me eye out for them on here. You never know, you might even get a snap of the Lesser Spotted Reilly around the South Beach!

I think its called s**t stirring;)

Dont know of a south beach in Tipperary:). Would I need a fisheye

MaurMaurMaur

This might have a few financial consequences for the community council. I bet if they can't pay and the windup is enforced that the ordinary people of Rush will not mourn. Just as an outsider married into Rush, to put it one way, I would remind people here of the old saying about this being a town of two churches....

As a legal person working for a multinational I don't know the ins and outs of this case. I was aware of the initial Re-route campaign and thought most of it was flannel for other agendas in church no1(Rush people will know what I mean).

I was really surprized at the community council taking this to the high court. I guess this was a mixture of bitterness, groupthink and bad legal advice. Whoever decided on that route for something as sketchy or "misconcieved", as they were claiming, should withdraw their cost claims. Normally judicial reviews take place but they went for full proceedings with all the associated costs. Go figure.

SpatialPlanner

For some reason nobody seemed to have a copy of this in Rush. Here are some excerpts and I have attached the full document if you want to have a read of it.

Opening paragraph of Mr Justice Michael Peart Ex tempore decision: 31st July 2012:
“These proceedings are misconceived and in my opinion have wasted a lot of valuable court time, not to mention I imagine a great deal of money. They represent in reality an impermissible collateral challenge to a planning permission granted on the 14th September 2009 for the development of this High Voltage Direct Current East West Interconnector which is now almost completed and ready to be put into operation.”

Page 3 excerpt
“They did not challenge the permission by way of Judicial Review. In my view it is disingenuous for them now to say that they do not seek to challenge the planning permission but rather they seek only to restrain the use of the Interconnector in so far as time varying magnetic fields will be produced.”

Page 5 excerpt
“But in my view the applicants are living on scraps and trying to convince the Court that they are enjoying a substantial meal.”

Page 6 excerpt
“These reports and evidence are such that the residents who have concerns should take comfort from them, whatever residual extremely low level and almost purely theoretical and unestablished risks may be said to remain possible. In ordinary man’s language they are worrying themselves needlessly.”

Worrying time for the members who took the case, I would say.

Cardinal Richelieu

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

For some reason nobody seemed to have a copy of this in Rush. Here are some excerpts and I have attached the full document if you want to have a read of it.

Are we surprised? The main communication tool for RCC these days seems to be the "Rush Needs You" Facebook page and not even a mention about the court case:rolleyes: They are usually very quick at throwing digs at FCC or Eirgrid on that. I kept mentioning in the original Eirgrid thread that the major issue at the heart of this was the lack of communication from all sides. Eirgrid and FCC have improved on this point but FCC have steadily got worse. I am not a member of Facebook but it be interesting to hear if anyone tried posting the details of the court ruling on the FB page.

The timing of the Harbour Festival this weekend could actually save a few of the members of RCC if they wish to be on the board of whatever replaces RCC. Apart from facing all the awkward questions from the public, such a wonderful festival can show the People of Rush what can be organised when you have a central town organisation so it would be a shame not to have a replacement for the Community Council. I suspect some members of RCC will be putting plenty of distance between themselves and the more prominent members linked to the court case.

MaurMaurMaur

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

For some reason nobody seemed to have a copy of this in Rush. Here are some excerpts and I have attached the full document if you want to have a read of it.

Opening paragraph of Mr Justice Michael Peart Ex tempore decision: 31st July 2012:
“These proceedings are misconceived and in my opinion have wasted a lot of valuable court time, not to mention I imagine a great deal of money. They represent in reality an impermissible collateral challenge to a planning permission granted on the 14th September 2009 for the development of this High Voltage Direct Current East West Interconnector which is now almost completed and ready to be put into operation.”

Page 3 excerpt
“They did not challenge the permission by way of Judicial Review. In my view it is disingenuous for them now to say that they do not seek to challenge the planning permission but rather they seek only to restrain the use of the Interconnector in so far as time varying magnetic fields will be produced.”

Page 5 excerpt
“But in my view the applicants are living on scraps and trying to convince the Court that they are enjoying a substantial meal.”

Page 6 excerpt
“These reports and evidence are such that the residents who have concerns should take comfort from them, whatever residual extremely low level and almost purely theoretical and unestablished risks may be said to remain possible. In ordinary man’s language they are worrying themselves needlessly.”

Worrying time for the members who took the case, I would say.

O thank you.
His summary statement, most people kind of knew.

Page three I thought that would be the case. I think any solicitor worth their salt would know that. I would also think that if someone advised them knowing this there is some scope to go to the Law Society.

Page five I think everyone knew. Even someone who looked at Rush Needs You!

Page six, wonder if there will be some kind of effort by the community council to put this right. What I am saying is tell all the people of Rush that there isn't a concern. Somehow, knowing the town of two churches, this will go down in legend as the judge screwed them over and some scientists lied etc

What I don't think you saw was the tone of the Judge. He said while it is right to be concerned and that people should be informed, inform themselves these particular geniuses fell at the starting gate.

SpatialPlanner

MaurMaurMaur wrote: »

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

For some reason nobody seemed to have a copy of this in Rush. Here are some excerpts and I have attached the full document if you want to have a read of it.

Opening paragraph of Mr Justice Michael Peart Ex tempore decision: 31st July 2012:
“These proceedings are misconceived and in my opinion have wasted a lot of valuable court time, not to mention I imagine a great deal of money. They represent in reality an impermissible collateral challenge to a planning permission granted on the 14th September 2009 for the development of this High Voltage Direct Current East West Interconnector which is now almost completed and ready to be put into operation.”

Page 3 excerpt
“They did not challenge the permission by way of Judicial Review. In my view it is disingenuous for them now to say that they do not seek to challenge the planning permission but rather they seek only to restrain the use of the Interconnector in so far as time varying magnetic fields will be produced.”

Page 5 excerpt
“But in my view the applicants are living on scraps and trying to convince the Court that they are enjoying a substantial meal.”

Page 6 excerpt
“These reports and evidence are such that the residents who have concerns should take comfort from them, whatever residual extremely low level and almost purely theoretical and unestablished risks may be said to remain possible. In ordinary man’s language they are worrying themselves needlessly.”

Worrying time for the members who took the case, I would say.

O thank you.
His summary statement, most people kind of knew.

Page three I thought that would be the case. I think any solicitor worth their salt would know that. I would also think that if someone advised them knowing this there is some scope to go to the Law Society.

Page five I think everyone knew. Even someone who looked at Rush Needs You!

Page six, wonder if there will be some kind of effort by the community council to put this right. What I am saying is tell all the people of Rush that there isn't a concern. Somehow, knowing the town of two churches, this will go down in legend as the judge screwed them over and some scientists lied etc

What I don't think you saw was the tone of the Judge. He said while it is right to be concerned and that people should be informed, inform themselves these particular geniuses fell at the starting gate.

The judge's tone is fairly clear I'd say. I was talking with some people at the Harbour Festival last night who didn't even know there was a case ongoing, which did surprise me. Others I spoke to today were very angry that the opportunity to announce the fact that there are no health issues hanging over people, was not taken up at the launch last night.

Interestingly, members of the RCC committee did not have a copy of the judgement. It would be reasonable to expect an EGM to be called to discuss the implications of the case straight after the case was dismissed but it didn't happen. It hasn't even been posted on the RCC website. Strange when you consider that RCC always have said they are "representing the 8,500 people in the town."

Cardinal Richelieu

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

The judge's tone is fairly clear I'd say. I was talking with some people at the Harbour Festival last night who didn't even know there was a case ongoing, which did surprise me. Others I spoke to today were very angry that the opportunity to announce the fact that there are no health issues hanging over people, was not taken up at the launch last night.

Interestingly, members of the RCC committee did not have a copy of the judgement. It would be reasonable to expect an EGM to be called to discuss the implications of the case straight after the case was dismissed but it didn't happen. It hasn't even been posted on the RCC website. Strange when you consider that RCC always have said they are "representing the 8,500 people in the town."

They must be waiting to respond when they appoint a new PRO. I see that the role is vacant. One of the biggest wasted opportunities in the town is that Website. It looks good until you notice that the last news update was 2011 and the 3 news items they have, 2 are about Eirgrid and the last is about bathing water quality. They never use it to its full potential to communicate the good work done by RCC or to promote local business and services. The Parish Bulletin every week has more useful information than that website for the people of Rush. The Tidy Towns page is 2011 events, the site has two separate people listed as Chairperson of the Chamber of Commerce and Tidy Towns. There isn't even a mention of the Harbour Festival except as one of the roles of the Chairperson of the chamber of commerce to organize. How hard is it to update a website? It gives a poor impression of the professionalism of the people involved with RCC. If they don't want to update it they should just take it down.

SpatialPlanner

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

How hard is it to update a website? It gives a poor impression of the professionalism of the people involved with RCC. If they don't want to update it they should just take it down.

There hasn't even been a mention on the 'Rush Needs You' Facebook page, which I think you mentioned earlier. This is incredible considering they put information on there courtesy of '...the Chairperson of Rush Development Committee' which is a sub committee of Rush Community Council. Do they not see the dismissal of the court case important enough to inform the community of? Especially when people who were genuinely concerned about the health implications have not been told that there is nothing to be concerned about. Surely it is remiss of an organisation that represents the community at large not to allay the concerns of residents.

Additionally, there has been no official statement from any politicians to allay the concerns of residents of the town. What is the problem here? Surely this is good news that there are no health issues related to the Interconnector. Why aren't they shouting this from the rooftops? :mad:

Spidermany

I was opposed to the route Eirgrid have used. I was extremely concerned about the health issues raised by RCC. With children and a potentially heredity illness in the family I did not need any additional stress about external factors which could trigger the illness.

I read the safety report from Kema and felt that was the end of it, nobody could argue with that.

I was shocked that RCC could bring a case to court, claiming to be the representatives of the people of Rush, without contacting the people of Rush first. They didn't represent me and I had been on their side.

I couldn't get a copy of the judgement from them despite them being contacted on many occasions. I eventually got one, (should have asked spatialplanner!). When I read the judge's comments I was shocked, in particular with this comment: "... it is reasonable for them to seek answers and information... But what is not reasonable in my view is to then ignore the information and answers given"

Why haven't RCC notified the people of Rush that they bought this court case. Why haven't they notified us that they lost and most importantly of all, why aren't they shouting to let us know that "we are worrying ourselves quite needlessly."

SpatialPlanner

Spidermany wrote: »

I was opposed to the route Eirgrid have used. I was extremely concerned about the health issues raised by RCC. With children and a potentially heredity illness in the family I did not need any additional stress about external factors which could trigger the illness.

I read the safety report from Kema and felt that was the end of it, nobody could argue with that.

I was shocked that RCC could bring a case to court, claiming to be the representatives of the people of Rush, without contacting the people of Rush first. They didn't represent me and I had been on their side.

I couldn't get a copy of the judgement from them despite them being contacted on many occasions. I eventually got one, (should have asked spatialplanner!). When I read the judge's comments I was shocked, in particular with this comment: "... it is reasonable for them to seek answers and information... But what is not reasonable in my view is to then the information and answers given"

Why haven't RCC notified the people of Rush that they bought this court case. Why haven't they notified us that they lost and most importantly of all, why aren't they shouting to let us know that "we are worrying ourselves quite needlessly."

Well said Spidermany! It's good to hear a reasonable response from someone who was concerned about the health implications but was willing to accept the outcome of the scientific report. I have to say, there was perception that the whole town was supporting the campaign, which worried me. I suppose I should admit that I am slightly embarrassed at the fact that now the national public perception is that the people of Rush took this case and lost.

Although the most important thing is that people in Rush need to be informed that there are no health implications relating to this Interconnector.

It's incredible that RCC has been silent on this since the 31st of July. :mad:

Spidermany

To be fair I'm giving them until after the festival to make a response.

MaurMaurMaur

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

The judge's tone is fairly clear I'd say. I was talking with some people at the Harbour Festival last night who didn't even know there was a case ongoing, which did surprise me. Others I spoke to today were very angry that the opportunity to announce the fact that there are no health issues hanging over people, was not taken up at the launch last night.

Interestingly, members of the RCC committee did not have a copy of the judgement. It would be reasonable to expect an EGM to be called to discuss the implications of the case straight after the case was dismissed but it didn't happen. It hasn't even been posted on the RCC website. Strange when you consider that RCC always have said they are "representing the 8,500 people in the town."

I promise you that most people don't know there was a case, and fewer will find out that the case was lost. It will be a smaller number again that know how embarrassing the judgement is. I would say a handful of people will even think about the obligation that the people behind this have to end the worries they have started in the Rush Community. I am trusting that most people are intelligent enough not to buy into the "concerns", after the point when Eirgrid were being grilled and provided practically all the answers other than the Kema issues. Let's hope people were that clued in.

SpatialPlanner

MaurMaurMaur wrote: »

I promise you that most people don't know there was a case, and fewer will find out that the case was lost. It will be a smaller number again that know how embarrassing the judgement is. I would say a handful of people will even think about the obligation that the people behind this have to end the worries they have started in the Rush Community. I am trusting that most people are intelligent enough not to buy into the "concerns", after the point when Eirgrid were being grilled and provided practically all the answers other than the Kema issues. Let's hope people were that clued in.

Here's hoping.