Eirgrid cable case dismissed by court

LeoB

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

Just saw senior members of the Community Council chatting outside Eurospar in the Main Street. Looked like they were just finished a meeting and were heading off. Wonder if there are meetings taking place outside the official committee meetings as it is the norm to have RCC meetings in the Community Centre.

I am aware there is a meeting of the Community Council scheduled for tonight in the Community Centre so it would be completely improper if things were being discussed between a select few members of the Community Council and they weren't including other RCC members. If indeed that is the case. .

Are you trying to tell us you have never done this? Discussed a topic outside a meeting with a few collegues? It is quite normal for people to meet and discuss items outside a full meeting whether it be Rush C.C and it goes on it most clubs also especially when you have urgent or important things to discuss. I am happy to say I have made phone calls looking for support if I were bringing up an item at a meeting. And I have on numerous occasions had "meetings" outside of club sometimes to get an opinion off someone or sometimes canvass support. This is important especially when you have a large committee where people will want to throw in the tuppence worth, just to be heard.

SpatialPlanner wrote: »

This lack of communication from RCC is leading to huge speculation.

Should have been some communication by now ok.

MaurMaurMaur wrote: »

Is anyone a committee member? How do you call an EGM.

This often depends on the constatution of a club or organisation. In a club I am familiar with an E.G.M can be called by executive committee or by an ordinary FULL member who has the required amount of signatures 30% of full members, in cases I know of it depends on the size of the club. In some cases an E.G.M must be called if you cant elect a committee at an A.G.M. before a certain time elapses, 30 days or the club must be dissolved.


Maybe I am wrong again but cant help but get the feeling some people on here would like to see this blow up in their faces. This I feel would be disastrous for Rush. I hope this is finallyy put to bed in the next few days and Rush can prepare to get at least 2 councillors elected next year. This can be achieved only by working together. Anyone on here who has been on a committee has most likely had to work with people they would prefer not to even sit in the same room but its says more about them if they just go and get a job done.

Rant over Slán

Cardinal Richelieu

LeoB wrote: »

Are you trying to tell us you have never done this? Discussed a topic outside a meeting with a few collegues? It is quite normal for people to meet and discuss items outside a full meeting whether it be Rush C.C and it goes on it most clubs also especially when you have urgent or important things to discuss. I am happy to say I have made phone calls looking for support if I were bringing up an item at a meeting. And I have on numerous occasions had "meetings" outside of club sometimes to get an opinion off someone or sometimes canvass support. This is important especially when you have a large committee where people will want to throw in the tuppence worth, just to be heard.

Should have been some communication by now ok.



This often depends on the constatution of a club or organisation. In a club I am familiar with an E.G.M can be called by executive committee or by an ordinary FULL member who has the required amount of signatures 30% of full members, in cases I know of it depends on the size of the club. In some cases an E.G.M must be called if you cant elect a committee at an A.G.M. before a certain time elapses, 30 days or the club must be dissolved.


Maybe I am wrong again but cant help but get the feeling some people on here would like to see this blow up in their faces. This I feel would be disastrous for Rush. I hope this is finallyy put to bed in the next few days and Rush can prepare to get at least 2 councillors elected next year. This can be achieved only by working together. Anyone on here who has been on a committee has most likely had to work with people they would prefer not to even sit in the same room but its says more about them if they just go and get a job done.

Rant over Slán

2 seats in a 5 Seat Ward!! :eek: Getting greedy with that one Leo. IMHO the better strategy would be to look at electing one council member then building on that in the following elections otherwise you might find that you end up with the two candidates splitting the local vote so much so that neither gets elected. To get two council members in place in 2013 your looking at too many variables:

• Exceptional vote management within Rush
• 90-95% voter turn out in Rush area and voting just 1 and 2 for the two local candidates. No transfers after that to other candidates.
• Steal Votes from neighbouring parts of the ward such as Skerries and Lusk which should weaken the present sitting members.

Sure Skerries has two Council Members but its a large catchment area and Balbriggan never really performed in recent elections. This may be due to the town having a town council and weak candidate options. If Phil Hogan gets rid of Balbriggan Town Council and Balbriggan has two or three strong candidates you won't have a chance of returning 2 council members from Rush. Local Campaigns like the Reclaim Fingal might throw up protest candidates that could drawn votes away from Rush too. Better to focus on a Single candidate from Rush.





Demographics of Balbriggan Ward 2011(counts include those too young to vote)
002 Balbriggan Rural, Fingal 15,146
003 Balbriggan Urban, Fingal 7,530
006 Ballyboghil, Fingal 1,020
007 Balscadden, Fingal 666
018 Clonmethan, Fingal 785
021 Garristown, Fingal 1,434
022 Hollywood, Fingal 1,250
023 Holmpatrick, Fingal 3,218
028 Lusk, Fingal 8,814
033 Rush, Fingal 9,207
034 Skerries, Fingal 8,344



Balbriggan Ward

Current Elected Officials and Support Bases

Ken Farrell LB- Lusk/Rush
http://electionsireland.org/candidate.cfm?id=5168

David O'Connor INDP- Ballyboughal/Naul/Garristown Rural Fingal
http://electionsireland.org/candidate.cfm?id=4590

Tom O'Leary FG- Skerries
http://electionsireland.org/candidate.cfm?id=315

Ciaran Byrne LB- Skerries
http://electionsireland.org/candidate.cfm?id=311

May McKeon INDP- Balbriggan
http://electionsireland.org/candidate.cfm?id=6173

LeoB

2 seats in seat ward..... Why not.

One of the problems we have and it is not being helped with this Eirgrid controvesy is the Community council have never came out and supported a local candidate from Joe Corr back to Sean Sweeney which I feel was a mistake. To use the people who have been mobilised with Re-Route campaign is one way to get up and running and yes it would take good vote managment and some serious organisation to get it right but it can be done. Look at west belfast.......

I take your point ok on protest candidates being thrown up and again we are back to Rush C.C. and how they manage any campaign.

It might be worth noting what protest elected members to a council can achieve if anything. On the particular issue you mention most local communites are against this project so we have a good starting point.

The Hill Billy

Can we stick to the Eirgrid issue please.

Thanks,

tHB

LeoB

The Hill Billy wrote: »

Can we stick to the Eirgrid issue please.
Thanks,
tHB

Apologies thb.

I do hope the next week or two will bring this whole Eirgrid business to a close once and for all. That Rush can then move forward. Time will tell how foolhardy it was for Rush C.C. to go as far as they did with the case but looking back there was a fairly vocal support in opposition to the route of the cable and probably quite a few who attended A.G.M s were in that vocal group and Rush C.C. felt it had to pursue the matter.

I would also hope people like Cardinal Richileu, spatial planner, MaurMaurMaur and a few other would come forward and put their views out to the wider public which by times I would not agree with but would respect as being well thought out and researched.

We await the statement

Spidermany

LeoB wrote: »

I do hope the next week or two will bring this whole Eirgrid business to a close once and for all. That Rush can then move forward. Time will tell how foolhardy it was for Rush C.C. to go as far as they did with the case but looking back there was a fairly vocal support in opposition to the route of the cable and probably quite a few who attended A.G.M s were in that vocal group and Rush C.C. felt it had to pursue the matter.

I was one of the people vocally against the route. However, my understanding was we agreed to wait for the Kema safety report. This was issued a year ago and was quite clear in it's summary that the cable is safe.

I was not in favour of any more actions in my name, and was not asked did I support any more actions.

I honestly believe that RCC Ltd need to issue a statement, and was prepared to give them until after the Harbour Festival to do so, however, from my personal dealings with them over the last number of months I won't be holding my breath.

Cardinal Richelieu

Ok I decided to ignore your statement in the earlier post but I am going to answer it now.

Maybe I am wrong again but cant help but get the feeling some people on here would like to see this blow up in their faces.

I think my thoughts on this subject have been consistent from the start when this whole thing blew up in 2010 if anyone has read my posts in the Original Eirgrid thread many under my old nick so saying it's just people hoping it would blow up in RCC faces is rather insulting LeoB to me. I felt the No Campaign was a combination of bull and poor planning at the time when the popular feeling on here and in Rush was to row in behind them and slate Eirgrid. If I remember correctly you where the main supporter of No Campaign at the time on here if you can recall back to the 1 week ban both of us got when the debate got too heated. I take no gratification that RCC managed to walk off a cliff because they felt they were right and spoke for the People of Rush as the Chairperson liked to call us in emails to Eirgrid even do not once was I stopped by someone from the No Campaign and asked my opinion even do I live on the route. I was told plenty of times their opinion do. Maybe I am not a member of this People of Rush, it could be a private members club.

LeoB wrote: »

Apologies thb.

I do hope the next week or two will bring this whole Eirgrid business to a close once and for all. That Rush can then move forward. Time will tell how foolhardy it was for Rush C.C. to go as far as they did with the case but looking back there was a fairly vocal support in opposition to the route of the cable and probably quite a few who attended A.G.M s were in that vocal group and Rush C.C. felt it had to pursue the matter.

I would also hope people like Cardinal Richileu, spatial planner, MaurMaurMaur and a few other would come forward and put their views out to the wider public which by times I would not agree with but would respect as being well thought out and researched.

We await the statement

Most of this popular feeling that you speak about was generated by irrational hysteria which was fueled by a group called No to Eirgrid that sprang up a full two years after planning permission was granted. Most of the town hadn't an issue with the line until we started to hear about the cancers and explosions the powerline would cause and these were generated by the No Campaign. You will remember that it took at least a couple of weeks to even establish who was behind this group like it was a state secret. Then it was made know it was RCC after you did some digging on the topic. If as you say

Rush C.C. felt it had to pursue the matter

why were they so slow at announcing that the No to Eirgrid Campaign was actually RCC? Wouldn't you also think that on public notices they would have declared that the meeting was called by RCC?





Back to my standpoint, I felt and still feel

1. The campaign was poorly though out from the start.
2. Poorly advised legally as evident by the way they applied the precautionary principle not to forget the recent court case.
3. Badly researched(only one research paper was ever quoted)
4. Consistent Poor communication from No Campaign but they often liked to slate FCC and Eirgrid communications. Eirgrid set up a text service to update residents but as the campaign went on the communication from the No Campaign(RCC) dried up until now they can't issue a statement nearly two weeks after the court case.
5. Was an attempt to establish a political base for FG in the area, James Reilly pre-election speech, the former FG Dublin North constituency chairman speaking out in his day job capacity, prominent members of the local FG party in key positions in the No Campaign etc

I think in your recent posts your attempting a certain amount of sweeping under the carpet of this fiasco. History is there to teach us lessons and not to be forgotten.

LeoB

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

Ok I decided to ignore your statement in the earlier post but I am going to answer it now.

I think my thoughts on this subject have been consistent from the start when this whole thing blew up in 2010 if anyone has read my posts in the Original Eirgrid thread many under my old nick so saying it's just people hoping it would blow up in RCC faces is rather insulting LeoB to me. I felt the No Campaign was a combination of bull and poor planning at the time when the popular feeling on here and in Rush was to row in behind them and slate Eirgrid. If I remember correctly you where the main supporter of No Campaign at the time on here if you can recall back to the 1 week ban both of us got when the debate got too heated. I take no gratification that RCC managed to walk off a cliff because they felt they were right and spoke for the People of Rush as the Chairperson liked to call us in emails to Eirgrid even do not once was I stopped by someone from the No Campaign and asked my opinion even do I live on the route. I was told plenty of times their opinion do. Maybe I am not a member of this People of Rush, it could be a private members club. .

Where do I start. Firstly it was never my intention to post any comment in this thread that you or anyone else would find insulting. However I felt some of the tone I read was one "Told you so" "ha ha". In my previous post I recognise the contributions you Spatial Planner and Maur MaurMaur have made to the debate.

I was never a supporter of a "No Campaign" but did support the re - route Eirgrid campaign for these simple reasons,
1) I didnt believe what I heard Eirgrid say at Rush National school,they were confused, selective in who/ how many could go in, so what had they to hide. One person was there to address the meeting but by the time people started to ask questions the hiccups had started and other people had to come out and add a bit in, this was very confusing. I had never heard of the mesurements they were using so when one says one thing and another comes out and says something else it was bound to lead to people being sceptical. Also one local man addressed the meeting and openly called into question the integrity of one of the Eirgrid staff and quoted a statement he made on the record the place went silent. The Eirgrid man had done a complete u-turn in 48 hours
2) There was a cheaper alternative to the choosen route. These 2 points contributed more to the campaign gaining momentum than anything I heard Rush C.C. announce.
I had no other motive to be involved and in fact would say I was not involved at all, just voiced an opinion.

I dont think Rush C.C could have called to every house in Rush, they didnt call to mine but we did have the chance to call to community centre and or attend a public meeting. I heard only 1 person question their motive decision to object. The first meeting I went to was in St. Josephs and I was suprised at the size of the crowd, approx 400 some say more some say less. You got critised for going for a walk after work I believe and walking by the meeting? (I am not critising you either)I went to one other meeting that was it

They as Rush C.C represented the residents of Rush. I dont particularly want Enda Kenny to represent me but I have no choice. Now WE ALL have a choice come the next Rush C.C. A.G.M.

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

Most of this popular feeling that you speak about was generated by irrational hysteria which was fueled by a group called No to Eirgrid that sprang up a full two years after planning permission was granted. Most of the town hadn't an issue with the line until we started to hear about the cancers and explosions the powerline would cause and these were generated by the No Campaign. You will remember that it took at least a couple of weeks to even establish who was behind this group like it was a state secret. Then it was made know it was RCC after you did some digging on the topic. If as you say
why were they so slow at announcing that the No to Eirgrid Campaign was actually RCC? Wouldn't you also think that on public notices they would have declared that the meeting was called by RCC? .

As it says in your quote RE-ROUTE, it was not a no campaign. Eirgrid told a few fibs along the way when they gave details of similar projects in Austria and Belgium(?). It was plain to be seen they were 100% up front so they through poor P.R caused as much of this as anyone. I was fairly sure from very early on it was also a Rush C.C sub committee who were behind the re route campaign

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

Back to my standpoint, I felt and still feel

1. The campaign was poorly though out from the start.
2. Poorly advised legally as evident by the way they applied the precautionary principle not to forget the recent court case.
3. Badly researched(only one research paper was ever quoted)
4. Consistent Poor communication from No Campaign but they often liked to slate FCC and Eirgrid communications. Eirgrid set up a text service to update residents but as the campaign went on the communication from the No Campaign(RCC) dried up until now they can't issue a statement nearly two weeks after the court case.
5. Was an attempt to establish a political base for FG in the area, James Reilly pre-election speech, the former FG Dublin North constituency chairman speaking out in his day job capacity, prominent members of the local FG party in key positions in the No Campaign etc

I think in your recent posts your attempting a certain amount of sweeping under the carpet of this fiasco. History is there to teach us lessons and not to be forgotten.

On point #1 Possibly, but when you take #2 you must wander what advice they were given by highly paid professionals.
#3 They paid for (I assume) the report/research paper and went with the contents
#4 Agree fully with you here, well nearly. I think I posted at the time I had asked for information from a member of the campaign and I am still waiting for it. I also asked the same person to have a read on here but they declined, I asked on the basis that I could not compete with some posters on here but then again I was not involved only trying to put forward an alternative view. I do think Eirgrid were very poor at the very start. I got nothing in my door about public meeting. They should have used An Post to deliver leaflets.
#5 I would have no part to play in helping establish a base for F.G in the town. If that was the intention of this campaign from what I hear this has blown up in their faces big time as they, from what I hear are furious with James Reilly and the political party.

I am not attempting to sweep anything under the carpet. It would be very foolish to try. However as I have stated earlier we have to move on. I dont see the point in recriminations
In my opinion the Re-Route campaign is OVER. gone, dead in the water......... Has been once they put a hole in the road.

It is impossible to sweep this away but neither would I like to see a division in the town that would have a negative effect like we had back at the time of the church debacle.

Hope that all makes some bit of sense

Cardinal Richelieu

Link for the Fingal Indo article mentioned last week.

http://www.fingal-independent.ie/news/eirgrid-action-a-failure-3199561.html

The community council has told the Fingal Independent it is 'extremely disappointed' that its action in the High Court was thrown out by Justice Michael Peart

Is that the extent of RCC press release to the People of Rush? Did anyone get any feedback on the FB page?

The Hill Billy

If that is the 'Rush Needs You!' FB page then there is nothing at all about the dismissal of the case. But 10 hours ago they were posting to see who would be their 2000th fan.

That said, there is no mention of any official 'relationship' between the FB page & RCC.

LeoB

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

Link for the Fingal Indo article mentioned last week.

http://www.fingal-independent.ie/news/eirgrid-action-a-failure-3199561.html


Is that the extent of RCC press release to the People of Rush? Did anyone get any feedback on the FB page?

Is that picture of me:)

LeoB

The Hill Billy wrote: »

If that is the 'Rush Needs You!' FB page then there is nothing at all about the dismissal of the case. But 10 hours ago they were posting to see who would be their 2000th fan.

That said, there is no mention of any official 'relationship' between the FB page & RCC.

AnD this seems to be the problem HB. Like with a lot of stuff there is little or no communication. The facebook page I believe is ran by sub committee of Rush C.C.

Its fair to say in hindsight this has been handled badly from day 2. They were right IMO to object if members of community brought concerns to them but I do agree with cardinal there is an awful lack of information coming out.

Spidermany

I see a request for a statement on the Rush Needs You Facebook page.

Why aren't more people clamouring for information?

The Hill Billy

Spidermany wrote: »

...Why aren't more people clamouring for information?

Because they don't have FB profiles?

Seriously - Maybe folk are asking for info, but not online. Just becaue it isn't on the internet does not mean that it is not happening.

Spidermany

The Hill Billy wrote: »

Because they don't have FB profiles?

Seriously - Maybe folk are asking for info, but not online. Just becaue it isn't on the internet does not mean that it is not happening.

Valid point.

brian ireland

From Rush needs you facebook page @ 23:30 15/08/12

"The administrators of this page would like to clarify that we do NOT represent any group or organisation in the town. We have endeavoured over the past couple of years to pass on information sent to us by groups, clubs and individuals. We will continue to give our time to this page for the good of the town of Rush!"

The Hill Billy

It is nice that it is clear that the FB page is not an official mechanism of RCC for communication.

However, I wonder how/when RCC plan on informing the community of Rush about their reaction to the judgment & what, if any, plan of action that they now have in place.

Cardinal Richelieu

brian ireland wrote: »

From Rush needs you facebook page @ 23:30 15/08/12

"The administrators of this page would like to clarify that we do NOT represent any group or organisation in the town. We have endeavoured over the past couple of years to pass on information sent to us by groups, clubs and individuals. We will continue to give our time to this page for the good of the town of Rush!"

Thanks for that

It might be better then for all us Rushians to blanket mail the following emails for some sort of statement from RCC.


http://www.rushcoco.ie/contact-us/

General Enquiries
info@rushcoco.ie

Anne McCrudden - Chairperson
chairperson@rushcoco.ie

Charlie Monks – Public Relations Officer
pro@rushcoco.ie

Kevin Torpe - Community News
communitynews@rushcoco.ie

I don't think Charlie Monks is still the PRO but its a generic account so should reach whoever is the current PRO. I included the Community News because they at least should know the present situation update.

Three other alternative email addresses used by RCC in correspondence with the government and Eirgrid might be useful to mail as well. Since they are in the public realm I am posting here.

http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/NR/rdonlyres/CF290BC6-1189-41A9-A99B-A99A65D948C4/0/FOI201050RequestandReplyPart1.pdf

David Sheehy- Vice Chairperson
dave_sheehy@eircom.net

Anne McCrudden - Chairperson
anne@dalmac.ie

Colette Kelly- Council Board Member
ckelly.mc@hotmail.com

The others on the mailing lists seem no longer involved in RCC as board members so no point mailing.

LeoB

LeoB wrote: »

The facebook page I believe is ran by sub committee of Rush C.C.
.

I believed wrong.

The Rush Needs You facebook page is totally independent of Rush C.C. The page was set up as a tool for Rush people to use to advertise, promote and for miccellenious info on events happenings in the Community. Looking back I and others have had no problem posting up events in St. Maurs and others have done the same.

So apologies for any confusion I may have caused.

LeoB

Only see Cardinal Richelieu post above now

MaurMaurMaur

Ok sorry for being gone.

The festival is over. Fair amount of time to absorb the jolly feeling.

Now, here we are with nothing said about the judgement. Even the customary 'Judge got it so wrong' hasn't happened.

Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock.

http://www.solocheck.ie/Irish-Company/Rush-Community-Council-Limited-170232

I've got these and can't share them. If anyone wants them it makes a good read.

MaurMaurMaur

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

Thanks for that

It might be better then for all us Rushians to blanket mail the following emails for some sort of statement from RCC.


http://www.rushcoco.ie/contact-us/


I don't think Charlie Monks is still the PRO but its a generic account so should reach whoever is the current PRO. I included the Community News because they at least should know the present situation update.

Three other alternative email addresses used by RCC in correspondence with the government and Eirgrid might be useful to mail as well. Since they are in the public realm I am posting here.

http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/NR/rdonlyres/CF290BC6-1189-41A9-A99B-A99A65D948C4/0/FOI201050RequestandReplyPart1.pdf


The others on the mailing lists seem no longer involved in RCC as board members so no point mailing.

Have a little care Cardinal, just because you can find these e-mail addresses doesn't mean you should viralise them across other public fora. I want answers but you are giving a few of these people the chance to play the victim card.

Wishbone Ash

MaurMaurMaur wrote: »

you are giving a few of these people the chance to play the victim card.

My sentiments also! I'd prefer if individuals weren't individualy mentioned - not because of any loyalty to them but because I don't wan't any of the No/Re-Route brigade to claim that they are being "victimised".

These were the people who attempted to alienate those of us who had no objection, even though the Eirgrid route ran right by our front doors. I said it to them at the time that if they had any interest in real health matters they would be protesting outside every shop in Rush which sells tobacco products. They didn't want to know.

I also made a formal objection to their distribution of propaganda on vehicle windscreens (illegal since the Litter Pollution Act 1997) but they failed to answer my calls on that.

I am finding it very difficult to muster up any sympathy for them.

LeoB

Have any of you wrote to them for explanation on delay? I sent email to one person not on the above list mind you asking for their opinion/position now that the case has been dealth with..

I am in agreement with you all about the delay, its gone on a bit too long at this stage.

I dont think any of them will have a big problem with their Rush C.C contact email being used here. I am sure they are on display in Rush Community centre.

Wishbone Ash, I would be interested to know how they alienated anyone, I am aware there was very bad feeling around the time of the church debacle but didnt realise it was bad in this instance despite some of us getting a little heated at various points of the debate. I would not like to see anyone alienated for having a view.

Cardinal Richelieu

MaurMaurMaur wrote: »

Have a little care Cardinal, just because you can find these e-mail addresses doesn't mean you should viralise them across other public fora. I want answers but you are giving a few of these people the chance to play the victim card.

They already played the victim card many times in the past. Big Business versus Small Town, FCC against Rush, Government against Rush, that's only a small selection of the victim cards already played by them

Eirgrid had to issue the below following allegations of intimidation of women in gardens by men on a dark evening.

http://www.fingal-independent.ie/news/eirgrid-take-legal-action-against-five-rush-campaigners-2441764.html?start=2

The company has rejected charges that the injunctions were served in an intimidating fashion, saying that a sworn affidavit from the man who served the papers confirmed that the task was 'carried out in a professional and courteous manner'.

At the time stories like that heightened the tension in the town between Eirgrid and the locals just after the trouble on the Channel Road when they started work. Luckily for the people involved no one faced criminal charges or got hurt.

Anyone got a figure for the policing cost of this project in Rush?

LeoB

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

They already played the victim card many times in the past. Big Business versus Small Town, FCC against Rush, Government against Rush, that's only a small selection of the victim cards already played by them
Eirgrid had to issue the below following allegations of intimidation of women in gardens by men on a dark evening.
http://www.fingal-independent.ie/news/eirgrid-take-legal-action-against-five-rush-campaigners-2441764.html?start=2

Some would agree with the big business v small town, there was very little trust between the sides and I would not put all the blame on the Re-Route eirgrid people.

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

At the time stories like that heightened the tension in the town between Eirgrid and the locals just after the trouble on the Channel Road when they started work. Luckily for the people involved no one faced criminal charges or got hurt.

Anyone got a figure for the policing cost of this project in Rush?

Some of these notices were delivered in the evening time to elderly people living alone. That is not right.
This was very badly policed and not fault of local Rush Gardái and luckily none of the contractors got hurt. One or two workers were pretty pathetic and sneering at people behind the Garda lines. What I witnessed was was very heavy handed approach by outside members of Garda on some elderley people. I saw one lady who I am sure you know being pushed to ground. There was little or no effort to communicate with people just a very heavy handed approach from some Guardians of the peace. I complained to the senior officer there at the time but should have addressed my comments to the lamp post behind him, I was not on the protest I was out for a walk with my child and dog and saw some pretty pathetic behaviour from the people there to maintain law and order. What galled me even more was Rush Gardái who have built up a good relationship were put slap bang in the middle of it and this I felt was undoing the good work they done in local clubs and schools. I said this to a Garda who sniggered they are doing their jobs which of course was right but as I said to him you can go away and hide behind a desk or a bigger Garda these lads have to work in the community. I also witnessed one of the re route campaign organisers approach a few "protesters" and warn them in no uncertain circumstances were they not to lift a hand to anyone or become abusive to members of the Gardái. They done as they were told.

As for the cost I would not think it was a lot. Most Gardái came from North Dublin along with a few from Rush and Lusk

In my opinion the Rush people protested in an orderley manner and were treated very badly. This goes back to a severe lack of trust from day 1 as I have stated before.

I could put names to to any of the above but dont want a ban (or a court case)

MaurMaurMaur

LeoB wrote: »

Have any of you wrote to them for explanation on delay? I sent email to one person not on the above list mind you asking for their opinion/position now that the case has been dealth with..

I am in agreement with you all about the delay, its gone on a bit too long at this stage.

You shouldn't HAVE to write to people who littered up the town, screamed "intimidation!" when the eirgrid info was put about, and when the decisions all along the way were made by the authorities.

This quiet is leading us all to speculate. Here's ideas on how a body that claims to be speaking for us would - - - normally - - - communicate if it wasn't very used to talking out of the sides of its mouth.

Publish a letter to all Rush residents and pay the post office to deliver to all addresses here. The letter states in clear terms why the RCC went to the High Court, says what the judgement was.

1. States that it wants a period of time to reflect on whether another appeal or challenge should. Welcomes the views of us Rush people, to be gathered by a vote or everyone writing in.
   
   or
   
   
2. States that the case was fought with the best intentions but that RCC now accepts that it is defeated and that the people of Rush have no malignant cancers in their bodies if they live near the cable.

Why are we still waiting. Is RCC so disorganized that they cant get these thoughts together.

MaurMaurMaur

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

They already played the victim card many times in the past. Big Business versus Small Town, FCC against Rush, Government against Rush, that's only a small selection of the victim cards already played by them

Eirgrid had to issue the below following allegations of intimidation of women in gardens by men on a dark evening.

http://www.fingal-independent.ie/news/eirgrid-take-legal-action-against-five-rush-campaigners-2441764.html?start=2


At the time stories like that heightened the tension in the town between Eirgrid and the locals just after the trouble on the Channel Road when they started work. Luckily for the people involved no one faced criminal charges or got hurt.

Anyone got a figure for the policing cost of this project in Rush?

I see, then are you better than them for adopting their tactics?

...but you make a good point at th end. What was the cost of policing Rush for this and what was the daily cost of the Garda barracks being open? I'm no financial genius but I guess you could have a year or two more of the barracks.

LeoB

MaurMaurMaur wrote: »

You shouldn't HAVE to write to people who littered up the town, screamed "intimidation!" when the eirgrid info was put about, and when the decisions all along the way were made by the authorities. This quiet is leading us all to speculate. Here's ideas on how a body that claims to be speaking for us would - - - normally - - - communicate if it wasn't very used to talking out of the sides of its mouth.

The quiet is leading some to speculate. They dont claim to represent us whether you like it or not they DO represnt you and if you want to change it go to an A.G.M. And without going over old ground I and other neighbours got nothng in our doors advising us of Publin meetings. I didnt see any litter around either, however I did see plenty of posters and got a few pieces of litrature in my letter box. We are emotional today?

MaurMaurMaur wrote: »

Publish a letter to all Rush residents and pay the post office to deliver to all addresses here. The letter states in clear terms why the RCC went to the High Court, says what the judgement was.

1. States that it wants a period of time to reflect on whether another appeal or challenge should. Welcomes the views of us Rush people, to be gathered by a vote or everyone writing in.
   
   or
   
   
2. States that the case was fought with the best intentions but that RCC now accepts that it is defeated and that the people of Rush have no malignant cancers in their bodies if they live near the cable.

Why are we still waiting. Is RCC so disorganized that they cant get these thoughts together.

I would have thought it was pretty obvious that they objected to the route as they recieved a number of complaints from residents. People had concerns went to a meeting raised their concerns while other stayed at home or were to busy watching the Simpsons or Fair City. As for authorities we are entitled to challenge authority. Its Rush not Russia we are in

MaurMaurMaur wrote: »

I see, then are you better than them for adopting their tactics?

...but you make a good point at th end. What was the cost of policing Rush for this and what was the daily cost of the Garda barracks being open? I'm no financial genius but I guess you could have a year or two more of the barracks.

The cost of policing it is a real red herring to throw up at this stage. We had a Garda station at the time and a handful of extra Gardái were needed at one protest.

The last time I checked we were not living in a Police, but I am beginning to wonder

Cardinal Richelieu

LeoB wrote: »

The quiet is leading some to speculate. They dont claim to represent us whether you like it or not they DO represnt you and if you want to change it go to an A.G.M. And without going over old ground I and other neighbours got nothng in our doors advising us of Publin meetings. I didnt see any litter around either, however I did see plenty of posters and got a few pieces of litrature in my letter box. We are emotional today?

TDs should investigate the whole community council area and see if it requires regulation. I think this thread has gone some way to highlight the issues around transparency and responsibility with the current system.

LeoB wrote: »

I would have thought it was pretty obvious that they objected to the route as they recieved a number of complaints from residents. People had concerns went to a meeting raised their concerns while other stayed at home or were to busy watching the Simpsons or Fair City. As for authorities we are entitled to challenge authority. Its Rush not Russia we are in

Ok lets get the timeline straight, public rally in old church car park led by the chair of RCC then we had a public meeting in St Josephs with public representatives and Eirgrid chaired by chairperson of RCC. I don't know about you LeoB but that in my book is a conflict of interest. How can you have a free and fair debate when the chair represents one side?

LeoB wrote: »

The cost of policing it is a real red herring to throw up at this stage. We had a Garda station at the time and a handful of extra Gardái were needed at one protest.

The last time I checked we were not living in a Police, but I am beginning to wonder

You must have big hands...........:D Sure a handful of garda were used at one protest but when construction started you had 20 plus garda on the Channel Road, not to forget the additional private security Eirgrid(the state) had to provide 24/7. Well at least it stopped the drunks nicking or moving the traffic cones on the way home from the pub/open air drinking unlike the councils current sewage pipeline works. Apart from the policing costs I suspect that the the above mentioned Garda could be have been put to better use reducing serious crime rather than battling scared moms and pensioners.


http://www.rushdublin.com/#/news/4532601854

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35xuB1w0G-o

LeoB

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

TDs should investigate the whole community council area and see if it requires regulation. I think this thread has gone some way to highlight the issues around transparency and responsibility with the current system.

You may well have a point here but to throw this up now is like the policing issue.

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

Ok lets get the timeline straight, public rally in old church car park led by the chair of RCC then we had a public meeting in St Josephs with public representatives and Eirgrid chaired by chairperson of RCC. I don't know about you LeoB but that in my book is a conflict of interest. How can you have a free and fair debate when the chair represents one side?

I am unsure of the timeline but thought the meeting in St. Josephs was first and carpark rally second. And when you look at the numbers there was a substantial crowd at the rally some estimated 4,000 hard to tell from these but it was close
[EMAIL="%3Ca%20href="][/EMAIL]">

[EMAIL="%3Ca%20href="][/EMAIL]">

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

You must have big hands...........:D Sure a handful of garda were used at one protest but when construction started you had 20 plus garda on the Channel Road, not to forget the additional private security Eirgrid(the state) had to provide 24/7. Well at least it stopped the drunks nicking or moving the traffic cones on the way home from the pub/open air drinking unlike the councils current sewage pipeline works. Apart from the policing costs I suspect that the the above mentioned Garda could be have been put to better use reducing serious crime rather than battling scared moms and pensioners.


http://www.rushdublin.com/#/news/4532601854

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35xuB1w0G-o

I just dont buy the policing bit at all. Eirgrid would have security on all their sites after what happened in Mayo. The hours used up by Gardái were minimal for any large gathering. I dont think some of the powers that be or were there would have the kop on to use them any better and sadly some of their collegues felt the same. And I would like to stress here quite clearly I am not in favour of Breaking the law nor would I condone any abuse to a member of An Garda Siochana but I did not like the heavy handedness towards elderly people. I mentioned nothing about moms