Council accused of ‘coercion’ tactics

CLARE County Council has been accused of effectively engaging in “coercion” by threatening to withhold payment to consultants if they did not withdraw objections to the compulsory purchase of lands in Killaloe and Ballina for the proposed €40m Shannon Crossing project.
On the first day of an oral hearing concerning the Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in relation to the project, Richard Rea of Martin and Rea Agricultural Consultants, Tipperary, also claimed that the council had failed to properly engage with a number of representations he made on behalf of Killaloe and Ballina landowners last May.
Asked to clarify his comments during a break in the hearing, held in Nenagh, Mr Rea also claimed the council did not make any attempt to minimise the impact of the new river crossing and bypass on property owners.
The Clare Champion forwarded a list of points raised by Mr Rea at the hearing to Clare County Council but there was no response at the time of going to press.
Mr Rea said he had represented other property owners on a number of regional and national roads and alleged Clare County Council was the worst because the authority didn’t want to get involved in meaningful engagement.
He said consultants try to sort out issues like design, accommodation works and distance from major structures, such as the bridge crossing.
He said that in a letter to the Rea Group, the council stated it would only pay a fee to the consultants if they withdrew objections on behalf of its clients before this Tuesday.
Mr Rea claimed under the Danish system, the Irish way of dealing with a CPO would be deemed to be fatally flawed and heavily weighted in favour of the acquiring authority because the system does not act in favour of the person impacted by a CPO and for other reasons.
“John Crowley and I have always participated to ensure that a project is properly carried out. I submitted detailed points to assist Clare County Council in furthering this project in May 2012. Clare County Council refused to engage in a meaningful manner.”

They failed to substantially respond before the original oral hearing date last September, he claimed.
“We have to reject the offer made on October 3 by Clare County Council, which is in effect asking us to act against the best interests of our clients and is coercion and we reject this. We will not be withdrawing any objections by Tuesday, October 9 [date of oral hearing].
“If objections are withdrawn, the accommodation works, the necessary variation in design, together with the normally legally binding commitments are agreed in full,” he stressed.
Mr Rea said the standard of road required should be to the same standard as applied on the M7 – North Tipperary and on the M8 – South Tipperary and on all other national roads they have been involved in.
“Even if Clare County Council were to offer us 30,000 pieces of silver per client, there will be no withdrawal of objections to meet the Clare County Council deadline,” he stressed.
Responding to previous Clare Champion queries about CPO concerns and submissions to An Bord Pleanála, senior engineer, Tom Tiernan, had stated that where possible, the council would assist, clarify and deal with concerns raised prior to or on the fringes of the oral hearing.
“We have already had some liaison with consultants representing some of the people whose properties are affected. We would hope that it won’t be necessary to have some issues raised in submissions dealt with in the oral hearing itself,” he said.