New
terminal 'subsidy driven' We were somewhat surprised by your ''get on with it'' editorial (Joined-up planning essential to terminal, 2/9/07). It contrasts sharply with what David McWilliams said in the adjoining article, where he pointed out that the ESRI had been highly critical of the absence of a framework for analysis of our transport infrastructure planning. Dr Garret FitzGerald has described this ESRI criticism as a ''remarkable indictment of an extraordinary absence of public administration oversight in this whole area''. We will be meeting Trevor Sargent (our local TD) in Portmarnock today (Sunday) to discuss how he and his fellow Green Party ministers will help to ensure that due process is properly observed as far as the implementation of government ''value for money'' policy is concerned. In essence, the planned expansion of Dublin Airport has not been subjected to ''value for money'' evaluation as applies under Department of Finance and NDP appraisal guidelines, both of which are expanded in the 2007 Programme for Government to embrace, in particular, the environmental impacts of transport projects. The congestion that is driving this exploding demand for services at Dublin Airport and consequent chaos is subsidy-driven, not a real economic demand that should be met under a distorted ''predict and provide'' planning paradigm. Apaper with such a pragmatic pro-business ethos as yours should be demanding that our infrastructure projects be properly assessed, rather than rowing in behind the blind consensus that Dublin Airport must be expanded to the scale of Heathrow regardless of its social, environmental and economic viability and in breach of overriding ''value for money'' policy. Matt Harley |