Photos of Rossport Solidarity Picket in Madrid

by so Sat Sep 15, 2007 20:00

thanks lads!

by DM Sun Sep 16, 2007 11:50

It's apreciated

by gosimeon Tue Sep 18, 2007 19:13

Well done. A dozen people in Spain held a banner supporting you. I bet you feel like you've won over the masses now eh?

Lads and lasses. The bottom line is:

The planning process is the only way this could have been stopped. It's fair and, trust me, Councils and ABP are more than happy to reject proposals when they have reason to.

The people of the region are mostly supportive of Shell's plans being seen through. They elected only pro-Corrib Gas parties politicians, failing to elect one anti-Corrib Gas politician. You can't import voters from England and elsewhere like you guys import protesters. Democracy spoke and the people want this project completed.

The majority of current protesters did not take part in the planning process when they had a chance. If you didn't partake in this open process then it's a tad stupid trying to stop Shell's plans going ahead now.

Also, has S2S being hijacked by anti-capitalism and Shell folk or am I dreaming? I though S2S was about getting Shell to Sea. Alas, it seems you guys are more interested in trying to mess with Shell now rather than achieve your previous objectives; which could have been met through the planning process if they had any grounds.

by MacE Wed Sep 19, 2007 16:47

"The planning process is the only way this could have been stopped."

The planning process did stop it. An Bord Pleanála turned it down flat. Their Senior Planning inspector said:

"From a strategic planning perspective, this is the wrong site; from the perspective of Government policy which seeks to foster balanced regional development, this is the wrong site; from the perspective of minimising environmental impact, this is the wrong site; and consequently, from the perspective of sustainable development, this is the wrong site..."

"...it is my submission that the proposed development of a large gas processing terminal at this rural, scenic, and unserviced area on a bogland hill some 8 kilometres inland from the Mayo coastland landfall location, with all its site development works difficulties, public safety concerns, adverse visual, ecological, and traffic impacts, and a range of other significant environmental impacts, defies any rational understanding of the term “sustainability”. It is an irony that this large industrial proposal is linked with a natural gas resource, the exploitation of which adheres to the concept of sustainability.""

Any notion that the planning process is fair went out the window when ABP gave in to Fianna Fáil pressure to reverse its decision. There's been no referendum on the project, and all polls show support for Shell to Sea. Only when people were asked would they support the project if the only alternative would be to leave the gas in the ground did they support inland refining, and there are plenty of alternatives in the real world. As the planning process has been "subverted" (I'm quoting Michael Ring), it's everyone's duty to oppose the project, whether or not they were aware of it when the planning applications went in.