Monday, September 10, 2007
“It would not be a prudent use of taxpayers’ money to proceed further in the circumstances..”
The winning architectural design for the proposed Visitor’s Centre at the Giant’s Causeway was announced in October 2005 and, presumably, that’s what they still intend to build [Adds or perhaps not..]. But the question of who is to build it looks like being another battle-ground within the NI Executive.. and outside as well. On Saturday SF MLA Daithí McKay complained about the delay, today we have a quick one-two of statements from the DUP representatives in the Executive - firstly from the Environment Minister Arlene Foster, and then from DETI Minister Nigel Dodds. The upshot of which seems to be that their preferred choice is for a private development company, Seaport Investments Ltd, to take on the project.. and the costs involved in building it. BBC report here Update SF’s Daithí McKay wants clarification from the DUP.. and the BBC have just reported that Seymour Sweeney, of Seaport Investments Ltd, has confirmed he is a member of the DUP and signed nomination papers for a councillor in Moyle, but he also stated that he has not donated “a penny piece” to the party. [added link and photo of Mr Sweeney with Ian Paisley Snr and Jnr] And another link with this quote from Environment Minister Arlene Foster [statement here]
Updated From a 2003 UNESCO-IUCN report on the Giant’s Causeway [PDF file]“A minister, when making decisions, cannot and should not investigate party affiliations of applicants, and I did not do so in this case,” the minister said. “I do not know the applicant, have never met him, and know nothing about him. “If anyone impugns my integrity in this matter I will be seeking legal advice and will act accordingly.”
However, a number of potential threats exist, including development proposals, which could threaten the values and the integrity of the site. None of these proposals have been through the full planning process and have been approved. No approval should be given without reviewing a proposed development within the context of the protection and safeguarding of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and the World Heritage site and its management.
From the Environment Minister Arlene Foster
The Minister said: “I have recently received a report from the Planning Service on a planning application by Seaport Investments Ltd for a new Visitor and Study Centre at the Giant’s Causeway World Heritage Site. I have given this report my fullest consideration and have also taken the opportunity to visit the site.
“Having done so, I have concluded that there is considerable merit in what is proposed and I am of a mind to approve it. I have asked my officials to engage with the developer and key local stakeholders on some aspects of the proposal so that I can make a formal decision on it at the earliest opportunity.”
The Minister added: “I am of course conscious that this announcement will have implications for the public sector proposal which has been under development by DETI and the NITB but which has not yet led to a planning application. I understand that my colleague, Nigel Dodds, will be making a separate statement on this issue.”
And from the Tourism Minister Nigel Dodds
The Minister went on to explain what this decision meant for the Department of Enterprise Trade and Investment and the Northern Ireland Tourist Boards’ proposals for developing a visitor centre; he said: “The Department and NITB became involved as a potential developer of last resort. This was at the request of the key stakeholders who were unable, over an extended period of time, to reach agreement.”
The Minister continued: “It would not be a prudent use of taxpayers’ money to proceed further in the circumstances, given Minister Foster’s position on the private sector planning application. The DETI/NITB project would cost in excess of £21million.
“The people of Northern Ireland will no doubt look to all local stakeholders to work constructively to deliver the facilities expected by visitors to this magnificent tourism asset.”
Pete Baker @ 04:03 PM
Quite right - just saved us ÂŁ20 million.
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 04:13 PMRemind me - in Northern Ireland to all donations to politcal parties over ÂŁ5000 have to be declared?
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 04:19 PMThis has been a long and bitter battle that has been going on for quite some time between the Developer (Seymour Sweeney), Moyle Council and the National Trust.
What is often forgotten is that the National Trust own 97% of the World Heritage Site, Moyle Council own the other 3% on which the current visitor facilities are situated. The only revenue the National Trust gets to look after the site is from its shop and tea room. A developer is now threatening that income stream.
The Minister is clearly prepared to allow development on a greenfield site adjacent to the current brownfield site. This is in total breach of UNESCO guidlines for World Heritage Sites and the Department’s own planning guidelines and could threaten World Heritage Site status.
Am I being cynical when I suggest that this is all a game. The next move is for Moyle Council to be persuaded ‘in the interests of all parties’ to invite Mr Sweeney to build his Centre on their site.
Where will that leave the National Trust who look after the site for the people of Northern Ireland?
Oh and another thing! Try and guess who is a major funder of the DUP and friend of Baby Doc?
This is not the end of this story.
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 04:35 PMIs Presbyterian a Free Presbyterian by any chance? Save government ÂŁ20m make party ÂŁxM. Win win, except for the environment.
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 04:44 PMI’m told the developer is a party member who attended the meeting in North Antrim which selected candidates for the Assembly elections.Nothing illegal in that but cynics might draw their own conclusions.
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 04:54 PMI’m a bit confused here. How exactly is there some contest here? Apparently only one planning application has been lodged.
How exactly would any other projet get the go-ahead if they dont bother to apply for planning permission?
What’s the problem with private investment anyway? Might lead to the danger of efficiency I suppose.
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 04:58 PMInterested
The history on this goes back to Sweeney and the National Trust trying to persuade Moyle DC to back their competing proposals. Once the government showed an interest the National Trust were happy to work for the common good and dropped their plans. Anu objective party would have taken the land from Moyle and just given it to the National Trust and left them to do what they are best placed to do - running a world heritage site. Now we have the Taliban in charge with very little interest apart from self interest.Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 05:07 PMWould the sock puppet on this thread please desist and use a single name
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 05:09 PM... and try to vary his English usage. Very transparent.
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 05:19 PMAh well, it’s back to the politics of the pork barrel. Bourgeois democracy rules - o.k.?
Was it Dr Johnson who said that the Giant’s Causeway was “worth seeing, but not worth going to see”?
The profit on this development will have to come from whatever can be quickly squeezed, with political assistance, from development and construction as any long term profit envisaged, by whatever optimistic projections offered in support of the development, will be slow, painful and dissipating. Think of the St Patrick Centre in Downpatrick - if you can think of it without shuddering.
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 06:35 PMThere was a design competition for this site and a very interesting design won it. Giving this project to a PPP consortium risks them building something else on the cheap to maximise their short term profits, but ruining our only world class tourist attraction.
The great thing is though, after it goes up we get to look at the result ourselves: promoting prudent patronage or parochial penny pinching.
I reckon we will rebuild it again before we finish paying for it.
But first lets establish accountability. None of this two minister shuffle. Who is signing for this one?
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 07:28 PMAre the DUP fit for government ?
This is a blatant case of jobs for the boys!!!!
RE INSTATE THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 07:42 PMMinister Dodds: ‘The DETI/NITB project would cost in excess of ÂŁ21million.’
And what are the costs and benefits of the circular counterproposal with the hexagonal modelled outthrusts at the entrance?
It does not sound like world class architecture, though the local architects are too polite to say, or too busy building publicly funded schools and hospitals.
Cheap is not necessarily cheerful
Maybe he could build it right and then rent it out to a private sector operator, getting both good design and a low risk return.
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 10:57 PM“Are the DUP fit for government ?”
No, like the rest of the local clowns, they are not. Some of us have been saying that all along.
Why is anyone surprised? This is what you get when you elect serial complainers to positions of authority!
FWIW this sounds like another in a long line of fiascos.
Scrap the bullshit at the Maze and there’s your NITB project funded and the upgrades for the 3 sports grounds paid for.
Next question, please.
Posted by on Sep 10, 2007 @ 11:46 PMHave never heard of Seymour… but he seems Serious player. see article below from belfast telegraph
Councillor hit in pocket after plans protest
Belfast Telegraph Monday, June 11, 2007
By Ben LowryBattling against development on the north Antrim coast burned a deep hole in one councillor’s pocket.
Coleraine independent representative Christine Alexander was handed a ÂŁ7,500 bill for damages and costs after she stood in the way of a digger as it cleared the way for a large development on land close to Barry’s Amusements on the Portrush seafront.
The incident led to Ms Alexander being sued for trespass and nuisance. She must now stay away from land owned by the property company Seaport Investments Limited, which is run by developer Seymour Sweeney.
The row flared in August 2003, when diggers began by clearing gardens, the ownership of which was disputed. Ms Alexander said they belonged to her constitu- ents and she stood in the bucket of a digger for two hours. Seaport insisted it owned the land.
The West Strand site was popular with dogwalkers, and had been earmarked as an amenity area in the Northern Area Plan.
When news of the plan broke in late 2000, there were almost 300 objections.
The council called for a public inquiry into the proposals, but a sudden motion to rescind it - by the late Ulster Unionist councillor Jim Watt - was carried by 11 votes to nine in April 2001. Planning approval was later granted.
“It was a quite staggering decision. No-one could understand why a piece of amenity land could be built on,” Ms Alexander said.
Now, 132 units of high-density housing, worth many millions of pounds, dominate the skyline.
Ms Alexander was left with the ÂŁ7,500 bill and is now prevented from “ entering onto or otherwise interfering with” Seaport’s land.
Conservationists are aghast at what happened to her. They say wealthy developers are rarely left out of pocket.
When the Belfast Telegraph asked Mr Sweeney about the dispute, he said: “ The case is over and done with and finished.”
When we said we understood the case was not finished because the injunction still stood, he said: “I have no comment to make on this matter whatsoever” adding: “If you run a story that is inaccurate then I will have to take action.”Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 07:55 AMSlugger O Toole Admin
I posted yesterday between posts 4 and 5 . Why has it been removed?
Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 07:57 AMToo bad the NI government didn’t invest the money and build the original proposal for it would recoup it tenfold in tax revenue from tourists. The dangers of a private company taking the reigns in this case is that they may turn it into a OTT commercial Disneyland.
Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 08:50 AMRap,
So far as I can tell only one was closed on this thread, and that only because it related to a previous post which was removed for breaching the commenting rules. No slight intended.
Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 09:00 AMMr Sweeney signed the nomination papers of Moyle DUP councillor Davy McAllister for the 2005 local government elections.
Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 09:27 AMIs it also Seaport who are behind the planned marina at Cushendall? More public land at risk?
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, why are residents groups in Belfast having to take the Department to judicial review over the need for a full public enquiry into the extension of the City airport ? What kind of protection are we getting from government? What price existing planning Agreements ?
Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 09:39 AMPerhaps the National Trust will now reinstate its earlier and cheaper proposal.
Does anyone remember the close encounter on TV between Steven Nolan and Seymour Sweeney of Seaport Investments Ltd., Ballyallaght Management Ltd., Runkerry House and the Giant’s Causeway Railway Company? Perhaps it’s now time for a rematch!!
I wonder if the DUP ministers were minded to take a look at the trading record of Seaport Investments Limited. I’ve noted two fairly recent ‘honorable’ mentions from the Northern Ireland Courts Service: 27 February 2006 and 19 June 2006. I understand Seaport Investments settled out of court and Robinson Interiors got satisfaction ie debts and expenses paid.
The Nolan Show is running as I slowly put this together. I nearly choked when Ian Paisley jnr said that he knew of Seymour Sweeney!! Ian gave his address at a recent election as Ballyallaght Cottages, a Seymour Sweeney/Seaport development. He also intervened in an Assembly debate in another tussle between the National Trust and Seaport Investments. Strangely, he didn’t support the National Trust despite his membership of that body.
“Does the Minister agree that the intention expressed by the National Trust in its autumn/ winter magazine to seek a judicial review of the Department of the Environment’s policy on this matter and on the application is a waste of National Trust resources, given the procedures that the Minister has so carefully outlined to the House? Will the Minister assure the House that in all future applications at the Giant’s Causeway, the Department of the Environment will not become the “meat in the sandwich” of a commercial bidding war for valuable sites in that area?” .. source
Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 09:44 AMPart of the difficulty is that N Ireland here does not have the same rules as westminster or the Dail. Untill 2011 party income info will be passed to the electoral commision but not maid public.
For instance as a labour party member i keep an eye on Midlads Industrial Council who have put loads into tory coffers,nothing illigalbut as they tend to fund thathesite canidates worth the watching.
indeed they put a usefull donation into David Davis bid for tory leadership.however in N Ireland it seems to be left to speculation. roll on 2011.Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 09:53 AMNevin - anyone who has lived on the North Antrim coast will have heard of Sweeney. He is a widely loathed figure due to incidents like those mentioned above and I have personally heard allegations of hired thugs being used to intimidate those who, conincidentally, happen to oppose his schemes.
Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 10:24 AMFrom today’s Tele:
A DUP councillor yesterday said Seaport boss Seymour Sweeney had supported him at election time as a friend.
Moyle Council representative David McAllister confirmed that Mr Sweeney had signed his nomination papers at the council elections.
“I know him as a personal friend. I’ve known him all my life,” the DUP man said.
“There is nothing in my book or anyone else’s book that says you cannot go to somebody that you know and ask them to sign your nomination papers.”
David McAllister is a convicted fraudster. From the Irish News last year:
DUP man may lose policing role
11/05/2006
By Staff ReporterA Co Antrim DUP councillor faces losing his seat on Moyle District Policing Partnership (DPP) after being convicted of benefit fraud.
David McAllister (52) of Huey Crescent in Bushmills was fined ÂŁ200 earlier this week for claiming incapacity benefit to the value of ÂŁ17,744 while working.
He must also repay the money to the Social Security Agency. Mr McAllister was unavailable for comment yesterday but a Policing Board spokeswoman said it had the authority to remove from office any DPP member “convicted in Northern Ireland or elsewhere after the date of his appointment of a criminal offence”.
The spokeswoman said the board would not comment on Mr McAllister’s case.
“In developing the policy the board has not attempted to define those criminal offences which may lead to the board considering a DPP member’s position,” she said.
She said the board “will consider each case on its merit” and decide “the degree to which the DPP member’s behaviour or action will lead to a loss of confidence on the part of the public in the DPP member’s ability to carry out the responsibilities required of them.”
The politicians taking the lead on the Giant’s Causeway issue are Nigel Dodds, Arlene Foster and Ian Paisley Minor.
All DUP.
Isn’t it about time that the DUP explained its relationship with Seymour Sweeney? Is it the case that if Sweeney benefits, the DUP benefits?
After ruining Portballantrae, is he now going to be allowed to get his hands on a World Heritage Site?
Has the DUP taken leave of its senses, or should we follow the money trail?
Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 10:43 AMBG, according to a member of the Planning Service in Belfast the plans were submitted in 2002 under an Article 31 application ie a major project. Is there a time limit on such applications?
Posted by on Sep 11, 2007 @ 11:33 AM
