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 @ 03:03 PM
Saffron
I have been quite clear on my reasons for supporting the private development and it was only in an aside that i mentioned SF’s policies.
I believe this business of Seymour Sweeney being a DUP member has been picked up by the media in an attempt to scandalise this decision. There has been absolutley no proof that he held any sway over the two ministers in question, merely that he knew the Paisleys, of whom he is a constituent of.
So if anybody would like to provide some proof of devious dealings in DOE or DETI then please bring them forward. Otherwise stop this stupid rumour mill and go back to debating the real issue here, whether or not the Causeway Centre should be in Public or Private hands.
Posted by on Sep 12, 2007 @ 10:06 AM“rumour mill”
What rumour mill, BP? Paisley jnr’s coyness - rather like your own - was in sharp contrast to Sweeney’s own revelations.
There are many issues involved ie there is no ‘real’ issue.
The earlier proposals for a ‘bunker’ on a green field site adjacent to the World Heritage Site were rejected in a PACNI investigation. Do you imagine these new proposals could expect a different outcome?
We heard a number of disparaging remarks made about the current visitor’s centre. Perhaps these should be contrasted with the following accounts:
http://www.moyle-council.org/news/details/?id=43
http://www.moyle-council.org/news/details/?id=56
Posted by on Sep 12, 2007 @ 10:44 AMBut can you relate these to either department?? Paisley minor has no control over this decision and therefore no matter what his relationship is with him, it has not been proven that there is a correlation with the ministers involved. In fact given Dodds’ view regarding the Maze it is unlikely that he would have have bowed to pressure from Jnr. In fact provide me with any links that there has been shadowy dealings with this man. All you are going on is Jnr’s “coyness”.
As for myself i have stated my views on why the private development should go ahead and i’d have thought it the best way forward if the guy had been a member of any party or none. My economics hat is on in this thread not political.
The current visitor centre, yes the wooden huts run by Moyle DC. Well they are hardly going to rubbish their own services on their website and they have also concluded that a new visitors centre needs built, so no matter how you try and defend it everyone admits that a new centre needs to be built.
Posted by on Sep 12, 2007 @ 10:56 AM‘Alan, David McAllister, who appeared on today’s Nolan Show is not the chair of Moyle DC; the post is held by Madeleine Black.’
The same David McAllister whose nomination papers were signed by Mr Sweeney!
Posted by on Sep 12, 2007 @ 11:08 AMBP, neither you nor I know who pulls the various ministerial strings.
The awards were made by outside groups, not Moyle Council, so the quality of the buildings is one of many factors to be considered.
I wonder if the DOE minister is of a mind to remove all buildings and businesses in the complex which are not owned by the private developer.
Posted by on Sep 12, 2007 @ 10:11 PMI would challenge the assumption that the National Trust are working for the common good. In my experience they are greedy, unscrupulous and treat their neighbours with arrogant contempt. They also seem to be unaccountable.
Why should a private landowner profit from a publicly funded visitor centre?
Mother Nature looked after the causeway for 60 million years without any help from the N.T.
The National Trust are my own ‘neighbours from hell’. I live in the Mournes, However, they have upset people in Wales and Scotland. Please follow the following links to see what they are capable of.
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/petitions/pdfs/PE227.pdf
Posted by on Sep 13, 2007 @ 06:11 PMFrank, at present, as far as I know, the NT only receives money at the Giant’s Causeway from a shop that it leases from Moyle District Council. It’s likely that that would continue to be the case under public ownership.
If the private developer is granted permission to build a visitor’s centre on the green field site the present buildings could be demolished. Would the NT then begin charging visitors to visit ‘its stones’?
Posted by on Sep 13, 2007 @ 06:45 PMNevin, the following link suggests that they will get 25% of the profit (or surplus).
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ni/?gid=2007-09-11.3.6
It is my experience that they will not do anything unless someone else is paying for it or they are making a quid.
Frank
Posted by on Sep 14, 2007 @ 06:33 AMAlan
You earlier stated that the same Private developer - Seymour Sweeney is involved in the proposals for a marina in Cushendall.
This is wrong - there were only 2 organisations who presented their Marina proposals and unless Sweeney is a silent partner he was not part of either group.
The fact is that this planning application was already lodged before the plans for the competition for a new visitor centre were even annouced so why is it now being taken into account after all that public money has been spent?
Regardless of whether the centre will be paid for by public or private money or not we (the tax payers) should not have been funding something for so many years that was never going to go anywhere!
Devolution does not spell “do what the politicians like”.
It certainly wasnt what I voted for.
At least with direct rule you know that those making the decisions havent a clue about the area or the people and therefore (usually) dont have any conflict of interest.
Posted by on Sep 15, 2007 @ 08:20 AM
