I don’t have alternative costings, I am a non-expert person with an interest in the subject (as a Green Party member and resident near Poolbeg). Perhaps you are right that Poolbeg is the only location for the incinerator. I think the charges of Nimbyism ring true in certain cases of opposition to the project. If Poolbeg is the best location in Dublin for an incinerator then so be it. Even then, does it have to be so large so that it crowds out other waste treatment alternatives for the forseeable future and so large that it commits Dublin City Council to guaranteeing large amounts of waste even as other, possibly better, waste disposal methods are being developed? And as Dublin increases its rate of recycling? To my non-expert eye, it seems to me that Dublin City Council has entered into a contract that may be detrimental to Ireland’s waste policy.

As the Minister plans to forbid intercounty trade in waste, Dublin will need a waste facility somewhere in the city. If not Poolbeg, Phoenix Park?

Greenies at war! Fake wars have a role to play, like sports battles. Bread and circuses.

Also, to switch to a boxing analogy, people following this story should be aware that this is not an even fight. The county council must be at least partially inhibited, while John Gormley is not only in the ring - he’s also to a large extent the referee.

@Paul Hunt
Like abolishing the Seanad, having ministers who are not TDs is something I initially had reservations about. However, I now believe that the constituency time demands and the dangers illustrated above make it essential. Dan O’Brien wrote on this some time back. Politicians, very sincerely, oppose it. But our national history of deep crisis means that it is now safer to be radical than to be incremental.

“on these islands it appears that the economists, political scientists and lawyers are happy to remain in their own silos.”

… and in the Universities, for the very most part. Policy is inter-disciplinary …… the ’silo mentality’ is very strongly entrenched ……….

Thank you. In my dealings with North American economists and lawyers I am constantly struck by the way economic, legal and democratic governance principles and practice are combined in the formulation and execution of public policy. Unfortunately, on these islands it appears that the economists, political scientists and lawyers are happy to remain in their own silos. Not only is public understanding and enlightenment diminished as a result, but the formulation and scrutiny of public policy is also deficient.

On this matter, given Richard’s evident and admirable persistence, I’m sure there’ll be further consideration. This forum is as good as, if not better than, most; but I doubt our effusions here will have any impact on the PTB.

Your arguments are persuasive. In addition, have you noticed the timing of this announcement by the Minister? It appears very cynical given that news will be swamped today and for the rest of the week by the public service agreement and the announcements about the banks this afternoon. A good day to bury a controversial decision! I think Richard might consider coming back to this issue again after Easter.

This Minister has gone native. Similar to PDs, blinded by an obsessive ideology - and who ends up paying for all these idiotic ideological obsessions? Joe and Joan Serf (ex-citizens of what was once a republic).

Do they still do policital asylum in Holland? or Germany? or France? or Denmark?

Thank you. I was aware of some, but not all, of these anti-incinerator provisions. The way this matter is being dealt with raises important issues about the design and implementation of public policy and the nature of democratic governance - with which, I suspect, you may be reluctant to engage, but which should be of concern to anyone on this board who has an interest in the efficient functioning of the Irish economy.

First, it highlights the conflict of interest that arises when ministers double-job as members of the executive - ostensibly making decisions in the public interest (and, particularly, where conflicting interests have to be balanced) - and as public representatives - being tender about the concerns of the voters who elected them.

Secondly, it highlights the impotence of the Oireachtas (or of the relevant and duly appointed Oireachtas Committee) to assess the evidence gathered by all parties and to adjudicate on this conflict of interests.

And finally, and linked to the previous point, it highlights the need for Oirechtas Committees to be empowered and resourced to evaluate and assess the evidence presented and the conclusions of consultants’ reports commissioned by the various parties to a dispute or to a debate on policy formulation. These committees should provide a public forum where assertions are contested, rebutted and counter rebutted, where evidence presented is tested and where decisions are arrived at in the public interest.

On current trends, it may well be that in a few years time we’ll have a brand new state-of-the-art incinerator sitting idle. A green elephant.

Is it possible that the Minister, having been advised of the serious implications of any attempt to kill DCC’s incinerator, is seeking to strangle it slowly?