Shell and Erris, the future?

by Merry Christmas - no SANTA for $h£ll Wed Dec 24, 2008 06:57

AN EVEN RARER Point : BUILD A BIG REFINERY WITHOUT PIPELINE PERMISSION ; WELD PIPES, TAKE PIPES APART BECAUSE NO planning PERMISSION, Bully the local population, put 100s people though the courts to get the local people out of the way.
Here's your chance DEVILS ADVOCATE why don't u just show us the planning permission for their new and Approved pipeline ?
Drinking water, seawater, air, and soil, being acid rain goes into the soil, TELL the FACTS , not some shit story of the Devil'$ Advocate,
who we all know the Devil is with shell, But the people of ERRIS shall prevail and prevent a Hell in their future.

by dreamer Wed Dec 24, 2008 09:46

the last post seems to suggest that if shell gets planning permission for the pipeline that everything will be fine.
strange logic.

by J lavelle Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:47

Even if the devils advocate is a shell troll, maybe this is still an idea which should be considered.
If the local people voted for one of their own to repersent them at councle meetings it would give them a real platform to argue the dangers of this project.
but who should stand?

by a.carey Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:27

Will SHell be putting up candidates? Or do the main political parties represent their interests, so theyu don't need to.

by lulu Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:46

For true democracy, we need an accurate & impartial source of information as a basis for election, rather than the Gov't/Shell/big media/small moneymakers' propaganda that's being broadcast.
Since that's unlikely, it wd be worth getting some information from eg, Amnesty International, Corporate Watch, Friends of the Earth, & similar NGOs with no axe to grind, & no profit to make.

by Chrissie Wed Dec 24, 2008 13:51

Look up Shell's history in Nigeria on abuse of the environment & Human Rights. Remember Ken Saro-Wiwa & his companions. Look at what an Irish Government has been doing to its own people & land, via Garda & Irish Navy actions, & Parks & Wildlife inaction.

by Conor. M - S.E.E.D Wed Dec 24, 2008 14:31

I believe Chrissie is on the ball. You want to talk about Democracy. Lets talk about Shells history. I'm not demonizing Shell, they do it themselves.
It is plausible to have one person from each side but, having people from different interest groups with nothing to gain is the best and fairest idea. Shell are a massive Corporation with all the help in the world. Why shouldn't the people be able to abuse defense aswell

by John Walsh Wed Dec 24, 2008 16:12

I wonder if Conor has a idea who the people from different interest groups with nothing to gain would be, maybe he has a suggestion ?

There would be absolutely no point in having people from several interest groups as that would only divide the vote, maybe one candidate who is trusted and respected by the pressure groups opposing the current plan could be agreed!
I will start the ball rolling by suggesting that person should be Vincent McGrath, he is always well spoken and commands respect from many people in Erris.
Next years election will be a referendum on how our politicians are viewed by the people, and I don't think the mainstream parties will like the message they are given considering the state of the economy, so single issue candidates or independents will have a great chance to pull votes.
A seat at the table where decisions are made would be invaluable to all the right thinking people who oppose this project as planned!

by Local Resident Thu Dec 25, 2008 00:12

Suggest the less comments added to this meaningless article, the better.

Talk is cheap.

by Vote for SHELL OUT - Bay Watch Thu Dec 25, 2008 06:43

Only Erris; has The Garda watching you at Voting time, and Taking the ballots, away. I'm amazed to think that the people don't realize what goes on behind closed doors. last comment , we'll see what the new year and the people have to say

by cable - Shell to Sea ~ Cambridge Thu Dec 25, 2008 15:40

Shell has no future in Erris.

by JT Cawley - Tallagh Thu Dec 25, 2008 16:49

I agree that we should be given a chance to vote on who represents our view in relation to this issue, and I intend contacting all the local papers to try and progress this idea.
As those of you who know me knows I will not rest until I at least try to ensure this will happen.

It is well past time that the silent majority had their chance to speak, and this is their chance, I will keep you updated on any developments.

by local Thu Dec 25, 2008 18:35

This is loony tunes stuff- even for indymedia at christmas.

by Abe Thu Dec 25, 2008 22:12

Why is it "Looney stuff", most people would call it democracy in action to go forward for election on an issue which will have impact on Erris for decades to come!
I say go for it and forget the Shell trolls who are trying to rubbish the idea.

by Peter M - : > Thu Dec 25, 2008 22:56

Yawn, Yawn, I see that the old stos Gramophone has been brought out for the festive season again, Playing the old elected representation tune.
Time for change and time to move on and pat your self’s on the back, yes you have won a few battles however you ultimately lost the war due to you leadership from day one.

by MacE Fri Dec 26, 2008 00:58

There are two county councillors from Erris. Gerry Coyle is one side of the debate, Tim Quinn the other. But Erris stretches all the way south to Ballycroy (almost to Clew Bay) and west to An Fál Mór! Of Erris' four parishes, the parish of Kilcommon is the area that holds all existing and intended Shell works, from Glengad through Rossport to Bellanaboy. A referendum in this parish (there are only 2,000 people) would be the simplest and fastest method of deciding the issue.

"The challenge of developing ‘real’ local democracy in Ireland should not be underestimated."

Ciaran Cuffe, Green Party TD

by M Lynch - Erris Co-op Fri Dec 26, 2008 10:49

Maybe MacE should ask Tim Quinn if he wants to be seen as the face of the shell2sea candidate before he makes claims like he did in his last post.
Putting Tim into such a position without his consent is both unfair and unethical of MacE, as Tim has worked tirelessly for decades for ALL the people of Erris and not just for the concerned people of Rossport/Bellanaboy.

by lulu Fri Dec 26, 2008 13:15

Shell's plans are likely to affect a far wider area than 'just Rossport/Bellanaboy' & the abuses of human rights by the State, the Courts, & the Gardaí threaten the rights of the whole nation.
Shell have a history of abuse which can be found via NGOs' records.

by all politics is local Fri Dec 26, 2008 19:26

Tim Quinn is the Fianna Fáil Cllr isn't he?

by HK Fri Dec 26, 2008 20:14

yes Tim Quinn is the Fianna Fáil Cllr and has been for decades, he has tried to play both sides of this argument with varying success.
I wouldnt like to be a FF politician at the next election, they dont have a snowballs chance in hell, dustin the turkey would have more a chance next year never mind an independent!

by John Sat Dec 27, 2008 17:02

How could one person, elected or otherwise hope to represent the marvellous diversity of opinions and interests that there are in Erris?
How could this extraordinary complexity ever be done justice through such a simplistic and out dated system as what passes for democracy in this part of the world?

This mess is down to the systemic failure of our way of doing democracy and running our society and it will not be remedied by the same way of doing things as created it. It is foolish to think so.
We have an alarming tendency as humans to give away our power to representatives, elected or otherwise who then become cynical, unbalanced, burnt out, helpless, corrupt, or all of these, unable to handle the weight of such expectation; or else they turn out not to be who we thought they were and we end up feeling betrayed by them.

It's time for something completely different!
Perhaps the People's Forum can provide a space where the diversity of voices can truly be heard and where a community can learn to decide for itself what is best and how it will be run as part of the move towards self reliance and autonomy that needs to be made everywhere, soon

by MacE Sat Dec 27, 2008 17:13

M, you seem to ascribe claims to me that I have not made. Coyle is a cheerleader for Shell. Quinn, on the other hand, often backs S2S/PCC proposals. He has called on Shell to refine the gas offshore, Shell to Sea's primary objective. He has called on the government to look at alternative sites, which is what PCC want. I'll let his words speak for themselves:

http://www.corribsos.com/index.php?id=1105

http://www.mayonews.ie/index.php?option=com_content&tas...id=38

http://www.mayonews.ie/index.php?Itemid=80&id=604&optio...=view

http://www.mayonews.ie/index.php?option=com_content&tas...id=38

http://www.corribsos.com/index.php?id=1073

http://www.corribsos.com/index.php?id=191

http://www.corribsos.com/index.php?id=211

http://www.corribsos.com/index.php?id=798

by MacE Sat Dec 27, 2008 18:22

I agree that Shell's plans will affect more than the people of Kilcommon, but they are the ones who will be by far the most affected, therefore the decision on whether or not a refinery and raw gas pipeline should be in their parish ought to be down to them. By the same token, there should be a national referendum on the government's Santa policy regarding our hydrocarbon reserves. While the national referendum would take a fair bit of organising, the Kilcommon referendum could be set up in a couple of days. It ought to be organised by a respected neutral figure. I propose Father Nallen.

by Devils advocate Sun Dec 28, 2008 18:44

Johns Idea " the move towards self reliance and autonomy that needs to be made everywhere, soon "
and, MacE's dream world of a "Kilcommon referendum " are fantasies which are never going to happen.
If S2S doesn't put forward a candidate in next years election, then they will have lost a golden opportunity to decide this issue once and for all!

by maggie Sun Dec 28, 2008 19:27

In view of the more recent oil and gas finds at Dooish off donegal and Cashel off mayo coast near BELMULLET [see Colm Rapples column Irish mail on sunday dec 14th edition] we should be asking the Government if it is their intention to try to force through a much wider corridor from GLENGAD to facilitate Shell and Hydrostatoil using the2006 STRATEGIC INFRACSTRUCTURE ACT. This would mean not just one gas refinery but oil refineries also ,thus leading to further pollution of carrowmore lake, Broadhaven bay,air pollution over a wide area,the dangers of chemical storage etc,Politicians must be put on the spot before the June elections not just in ERRIS but nation wide and NOW!!.Our country needs to, protect its national natural resources,respect and protect it,s citizens where there is NO CONSENT.

by JT Cawley - Tallagh Sun Dec 28, 2008 20:45

When MacE say "It ought to be organised by a respected neutral figure. I propose Father Nallen." I wonder if he is serious, father Nallen is strongly opposed to shells plan.
As for Tim Quinn, his son is the fiancé of Willie Corduff's daughter so it is unlikely he will openly support Shell.
If it turns out that S2S/PCC refuse to put forward a candidate then we will have to assume Tim Quinn is the closest we will have to use as a stalking horse!

by Local Sun Dec 28, 2008 22:51

Tim Quinn?

So you reckon a a vote for Fianna Fail would be a vote against Shell?

This is getting more lunatic by the day. Seek help, add more mixer, lay off the funny tobacco - whatever you need to do, but get back to earth soon- your families are worried!

by MacE Mon Dec 29, 2008 05:21

A referendum for just 2,000 people would be a relatively easy thing to organise, I would think. And without a shadow of a doubt, the absolute best way of deciding things for "once and for all". I wouldn't exactly describe Father Nallen as a trenchant opponent of Shell, but I'm open to alternative suggestions.

by Wikipedia Mon Dec 29, 2008 09:52

"A referendum for just 2,000 people would be a relatively easy thing to organise,"

NIMBY is an acronym for Not In My Back Yard. The term is used to describe opposition to a new project by residents, even if they themselves and those around will benefit from the construction. Often, the new project being opposed is generally considered a benefit for many, but residents nearby the immediate location consider it undesirable and would generally prefer the building to be "elsewhere".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIMBY

by Jeff Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:41

NIMBY is one thing, and the Aarhus Convention Agreement which the Republic of Ireland SIGNED in 1998 is another.

Related link: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Aarhus+Conventi...o&oq=

by observer Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:21

This talk about politics is really a diversionary tactic and let those who want to play it talk among themselves. Potical representaion is not effective at the moment and as someone said a sure way of being silenced is to join it. We neeed a continuation of activist opposition and not a dilution of it. We had folks interested who went for DAIL election and the Senate and when they did not win they were rarely seen in Erris again. We are doing just fine as an activist group focussed on the political system and it is beginning to move when for years it pretended the issue did not exist. Keep pushing! Not politicking!

by JT Cawley Mon Dec 29, 2008 12:12

"when they did not win they were rarely seen in Erris again."
You are probably talking about Garvin,Cowley and Murray with that statement, but S2S then claimed that it was other reasons which cost them their seats.
Why not run with a S2S candidate and you will have what MacE and other want as the votes from Kilcommon can be analyzed and used as his local referendum!

by e45lotion - eyes open realists international Mon Dec 29, 2008 13:19

This issue has already been decided upon by the people, at a national and local level, some time ago. One of the posters above mentions that this issue stretches beyond the 2000 or so people living in the area of the pipeline. This is true - so where are the physical borders of the 'local' community who get to decide on the future of this project? You always hear about people saying (esp. here on iindymedia) communities should have the power to decide their own future etc, so where does that definition of community begin and end in this instance? Those people who just live alongside the pipeline; those in Mayo; or those in Ireland; or where??

The local community in Erris and the wider community in Mayo had a chance (not that this is the be all and end all) to have their say in 2007 about this issue at the ballot box - they voted in five right wing candidates, including a fraudster. The one candidate who made this issue a live one - Jerry Cowley, did not even get 5% of the vote. Seriously, what does this say about the level of support for the opposition to the project, in the heartland of the place where it is going on? If S2S (because Cowley was that candidate, even if he was not a member of S2S) cannot even muster the support of the Mayo residents, then how would they extend beyond that into the wider province or country?

Regardless of elections, this issue as a "protest" issue died some time ago. How? On two counts. One: the local community (again, if you want to rally that around as a starting point, you need to define exactly who it is you are talking about) made their decision about the pipeline when they turned up for work, day in day out, in their hundreds, to construct the pipeline, happily taking the money from Shell. They decided that feeding their families and paying their mortgages were more important than some landowners and school teachers having their back gardens ruined. They're the ones who kept showing up, rain or shine, and slowly building the pipeline and terminal, which all the time is nearing completion.

Two: the fickle nature of the 'activist' community, primarily in Dublin but also beyond, jumps from issue to issue from month to month, with no real permanence or grounding, and no ideas on how to define when a campaign is won or lost. The strategy employed to shut this pipeline work down was the same as the Shannon strategy: bring people down once a month by bus and car, have a bit of 'direct action' at the site, and then head home to post up about it on indymedia, feeling good about yourself and criticising leninists or statists for not doing enough. Repeat 2 or 3 times, until people get bored or disillusioned, and eventually the campaign dies a death. I dont recall seeing any S2S "days of action" this year at all, so is that it?

The pipe & terminal are slowly being built - even if there was still one "day of action" a month (a hard slog for even the most dedicated of "professional" protestors [dont quibble, you know what I mean]), the other 22 working days in a month would still go ahead unimpeded. I think Shell wouldnt mind too much about a 4% or 5% drop in productivity as a result of a monthly protest.

I think I'm just being a realist here - the work is being done all the time, slowly reaching completion - and the activist opposition has no mouthpiece anymore, either in the Dail with Jerry Cowley and Joe Higgins gone, or on the street with the apathy/laziness of the activist community who find something new to focus on from month to month (Greece protest, Palestine, etc)

by MacE Mon Dec 29, 2008 15:55

observer, you've pretty much hit the nail on the head. A referendum could be organised and ran with a fraction of the effort required for an election campaign. Anyone who decided to run on a ticket that was S2S and nothing else would run into a barrage of problems, the most fundamental being that once elected they would be rendered virtually impotent by the Shell loyalists that make up the rest of the council. They would also become the target of a propaganda campaign designed to personalise and obscure the issues, by Ireland's foremost experts in that field. No election can substitute for a referendum in deciding a single issue. Look at Lisbon; the vast majority of politicians in Ireland are so out of step with the people that elected them it's frightening. When e45lotion says the issue has already been decided, there's an element of truth in that. It was decided at Shell boardroom and Irish cabinet meetings hat a refinery would be built at Bellinaboy and that Corrib gas would be flowing into Irish homes by 2003. Other people decided that wasn't going to happen, and so there's still no gas flowing. Anyone can decide anything; the reason the gas isn't flowing yet is because of the democratic deficit caused by the zero consultation with the people of Kilcommon during the planning of the pipeline and refinery. I've already outlined why it's the people of Kilcommon who should decide on whether they should have a refinery and raw gas pipeline in their parish. I also suggest that there be an Erris-wide referendum on whether or not they should allow a refinery built in the catchment area of their drinking water reservoir. To say that "hundreds" of local people work for Shell would require a pretty elastic definition of the word local. It's also playing fast and loose with the English language to say that the pipeline is being built; there is no pipeline, and all attempts to build it have been defeated. To reduce the level of commitment and resistance of hundreds of Kilcommon people to "a few schoolteachers and landowners" crosses the line into the ridiculous, I think it's fair to say. And perhaps you missed the many and sustained days of action last August and September? Quite the coup, chasing that ship. I proposed Father Nallen for organising the referendum as I wouldn't regard him as S2S per se; but I can see how some might interpret his concerns about Shell's arrogance and the Guards' violence toward his parishioners as support. What do people think about Bishop Fleming running it?

by Des Mon Dec 29, 2008 16:40

The question that people -- all over the Republic of Ireland -- should be asking themselves is this: why did our grossly corrupt Government sign up to the United Nations Aarhus Convention Agreement in 1998, and then rapidly sweep all knowledge of it beneath the rug (with the help of all their many accomplices in Dail Eireann, the legal profession, and the main stream media), so that almost none of our citizens has yet ever seen or heard of it?

Part of the Aarhus Convention Agreement reads as follows:

"Recognising also that every person has the right to live in an environment adequate to his or her health and well-being, and the duty, both individually and in association with others, to protect and improve the environment for the benefit of present and future generations, ..." (Full text of Aarhus Convention Agreement can be viewed via http://www.unece.org/env/pp/treatytext.htm )

Are the basic principles set out in the paragraphs just above, and just below, not EXACTLY what the vast majority of our citizens desperately need and want?

"The Aarhus Convention is a new kind of environmental agreement. It links environmental rights and human rights. It acknowledges that we owe an obligation to future generations."

Related link: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/

by Nostradamus Mon Dec 29, 2008 18:22

Shell-to-Sea, PCC,PLC and others will have to either put forward an agreed candidate or live with the fact that Tim Quinn will lose the seat he has held since 1974,because he is the only one locals can use to sent a message to the objectors. You may think that is fantasy but the people of Erris are desperate to have their say on this and they will! ( remember Gerry Cowley?)
I think MacE's ramblings about a referendum for Kilcommon,(on the refinery) another for Erris(on the water) and hinting at yet another for the entire country to decide if it was wrong to "give away our gas" is fantasy.
For one, there isn't a community in the country (including those downwind from Glinsk) who would vote for an industrial complex on their doorstep. Secondly the government wouldn't even consider running a referendum on such issues as it would open a very large can of worms for them in relation to every controversial project for ever more!
So here are my predictions.
The people of Erris will attach the S2S tag to some candidate in next years election and vote accordingly, but it will be purely academic as this issue has been decided long ago, and its only purpose will be to send a message to both sides of the argument!
The project will go ahead and the vast majority of Erris people will welcome the opportunities it will offer to the area.

by chr Mon Dec 29, 2008 19:27

Yebbut, your prediction about the big name opponent of the scheme coming out as a supporter of Shell didn't amount to much did it Nostro?

But I like the idea that Tim Quinn is going to lose votes becasue of his supposed support for Shell to Sea. What about other Fianna Fåil cllr's who will lose their seats around the country? Are they being punished by the people for criticizing Shell too?

by MacE Mon Dec 29, 2008 19:39

To say that Quinn "is the only one locals can use to sent a message" is patent nonsense. The people of Kilcommon have been sending a very strong and clear message for the best part of a decade. While I have no doubt Quinn's interventions have been welcome, it is pure fantasy to suggest that people have relied on him to fight their cause. They have done that for themselves. Why do you assume the government would organise a referendum in Kilcommon? It's not in their interests at all to let the local community have any meaningful say in what happens. That is why I have suggested Father Nallen or Bishop Fleming (or another respected, neutral figure) organise it. You also say: "the vast majority of Erris people will welcome the opportunities it will offer to the area." If you reckon they would vote yes to Shell's plans in a referendum on their drinking water, what are you so afraid of?

by Nostradamus Mon Dec 29, 2008 20:43

In reply to chr question since he/she seems to have slept through last year.

"Yebbut, your prediction about the big name opponent of the scheme coming out as a supporter of Shell didn't amount to much did it Nostro?"

Well chr explain this

"Mr Eamonn Ó’Duibhir, Chairman of the EIFA said, "Over the past six weeks EIFA representatives and SEPIL have met nine times. Our discussions were always cordial and constructive but sometimes we had to be very frank with each other. We built a relationship of trust and through our dialogue we have reached a mutually acceptable agreement which is good for the marine community in Erris as well as the Corrib Gas Project."

http://www.shell.com/home/content/ie-en/exploration_and....html

and
"This is the best deal we could get after seven years. We were between a rock and a hard place," EIFA chairman Eddie Diver said."

"The outfall pipe will still discharge contaminated water and local drainage from the area at the refinery, the association has been told."

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0808/1....html

Yes this is the same Eddie Diver/Eamon Ó’Duibhir who would never compromise, one would have to ask why now?

by Euclid Mon Dec 29, 2008 21:04

"The subject of the Aarhus Convention goes to the heart of the relationship between people and governments. The Convention is not only an environmental agreement, it is also a Convention about government accountability, transparency and responsiveness." (See at http://www.unece.org/env/pp/ )

No Aarhus Convention Agreement - no "accountability, transparency and responsiveness".

QED (Quite Easily Done).

It's well time the Smart Alec's were tackled regarding this whole business, and tackled hard.

by J mg Tue Dec 30, 2008 13:10

the Aarhus Convention is something to aspire to but for we have to live with the facts on the ground.

by MacE Tue Dec 30, 2008 15:30

The facts on the ground being that people are willing to continue risking prison and hospital in order to secure the basic rights due them under the Aarhus convention. Shell, the government and the government's agents are just going to have to live with that.

"The use of physical force...against...unarmed civilians, who have committed their lives to the path of non-violence, and who are simply exercising the basic right of freedom of expression in a peaceful manner, is unacceptable and deeply shocking. All people of conscience throughout the world and all countries...must condemn the use of force against unarmed civilians, demonstrating peacefully and demand the utmost restraint."

Dermot Ahern TD, September 2007

by E D Tue Dec 30, 2008 18:24

I dont think there is a site which everybody will agree with, we hear mention of Glinsk but if Shell was to announce tomorrow that they are moving the refinery there people from Belderrig /Killala or another townland in that area will protest against it.
Even if shell moved the refinery there would still be people who would protest, so why should Shell even bother?
Also the claim by those that takes part in the protests that they have the support of the local community, how do you know that, any political representative who stood with the protesters were punished by the local people at last years election, that is what we can prove.
Citing a "poll" where Shell to sea supporters knocked at doors looking for people to sign petitions is hardly proof of support as it was a "in your face petition" and people would hardly refuse to sign it!
I think the protestors are scared to put forward a candidate in the local elections because they know that that person would be routed at the ballot box and it would discredit their entire campaign!

by walker Tue Dec 30, 2008 18:55

Will Shell put forward a candidate?

by MacE Tue Dec 30, 2008 19:04

Your concerns about the petition are justified in my view, E D. Naturally, a referendum would have to be by secret ballot to avoid the problems you mention. It would probably also be a good idea for Shell and its partners to be allowed to have representatives at the polling stations, in order to allay any concerns they might have.

by bh Tue Dec 30, 2008 19:19

Shell should nominate a candadite maybe one of their employees, my money would still be on them getting more votes that the s2s candadite.
If Shell did would s2s?

by MacE Tue Dec 30, 2008 19:37

What about Paddy Ruddy? He's from Muingingane (right beside Bellanaboy), he has years experience of political activism, and he's been with Shell from the get-go. He used to be a spokesman for Shell employees.

by John K Tue Dec 30, 2008 21:29

ok Paddy Ruddy pro Shell!
now who for anti Shell?

by MacE Tue Dec 30, 2008 22:21

I'm still not convinced electing an anti-Shell councillor just to go down to Castlebar and completely waste their time being outvoted by the bagmen down there is a great way for anti-Shell activists to divert their energy, compared with the absolute certainty on the issue that could come from a referendum. It's also possible the electoral juggernaut of the Ruddy Shell/Sinn Féin combine might be too much for a S2S, PCC or PLC candidate with no party background or corporate backing!

by easy Thu Jan 01, 2009 09:13

Paddy Cosgrove is the perfect pro shell candidate and mark garavin as the anti shell.

by MacE Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:46

Neither is from Kilcommon . In fact, I dont think anyone in the PGMG is. But in the Shell to Sea campaign, we have seen that politicians are of very limited use. Tim Quinn (and Jerry Cowley if he was still around) may have good intentions, but the Solitaire was chased and Shell's pipeline halted by lots of non-politicians on the ground putting their shoulders to the wheel when needed. I wouldn't swap one of those people for ten Tim Quinns in Castlebar or Jerry Cowleys in Dublin. If people really want to know what the people of Kilcommon want for their area, the simplest way is to ask them a yes or no question, and provide them with a chance to answer it by secret ballot.

by Ray Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:06

I think the Aarhus Convention Agreement is something we all have a legal right to, and a huge need for.

What legal right do the corrupt politicians and lawyers have to keep on preventing us from having it?

Absolutely none whatsoever I would say.

by qf Thu Jan 01, 2009 17:21

According to this thread's logic a vote for SF is a vote for Shell, while a vote for FF is anti-Shell.
Would you all give up the hard stuff for the new year and try and to clear your heads?

by eneough talk. Sat Jan 03, 2009 09:37

direct action is the only way to stop this giveaway, politics are tried and failed,

by Maura Harrington - S2S; Davitt League Sat Jan 03, 2009 13:11

This thread has been vaguely interesting in its testing the waters to see if there's any chance of continuing the flawed, failed processes that created the mess in the first place.

It shows the dire lack of state/corporate nous that such nonsense is still rated by them as having the proverbial snowball's chance!

'Shell and Erris, the Future' is an oxymoron. The sooner that is accepted, the better for all concered - see 'Shell to Sea Review' and take it from there ...

by Martin Sat Jan 03, 2009 14:23

"Give them (the politicians) a mandate to speak on our behalf" -- it says at the start of this thread.

Give them a mandate to do crooked and dirty deals behind our backs (and on their own bwhalf) is what will happen AGAIN if you go down that road.

Corrupt politicians are the problem, not the solution.

by BS detector Sat Jan 03, 2009 15:45

"but if Shell was to announce tomorrow that they are moving the refinery there people from Belderrig /Killala or another townland in that area will protest against it." - What utter Rubbish!!, Glinsk is closer to Belmullet than it is to Ballina and ticks virtually all the right box's short of getting these scumbags out of Mayo all together. Such ignorance of local geography/population distribution/ prevailing winds etc. suggest the ranting of a sad Shell Troll!!

by Conor B Sat Jan 03, 2009 20:53

Maura says
"This thread has been vaguely interesting in its testing the waters to see if there's any chance of continuing the flawed, failed processes that created the mess in the first place."
Well one would have to ask, that if Maura believes that democracy doesn't work, ant it is pretty obvious that peaceful protests doesn't work. so what does she recommend?

And Martin says
"Give them a mandate to do crooked and dirty deals behind our backs (and on their own behalf) is what will happen AGAIN if you go down that road."
The suggestion was that a righteous individual with morals would step up to the plate on behalf of the downtrodden inhabitants of Erris and be a voice for them from the inside where decisions are made!

Finally BS detector says
"Such ignorance of local geography/population distribution/ prevailing winds etc. suggest the ranting of a sad Shell Troll!!"

I would ask BS detector, have you asked the people of Belderrig? And the "prevailing winds" may be south westerly's but there is a significant amount of other directions from which they come, for example there are months when the wind blows mostly from the NW!
See http://www.windfinder.com/windstats/windstatistic_belmu....htm#
You will discover that the wind direction varies here and the truth is that the wind is southwesterly 12% of the time which leaves it another direction for 88% of the year!

One of the above quotes on their own would suggest a level of frustration on the individual involved, but combine them and it is clear that fear is setting in with the campaign and the writing is on the wall for the future.
One has only to look to Tara to see where this campaign is heading!

So here is something you can quote me on,

(If shell to sea doesn't put forward a candidate in the local elections even though they are well aware that that person will probably fail to get elected it will signal the end of any slim hope this campaign has. It will have confirmed that the objectors know that given the opportunity the majority of the people of Erris will not stand with them!).

by Maura Harrington - S2S; Davitt League Sat Jan 03, 2009 22:25

If FF/Green/Shell wishes were horses (or pigs, flying or not) this would have have been over long ago.

It isn't and won't be until it's sorted - locally, nationally and internationally.

The fact remains that Shell, despite the full and legally questionable backing of state ground and sea forces, failed to lay their offshore pipe in 2008; twittering about local elections doesn't change that and won't.

As I said, people with principle matter and they will continue to fight what was, is and will remain wrong for as long as FF/Greens/Shell try to force through this Corrib mess.

by BS Detector Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:13

"See http://www.windfinder.com/windstats/windstatistic_belmu....htm# "

According to that the Wind in Erris is predomintly from quadrants that would blow the vast majority of air emissons out to sea at Glinsk ie SW,S and SE with the vast majority of signficant winds from between 180 and 270 degrees(SW quadrant). In any case the Bellanboy site would expose Belderrig to far more air pollution from the refinery then a site at Glinsk.

PS - Try looking at a map of the area troll before u come on here spouting utter nonsense!!

by John Sun Jan 04, 2009 18:06

Some of the posts suggest a referendum by people who are against the Shell site.

Would that be the same as the election of president Mugabe?

by John Sun Jan 04, 2009 18:15

I am pretty new to this site. Everybody seems to be very fierce against the project.

Can someone please explain the main reasons?

Is it the extraction of gas from the sea?
Is it the consumption of gas by the public?
Is it the location on land of the new refinery?
Is it the polution that may be caused by the construction?

Please tell me and help me understand.

by Conor B Sun Jan 04, 2009 22:29

BS Detector's "point" seems to have a logic only he/she sees, it is clear from that website that the wind blows from between W-NW and E at least 30% of the time.
Will all this toxic pollution not drift in over Erris during that time?
There is no justification for suggesting that 30% of the emissions from the refinery are acceptable but the other 70% are poison, that is pure hogwash and most reasonable people realise that.
Shell would have to be crazy to even consider listening to such ravings.

by Tom Gaughan Thu Jan 08, 2009 08:47

talk of politics is nonsense, direct action has been shown to work so why change it!