‘Why Not Let The Landowner Appeal?’

at

Charter2

90357274

From top: Chartered Lands’ plans for the Carlton site on O’Connell Street and Arts Minister Heather Humphreys

You may recall how, in the High Court last Friday, Judge Max Barrett ruled that extra buildings and lane ways in the Moore Street – separate to numbers 14-17 – should be given State protection.

In the court, Arts and Heritage Minister Heather Humphreys’ department argued that the extra buildings were not of historical importance.

The ruling will impact Joe O’Reilly’s Chartered Land’s plans, above, to build a commercial development on the Carlton site on O’Connell Street.

Further to this, RTÉ’s Áine Lawlor asked Ms Humphreys about the ruling on News At One this afternoon.

Aine Lawlor: “I want to talk to you minster about the recent High Court judgement, particularly long, High Court judgement which pretty definitively ruled for those people who were looking for number 16 Moore Street and the areas around it to be kept from development and the fact that they won their case. Lot of those people now saying it’s now time for you and Peter Cooney from the Save 16 Moore Street committee, saying you should resign and your senior officials, because this was the wrong thing to do and cost the State many millions.”

Heather Humphreys: “Yeah well, first of all, the judgement was delivered last Friday, it runs to almost 400 pages and I and my officials, we’re still studying the judgement and the implications and you’ll be aware that the situation regarding Moore Street long predates my time and, as minister, number 14 and 17 were first declared a national monument back in 2007 and I’m the first person to have actually done anything about preserving those buildings for 14 – 17 Moore Street and we know that they are, they predate 1916, and they were the final headquarters for the 1916 leaders. Now work had started because they’re very, they’re in a fragile condition, 14 – 17, it’s fragile and work had started in November on conserving the buildings and bringing them back to exactly where they were in 1916. Now that work was delayed by protests and occupations in recent months. We have the court ruling and I do need time to consider it in full. And I’m not in a position, at this point, to outline my next course of action but I will consider the judgement and the case is due back in court on April the 5th when we will have further discussions with the judge but I just want to be clear that my priority is to continue the work on the buildings from numbers 14 – 17 Moore Street. And I wouldn’t be in a position to go into any further details at this point.”

Lawlor: “Minister, I know you’re the acting minister, but this is, you know, these are the buildings that have been designated and, indeed, in this very long judgement, the judge talks at length about the case of the Moore Street battle site, how evocative it is and how important it is and how much it impressed him. The state has lost its case. The Save 16 Moore Street people have won their high court case – are you going to appeal to the Supreme Court or are you going to accept the High Court judgement? Surely, this weekend of all weekends, you should be able to say?”

Humphreys: “Yeah, well, the point is 14-17 Moore Street, they are, they’re the four buildings that remain intact. They’re actually the only ones that remain intact and they are my priority because that’s what the last Council of War meeting was held..”

Lawlor: “Is the High Court judgement something you accept?”

Humphreys: “Well, first of all, the High Court judgement, I have to, I do have to look at, and I have to study it, it is 400 pages and we are back in court on the 5th of April to have further discussions with the judge so I must give it due consideration before I make any decision.”

Lawlor:Do you not give our history more consideration and not leave it to the landowner to appeal if they want to proceed with their development there? I mean the State, surely, it’s interest ought to be our history rather than any development there?

Humphreys: “Yeah, well I’m being clear, I want to see the work continued on 14-17 Moore Street and the work is to restore it. Now, I have to give, I really do have to give a 400-page judgement, I have to give it due consideration and I, as I said, I and my officials, we’re still studying it and its implications. And, as I said, I will, I have be back in court on the 5th and I will, I will give it consideration.”

Lawlor: “Thank you very much…”

Listen back here

Previously: Moore Protection

32 thoughts on “‘Why Not Let The Landowner Appeal?’

  1. Panty Christ

    Sounds like the minister is worried other future private developments around the country may be boshed because of this ruling. Her civil servants should be ashamed of themselves too.

  2. ringusboreum

    Does she think it is like another Nice referendum in that she and the department can keep going back to court (at our expense) until they get the “right” decision !!!!!

    1. bisted

      …I like to think that the contempt shown for the Arts by appointing Heather ‘Chopsticks’ Humphreys is part of the reason fg/labour got such a good kicking…

  3. Maria

    She always appears clueless. How do these people get their jobs? Moore Street is of historical significance to all of Ireland. What part of that can she not understand? I’m delighted for the ‘Save Moore Street’ campaigners victory.

  4. Polaroid Fluid

    she is a proven LIAR as demonstrated by the IMMA board appointment scandal; a careerist willing to do anything for her advancement, good luck getting the likes of her to resign over anything resembling ethics.

  5. The florist

    It is vital that moore street is persevered for future generations to quickly walk by…..

    1. Tish Mahorey

      And your grand parents were probably raised in the tenements of the north inner city.

  6. Tish Mahorey

    So is someone offering Humphrey’s money or a few apartments if she manages to get this overturned?

    That’s the impression I get. Either that or Fine Gael are just delighted to destroy more of our heritage linked to the rising and breaking free of British rule.

    1. jungleman

      Yeah if only she didn’t claim she would be studying it herself. She wouldn’t have a clue I reckon.

  7. ahjayzis

    Humphrey’s really is something else. I’ve literally never been less impressed with a minister. She’s so rote-learning-ish and clearly reading out something her boss prepared earlier. She’s a pawn, an empty vessel, Enda’s plaything, as proved during the McNulty affair.

    Gormless, talentless and dim. The new Mary Coughlan / Batt O’Keeffe.

    1. Rowsdower

      Look, she cant be expected to know about this. As she pointed out this has been going on before she was the minister. I dont think its reasonable to expect a minister to understand things that happened in the past and besides, the report was 400 pages. What do you expect from her? To read that and understand it?

    2. Charley

      She is a FG box ticking exercise . putting her in charge of 1916 events seems to have been some sort of party joke.

      1. ahjayzis

        Also again, Humphrey’s a caretaker minister in a caretaker government that has lost it’s Dail majority and electoral mandate – what business has she initiating further legal action on behalf of a fooking developer?!?!

        Seriously, the woman want to go to court on OUR dime to make sure a developer can have his shopping centre?! She’s a total, miserable car crash of a minister, even by FF/FG standards.

  8. 15 cents

    shes slips in the amount of pages good n early .. as if we’re all meant to be goin “wooaaa .. so many pages. jeez she really does do a lot of work, i mean, i wouldnt have the energy to tackle something like that” .. even tho it’s just work, that she has to do, on her work time .. unreal.

  9. 15 cents

    actually, i wrote that after just starting to read it. she says its 400 pages long THREE TIMES. saying she has to read it before the 5th of April. like its a big had task. its your fuppin job and you have two weeks, and probably more if u started earlier.

    1. ahjayzis

      She also has dozens of staff plus a professional legal theme.

      Perhaps they could summarise it for her.

      Or convey it’s meaning through a comic storyboard, lego or sock puppets.

  10. some old queen

    Ah now, leave off the poor woman. The executive summary of the report she received was clearly ripped out. Subversive civil servant SF activity under her very perfumed nose.

    Who knew?

  11. Truth in the News

    I bet if her Grandfather fought for God and Ulster and stood on some speck of ground doing so, it would be protected and preserved, she also has apirations
    royalty…..”I and my Officals”….is it any wonder they ended up electorally marrowned.

Comments are closed.