Press release 30th May 2008

“Have the Shutters come down on Market Square??”

Tuesday was a very bleak day for Dundalk, when a majority of Councillors deemed the proposed Private Public Partnership for a new landmark building on the Square to be unsuitable. The decision, put very simply, is anti-business, anti-progress and ignorant of any of the thrusts that a Regional Gateway must engage to succeed.

If this was democracy at work, then roll on the proposals from Department of Local Government, where under the Local Government review, we expect to see new instruments including that ALL stake-holders have a say and influence. In commercial rates and charges we heard at one of our recent meetings, that Dundalk businesses provide 40% of the income to fuel a total Town Hall annual spend of circa €32M. Did the business interest mater on Tuesday last; there’s not a shred of evidence from the air time claimed by the independents that they did ever consider the interest of Dundalk plc, nor the signals and impacts of their decision, nor for that matter did Councillor O’Boyle! Members of Dundalk Economic Development Group under Peter Malone’s chairmanship gave up 2 years of their time, the Square regeneration was deemed to be the most significant element to bring that elusive commodity, confidence in Dundalk, back on track. This group included stake-holders from DKIT, IDA. EI, FaS, Chamber, Town and County Councils; are their views worth nothing?

Fianna Fail councillors had indicated their pro-development attitude, Sinn Fein had indicated their abhorrence for the sale of public lands, though very little indication of how to remedy our shabby centre’s condition. At least we knew where these 6 Councillors sat; there was evidence of Party clarity. There was no coherence from the 3 Independents, and sadly, for their “reservations” to emerge 2 years after sitting on their hands whilst the process was worked through, suggests they had very poor understanding of the commitment to PPP in 2006, when it was adopted. The best take on that, would be that they just didn’t understand and didn’t ask for clarity about the process, about the way it was conducted, or about their involvement level. If they had, they couldn’t with any credibility be asking the questions or making the objections they have, at the end of what was an expensive road for some!

The most strident reactions they offered concerned issues that would have been dealt with when the normal planning debate were engaged if the PPP principle had been adopted. We heard eg that trees would be lost, well, if those that were growing were obstructing progress, then replacements could have been designated. If they’d actually known anything about carbon sinks they’d have know that mature trees, unlike saplings, absorb no new carbon! Red herrings were tabled all over the shop!

So what are the impacts?

First and foremost Dundalk has clarified that it will find it difficult, I’d say it’ll be impossible to attract another private sector participant to Dundalk, two have contacted me already to clarify this. In this case it was bringing €22M in the short term to the economy and rates income forever to Town Council of circa €100,000. The Town Council was to receive another €800,000. Maybe the nay-sayers think we don’t need what two of them described to be derisory income. They chose to ignore that over €1M has been expended by the contestants in the bid process, all on a no-foal, no-fee basis. Maybe they’ll be able to offer some consolation to the architects, quantity surveyors, construction workers and town service providers who won’t have a job emanating from the Square project. 

If they’d exercised their integrity and signalled their core objections in 2006, none of the bidders would have put their money on the line! The bidders read the rules, knew the pitfalls, I can’t say that any of that seems to have lodged with some of the Councillors. Tey also didn’t ever indicate responsibility during the past 2 years for the resource costs borne internally by Dundalk Council in the process, it signals a disquieting lack of joined-up focus and stewardship on the effectiveness of their own council’s spending. Councillors must be as equally culpable for their lack of action, as for their actions.

The second startling aspect is that there has been much reflection that the Square is either fine as it is, that it’s a pity it has gone into disrepair and then and it verged on the ludicrous, of how wonderful a sight it was, standing on the Courthouse steps! To be fair Councillor Grehan did offer a solution; she suggested on LMFM that in the next budget, Rate Payers, that’s us, should be levied with a Square regeneration fund line. Is that comment remotely real? Dundalk is well inside the top 10 most costly rateable urbans in Ireland, does she know that? Yet, here comes another increase proposal off the top of the head, from someone who’s just turned down an offer that would expand the rates base at no increased cost to the business rate.

The third aspect that received no consideration of its impact by these decision makers, was just where is Dundalk Town Council going to get the income at the spend level Councillors approve, for its work programmes.  I can tell you where it won’t come from, for neither John Gormley not Brian Lenihan are beating about the bush when they indicate clearly that local government current account budgets must be reigned in, there’ll be no inflation-beating hand-outs from DELGH in 2009, Minister or no Minister in the constituency. Perhaps the nay-sayers, like Baldrick, have another cunning plan? They’ll need it, Carroll’s building is now zero rated in DKIT ownership, it brought in €127,000, Harp are off to Dublin, they brought in €500,000. FaS have taken over a chunk of McArdle Moores and pay no rates. To cap that, on Clanbrassil alone, there are 17 for sale/to let signs, with Lifestyle the latest departure and the estimate is that 40% of that street pays no rates.

The fourth aspect which will hit Dundalk hard, is the massive erosion of confidence felt in and for the town’s future from this negativity. The Square which should be THE key hub, has virtually no footfall, ask any of those trading on it and you’ll soon find out; I’m informed that the closure sign that’s just gone up since Tuesday is simply because there’s fewer coming into town and the business is non viable; that trader had seen the new development as a strong adjacent handle. The South side of the Square was expected to lever off the back of the PPP, but I’m told those development plans will definitely now not advance for replacement of the 2-storey currently unlet(able) premises there. Maybe the nay-sayers might ask for comments from the Marshes, who were expected soon to announce their Phase 2, or from Ampezzana, whom we hope will proceed with regenerating Williamsons Mall, or from Harcourt Developments, whom we hope will re-develop the Longwalk, or Tesco's, who are believed to be considering a new Dundalk Shopping Centre, for their expression of confidence in Tuesday’s decision!

We have a message for all those who voted no; Dundalk’s businesses will not stand by and allow the shutters to come down, we will re-group, re-focus and we will find solutions for progress. We will support any and every progressive proposal with the Town Hall administration and we will collectively make it HAPPEN, you have had your say and we know where you stand!

Maybe now that the dust has settled, should all Councillors not take time out and challenge themselves and the executive to come up with a progressive plan B. Let them sit down with Frank Pentony and his team and examine how a proposal could proceed, taking cogniscance of all the comments made, see  what can be accommodated and engage with the developer to see if we can retain their commitment. Dundalk must arrest the flow of consumer spend that goes Northwards, by creating an attractive town with the quality and diversity in retail and leisure here, but we must do this now!