Weasel words and selective figuring

NAAS, 9 August, 2001: OPINION by John Kavanagh. It is interesting to read the discussion on the issue of the Sallins road car parks and the weasel words being used in this debate and the selective quoting of figures.
 
I was at the UDC meeting the night that the sale to Mr Treacy was to be discussed. I was the only member of the public present by 10.15 that night - the press were gone and only the councillors and I were left. I was then asked by the chair, Cllr O'Reilly, to leave as the Chair wanted this matter to be discussed off the public record. I am left wondering what would have happened if my immediate response after leaving had not been to inform others that there were matters being discussed of fundamental concern to the town and people of Naas off the public record. 
 
The next meeting at which the matter was discussed was in public, possibly as people now knew what was on the table. However the first order of business at an AGM - for such it was - is normally the election of the new chair. Cllr O'Reilly changed the order of business and that was moved until after the Baba sale item. A detailed report which must have taken a lot of time and effort was read out by the town executive officials and in doing so, at that point became a matter of public record. Prior to that it was not.
 
In the discussion on the price the UDC was getting for the property it was stated that one of the things that the Council was getting was a road that they would have had to build themselves, priced at £500,000. What was not mentioned that a condition of the planning permission was that the road would have to be built. It would have been built whether the site sold at £1.5 million or £500,000. This was irrelevant in the debate as to the value for money obtained.
 
On the issue of the actual price, It was stated that Mr Treacy felt that he should have been given the car park for free! In the end, though, he received it at the knockdown price of £500,000 over 10 years discounted at 6%. This does not mean that the town gains £707,000 as Cllr O'Reilly tries to claim, as the value of this money in 10 years' time will be far less than it is now. This is little more than a loan of £500,000 at a low interest rate. Interest rates are designed to reflect the cost of money changing over time. A more appropriate rate of inflation to reflect the true value of the site would have been in the order of 15%.  
 
What was also stated and restated in Cllr O'Reilly's letter was the rates gain. Again this is irrelevant to the sale price debate, as these would have been obtained no matter who had owned the site before it was developed. 

Now we see Cllr O'Reilly champions the developer's right to ignore legally binding planning conditions. Planning conditions put in for the benefit of Naas. Can the councillor tell me what is going to happen next September when the schools start up again and when the church opens up again next week?
 
The members of the NUJ who were criticised tell it as they see it and not only carry the bad news on the chamber, but also carry the positive news. They are not pets to be fed the occasional tit-bit so that they then roll over for their bellies to be scratched, but they are professionals.

NOTE: Cllr O'Reilly's letter is published here.

ED: Please note that views expressed under 'OPINION' on KNN are those of the writer concerned, and do not necessarily reflect the views of KNN or its proprietors. This facility is provided in the interests of free speech and public information and may be availed of either to make a point or respond to one. KNN reserves the right to edit any material submitted.