Bolder Commission moves centre stage

"To lose one parent, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune to lose both looks like carelessness."

First the Minister for the Environment, Mr Howlin, then the Minister for Transport, Mr Lowry, have had to be reminded bluntly, and within weeks of each other, that the European Commission is not to be taken for granted.

And Mr Lowry should read the letter his colleague received from the doughty Regional Affairs Commissioner, Ms Monika Wulf Mathies, before he pronounces himself too categorically on his plans for Luas.

In February, Mr Howlin was firmly rebuked by the Commissioner for his unilateral go ahead to Galway Corporation for work on the Mutton Island plant.

After expressing "surprise and bewilderment" at the Minister's approach, Ms Wulf Mathies replied to Mr Howlin's comments:

"Regarding your scepticism concerning the Commission's attitude in examining the environmental impact of the project, I can assure you that the Commission did not seek to promote debate over the heads of the national and local authorities on a specific proposal which has passed through the development consent process.

"The Commission has a right and an obligation which stem from the treaty, the relevant Structural Fund and Cohesion Fund regulations, and the relevant environmental provisions, to examine thoroughly the economic and environmental dimension of a project it is asked to co finance . .

"I would like to add that commissioning of independent studies for large projects is far from an unusual practice by the Commission.

"And to the extent that commercial confidentiality is not affected, I see no reason why these reports should not, in principle, be made available to legitimately interested parties."

THE Commissioner went on to say that, given the Minister's unilateral action, no Commission funding would be available for the project. (Not, that the money has gone to Portugal or elsewhere in the Union, as some have suggested, but Mr Howlin will have to find a more acceptable project.)

Now, to be fair to him, Mr Lowry has added the rider to all his speeches on the subject of the Luas "subject to Commission approval". But readers might be forgiven for thinking the formula implies some minor bureaucratic procedure, rather than a serious independent cost benefit analysis of the project.

Moreover, the report will specifically address the question of the social impact on the long term unemployed, one of the priorities of structural funding.

Clearly, it may find that social deprivation in Ballymun warrants support for the line above that to Dundrum - in which case the Commission will almost certainly press for a change of approach.

Commission sources say diplomatically that "at some point we got the distinct impression of a very strong preference for the Dundrum and Tallaght lines."

Not an unreasonable inference.

But the Commission then insisted in November that the independent consultants' report, mandatory for infrastructural projects over £20 million, would specifically look at the relative merits of the three lines. The EU is to contribute £114 million out of the £200 million projected cost.

Strange that Mr Lowry would not mention it? Well, not really.

ON the one hand there is the Drainage of the Shannon syndrome which propels Ministers of all persuasions to announce the most grandiose of projects when they are little more than a glint in the eye.

On the other, there is a congenital problem when it comes to giving credit to the EU for major projects which it has often more than financed.

The greater glory of the seems, must inevitably put a lustre on that of the minister. So it that when the Ball Ballyconnell canal reopened room could be found for Commission President, Mr Jacques Delors, at the opening ceremony.

But times are changing. The increasingly political Commission hash become more determined not to be taken for granted.

It understands that a key to this is a willingness to listen directly to the public in member states, unmediated by their governments, to insist on grassroots involvement in structural fund proposals and to respond to their concerns.

Indeed, in designing innovative structures for the administration of the Northern Ireland peace fund, Ms Wulf Mathies put Government noses out of joint by insisting that funding would be disbursed by nongovernmental groups close to the community.

That she should listen to public concerns in Dublin should not be a surprise. And, with any luck, the Commissioner will publish the report.