Liffey crossing project delay
Faulkner argues that delay over the sanctioned Liffey crossing caused wasteful expenditure. The Parliamentary Secretary says the motorway proposals were reviewed in light of economic conditions and the energy crisis, but rejects the claim that delay caused waste.
Does the parliamentary Secretary agree that the sanctioning by the Government of the Liffey crossing and the approach roads project in January, 1974, gave the clear impression to Dublin Corporation that the Minister favoured the plan including the motorways, and that this decision resulted in the wasteful expenditure of large amounts of money which could have been very usefully employed in other sectors?
Comment on this
The Minister was studying the implications of the recommendations for motorways to which Deputy Faulkner refers in the light of current economic circumstances and the energy crisis. When the review of the problems was completed he was in a position to announce his decision in regard to the motorways.
Comment on this
Would the Parliamentary Secretary agree that the circumstances to which he has alluded existed two years ago and the fact that the Minister was tardy in taking a decision has caused a very considerable amount of wasteful expenditure?