The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
I'm optimistic, but doubt very much a JR 'has already been rejected' as the 12 week period to enact this cannot start until the decision has been made by the Minister.
Unfortunately I've seen too many spurious JRs allowed, which in reality have never had a chance of succeeding, but have been successful as a delay tactic if nothing else. That for me is a reasonable risk, if for timing rather than the project itself.
I am optimistic. All lot of actions being taken suggests they know the outcome.
I keep saying that this is procedural. Follow that and they get the ML.
Stifler ,think we'll find out soon enough imho
If procedures have been followed then a JR will be rejected. It already has in my opinion. The ML is inevitable and politically the support is there.
I really doubt that they can show that DAEFRA has not followed procedure.
I would have to disagree. A judicial review does not mean that something is arguable. They need to prove that DAEFRA hasn't followed a legal process.
They are very aware of this. That is what the department does.
Just seen this through the UK Defence Journal Twitter Feed https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2021/W13/748093441. The value is within the assets of INFA so there should not be any issue from that point of view.
Hopefully this is on INFA's radar as it would be very lucrative to get the jackets contract for this one even doing half of the necessary jackets would be worth it.
TheEast In relation to your 10.04 post I think that if there was a Judicial Review permission might be granted but the application would not be granted. You have to remember that, assuming the process is the same in both England and Northern Ireland, Judicial Review is a two stage process. The first stage is the permission stage where all that is needed to prove is that the case is arguable. The second stage is the harder one where you have to prove your case. It also has to be remembered that the Minister would be the defendant INFA would only be an interested party.
Hi All,
My opinion on all this is to chill a bit. Covid has thrown everything up into the air in terms of timescales, felt especially so in the public sector as so many people are doing other work.
Step 1 is done- DAERA have given their recommendation to the Minister.
Step 2- hopefully the Minister approves the project to go-ahead. We have to take a balanced view that this will be positive given the economics, and that we clearly had a pack of information which says the project can be delivered with an acceptable environmental impact.
Step 3- prepare ourselves for a 12 week period of waiting for a JR- and hope one isn't granted. If it is (and assume it is a possibility), may as well the project on the back burner for now. My view however, is that we have hopefully exhausted the legal possibilities that might allow a JR, and that we're reasonably confident one will not be forthcoming. As others have said below, it isn't a case to demanding one and its granted, there would have to be a reasonably high level of proof that due process was not properly followed. Irrespective- if one was granted- its role isn't to change the decision, but to just review the decision making process followed the law.
All in all, I'm around the 80% confident make that we'll get a positive decision, and this will give a welcome boost to the SP. It de risks the company somewhat.
With other projects, I'm not excited by Defence. Whilst I think we have a good chance of getting large contracts in the future- this is in my '5-year +' bracket. We all know the MOD are shockingly bad at procurement and all governments are shockingly bad at giving the MOD long term certainty and strategic direction. I completely acknowledge that there are good signs, I'm just not anticipating any contracts for a long time. I'll also be very happy to be proven wrong on this point..!!
For me, INFA needs to become self sufficient on the O&G/ cruise and ferry/ renewables as I see this as having a higher chance of success at us winning decent chunks of work. Whilst the booking of £6.5m of revenue is a step forward, it must be painfully shy of where it needs to be for us to cover our overheads/ investment needs and project costs and have always anticipated we'll need further cash raises, but equally have said before I really hope it is on the back of a significantly higher SP than where we are now.
Hope everyone is enjoying the long weekend
TheEast
Nobby. I also expect a quick decision now we have the Executive Committee (Functions) Bill on our side. Perhaps the ML process was delayed to allow the legislation to go through, thereby clearing a path to avoid further lengthy litigation?
From the linked article:
The amendments to the Northern Ireland Act introduced by the proposed Bill remove the requirement to bring any decision on a planning application by the DFI or DFI Minister before the Executive, no matter how controversial or significant, and regardless of how many other departments that decision would affect.
https://www.irishnews.com/business/2020/07/21/news/executive-committee-functions-bill-function-or-dysfunction--2008874/
I still think there will be a kind of compromise Maybe heightened real time monitoring of the brine discharge etc.
Good link Speedy. It enjoys cross party support.
Surely the role of the minister is to make sure his department have followed procedures. That has taken years.
I think all legal procedures are being followed. To take the ML to a judicial review will involve proving that those procedures have not been adhered to. I personally think that is not the case so this will not get a judicial review.
I agree with those sentiments.
If H&W were to fail it would sit squarely with the intransigence and ineptitude of the political parties and be a great disservice to the hardworking people of NI.
We can but hope common sense prevails as there are numerous examples of them being exceptionally adept at kicking themselves up their own backsides.
I expect this decision to be made within a month and from it we can expect a significant boost to investment and employment across the yard and the storage project.
The other factor here is the trickle down effect into the wider economy; smaller diverse businesses seeing an uptick is all very likely.
What is not to like about this opportunity?
It's also worth considering that infrastrata has resurrected one of Northern Irelands icon assets Harland and Wolfe.If infrastrata prospers so does Northern Ireland. Maybe a little bit of abargaining chip.
Colin McGrath Social Democratic and Labour Party:
The Bill allows a lot of major decisions that are currently in, for example, the planning system to be taken quickly, and that will provide a positive boost for the economy of the North and allow major projects that are in the system to be delivered on the ground faster, as that allows for the potential for jobs in our construction industry and, with new factories and facilities, more jobs in all of our communities.
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PMd_DHzxwJ4J:https://www.theyworkforyou.com/ni/%3Fid%3D2020-07-06.2.49%26p%3D25011+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-b-d
Far too much at stake with the gas caverns for them not to go ahead and I would suspect that the decision was already known in advance when Mr Jessop was taken on as project manager.It's worth checking out his record .
The crux of the matter as outlined by Gordon Lyons DUP in the debate:
The Assembly will be aware that a cross-cutting matter is defined as one that cuts across the responsibilities of two or more Ministers. Planning decisions had up to then been regarded as solely the preserve of the relevant Minister on the basis that, though of interest to other Ministers, such decisions did not cut across their statutory responsibilities. The court, however, defined the planning decision in question as a cross-cutting matter by eliding the concepts of responsibility and interest and therefore potentially making all planning decisions subject to agreement by the Executive Committee and effectively making it the relevant authority rather than the Minister. The Executive have agreed that that is not an appropriate position, but ignoring the court's judgement would risk opening up planning decisions to legal challenge simply on the basis that they had not been agreed by the Executive. Such a situation would have profound implications for a number of significant planning decisions that are expected during the remainder of this year and could lead to significant investment and employment opportunities being deferred or lost. We believe that that vulnerability can be quickly and simply rectified by means of the Bill before us today.
The cross-cutting issue is the last straw the protestors are using to forward a public enquiry. The Northern Ireland Executive voted 80 for with 4 against, so I would venture to say the protestors ship is sinking, though I know a few Shipyards that hopefully soon could build them a new one!
Chrisatrdg. Very interesting reading regarding state of affairs in Northern Ireland Executive, re: economy vs planning permissions/public inquiries. Only objectors are the Greens, of course! The Bill has now passed giving Ministers greater powers to decide............looking good for a prompt decision on ML!
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PMd_DHzxwJ4J:https://www.theyworkforyou.com/ni/%3Fid%3D2020-07-06.2.49%26p%3D25011+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-b-d
Judicial reviews are rarely granted. You cannot submit a judicial review and expect to get it heard. I believe around 75% are never taken to that stage.
I am not invested here for the IM project but I understand many were.
Stifler In relation to your 15.58 post even if a judicial review does not succeed it can delay the matter for years with appeals so it is a very expensive but good stalling tactic as the Court would probably grant an injunction preventing the decision being implemented.
Full details:
Member Question Tabled Status
AQW 16206/17-22 Mr Stewart Dickson
(APNI - East Antrim) To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, with regards to the proposed Islandmagee Caverns Gas Storage Project, for an update on whether he plans to bring the marine construction licence to the Executive Committee for consideration as it is a cross-cutting matter.
- Hide Answer
I expect to be presented with a portfolio of documents within the near future to assist me in determining the application for a marine construction licence for the Islandmagee Gas Storage project.
I have been advised that the briefing will include advice on whether this is a cross cutting issue and on the need for Executive referral. I trust you can appreciate that I am keeping an open mind on the matter and unable comment further until I have had sight of the documents.
11/03/2021 Answered on 22/03/2021