Treasury Holdings, the property company behind plans to build a National Conference Centre in Dublin is expected to lodge a complaint with the Dail Committee of Public Accounts today concerning the role of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA) in the project.
Treasury Holdings, who with businessman, Mr Harry Crosbie, is trying to build the centre as part of the Spencer Dock consortium, claims the committee should examine how the DDDA is proceeding with its "Section 25" planning scheme for the conference centre. Mr Richard Barrett, a director of the company, said last night that the DDDA is proceeding with a two-fold planning scheme which is not needed.
"The DDDA should be implementing one planning scheme, as the second is not needed and is a waste of public funds," he said. The DDDA is making a planning scheme for the four acres where the centre will be situated and another one for the 24 acres surrounding the centre.
It says combining the two into one scheme would mean delays, whereas under its arrangement a scheme for the centre would be completed by Scott Tallon Walker by Christmas.
Treasury says the two-fold scheme will result in unnecessary delay and could threaten EU funding for the project. It is unclear if the Committee of Public Accounts could investigate the complaint and Treasury may instead lodge its complaint with the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr John Purcell.
Work at the site continues to be suspended with the Spencer Dock group awaiting a commitment from the DDDA that it will not object to the recent decision by Dublin Corporation to give planning permission for the centre. Yesterday a short meeting took place between the chief executive of the DDDA, Mr Peter Coyne, and Mr Barrett. It is understood that Mr Coyne is to write another letter to Mr Barrett on the issue. A spokesman for the DDDA said last night that the authority had already given a commitment not to object. However, Treasury says the commitment was only given with conditions attached concerning a linear park, which are not acceptable.
