Not sure people can see my expansion of reasons why I feel the #PFG needs to act sooner & more precisely on #ShannonLNG than 2021. So here is an expanded explanation. I'd be delighted if those who did the negotiating can correct me if I'm wrong as this is how I see it

A pjct which has been on a PCI list continues to enjoy the benefits of rights & obligations unless it was not correctly there in the 1st instance. The view was #ShannonLNG was put on the list so it could argue Imperative Reasons of Overriding Public Interest #IROPI . That's key..

Because it was seeking an extension to its planning permission & it was challenged on the basis that further consideration of #AppropriateAssessment obligations under the Habitats Directive was required - a question on this has been referred to the #CJEU and if the Court agrees

with the Advocate General's opinion which views one is required in this case, then the pjct can only proceed if it can argue IROPI in circumstances were it causes adverse impacts on the integrity of protected Natura 2000 sites. So even though #PFG proposes to act in 2021

..what is actually critical is to capture & record formally Ireland's reasons, which need to reflect it should not have been on the PCI list in the 1st instance because of incorrect/inadequate data and/or non-compliance with Union law. (Basically trigger Art 5(8) of the Reg.)

That will strip it of its potential to argue IROPI. See Articles 5(9), 5(8), Chapter III especially Art 7(3) of the Regulation. This could be really crucial to ensuring the pjct dies a natural death because it cannot extend the duration of its planning permission, otherwise the

we are dependent on the challenge to its inclusion in the #PCI list succeeding to show it was incorrectly included - to puncture its IROPI teflon blanet. My concern is that's a complex case given the particulars of the reference, standing etc. Let me be clear

I concur with the concerns on the project. I just want to see a stake driven into its heart thus also critically we have to limit Ireland's exposure to any claim under the #EnergyCharterTreaty #ECT which could be very costly and the threat of that alone may be deeply problematic

- for Ireland's position on the pjct ultimately. I'd welcome clarity on how that risk has been assessed & managed/mitigated. But it would seem to be expedient - to do all now to ensure reasons are given which put an end to any potential to argue IROPI ensuring the prjct dies -

a natural death, thus limiting any possible argument over the ECT, and making it impossible to revive it, and setting other LNG pjcts in similar context. So moving like Trump did to get his position on the record re the Paris Agreement in advance of it coming into effect - smart!

If I am wrong - I'd be very grateful to be put right & to have how these considerations were assessed or are not relevant clarified by those who negotiated this. This is too important to be allowed slip for want of detail, & the #PFG & PRs gives me no comfort on this matter.