The EU rolled into Wexford yesterday, with roadshow and workshop, to spread the good word on funding and to ride a few feeble punches on its imperfect policing of the environment.
As part of an information blitz on the southeast region, a sleek "mobile unit" in the centre of town promoted the potential of the £1.1 billion in Structural and Cohesion Funds allocated for the region over the period 1994-1999.
Meanwhile, an open "Citizens' Hearing" in a local hotel offered the disgruntled and aggrieved a chance to challenge "key policy makers and legislators" on environmental issues.
As is the way with such limited exercises in democratic participation, the harvest of opinions was multifarious and the treatment inevitably perfunctory.
But the experts and their inquisitors found common ground, somewhat surprisingly, on one broad conclusion - that the enforcement of EU environmental directives is generally inadequate.
Ms Nuala Ahern MEP tapped into the vein of frustration which she detected among the attendance of over 150. The discontent was widespread, she deduced, because the EU needed to move from principles to practice.
"We don't seem to be able to implement, to practise what we preach," she conceded. She spoke of blockages at European Council level on environmental policy issues and said the only way to unblock them was for the public to speak out loudly.
They needed to hear from the EU Commission how the "polluter pays" principle was to be implemented. What sanctions could be applied?
Mr Tom Garvey, deputy director general of DG XI, the Commission's environmental section, admitted that implementation was unsatisfactory.
The Minister for the Environment, Mr Howlin, took some flak on specific local issues.
Ms Nancy Quinn, of Arklow Action Group, demanded how he could justify a sewerage scheme on a Category A beach. Mr Howlin could only plead that the location of the Arklow water treatment plant had been approved by the local UDC and Wicklow County Council as well as going through all the statutory legal requirements.
Mr Brendan Garvey, of Genetic Concern, called on him to allow a Dail debate and a full public inquiry into a chemical company's proposal for test planting of genetically engineered crops.
Mr Howlin voiced his personal view that consumers had a right to know which products were genetically engineered before they purchased. But he pointed out that the Environmental Protection Agency was the dedicated agency for investigating such applications, "and they are statutorily independent of me."
Mr Howlin extolled the potential of the Government's new National Sustainable Development Strategy. He revealed that a majority of the Constitution Review Group favoured the inclusion in the Constitution of a duty on the State "as far as practicable" to protect the environment.