Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
MONDAY’S VOTE TO green-light the redevelopment of O’Devaney Gardens on Dublin’s northside brings to an end more than three years of discussions at Dublin City Council, following an 11th hour “agreement” struck between councillors and developer Bartra.
The deal – which came in for heavy criticism – foresees the site being divided between 30% social housing, 30% affordable-rental, 20% affordable purchase and 20% private dwellings.
In the context of a housing crisis and spiraling rents, however, few councillors believe it is perfect deal. It wasn’t so long ago they voted for 100% of the site to be public, mixed-income housing.
So, what happened in the meantime?
To get a clear picture of how we reached this point, we’ve to head back 10 years ago and work through the motions of local authority debate.
‘Shifting Focus’
Built in 1954, O’Devaney Gardens – once home to 272 social houses – was originally set to be redeveloped in 2008 through a public-private partnership between developer Bernard McNamara and Dublin City Council.
That deal collapsed due to the economic crash and, in 2012, the council said it could no longer afford to redevelop O’Devaney. A number of blocks were demolished yet no new units were built.
The council tried, in July 2015, to revive the redevelopment in its Housing Land Initiative to seek out potential developers. Buildings on the site were torn down the following year.
The council’s Housing Land Initiative aims to work alongside developers to build a mix of social, affordable and private housing on large council-owned sites.
In July 2016, councillors approved a motion, put forward by Workers’ Party Councillor Éilis Ryan, that the redeveloped site should be 100% public, mixed-income housing.
At the time, Ryan, who is no longer a councillor, argued that the aim of her plan was to “shift the focus from looking at whether or not there is a mix of renters and owners [mixed-tenure], to how much people earn,” she told Dublin Inquirer in October 2016.
Ryan’s proposal catered for 50% of homes rented to the council’s housing list applicants and 50% for those with a “demonstrated housing need”. In other words, those who are above the social housing threshold, but struggling in the private-rented sector.
‘A Solid Outcome’
In September 2016, however, Ryan’s plan was rescinded.
Councillors decided instead – after negotiating with then-Housing Minister Simon Coveney – that the homes replacing the old units should be 30% social housing, 20% affordable-to-buy and 50% private residential, following a motion from Sinn Féin.
At the time, Coveney was originally willing to only earmark 10% of the homes at O’Devaney for social housing.
Those in favour of a mixed-tenure development at O’Devaney, like Sinn Féin’s Daithí Doolan, argued that having mixed tenure, instead, could lead to a more sustainable community.
At the time, Sinn Féin’s Doolan said that 30% social housing for the 14-acre site was “a solid outcome” under a Fine Gael minister.
Advertisement
Cranes tear down 1950s flats at O'Devaney Gardens in 2016. CónalThomas
CónalThomas
In December 2016, Dublin City Council said building was set to start on the site in November 2017 and that land on which private housing will be built at O’Devaney will be transferred to a developer in exchange for a project of public benefit.
The council recently completed building on 56 social housing homes for the site.
Councillors voted to push forward with the plans in January 2017 and the procurement process began.
In July this year, the council said it planned to use the land for 580 homes under the 30-20-50 mix.
‘Dublin Agreement’
Following May’s local elections, the ‘Dublin Agreement‘ was drawn up between city councillors from Fianna Fáil, the Green Party, Labour and the Social Democrats.
In it, councillors said they’d “reject any selling off of publicly owned land to private developers within the city boundaries” unless “the monetary benefit to the Council far outweighs the long term social and economic benefit”.
By September, the council had picked Barta Capital Property as the preferred bidder to develop O’Devaney Gardens.
Shortly after, councillors were shown plans drawn up by O’Mahony Pike Architects for the redeveloped site, replete with parks, bicycle lanes and community spaces.
“I suppose what we were trying to do here is we were trying to create a sense of place,” said John O’Mahony of O’Mahony Pike, who added that O’Devaney Gardens is “probably the best site in the North Inner-City”.
Impression of a redeveloped O'Devaney Gardens. O'Mahony Pike Architects
O'Mahony Pike Architects
A council report from Deputy Chief Executive Brendan Kenny published that day said that, of the 824 homes on the site – 768 built by Bartra – 411 would be private dwellings, 165 would be affordable-to-buy and 248 would be social housing.
Under the plan, 50% of the homes at O’Devaney would be sold to Bartra at market prices.
The council report said that the “affordable” homes would be sold with a 30-40% discount.
The council also laid out the cost for the affordable units; €240,000 to €250,000 for a one-bedroom apartment and from €300,000 to €320,000 for a two-bedroom apartment.
And for housing at O’Devaney- €260,000 to €300,000 for a two-bedroom house and €300,000 to €320,000 for a three-bedroom house.
‘The Government’s Door’
By the time a new Dublin City Council sat this September – altering the political make-up of the council and bringing a cast of new councillors who hadn’t voted for the original plan in 2016 – the landscape had shifted.
A number of councillors said they’d vote against the O’Devaney plan ahead of a meeting on 7 October. Objections were continually raised around the “affordable” price-tags for the homes. Some councillors said any private homes at O’Devaney was a poor use of State land.
In early October – once had it became clear that the deal would be rejected at the meeting – councillors agreed to delay a vote on whether or not to proceed with the DCC/Bartra-led development at O’Devaney Gardens to allow for discussions with Housing Minister Eoghan Murphy.
Related Reads
Councillors green light O'Devaney Gardens redevelopment after developer offers up 'affordable-rentals'
Writing to councillors, Murphy said funding for the O’Devaney redevelopment could be reconsidered if councillors rejected the plan on the table and that it could delay the entire project by five years.
“Funding from my department to both reduce the cost of homes and help fund much-needed community facilities will also be lost if elected members decide not to proceed with this important project,” Murphy said, in a letter to councillors.
As Dublin Inquirer reported earlier this month, there was not much scope for changes – due to contrainsts in the procurement process – in the O’Devaney plan that could bring more councillors on board.
Prices for the affordable units were assessed by the National Treasury Management Agency and the council’s own Quantity Surveyor’s Department.
First phase of O'Devaney Gardens regeneration. RollingNews.ie
RollingNews.ie
Labour said in a statement shortly before the council meeting that it couldn’t back the sale of over 410 units at O’Devaney at over €500,000 per home, despite backing the deal in 2016.
Labour councillor Alison Gilliland argued that by October 2019, rents in Dublin had risen 30% and that family homelessness had doubled.
“The key reason families find themselves homeless is that they cannot afford private rents,” Gilliland said, adding that the O’Devaney plan did not deliver “for those families and individuals and the reason for that lies squarely at the government’s door.”
‘Full-steam ahead’
Following the deferral, the plan hung in the balance and ‘Dublin Agreement’ councillors moved quickly to secure a deal with Bartra to push the redevelopment through and end years of inertia.
In the end, councillors said that they had “secured a commitment” from Bartra that 30% of the total units will be purchased from the developer at market price and offered as “affordable-rental” in an attempt the end the deadlock.
Long-time skeptics of the O’Devaney plans continued to object.
Independent councillor Cieran Perry said O’Devaney Gardens “has the potential for accommodating over 800 public homes but councillors have accepted crumbs.
“Developers shouldn’t be profiting from public lands,” said Perry.
The “commitment” from Batra CEO Michael Flannery is to sell 247 of the 411 private dwellings at O’Devaney to an Approved Housing Body (AHB), which in turn will offer these units as “affordable-rental”.
On Monday evening – amid protests at City Hall – councillors voted to approve plans for the redevelopment of O’Devaney Gardens.
Following the vote, Independent councillor John Lyons said the decision “further entrenches the Fine Gael model of housing delivery which is fully dependent on the private sector to deliver” while Green Party councillor Neasa Houirigan said the deal “will produce a good neighbourhood to live in the long-term and not an empty wasteland while we wait for the perfect conditions to arise”.
For now, questions remain around what “affordable-rental” will look like at O’Devaney, whether an AHB will actually come on board to deliver these units, where the money to buy these units will come from and whether or not the Department of Housing will play ball.
Bartra is expected to lodge a planning application with Dublin City Council early next year. Once planning is approved, on-site works must begin within four weeks.
Ultimately, few councillors agree it is a good deal. Yet as one council official told TheJournal.ie this week; “It’s full-steam ahead”.
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Close
58 Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic.
Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy
here
before taking part.
Strange country we live in when you can either study hard to get a job and then do a 3 – 4 hour commute every day to pay for a barely affordable house in a commuter belt OR never do a day’s work but create plenty of work for gardai and welfare services and be handed a high spec house in a urban location.
@Thomas Sheridan: It’s such a pity that you wouldn’t include in your statement very hard working minimum wage workers, our military and other very hard working in our communities that could never afford to buy or qualify for a mortgage to buy a home. Many welfare recipients are pensioners, disabled, carers, all who work very hard for nothing looking after our most vulnerable so please do not say we do not contribute to our country. Many unemployed people lost their jobs during the downturn and many are at an age that no one wants to employ them, Many employers just want to hire younger people that they can pay much lower wages to. Get real not everyone in Ireland lives in your glass house and remember those that throw stones get broken windows!
@Thomas Sheridan: I agree, as someone who bought in Dublin town, an “outsider” with an education and office job, im made feel that I should have bought on the commuter belt, spend 3 hours a day in the car, so that someone “local” who has numerous educational and employment opportunities close at hand but chose not to avail, and instead put their names on a housing list, not work should have a priority to a tax payer funded accommodation.
@Thomas Sheridan: You are tarring everyone who is not earning enough to be ever able to afford to buy a house with the same brush. There are thousands of local authority estates all over Ireland in every town and village where the residents take care of their property and their estates. But people like you continue to suggest that people who need housing are wasters and troublemakers. There are some but they very much in the minority.
Just be glad that you are fortunate enough like me to be in a position to buy your own house.
@Thomas Sheridan: of course many do work too but can only hold down min wage jobs. That doesn’t suit the narrative for some though. Many were born and bred in the area also, have roots and family there. Where were the middle class whingers when houses were affordable around the city centre. Why did they not snap houses up then? Some did of course and are now renting to, exploiting even, others. Offer most accommodation there now and they would still turn their noses up at it, a bit too close to the working class perhaps.
@Bleurgh: but sure if life is so great on the housing list then why don’t you stick your name down? I’m sure it’s not all Lattes and Brown Thomas. You do realise that there are many people working hard on min wage on that housing list?
@Charliegrl80: – of course I cannot speak for everyone in a short post and I am happy to accept your views and share your sympathy for low wage earners. They are mearly rent and tax slaves with no way out.
But perhaps you should read my post more carefully because I only made reference & comparisons with people being rewarded after never working.
Google “Gilmartin Road” for just one of many examples that I could give.
@Thomas Sheridan: the people living in these flats are being harassed by guards, not the other way around. You clearly have no idea what it’s like to walk outside your home, minding your own business to be pulled up on by 4 guards in 1 car asking questions that don’t need to be answered, intimidating and conducting illegal searches every single day. There is a reason they get treated disrespectfully in these areas and I’ll give you one clue: it’s not because they treat us respectfully.
@GrumpyAulFella: I’m merely making a point that as someone who is not from Dublin, bought a private house in a largely social housing area in the city that the narrative that is being put about is that I should have bought on the commuter belt, that I took a house that the council should have bought and given to a “local working class family” that as myself and my spouse are “office workers” not from they area that we were denying those families a house…I spent my early formative years in a council house, where my parents saw it as a hand up, not a hand out. Many of those living now where I live, of my age, complain they didn’t have the opportunities, yet college grants were available to them tpo, and universities and colleges within walking and cycling distances!
@Bleurgh: if you bought a house in the city then you deserve that house. Anyone who thinks otherwise deserves no respect. Anyone who taints all people on the housing list with the same brush also deserves no respect. It’s not east to be admitted to some 3rd level colleges with certain addresses.
@Bleurgh: An outsider as you have an education, you certainly dont come across as educated with comments like this one.
People do not choose to put their name on a housing list as is an easy way to get a home, its not. It can take years.
I know this as I ended up on the housing list through no fault of my own. As it was it would have taken me 15 years to get a home on the list
How? When DCC councilors started getting involved, i.e. from the start. This land should have been sold to the highest bidder in order to generate the most money for the city. The developer should have been selling the homes at market price (with the standard provision for social housing but no more than that). This was a golden opportunity for many hard-working people who have been saving a deposit for months/years to buy their first home or trade-up/down in a great location.
These should be redeveloped as 100% social housing or very affordable housing, i havent seen any affordable houses built in this country unless you move to donegal
Agreed . Lest we forget O Devanney gardens was a 100 per cent social housing scheme for the past 50 years and for all if that period it was a pure kip of a place encompassing the worst social problems, Drugs , violence , murders etc.
A balanced mix is the only way forward here.
@Tim McCormack29: I agree with you- local to the park I can honestly say this area has been a no go area for well over 20 years with 100% social housing so proof it hasn’t worked so why repeat the same model? Duh! O’D gardens was blighted by anti social behaviour and drug use, 30% social housing is about right IMO, it’s a great part of the city especially now all those flats have been demolished- the champagne socialists will never be happy!
mix of private/affordable/social is by far the best mix. anything heavily tilted towards 100% public housing, of any type, is a recipe for social problems.
Apart from the division of the units look at how long it all took. 11 years! On top of that in fifteen years time we’ll hear about all the faults leading to calls for the demolition and rebuilding and nobody will be accountable.
@Niall Bourke: and its only going ahead now because of the SocDems, FF, Greens and Labour. FG and Sinn Fein tried to sink it last week and cause further delays.
@Padraic O Sullivan: The Vienna Model works because Austrian Citizens and long-term residents receive first preference in the allocation of housing, thus ensuring better social cohesion
@Kate Fogarty: Why are the people who live in private and affordable houses all model citizens and those who qualify for social housing all troublemakers. Have you proof of this.
Why not 100% private and make it high end housing for professionals and Chuck the social housing wasters into an extension in the grounds of mosey with the other parasites.
More evidence that this government, & it’s fellow traveller co-conspirators in the supply & confidence scratch my my back & we will scratch yours deal, do not have any intention to provide sufficient social housing for working families.
Their policy is to leave them to the vagaries of the rental market, with very little security of tenure, & perpetual squeeze on incomes to pay ever increasing rents. It’s a case of just include a minority quota of social housing to ensure that the market valuations for banks, builders, & offshore corporate investment reits are not affected.
Voters need to see that this policy leads inevitably to the yuppification of our cities with a migrant office based population, displacing our own young folk to commuter towns, & OAPs unable to pay the rents after work.
People are going to really have to start taking on politicians. Who makes the rule here . The department ? The minister who is bound by terms of a deal made by b lenihan for eu imf loan never laid before the dail cos TD opted not to have the govt account to the dail under at 28 and yet will vote thru estimate giving min permission incl murphy to SPEND ( he is telling council u go by that plan or i wont give the money) xxxxxxxx billions out of public fund but cant tell us the the 44 billion of the loan monies also in the fund wont be touched cos the deal not laid before the dail.
TD have been giving far to many power to minister.
They still have not learned lesson of the infamous promissory note that left us and the people struggling for housing with the burden of 30 billion debt to central banks cos minister exercised a power he was given by TD in legislaiton.
B Lenihan would not have been able to do that with out the vote of TD in dail eireann The latest legislation only three month ago setting up rainy fund giving min access to pension funds to remedy ‘excessive budgetary deficit but no social housing.
Do people realise the importance of TD vote on our lives. And here is another cost.
Min Says to council u will not get the money unless u go by my plan and is is DAIL that gve the money no one else. He cld not say that without TD VOTES.
TDs abdicated from the responsibilities under art 28 of constitution that government account to the dail and it show in the voting scandals now coming out .
The terms of that laon to B Lenihan stick conditions on us to pay for banks or a euro but that loan and those loan terms never laid before the Dail and it need to be laid before it and reduce public deficit until the terms are approved by the dail and 44 billion loan funds ‘ringfenced until that done and that is our TD job /
From everything I have read and heard it was a situation where it was never going to be a win situation for the councillors.
Council management will say if this does not happen it will take years to get something done and it will be worse than this.
Public Private Partnerships is not the way forward. The Vienna Model of Social Housing is
Conal for the record. I believe this is a good deal. Good on housing, good n housing initiatives and good for the wider community. As Councillors we have a broad responsibility – housing is one of them, building strong good communities with a good mix and good planning. I stand over this deal which in all the circumstances was the best deal deliverable- most Political people who criticised it have never delivered a single additional home in their entire political careers.
Government to make cabin homes in back gardens exempt from planning
Christina Finn
8 hrs ago
54.0k
69
Good Morning
The 9 at 9: Wednesday
Updated
5 mins ago
1.0k
air fryer fires
British insurer warns air fryers are causing tens of thousands of pounds worth of damage
23 hrs ago
49.6k
42
Your Cookies. Your Choice.
Cookies help provide our news service while also enabling the advertising needed to fund this work.
We categorise cookies as Necessary, Performance (used to analyse the site performance) and Targeting (used to target advertising which helps us keep this service free).
We and our 148 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device. Selecting Accept All enables tracking technologies to support the purposes shown under we and our partners process data to provide. If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you. You can resurface this menu to change your choices or withdraw consent at any time by clicking the Cookie Preferences link on the bottom of the webpage .Your choices will have effect within our Website. For more details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
We and our vendors process data for the following purposes:
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
Cookies Preference Centre
We process your data to deliver content or advertisements and measure the delivery of such content or advertisements to extract insights about our website. We share this information with our partners on the basis of consent. You may exercise your right to consent, based on a specific purpose below or at a partner level in the link under each purpose. Some vendors may process your data based on their legitimate interests, which does not require your consent. You cannot object to tracking technologies placed to ensure security, prevent fraud, fix errors, or deliver and present advertising and content, and precise geolocation data and active scanning of device characteristics for identification may be used to support this purpose. This exception does not apply to targeted advertising. These choices will be signaled to our vendors participating in the Transparency and Consent Framework.
Manage Consent Preferences
Necessary Cookies
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Store and/or access information on a device 102 partners can use this purpose
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development 133 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 103 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Create profiles for personalised advertising 75 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Use profiles to select personalised advertising 74 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Create profiles to personalise content 36 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Use profiles to select personalised content 32 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Measure advertising performance 124 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Measure content performance 59 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Understand audiences through statistics or combinations of data from different sources 72 partners can use this purpose
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Develop and improve services 79 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Use limited data to select content 37 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
Use precise geolocation data 42 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification 24 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Ensure security, prevent and detect fraud, and fix errors 82 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Deliver and present advertising and content 92 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Match and combine data from other data sources 65 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Link different devices 48 partners can use this feature
Always Active
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Identify devices based on information transmitted automatically 81 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
Save and communicate privacy choices 60 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say