Vol. 466 No. 8
3 Miss Quill asked the Minister for the Environment if his attention has been drawn to a recent statement by a Teagasc farm environment adviser that Ireland's rivers are threatened with an environmental timebomb in view of heavy rainfall boosting silage effluent to an alarming level; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12273/96]
Silage making, if not carried out in accordance with good farm practice, can entail risks to river water quality. Much work has been done in recent years to promote understanding of these risks in the farming community and to establish suitable arrangements for prevention. Local authorities and the agricultural advisory agencies have carried out extensive farm inspections. Initiatives to promote environmental awareness by a range of agencies, including farmer representative associations, have also given important assistance.
There has been substantial investment in recent years by farmers, with EU and State support, in installing and upgrading storage facilities for silage and the management of farm wastes. This is reflected in the general reduction in the number of fish kills attributed to agriculture since 1987 when the sector accounted for 85 incidents out of a total of 122. In 1995, agriculture was directly responsible for 19 fish kills, including ten caused by silage effluent, from the total of 85 recorded.
Local authorities are regularly reminded by my Department of the need for intensive efforts at pollution prevention, and extensive powers are available to them under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Acts, 1977 and 1990, for this purpose. Earlier this week, the Minister issued a statement calling for greater vigilance on the part of all concerned with the handling and disposal of wastes of different kinds to safeguard against water pollution during the sensitive summer period.
Sadly, there was a major fish kill on the river Lee this morning — hundreds of young salmon and trout died as a result of a slurry run-off. What steps will the Minister take to ensure that the culprit in this case is prosecuted? The text of my question mentions that, three weeks ago, a senior Teagasc farm environment adviser warned that Irish rivers were threatened with an environmental time bomb this year. On foot of that warning, what specific measures did the Department authorise to avert a summer of frequent fish kills this year?
I share the Deputy's regret and deep concern about the fish kill in Cork, which is a serious matter. I have been in contact with the local authority, I understand it has already embarked on a certain amount of remedial work and is considering further action. I have also asked it for a full report of its deliberations. The Minister underlined the importance of constant vigilance when issuing a statement which pointed out the negative effect of carelessness and irresponsible acts. A small number of people can often have a major impact on the environmental life of our rivers and lakes.
All the Minister is doing is issuing statements but the Government abandoned the farmyard improvement scheme. Statements will not——
We are dealing with priority questions and only the Member who tabled the question may intervene.
Local authorities have considerable powers to take legal action and send out notices if they think there is a risk or threat of damage to lakes or rivers. In relation to Deputy Dempsey's interjection, it is important to point out that queries about the REPS relate to the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry, not the Department of the Environment. The powers of local authorities——
That is typical of this Government.
No, it is a matter of fact.
An important matter of environmental policy is not a matter for the Department of the Environment.
Predictable.
Deputy Dempsey heard me laying down the strictures governing priority questions.
If I cannot intervene the Minister should not reply.
Please, Deputy Dempsey, you have no right to intervene. Your question is coming up shortly.
There has been some improvement in the overall status in recent years but that should not give grounds for complacency. What happened yesterday is an indication of how irresponsible people can cause havoc. In this instance I understand the local authority acted swiftly but it serves as a warning, first, that people should be vigilant about the dangers and second, that irresponsible people cannot continue to dispose of waste in a fashion which affects rivers and lakes without running the risk of paying the price.
Does the Minister accept that issuing ministerial notifications is about as productive as throwing confetti at a wedding? Last year there were 74 fish kills; how many prosecutions resulted?
That is a separate question and may be one for another Minister.
Will the Minister demonstrate what action is proposed to ensure there will not be a similar number of fish kills this year? That must be an environmental issue.
I would be delighted to provide the Deputy with follow-up information. It is worth nothing there was a series of fish kills last year and that the unusual weather conditions and low water levels added considerably to the problem. This is one reason the Minister again took the initiative to warn people of the need for constant vigilance.
He just warned them.
Confetti is quite nice at a wedding——
It is not productive, though.
——however, one must be conscious that the Minister made his statement to alert people that vigilance was needed, to reinforce the message that the law and controls are in place and that local authorities have powers, not just to take action when an offence is being committed but also when there is a risk or threat of danger. That is an important point because we must all support local authorities in their work and they have powers which they can invoke.
The Minister has assured us the law is in place. Why is it not implemented effectively? If it were, one would imagine there would be a reduction in the number of fish kills. Is the policing mechanism not sufficiently well resourced, or is there another reason? If the Minister for the Environment does not know the answer, the Department stands accused of gross complacency in the face of what has happened to our rivers and freshwater lakes.
I assure the Deputy there is no complacency in this regard and that in recent years there has been a noticeable reduction. In 1995——
Not last year.
There were 74 fish kills in 1995.
I have difficulty with Deputy Dempsey's interventions, as I cannot reply to them if I am to comply with the ruling of the Chair.
Do not tell us there was an improvement because last year was not a good year.
Must I ignore them? Perhaps I could have your guidance, a Cheann Comhairle.
The Minister is ignoring the questions, so she may as well ignore the interventions.
We are still on priority questions.
The Minister is answering my question.
Please do not shout down the Chair, I will not tolerate that.
I beg your pardon.
We are still in priority question time and only the Member in possession, that is Deputy Quill, and the Minister may intervene.
There has been an improvement in recent years but last year there were exceptional circumstances which created conditions, both in temperature levels and in reduced water levels, which had a negative impact. Local authorities have the powers to take action and I will provide the Deputy with more information, as I totally reject any notion of complacency in this regard, whether on the part of the Government, local authorities or the public. This event in Cork only highlights how important it is to ensure that those three groups are vigilant in dealing with this serious matter.
The time for dealing with priority questions is exhausted so we will proceed to deal with Questions Nos. 4 and 5 in ordinary Question Time.
