The time remaining for debating this motion is 25 minutes. There are ten minutes remaining to Deputy Treacy who is in possession.
Private Members' Business. - Air and Water Pollution: Motion (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That, in view of the deteriorating situation with regard to air and water pollution and the lack of up-to-date legislation to deal with the position, Dáil Éireann calls on the Minister for Local Government to introduce legislation forthwith to rectify this state of affairs.
—(Deputy L. Belton.)
In the course of my remarks last evening I was seeking to impress on the Parliamentary Secretary, on the Government and on all concerned, the need for each of us to show much greater concern about the preservation of a healthy and aesthetic environment. Fortunately, so far, by international standards, we are relatively free from pollution of a serious nature. Our air is relatively clean and the same can be said of our waters. Our noise problem has not yet become very critical. However, we must be concerned gravely with the destruction of some of our historic buildings and with the destruction of our landscape. The situation in regard to these is not beyond redemption.
At the same time, it is clear that if we continue to do nothing in these areas, it will not be long before the industrial and technological developments overtake us. I submit that it would be much cheaper for us as a nation to spend money and time now in ensuring the creation and preservation of a healthy environment and to try to redeem the situation before it is too late. In the restricted time allowed me last evening I suggested briefly what my Party believe should be done. It is our belief that the whole range of environmental problems should be dealt with by one Minister. We consider the matter to be of such gravity and urgency as to deserve the creation of a special Ministry. However, if that suggestion should not be considered feasible in the circumstances, perhaps the Minister for Local Government might be empowered to deal with this whole problem and, of course, he should have available to him the staff and resources necessary.
Last night, too, I pointed out that at present matters appertaining to our environment are scattered throughout a whole range of Departments—the Departments of Agriculture, Industry and Commerce, Lands, Local Government, Transport and Power, Health and others. This is an unsatisfactory situation and that is why we advocate that the matter be dealt with by one specific Department. It is necessary that more money be spent on research. An Foras Forbartha, the agency dealing primarily with matters of this kind, receive an annual grant which is totally inadequate for their purposes. Only a small portion of that grant is devoted to physical planning, water resources and so on. Having regard to the intrinsic worth of An Foras Forbartha and the very many talented people employed by them, they should be utilised more fully and given the necessary finances to carry out their work in this important field. We support the motion in the names of the Fine Gael Members and we believe that new legislation should be introduced as a matter of urgency so that one Act can be substituted for the seven Acts which relate now to the matter of environment.
Special help should be available to local authorities to enable them to grapple effectively with the problems of pollution. The problem of untreated sewage, which is polluting our rivers and streams and, consequently, destroying fish life, is one with which the local authorities are genuinely concerned; but they do not have the capital resources necessary to tackle the problem. Therefore, the Minister must come to their assistance. As of now, there is a very good chance of redeeming the situation. We have the lowest population density in Europe—41 people per kilometre. Our volume of production is probably the lowest in Europe. We escaped the Industrial Revolution and half of our population reside in rural areas. These are matters in our favour. We have been allowed to retain very much of the natural beauty and rich scenic heritage of our country but that rich heritage is now under attack and is being whittled away.
Now is the time to act. Wildlife is under serious attack. The natural habitat of the bird life of the country is being eroded. Some of the Departments of State are responsible in this regard. I refer, in particular, to the Department of Lands in regard to the work they have been doing in drainage, work that is excellent in its own way, but at the same time the Department should make every effort to retain the natural habitat of the bird life of the country. There is a growing incidence of the use of pesticides and insecticides which constitutes a serious threat to our health in so far as it affects our food. I understand that the Food Advisory Committee are concerned about this matter and that there is evidence of growing danger of organochlorine residues in food. This is a matter which must be tackled so that we may maintain our prestige as users of good, pure and natural foods.
River pollution is becoming a very serious problem. When referring to this matter, I would have adverted to the problem as it affects this city but, no doubt, Deputy Luke Belton will deal adequately with the situation in so far as the city is concerned. Many of the rivers in this city have become seriously polluted. They have become stagnant cesspools, but this situation is not peculiar to the city because many of the rivers throughout the country are being affected also by the discharge of untreated sewage. It is known that the air in this city is twice as dirty as the air in London despite the fact that we escaped the Industrial Revolution.
These, then, are some of the matters one would wish to put before the House in the time available. We must have regard to that very eminent man, Mr. Steward Lee Udall of the United States, who, after an examination of the situation in this country, said that Ireland is moving into a dangerous era, an era in which she is attracting industries which can contribute a classical pattern of pollution and despoliation of the countryside. We should have regard to the comments of that gentleman because he has observed what has happened in his own country. I am grateful to Deputy Belton for having afforded me some of the precious time available to him for discussion of this important matter.
Some months have elapsed since this motion was tabled but, due to nobody's fault in particular, it is only now that it is before the House for discussion. In introducing the motion I referred to the condition of the River Tolka and the dreadful stench which the people who lived in the vicinity of the Tolka had to tolerate. I addressed questions to the then Minister for Local Government as far back as 1969. He disclaimed all responsibility for this and said it was entirely a matter for the local authority. When I raised the matter with the local authority, the sanitary section of Dublin Corporation, they said there was no need to worry, that there was nothing seriously wrong with the River Tolka, that the stench was merely due to the fine weather and the low level of the river and it would disappear with the rise in the level of the river.
When I contacted the medical officer of health he had a different story. He informed me that for many years he was fully aware of the dreadful state of the River Tolka, that raw sewage was flowing into this river, and that effluent from a slaughterhouse in the vicinity of the river was also going into it.
Dublin Corporation also informed me that they had considerable difficulty in exercising whatever power they had, that many of the laws which existed in regard to pollution were archaic, and that it was very difficult to bring prosecutions and to secure a conviction. Another difficulty to which they pointed was that no Minister had any direct responsibility for this matter. While it might be primarily the duty of the Minister for Local Government, it also involved the Minister for Lands and the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries and, of course, anything concerning money must involve the Minister for Finance. A section of a very old Act provided that the Minister for Local Government could not act without prior consultation and prior agreement with other Ministers. Therefore, whatever laws were there were outdated and could not be enforced by the local authorities. There is also the consideration that the penalties laid down in this out-of-date legislation were related to the time when the legislation was introduced. A minimal fine of £5 was the normal penalty to be imposed against anyone guilty of a pollution offence. If any industry or factory were to pollute a river today and if a prosecution were to be brought against them, they might find it much more economical to pay the £5 fine than to carry out the reconstruction work necessary for the prevention of pollution.
Deputy Esmonde, who seconded this Bill, referred to our unique position in that, unlike many other countries, our rivers are our own concern and we do not have to worry if any laws we would make to prevent the pollution of a river would affect another country through which that river flowed. I do not know if there is any river flowing both through the northern and southern parts of the country, but certainly it would not affect our legislation to any great extent.
The Deputy also said there were three main ways in which river pollution was occurring: first, by allowing untreated domestic sewage to flow directly into rivers; secondly, from industrial waste from factories; and, thirdly, seepage from dumping in the vicinity of the river, or, in rural areas, agricultural pollution from artificial manures or from large piggeries adjacent to the river, or the seepage from silage. He also posed the question as to what powers were available to the Minister should there be such a disaster as the Torrey Canyon. Would the Minister have powers to deal with this or would the Department of Transport and Power have to intervene? Or, if this happened down along the Wexford coast, for instance, would it be the responsibility of the local authority?
Deputy O'Connell referred to the effect pollution was having on our tourist industry. If ever our tourist industry was in need of being protected, surely it is the present time. We need all the encouragement we can possibly get to try to build up our tourist industry, because, due to circumstances outside our control, it has been very seriously affected and is likely to be still further affected.
At the moment we can boast of one thing as regards pollution, that we suffer less than most other countries, that our rivers are purer and clearer than most of them, and that our air is purer. We must do everything possible to preserve those advantages we have.
Deputy Moore said that local authorities had allowed dumping on and adjacent to beaches because it was the cheapest method of dumping. It is a reflection on our local authorities that, just because it was the cheapest form of dumping, and regardless of the consequences they had allowed it to continue. He stated that the Thames had been in a far worse condition than ever the Liffey was but that the Thames was now clear of pollution. He exhorted us to tackle the Liffey problem, and said he regarded pollution as a disease that must be conquered.
Deputy Cruise-O'Brien gave us the benefit of his experience in America. He told us of the conditions in New York which probably suffers more from air pollution than any other city. He said that in America unrestricted free enterprise allows factories to operate without having regard to their effect on the pollution of the air in the cities. In Britain and France certain conditions and regulations are laid down with which factories must comply. Deputy Cruise-O'Brien wondered whether we in Ireland, because of our anxiety to provide factories here, might be inclined to allow the American system to operate rather than the French or British system.
Deputy Dowling, like his colleague, Deputy O'Connell, was worried about the state of the Camac river. He said that the medical Officer of Health for Dublin had stated that this river was not polluted but that, when it was examined, it was found to be very definitely polluted and that fish life was extinct in it. He said that if you were looking for the Camac there was no need to get a map, and this applies to the Liffey too.
Deputy Barry and Deputy Cott referred to pollution in the south of Ireland. Deputy Barry suggested that there should be a Minister for environment. I was at a meeting in Mullingar two or three nights ago and the people there are very worried about the state of Lough Ennell. They also mentioned that Lough Sheelin is heavily polluted and Lough Derravarragh. The problem of pollution is spreading and increasing.
The Parliamentary Secretary told us yesterday that the Minister agreed that there was no major problem and said that he had powers to deal with the present situation. He was hoping that we would not press this motion too hard. Deputy de Valera was in favour of getting pollution under control but he was worried about having too many laws on the Statute Book and none of them enforced, as is the case in regard to road traffic legislation. The idea behind this motion was to restrict the number of laws on the Statute Book and, instead of having several archaic measures, and several different Ministers responsible, that the whole question should be put under the control of one Minister. We also wanted to awaken public opinion to the dangers of pollution.
I do not know whether the Minister is fully satisfied that he has ample powers to deal with the present situation. We will not press this motion unduly if the Minister will guarantee that he will utilise fully the powers available to him and, as Deputy Treacy said, that he will not hesitate to allocate the necessary money to the different bodies dealing with it. The Minister told us that he hoped to have a report from the commission he had set up by autumn but, according to the Parliamentary Secretary, that report is still not available.
The Minister should utilise whatever powers he has. He should allocate the necessary money to the people who are inquiring into this problem. If he finds that he lacks any powers he should not hesitate to acknowledge that. He should seek all the powers he needs to deal with the problem as effectively and expeditiously as possible.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.