asked the Minister for Industry and Energy if he is aware of recent reports concerning the nuclear plant at Windscale indicating that that plant is among the dirtiest of all nuclear plants; and if he has considered the implications of such a situation for the Irish Sea and for this country.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Nuclear Plants.
8.
I have assumed that the Deputy is referring to a report of March 1982 entitled "The Impact of Nuclear Waste Disposals to the Marine Environment" compiled by the Political Ecology Research Group, UK for the environmental organisation, Greenpeace, UK.
I am aware of this report and of related articles in Irish newspapers of 5 and 14 April.
I assure the Deputy that the situation regarding the Windscale fuel reprocessing plant and the radioactivity levels in the Irish Sea arising from the discharge of low level liquid radioactive wastes from Windscale is kept under continuous review.
Discharges of effluents to the Irish Sea are controlled by authorisations issued by the relevant UK authorities that such doses are well within the limits recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection and the standards established by directive of the European Community. The UK authorities undertake extensive monitoring programmes to ensure that their authorisations are observed and that no public hazards arise.
The Nuclear Energy Board in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries undertake an on-going monitoring programme which includes the sampling and analysis of fish and seaweed samples. The board have advised me that it is clear from the resultant radioactivity data that doses to people living in Ireland due to the activity levels of the Irish Sea are extremely small and do not constitute a radiological hazard.
May I ask the Minister three questions? First of all, has he personally seen these very authoritative reports and, if so, what is his comment in relation to the allegation that Windscale is now amongst the dirtiest nuclear plants anywhere in the world? In that light, how does he consider it acceptable in relation to its implications for this part of the world? Secondly, is the Minister aware that allegedly there has been a continuous uncontrolled leakage of contaminated water from this plant over the last number of years. Does he believe that that standard is acceptable to Irish people and indeed to the fishermen who fish in those waters? Thirdly, can the Minister be as precise as possible about the nature of the constant monitoring and constant review to which he refers? Am I to assume that the fairly bland and complacent assurances he has given this House are based on some kind of a hand-out from his counterpart across the water? I want to know on what the Minister bases——
It is not based on what the Deputy suggests anyway. What was the second part of the Deputy's question?
How can the Minister say that if he has to ask me what I have just asked him?
Would the Deputy await the replies to his supplementaries?
The specialists in this area under my Department are the Nuclear Energy Board. I am aware of the reports the Deputy mentions; I have read them. But I must say also that I would question the people to whom the reports are attributed; the Nuclear Energy Board would question their expertise in this area, who they are, what is their professional situation in relation to radioactive waste. The Nuclear Energy Board, who are the specialists in this situation, are quite satisfied — from what I have already read out to the House — that the activity levels in the Irish Sea are extremely small and do not constitute a radiological hazard.
Would the Minister be good enough to answer the second part of the question in relation to the allegation of a continuous uncontrolled leakage at the plant?
The information on that is covered by the report to me by the Nuclear Energy Board, that is, that they do not constitute a radiological hazard and they are the people with the expertise in this area under my Department. If the Deputy has any information he thinks is new on this scene I shall be glad to accept it from him, have it totally investigated by the Nuclear Energy Board and will give him an answer.
But the Minister has not answered the question.
I have.
Has the Minister carried out investigations into the repeated and widely reported allegation that there has been a continuous and uncontrolled leakage of radioactive type material from this plant?
The Nuclear Energy Board are satisfied that the conditions in the Irish Sea are as I have already stated.
That has nothing to do with it. Would the Minister answer the question?
If there is any further information Deputies require on this subject——
The Minister is avoiding a very important question. There either is or is not evidence of uncontrolled leakages. The Minister is seeking to avoid this by making a value judgment as to whether these constitute a radiological hazard. That is not the question. Are there or are there not, have there or have there not been uncontrolled leakages?
The question down to me asks if the plant is among the dirtiest of all nuclear plants, arising out of a report, and if I have considered the implications of such a situation for the Irish Sea and for this country.
That is not the supplementary question I asked.
The Nuclear Energy Board have investigated the matter fully in relation to all the allegations referred to, leakages and others, and are satisfied that no hazard of the extent to which the Deputy refers has taken place.
(Interruptions.)
Question No. 9.
May I finally ask the Minister——
The Deputy started off with four supplementaries.
May I ask a final question.
No. We are on to Question No. 9.
On a point of order, may I ask if you would allow one final question?
That is not a point of order. I have called the next question.
Will you facilitate me?
I would like to facilitate the Deputy, but could he not raise this in another way?
On a genuine point of order, would you be good enough to consider my request to raise this matter on the Adjournment because I feel this is an extremely important matter and the Minister has evaded the central question.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
9.
asked the Minister for Industry and Energy if there have been any discussions with Britain on the proposed construction of nuclear plants in Anglesey and Windscale, both of which are within 100 miles of the Irish coast.
According to my information a nuclear plant has been in commercial operation at Wylfa on the island of Anglesey for some ten years. I am not aware of any proposal to construct a further plant on that island.
With regard to the second part of the question, I assume the Deputy is referring to a proposal to extend existing reprocessing facilities at Windscale by the construction of an additional plant. This proposal was the subject of a public inquiry in 1977 which was attended by an officer of the Nuclear Energy Board. The discharge of radioactive substances from the Windscale plant is subject to regulations which conform to international radiation protection standards. The Nuclear Energy Board maintain close liaison with the UK nuclear regulatory authority which ensures that we are kept fully informed of any developments which are likely to affect radioactivity levels in the Irish Sea.
In relation to the Nuclear Energy Board's monitoring and review, would the Minister be good enough to give us some details of the number of times on which officials from this board have visited Great Britain and particularly the Windscale plant over the last three years?
That is a matter for a separate question. If the Deputy puts it down to me I will be only too glad to give him the information.
Will the Minister reconsider his last answer on the basis that his reply is based almost completely on the matters of his apparent satisfaction with the Nuclear Energy Board's attitude to this issue? I consider it a reasonable supplementary. Would the Minister not agree to answer how precisely the Nuclear Energy Board do their job in this respect?
That is the subject matter for a separate question. If the Deputy wants me to give all the times and all the information that is available from the various discussions that take place, he should put down a question and I will be only too glad to supply the information.
Is the Minister not perturbed that there are proposals to construct two nuclear plants in Anglesey and at Windscale? Will his Department now enter into direct negotiations with his counterpart's Department in England in order that he and the country can be assured that there can be no danger from nuclear contamination or leaks to this country?
As I have already stated, I am not aware of an additional plant being built at Wylfa on the island of Anglesey. There is one there for ten years and I have no information on an additional plant to be built there. I have information on an extension of the facilities at the Windscale plant and I presume that is what the whole question was referring to in the first instance. We are all concerned about the possible danger to fishermen in the Irish Sea in relation to the pollution of the waters. I have been pressing this matter with the Nuclear Energy Board because I have read the reports which were the basis for the Deputy's question in the first instance. The Deputy and every other Member of the House can be assured that we are very concerned to ensure that the necessary regulations are being adhered to and that no damage is being done.
Will the Minister indicate on how many occasions he has met the Nuclear Energy Board and how many occasions he has directly written to them or sought information from them?
That is a matter for a separate question and if the Deputy wants to put it down he will get the answer.
Did the officer of the Nuclear Energy Board who attended the inquiry to which the Minister referred in his reply attend it merely as an observer or did he participate in the proceedings of the inquiry?
It is not clear from the information available to me if he attended to participate in the proceedings. I will have that matter investigated and I will communicate the information to the Deputy.