Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 24 Oct 1989

Vol. 392 No. 1

Adjournment Debate. - Smoke Control Regulations.

Tomás Mac Giolla

I hope the Ceann Comhairle will note I have lost a couple of minutes already. The fact that the Ceann Comhairle gave me permission to raise this matter on the Adjournment is an indication of the importance which he attaches, and which we must all attach, to the need for smoke control in the city of Dublin. There is no need to go into detail on that matter because we discussed it at length last year. Smoke emission in Dublin was five times greater than the EC limit and on one occasion last year it was seven times greater.

There is a lot of confusion regarding this matter. Nobody knows the position. The people in Ballyfermot do not know what in God's name is happening. An Act was passed in September 1987 and the corporation moved into action. They designated Zone A for survey this time two years ago. The survey was carried out in the winter of that year. The corporation issued their first smoke control order in March 1988 and designated the fuels which were to be used. CDL then lodged an objection and an oral hearing took place in June 1988. The report was issued to the Minister in September 1988 and the Minister issued the order in October 1988. In issuing that order for Zone A the Minister added one fuel and one appliance. He added peat briquettes as an extra fuel which was not included by the corporation and he also added the full burning fire as a legitimate appliance. At the same time he issued the list of grants which were to be given and gave six months for Zone A to comply with this order. In other words, by 31 May 1989 we should have had Dublin's and Ireland's first smoke control zone.

In the meantime Eolas carried out a survey on the full burning fire and shot it down. Instead of the Minister making a decision in regard to the full burning fire, he postponed the date for implementation of the order from 31 May to 30 September. He then had the whole summer to make a decision on the matter but he did not do so. In early October he again postponed the date to 31 December. In the meantime Dublin Corporation were proceeding with their orders for Zone B. They issued a confirmation order for Zone B last February. Again CDL made an objection and again there was an oral hearing. That matter has been with the Minister for over a month and he is now in a position to make an order in regard to Zone B.

The corporation have also issued an order in relation to Zone C, concerning 3,000 houses. There was no objection by CDL to that and therefore the Minister is now in a position to issue an order for that zone. The orders for Zones B and C should now be issued and the Minister should also make a decision in regard to the full burning fire.

Dublin Corporation have also included the final part of Ballyfermot and Chapelizod in Zone D. I am not quite certain, perhaps, the Minister of State can clarify this for me, but I think an objection has been lodged against it and the county council have issued an order covering Neilstown while the corporation are proceeding with orders covering Crumlin, Drimnagh, Walkinstown, Inchicore and other areas. However, the Minister has fallen way behind and has made no decision yet in respect of the first 840 houses. In the meantime the price of coalite, the only smokeless fuel available on the market, has jumped in price. It is now 40 per cent dearer than coal and it was only 16 per cent dearer initially. The Minister was shocked by this price increase and said he was going to ask his colleague, the Minister for Industry and Commerce who has just left the Chamber, to initiate an urgent investigation into the disturbing differential in the price of coalite and smokeless fuel. I ask the Minister of State to tell us tonight if her colleague, the Minister for Industry and Commerce has done anything about this huge increase in the price of coalite which now costs £10.70 a bag as against a price of £7.60 for a bag of coal.

I ask the Minister of State to tell us what is meant by this increase in the price of coal. The Minister's solution is to increase the price of coal so that people will not be able to buy it and will end up having to buy coalite. The cost of coal and coalite is way too high at present. The Minister should look at the price of coal landed in the docks in Dublin and then look at the price being charged in Ballyfermot and other parts of the city and throughout the country. There should be a reduction in the price of coal, not an increase.

What is required by at least 200 householders out of the 840 is a solid fuel option they can offord. They do not want big gas or ESB bills. They want to be able to use solid fuel. The Minister of State must tell us how she is going to make this option available to these people at a price they can afford. They want a smoke free zone. They cannot afford it and the Minister must provide them with a solid fuel option.

Mr. Shatter

I thank Deputy Mac Giolla for allowing me to come in on this matter. I also sought to raise it on the Adjournment. All the public relations smog screen in the world cannot conceal the fact that the Government have behaved with complete and gross incompetence in this area. This time last year the Minister on a similar Adjournment Debate, in which I and other colleagues raised this issue, promised there would be a number of additional smoke control zones in Dublin by this winter. However, not one additional smoke control zone has been provided in Dublin. If breathing in Dublin this winter damages people's health responsibility for this will rest with the Government.

I find it inexplicable that the additional orders that Deputy Mac Giolla referred to have not been made. We have invited the Government to bring new legislation before the House so that far broader smoke control orders can be made and no single company, such as CDL, can in effect attempt to prevent the proper operation of the Air Pollution Act to safeguard people's health, but the Minister would not do that. It is interesting to note that the Minister of State Deputy Harney, is here. I congratulate her on her appointment. This is the first time she has come into this House in her capacity as junior Minister on the Environment to deal with an issue. I think she has been handed a smoking chalice by her senior colleague. It is notable that it is not her senior colleague, Deputy Flynn, Minister for the Environment, who is here this evening because it is he who has to make these orders under the statutory provisions, not Deputy Harney. Why do we not have Deputy Flynn explaining this incompetence and negligence to this House this evening?

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us give the Deputies their appropriate titles please, Minister or Minister of State.

Mr. Shatter

Why did the Minister for the Environment send the Minister of State here this evening to try to cover up his ineptitude in providing protection for the people of Dublin against the smog that will surely descend on them within the next three to four weeks? The Minister of State should indicate when new smoke control area orders will be made and why the Minister for the Environment is not agreeable to amending the Air Pollution Act so that it is more effective in its operation. The Minister should tell us if she will provide fuel vouchers of increased value to enable the people of Ballyfermot and other parts of the city and county of Dublin, such as Neilstown, to acquire the more expensive coalite product and other less smoky fuel products during the coming winter in an effort to reduce the level of smog?

An Ceann Comhairle

The time available to Deputy Shatter is now exhausted.

Mr. Shatter

Finally, may I ask the Minister of State to clarify if it is the Minister of State, the Department of the Environment or the Minister for the Environment who now accepts responsibility in this area and who will bear responsibility for the air pollution that the people of Dublin are going to suffer this winter?

Tomás Mac Giolla

There are two minutes left.

An Ceann Comhairle

No, I must now call on the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Deputy Harney, to reply.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment (Miss Harney)

I welcome this opportunity to respond to the points raised by Deputy Mac Giolla and Deputy Shatter and to explain to the House the background to what is clearly a serious environmental problem, to outline the present position in a proper perspective and to refute absolutely any suggestion of inaction or avoidable delay on the Government's part.

The basic cause of smoke pollution in Dublin is the burning of coal in domestic open fires across the city. It is clearly not a problem which is amenable to instant solutions or a wave of a ministerial wand. Neither is it one that can be solved without the commitment of substantial financial resources. The basis of the Government's remedial strategy is the establishment of smoke control areas in the most seriously affected parts of the city, obliging residents in such areas to change to an acceptable form of home heating. The Air Pollution Act, 1987, established a detailed procedure which must be followed before smoke control orders can be confirmed.

Tomás Mac Giolla

It has been followed in four of them.

Miss Harney

I would be less than candid if I denied that the nature of the objections——

Mr. Byrne

Three thousand houses come onstream tomorrow.

Miss Harney

Would the Deputy listen? I would be less than candid if I denied that the nature of the objections which have been raised in relation to the Ballyfermot orders and the difficulties which have arisen in dealing with these objections have not given rise to very significant delays. I believe the present procedures are unnecessarily lengthy and I am currently looking at ways in which the Act can be amended to eliminate these delays. I am not happy with progress to date. I am very anxious to get the programme of special control areas moving as soon as possible——

Mr. Byrne

Ratify the orders.

Miss Harney

——and I might add in this respect that it was only a couple of days ago that the functions in relation to this matter were delegated to me by the Government. I am also adamant that delays——

Mr. Shatter

Why did the Government not delegate the functions two and a half months ago when the Minister was appointed?

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us hear the Minister out.

Mr. Shatter

The Minister, Deputy Flynn, held on to the power for two months——

An Ceann Comhairle

The time available to the Minister is extremely limited, less than five minutes to reply.

Mr. Shatter

——and did nothing.

An Ceann Comhairle

I appeal to the Deputy's sense of fair play.

Mr. Shatter

I was astonished that Deputy Harney was sabotaged by the Minister for the Environment. It is a very serious matter of public concern.

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Deputy is astonished he should allow the Minister of State to complete her statement without interruption.

Miss Harney

I might remind Deputy Shatter that, unlike many previous Ministers of State in my Department, no other junior Minister has been delegated responsibilities similar to the ones delegated to me.

I am adamant that the delays have not been of our making and that there has been no inaction on the part of the Government or indeed local authorities. Far from it.

Tomás Mac Giolla

What about Zone A?

Miss Harney

If the Deputies will listen they will hear. Let me remind the House of the basic developments to date with regard to Ballyfermot. The Minister for the Environment confirmed the area A order with modifications in November 1988. The main modification in effect permitted the continued use of bituminous coal in conjunction with an appliance known as the full burning fire. However, having regard to issues which arose in that hearing, the Minister was concerned to obtain comprehensive, independent evidence regarding the smoke emission characteristics of fuels and appliances available in Dublin. Accordingly, in November 1988, the Minister commissioned EOLAS to conduct an intensive test programme for such fuels and appliances, including the full burning fire, and to recommend practicable criteria for determining the suitability of fuels and appliances for general use in smoke control areas. It was made clear that further confirmation of special control areas would have to await this report.

A Ballyfermot area B order was made in December 1988; an area C order in March 1989, and a final Ballyfermot area D order on 1 May 1989. In each case, other than for Ballyfermot area C, there were objections to the orders, thereby requiring oral hearings to be held. In addition, the validity of the area B order was challenged in the High Court making it impossible in any event to proceed on foot of this order until a court decision became available in April 1989.

EOLAS submitted an interim report in early May 1989. Given the availability of the report, an oral hearing on area B was held in early June 1989. The test procedures used by EOLAS, the smoke emission performance results obtained and the suitability criteria recommended, together with various other test results, were all the subject of lengthy and complex technical argument over the eight day hearing, with expert witnesses present from the UK, Federal Republic of Germany and New Zealand. The inspector's report and recommendations on the hearing were submitted to my Department on 21 September 1989 and are currently being considered by me.

It must be understood that the area B oral hearing was in the nature of a test case addressing certain basic issues which, once resolved, should allow rapid progress with the special control area programme. I confidently expect to be in a position to confirm the Ballyfermot area B and C orders within a matter of days, bringing a total of over 5,000 houses within smoke control zones. The way will then be cleared, as an objection has been raised, for the necessary oral hearing in relation to Ballyfermot D at an early date.

Tomás Mac Giolla

What about Zone A?

An Ceann Comhairle

I am sorry to interrupt the Minister of State but the time has come to adjourn the debate, and indeed the House.

Miss Harney

May I finish, please? As regards the general problem of smoke pollution, I believe that we must speedily put together a more effective programme of action designed, as a minimum, to reduce smoke levels below the maximum set by the EC Directive. I believe that we should, in fact, aim to achieve far more than that. We should aim, in effect, to make Dublin a smokeless zone. There is, of course, no accepted legal definition of such a zone but I think that we could take such a zone to be one where the very stringent EC guide values are consistently complied with.

Tomás Mac Giolla

Zone A is being left in limbo.

Miss Harney

I will be working actively over the months ahead to implement strategies designed to achieve this objective.

Tomás Mac Giolla

What about Zone A?

Miss Harney

I have recently made proposals to the Government which are currently being considered to deal with this problem in the short term with a view to reducing smoke pollution in Dublin. I hope to be in a position in a matter of weeks to make some announcements in this regard.

Tomás Mac Giolla

What about Zone A? It is a disgrace.

The Dáil adjourned at 9 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 25 October 1989.