Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 4 Feb 1997

Vol. 474 No. 3

Litter Pollution Bill, 1996: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Mr. Ring

I welcome this Bill. Many people in County Mayo were annoyed last summer when they read letters in the Irish Independent and The Irish Times by somebody from Dublin who had visited the county and saw that rubbish bins had not been emptied. Mayo County Council has made every effort over the years to keep beaches and towns as tidy as possible. I had intended to respond to that person at the time but I let it go. However, that person was not critical of the people who left litter on these beaches. Some of them came from other parts of the country, and not all from County Mayo.

I am annoyed by people who go to the beach for the day, particularly with young children, and change napkins, which council workmen have to go out next day to pick up. Why will these people not bring a bag to dispose of them when they go home through the refuse service provided in their area? I cannot understand why that cannot be done and why they expect Mayo County Council to clean up these beautiful beaches after them. The council does not destroy these beaches; it is the people using them.

The council is preparing a draft action plan to deal with litter and hopes to work with the business community, schools and voluntary organisations to try to get this plan up and running. I congratulate Mid-West radio, particularly Mr. Paul Claffey who has a mid-morning programme. For many months last summer, he sent roving reporters throughout the county to check on the dumping of litter and bags. His investigators went through these bags until they got the name or names of people who might have been foolish enough to leave a reference by which they could be traced. It worked well and on many occasions these people had to come back in the middle of the night to collect these bags and dump them. He created awareness and sparked discussion in the county on dumping. There is no need for people to be dumping black bags and washing machines because in most areas a good refuse service is provided by the council or private sources. This Bill will be a waste of time if people caught dumping cannot be brought before the courts and prosecuted. On-the-spot fines should be provided for in legislation for those who are caught. The media has a part to play in this. It must be highlighted locally and nationally.

There are dog wardens in the county and when that system was introduced people said it would not work. This Bill will not work if each county does not have a litter warden and if councils are not prepared to provide money to pay them. They must be able to issue fines, bring people before the courts and prosecute them. It must be simplified and I hope the media will help with this.

Every county should set up a similar plan to that in County Mayo. The Bill states that people living within the 30 mile per hour zone in towns and villages have to clean the streets and roads outside their homes. Every Sunday a priest in my area says that if everybody swept outside their own doors, there would be no problems. However, that does not happen. The council has a part to play and so does the business community.

One group of people has upset me for many years because of the late hourse they keep their shops open and the litter they create around their premises. They get away with murder and it is time legislation was introduced to control their opening hours and to make them clean up outside their places of business. I am talking about take-away restaurants whose owners make a lot of money. Some of those in our town stay open until almost 5 a.m. and people are unable to get a decent night's sleep but that is another issue. No Government has had the courage to take on this group and to stipulate that they should close by 2 a.m., they are allowed to stay open almost until morning if there are people looking for food, and they are allowed to throw their rubbish where they want. Take-aways should be required by law to have a litter warden in the shop who will clean the street outside after the shop closes. People going to Mass on Sunday mornings can see that these places are a disgrace.

Who has to clean up after them? The councils must provide the staff and do the job. We hear people talking about doctors and surgeons but probably the worst paid people in the State are council workers. Many of them would be better off on social welfare but they want to work. They have raised good families while working hard for the councils over the years, cleaning the streets and collecting refuse. They must be complemented for doing an excellent job under terrible circumstances. I have been in local politics since 1979 and at public meetings I have never let anyone criticise our council workmen. They are badly paid and do a tough job. When looking for litter wardens under this Bill perhaps we should consider giving council staff an opportunity to take these jobs, because they have gained experience from the service they have given to the councils. The councils should provide at least one litter warden per county. While one may not be enough at least it would be a start.

A man who called himself the "Gumbuster" was cleaning up chewing gum in Dublin recently. I hope he becomes a millionaire because he was the first man I have seen doing this. I challenge Members of the House to walk more than five yards down a street in Dublin without seeing chewing gum on the footpath. This is a terrible habit. Why do people not put their gum into a piece of paper and throw it in the bin instead of spitting it on the street? Legislation should be introduced to prosecute people who are caught doing that. I compliment this man on seeing a niche in the market and setting up his own business. I hope every local authority will give him some work because he deserves to be rewarded for his initiative. Perhaps the Department of the Environment would notify local authorities about this man so that he can employ a few people.

The councils also must play a part by providing more litter bins and collecting refuse more often. This will cost money but, in general, people are prepared to pay for a service to collect their rubbish. Private businesses are also willing to invest but they find that while the council is prepared to take on the easier urban business, it expects private companies to go to rural areas. That should not be the case, there should be a mix. County councils should make a deal with private businesses so that they can make a livelihood.

I hope that every council does the same as Mayo County Council and draws up a plan to educate young people about litter. On the way from Mayo this morning I was driving behind an articulated lorry. Every two minutes the driver was throwing out orange peels and apple cores and hitting my car. I signalled to him when I overtook him but I will not tell the House what kind of signal he gave me in response. People must be educated to bring their rubbish home. Why should this man throw it away when he knows someone else has to pick it up?

When travelling to Dublin I also observe many dead animals that have been hit by cars or lorries. If I see one when I travel up on Tuesday it is usually still there when I go home on Thursday or Friday. County councils will have to employ litter wardens so that these animals will not be left to rot for a week.

I hope every council educates young people in school about litter. Pupils now have civics classes and they are probably more civic-minded that older people — we did not get such training when we went to school. We should set up competitions to make them aware of the environment. In the next few months Mayo County Council will have writing competitions in which young people will be involved and prizes awarded. If young people talk and think about litter they will think twice before throwing it away in towns or at the seaside.

I welcome the Bill. The most important provision is the one making each council appoint a litter warden. If that does not happen the Bill will fail and we will have wasted our time. The Bill must have some teeth and allow councils to impose on-the-spot fines and bring people to court. The public must know we will no longer tolerate people dumping litter in towns or at the seaside. During the summer months people come into Westport and, when the litter bin is full, they will take their rubbish from the boot of the car and leave it on the street.

People should be more conscious of the environment and not dump rubbish where they like. We have the best county in the world with one of the most beautiful environments, if people would only treat it properly. Litter does not find its own way onto the street, people dump it there. Local authorities are providing litter bins, refuse services and tipheads. Why do people destroy our countryside and beaches or throw chewing gum on the street? I cannot understand it. We must put proper legislation in place and indicate that we will not tolerate this any longer and if people are caught they will be prosecuted. We need more people like Mr. Paul Claffey and the media should highlight the matter.

All last summer there was a major debate in Mayo about people dumping rubbish throughout the county. That campaign was successful and after a few weeks the litter problem died away because people knew they were being watched. If someone knows that his name or initials will be read out over the airwaves for dumping rubbish, he will not do it again.

Mr. Browne

(Wexford): Having spent some time in the environmental section of the Department of the Environment I welcome the Bill, although it is high on aspirations and intentions and does not have the teeth that it needs in order to deal with the litter problem. It is frightening that we spend £25 million annually to clean up Ireland yet most Irish people dump litter. We are wasting money cleaning up the country while people are indiscriminately throwing litter on our highways and byways. Despite many years of campaigning by the Department of the Environment and by local authorities we seem to have learned no lessons. When I was in the Department of the Environment, up to £500,000 was being spent on litter campaigns. The Minister for the Environment, Deputy Howlin, has been involved in such campaigns over the past couple of years, but they have had no major effect. We are still polluting our beautiful country with litter at an alarming rate.

What tactics should be adopted in the future to get the message through to people? It might be a better idea to give local authorities more money to deal with the problem on a county by county basis. Most local authorities have an environmental section to deal with these issues and organise clean-up weeks. Every year Wexford has a "clean up Wexford week", a "keep Wexford beautiful" campaign, and educational projects in the schools. Every other county has similar projects. They go part of the way to getting the message across, particularly to young people. Most people agree that trying to change 40 or 50 year olds is a waste of time. We should go to the schools and get the message across to people at an early age. Then they will grow up respecting the countryside, their towns, their streets and their homes. If we do that we will eventually become a litter free country. There must me something seriously wrong in the Department of the Environment and in the local authorities, and we are not dealing properly with the problem, if having spent £25 million in one year to clean up litter the problem is just as bad the following year.

The Bill mentions that local authorities will have power to require owner occupiers of any property to take immediate action to remedy littering or to take specified precautionary measures. It mentions appointing extra litter wardens and involving the Garda Síochána. The Garda Síochána are under pressure in dealing with crime, vandalism, etc. To expect them to deal with litter as well is a bit much. To enable them to get on with the work of protecting people from crime, vandalism, murder, etc., many of their minor duties, for example, collecting fines and checking up on dog licences, should be handed over to local authorities.

The local authorities find it difficult to deal in a major way with the environment because of lack of funds. The Minister spoke of having a litter warden in every local authority area, but if this is to be done he will have to make funds available because most local authorities are strapped for cash and are not in a position to appoint litter wardens. Perhaps when a substantial number of fines have been collected by the local authorities the litter warden will become self-financing. Instead of spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on the type of campaign we have pursued in the past, the Minister should seriously consider allocating the money to each local authority on a one-off basis to pay a litter warden for the first year, after which it would be the role of the local authority to finance him or her.

The litter problem is caused by people. It is of major concern that people in Ireland do not seem to be able to adopt a policy like that of other countries and take litter home with them or dispose of it in litter bins or containers provided by local authorities, shops and public bodies. For some reason best known to themselves, they throw chip bags, crisp bags, cigarette butts, matchboxes, cigarette boxes, etc. on the streets, and have no thought for the concerns of tourism bodies who are trying to encourage people to visit this country. There is no doubt that it has an impact. Surveys by Bord Fáilte, by the business associations and others indicate clearly that the greatest criticism of this country by tourists, probably the only real criticism, relates to the littering of our streets. We should deal with this problem.

We are developing as a tourism nation and only beginning to attract tourists. We were very much dependent on farming and other areas of industry but, as those move into decline, there is tremendous potential for growth in tourism. In fairness to the private and public sectors and successive Governments, they have made major funds available to develop tourism. In every corner there are new developments that extend our tourism season into the winter and spring, and we must deal with the litter problem if we are to encourage more and more tourists to visit this island. We have all of the glories that tourists look for — a green country, clean seas, nice cities and many places that people can visit. However, there is concern about litter on the streets of our cities, towns and villages.

I will certainly support the Minister of State, Deputy McManus, in any efforts she makes to deal with this problem. It is not an easy problem to deal with, because of the major cost. Wexford County Council recently had a review of the waste management plan for County Wexford. An executive summary was prepared by Fehily, Timoney, Weston of Cork, and the cost to Wexford County Council of implementing Government policy on waste management over the next five years is frightening. It will take major expenditure by the council and, at the end of the day, it is the taxpayer who will have to pay. Therefore, it is incumbent on all of us to minimise litter and waste and to deal with it effectively and in a way that will not impose major costs on the public. The public has a major role to play and must accept its responsibility for dealing with this matter. If people do not accept responsibility for the disposal of waste they will have to pay the local authorities through the nose to deal with the problem.

Every contributor has mentioned the problems caused by take-aways. There is no doubt that chip shops in Dublin and provincial towns, such as Enniscorthy, cause major problems. They sell their product after discos on Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights and the streets are littered with chip bags, chicken boxes and so on the next morning. The onus must be placed on such people who make large amounts of money. The majority of take-away owners exploit young people by charging them the highest possible price for a burger and chips. They make money hand over fist but they will not accept any responsibility for dealing with the litter problem outside their doors.

There is a number of chip shops near the church in Enniscorthy and on a Sunday morning Cathedral Street, the market square, Slaney Street and Temple Shannon are a disgrace. They are polluted by plastic bags, chip wrappers and so on. Criticism is levelled at the local authority for not cleaning the streets on Sunday mornings and making them beautiful for people coming into the town. I do not see why the local authorities should have to pick up the tab for that. A compulsory charge should be levied on such outlets to pay the local authority to clean up the litter on Saturdays and Sundays, which are not their normal working days. Alternatively, the onus should be on take-away owners to clean it up.

This situation cannot be allowed to continue. It is not just the case in Enniscorthy — the streets of every town are littered on Sunday mornings because the owners of take-aways do not accept responsibility. Most take-away owners do not even provide an adequate bin to encourage people to dispose of their litter.

I ask the Minister of State to deal as toughly as she can with these people under the Bill. I know that legislation must be fair and equitable. However, these people cause major problems at weekends. They make vast amounts of money and should be made to pay for cleaning up the litter they cause, particularly at weekends.

The principle of "the polluter pays" was adopted by the EU some time ago. If take-away owners are not prepared to deal with the problem they should have to make funds available to local authorities to deal with it. We cannot allow our towns and cities to be polluted and then expect tourists to spend money here when they see such filth and dirt in our towns.

I also ask the Minister of State to deal with the supermarket chains which have been getting away with murder for many years. When I was Minister of State at the Department of the Environment I tried to deal with the supermarket bosses. We had a number of meetings to which some of them came reluctantly. It was very difficult to get any commitment from them, particularly the larger chains. One or two of the major supermarket chains were very reluctant to get involved in cleaning up their act and usually sent someone to the meetings who was way down the management line. We were never able to force them to make any major decisions to deal with this problem. If we are going to deal with the problem of supermarkets littering our countryside with plastic bags, all the supermarket chains must be involved.

In the region of one billion plastic bags are distributed every year by supermarkets. Despite their huge pollution potential, very few bags are recycled and most of them end up on council tipheads. They do not decompose in the same way as paper and other material but stay in the ground for hundreds of years.

Litter caused by discarded plastic bags from supermarkets is an even bigger headache. The Minister of State travels from Wicklow on the same road as I do and all along that road one can see supermarket plastic bags in the trees, hedgerows and ditches. They are extremely unsightly.

Some of the supermarket chains tried their best to charge for plastic bags. Feargal Quinn is very involved in the area of recycling and plays a major role in environmental protection. However, if one supermarket chain charges its customers for plastic bags and a rival chain does not, most customers will shop in the other supermarket. If nothing further has happened in that area since early 1994, will the Minister of State try to get all the supermarket chains involved in an environmental protection project to deal with the problem of plastic bags?

There are alternatives to plastic bags such as reusable cotton shopping bags, cardboard boxes and paper bags. I ask the Minister to State to encourage the supermarket chains to change to such alternatives as quickly as possible. Supermarkets control 70 per cent of the domestic shopping market. They have a major role to play and are uniquely positioned to have a major impact on environmental matters, particularly in relation to the plastic bag problem.

I welcome the development on farm plastic recently announced by the Minister. In 1993 I was involved in a pilot project on plastic recycling in the Minister of State's constituency of Wicklow and my constituency of Wexford through the cooperative movement. It was successful but it only took place on a very small scale. We hoped at that time that it would lead to great things. I welcome the fact that the Minister has been involved with the farm organisations to deal with the problem of farm plastic. Up to now, farmers have dumped farm plastic in their haggards or backyards. Eventually, the wind blows it onto the roads where it is a major embarrassment to farmers, farm organisations and rural groups which are trying to keep rural areas clean and tidy.

I welcome the Minister's initiative and I hope farmers and farm organisations will play a major role in developing this project. The litter problem cannot be solved by the Department of the Environment or local authorities on their own but by the public, farm organisations, industry, local authorities and the Department of the Environment working together. There is no way in which the Department of the Environment or local authorities can continue to fund the cleaning up of litter without support from those who are causing the major litter problem.

Mr. J. Mitchell

I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak on the Bill. I hope, when enacted, it will contribute to a significant reduction in our litter problem. I do not believe the absence of law is the problem or that local authorities, as constituted, can be the vehicle to solve this worsening problem. A whole range of laws give local authorities roles and powers but frequently, the same local authorities are the worst offenders under those laws. Some of the worst derelict sites are owned either by local authorities or some other statutory agency, such as a health board. There is a total lack of will and commitment in enforcing the Derelict Sites Act. Notwithstanding the good intentions of the Litter Pollution Bill it will meet the same fate unless we provide for a sea change of attitude among the local authority management and workforce. The city of Dublin has reverted to "dirty Dublin". There had been an improvement in the state of the city five or six years ago but it is dirtier now than I can ever remember.

The shopping centres in the city and suburbs are spotlessly clean compared with the public areas immediately outside. Local authority management, its workforce and the State have failed the electorate. This is not just a problem in the high streets, it is a problem in the suburbs, on roadways, in public parks, walkways along rivers and canals. I am one of many people who walk a great deal. I walk with my wife and friends and we constantly encounter litter in practically every corner of every park, canal and walkway. This is a fairly recent phenomenon in some areas. When we complain to the local authorities they say the problem is caused by a shortage of staff or absenteeism and that their first priority is the bin collection. In other words, in the event of absenteeism or holidays staff is withdrawn from cleaning the streets and asked to do the bin collection because it is absolutely essential.

Has the Minister inquired how many hours per day the bin men in Dublin work? What time do they start work? What time are they supposed to finish work and what time do they actually finish work? Is there productivity? Are we paying for a service we are not getting?

One of the most reliable services in the city is the bin collection service, which usually takes place at the same time each week. Often, the street cleaners arrive and sweep the streets before the bin collection service. Despite repeated representations and telephone calls over the years this still happens. It is something that irritates my wife and my neighbours' wives and all their friends.

There are hundreds of people employed in the cleansing services in Dublin city and in the three administrative county councils. I do not believe we are getting productivity from the service. We are getting a good bin collection service but are we getting eight hours work per day from the workers? Are staff who should be cleaning the streets diverted to the bin collection service?

I am not in favour of privatisation. I have great respect for the public service and many of the traditions of the public service. My fellow constituents throughout Dublin are deeply offended, annoyed and irritated by the litter problem in the city and ultimately they blame the Government.

For many years I was a representative for the Dublin West constituency. We had a by-election in that constituency following the untimely death of our belated colleague, Brian Lenihan senior. I was given the job for my party as director of elections in that constituency which I had left five years previously. I was horrified at the state of the public areas, the streets and open spaces of the housing estates. When canvassing in that area I said if I was living in those estates I would not vote for the Government candidates. In the by-election not only did they not vote for the Government candidates but they did not vote for the established party candidates. A huge percentage of the vote went to non-established independents or parties. I do not blame the people because they are not getting public services of a standard which they rightly expect. They say that if local authorities are not doing their job, ultimately it is a matter for the Government.

One of the reasons no outgoing Government has been returned to power since 1969 is a growing dissatisfaction with Government over certain public services. Many people regard the litter issue as one of the chronic problems in the State and ask what can you expect from "the politicians"— to use that infamous and irritating generic phrase. They feel they will not get results from us, "the politicians". The reality is that despite having Governments of different hues in the past number of years and growing prosperity, there is no parallel improvement in the cleanliness of our streets, parks and open spaces. The public should not expect the litter problem will be completely eliminated after the enactment of the Bill as other measures are also required.

I am not a supporter of privatisation — I greatly respect the public service which is very good at carrying out many functions — but if local authority cleaning departments are not carrying out their functions then consideration must be given to dividing areas and awarding contracts for this work to private companies. One or two contracts may be awarded to cleaning departments but it is important to award the majority of contracts to private companies so that there is some assessment of performance.

We must urgently consider privatising this area as the culture in local authority cleaning departments does not allow for the radical and urgent change demanded by the public. I say this because of the stark contrast between the cleanliness of busy private sector shopping centres and malls and the amount of litter in some public sector areas. If those in the private sector did not keep their areas clean they would lose customers. In a sense, the Government is losing customers because of the appalling inefficiency of the public service in this area.

I have grave reservations about the effectiveness of this legislation if there is not the necessary political will to ensure its enforcement. We do not have to wait for the enactment of the Bill to seek improvements. Ireland is one of the major tourism destinations in Europe yet reference is constantly made to the dirt of many areas. At a meeting last night some of my constituents told me an English person they met at a sports gathering the previous day had stated loudly in front of everyone, "you Irish are a dirty lot". What he said is true, not because the problem is impossible to deal with or we are endemically dirty but rather because we are allowed to be.

In addition to the employment of more street cleaners for eight hours a day, there must be better management and supervision and more litter bins of an appropriate size and design must be provided in all areas. While certain litter bins are appropriate in some areas they may not be appropriate in others. For example, it should be made mandatory for litter bins outside schools to be of a type and design which are not easily vandalised. In the vast majority of cases there are no litter bins on the pavements outside schools and children throw their sweet papers on the ground. The installation of ATM machines outside banks has also contributed to the increase in litter. For security reasons banks install litter bins with small openings so that confidential bank slips cannot be retrieved or set on fire. However, this leads to an increase in the amount of litter outside banks.

The former Minister of State, Deputy Harney, used the powers under the Air Pollution Act to get rid of smog in Dublin. During the 18 months prior to its introduction I asked on the Order of Business every morning when air pollution legislation would be introduced. By cleaning the air in Dublin, Deputy Harney enhanced the lives of many sick people in places such as Ballyfermot which had been very badly affected by pollution. Prior to this many of these people had to leave their homes during the winter and stay with their sons and daughters in other areas. The decisive action taken under the Air Pollution Act has meant they no longer have to do this. I hope this legislation will be fully enforced as the problem of litter can be solved only through determined political will and action.

The Bill proposes the introduction of on-the-spot fines. However, very few of the millions of people who commit offences every week will be prosecuted. We are the greatest in the world at enacting legislation but the worst at implementing it. For example, very little was done about the drug barons before the murder of Veronica Guerin but much action was taken after her death.

I assume the Bill will be debated in committee by the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs, which I have the honour to chair. Without pre-empting any decision of the committee, I very much hope we will have an opportunity to ascertain from local authority managers the reason they cannot keep the streets of our cities clean and whether they believe the Bill will help them in doing this.

Mr. Boylan

I wish to share my time with Deputy Browne.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is satisfactory.

Mr. Boylan

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. I agree with all the points made and am delighted that so many Members have contributed to the debate. I hope the Bill will deal effectively with the serious litter problem, thereby ensuring the protection of our environment. I have no doubt that the Minister of State, Deputy McManus, will be successful in doing this. We have reached the stage where litter pollution is no longer acceptable and the public will support the Minister in her efforts to deal with it. It will take a firm hand and the implementation of legislation to bring people to their senses. Their carelessness is causing these problems which are affecting our environment and the appearance of our country. If we protect the environment the appearance of our country will improve automatically.

We had a problem with water pollution in County Cavan, particularly in Lough Sheelin, but through education and legislation Lough Sheelin has been restored to its former beauty. The fishing in Lough Sheelin last year was as good as it has been for the past 25 years. Environmentalists said Lough Sheelin could not be restored to its former glory but they were wrong. Much of the damage to the lake occurred through ignorance and that is the reason I say it was restored through education and legislation in addition to the efforts of the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry and Teagasc. The problems of pollution were addressed and the lake was restored to its former beauty.

The practice of discarding plastic bags, beer cans, mineral bottles and fast food containers on our streets is unacceptable and must be stopped. Local authorities should not have to pick up the substantial bill for cleaning our towns and villages in the early hours before people go about their daily business or tourists arrive. It is regrettable that this litter is created by young people on Saturday and Sunday nights.

Local authorities are doing a wonderful job in dealing with the problem of litter but the cost factor is unacceptable when there are more important jobs to be done such as the restoration of roads, upgrading our towns or improving footpaths. This cost factor can be reduced substantially if the problem of litter is addressed at source.

The appointment of litter wardens is essential to dealing with this problem. There is a cost factor involved in that wardens would have to be on duty between 12 midnight and 4 a.m. when the majority of litter pollution takes place. If the message goes out that litter wardens are on duty during these hours, people will be more careful about dropping litter in our towns and villages.

A traffic warden, Mary Fay, was appointed in Cavan with successful results. She has tapped me on the shoulder more than once and I have been given my final warning. That lady has done a marvellous job while maintaining a good attitude. Traffic is moving smoothly through Cavan town without the problems of double parking or parking on double yellow lines. The bigger the car the more joy the traffic warden gets from issuing tickets. People in the town now park in designated areas.

If we had more Mary Fays in this country, the problem of litter could be eliminated. People who break the traffic laws should be given one or two warnings which, if ignored, should be followed by on the spot fines. There is no other way to address the problem. It is not good enough simply to give more money to local authorities. That is the wrong attitude. People should be encouraged not to discard litter.

I accept Deputy Browne's point that supermarkets have a role to play in addressing this problem. Plastic is a revolutionary product which has thousands of uses but hedgerows throughout the country are littered with plastic bags. As those bags take years to disintegrate one wonders if their use should be banned.

As a result of afforestation programmes forests are now coming on-stream that are suitable for making wood pulp. Wood pulp can be used to make paper bags — I will not refer to brown paper bags — sufficiently strong to carry items bought in supermarkets. Such bags are environmentally friendly. Unlike plastic bags they will not be blown around by the wind and will disintegrate when wet.

One supermarket — I believe it was Quinns-worth — came up with the novel idea of paying 1p to a charitable organisation every time customers reused plastic bags. That is a step in the right direction although I know people may not always remember to bring their used plastic bags when heading to the supermarket to do their shopping. Rolls of these bags are provided at the check-outs and it is convenient for customers to use them. We must come up with alternatives to the packaging currently being used by shops and supermarkets.

Great efforts are being made by farmers, farming organisations and co-operatives to recycle plastic. A project in County Cavan, which hopefully will soon be grant-aided, recycles silage covers, bale wraps and other types of plastic to make brush and shovel handles. That is a marvel-lous development for which there is a great market. If we are serious about addressing this problem we should encourage people to carry out research on it. Due to their involvement in the REPS farmers are particularly conscious of the problems caused by pollution. They know litter cannot be left lying around their farms. Litter can find its way into rivers and streams and I understand it was the cause of a serious problem in the west two years ago.

Mushroom compost is packaged in hard plastic and problems have arisen in discarding this material which appears to be indestructible. I understand there is a cost factor in removing the plastic from the compost and that is a problem our young scientists and environmentalists should be asked to address. Surely machines could be developed to recycle this material. That would be one way to deal with this problem. Many of those who preach for hours about protecting the environment discard their rubbish along the road or throw it out of their cars when out for a drive. That is no longer acceptable. On a recent walk down Grafton Street I noticed chewing gum all over the street and I am not sure if it can be removed. As it is unhealthy as well as unsightly on our streets, chewing gum should be banned.

Mr. Browne

(Carlow-Kilkenny): Cuirim fáilte roimh an Bille. Tá sé thar am go mbeadh feabhas ar an scéal. Tá an tír seo salach agus is orainn féin atá an milleán agus caithfimid rud éigin a dhéanamh faoi.

Is féidir an milleán a chur ar an gcomhairle chontae, ar an Rialtas nó ar dhreamanna eile ach is sinn féin a chaitheann an bruscar timpeall na háite. Tá áthas orm go bhfuil iarracht á dhéanamh anois deireadh a chur leis an scéal seo.

If cleanliness is next to godliness, this is a very poor nation. A recent survey carried out by the Department which found that 80 per cent of the areas surveyed failed to meet proper litter standards is further proof that we have little respect for cleanliness. While nearly all primary schools encourage pupils to pick up papers and keep their schools tidy, for some strange reason — perhaps it is a form of rebellion — those pupils appear to get satisfaction from throwing litter all over the place when they become teenagers.

Many of our scenic areas are strewn with plastic bags and other forms of litter. This shows a terrible lack of appreciation of nature in this wonderful country. It is amazing that some people go to the bother of putting a plastic bag into the boot of their cars and stop along a scenic route to throw it out. One would imagine that having gone to the bother of putting it in the boot, they would at least go to a dump with it.

I welcome the implementation of on-the-spot fines. It is futile appealing to some individuals to be good citizens. An incredible amount of garbage is thrown around towns on Sunday mornings. As a Celtic breed, we appear to react only to punishment and the imposition of fines is the only way to make people adhere to proper litter standards. Appeals for tidy towns make no difference to some people. I have great sympathy for members of Tidy Towns committees who, with a great sense of pride and much energy and devotion, go out early in the morning to pick up the litter other louts leave behind them. It must be galling for those hard working citizens who take pride in their towns to lose marks in the Tidy Towns Competition because of litter.

Every county council should implement the £25 on-the-spot fine and litter wardens should be appointed. As the money collected in fines will go to the councils, litter wardens will be encouraged to ensure that those littering our streets do not get away with it. However, there is little point in litter wardens walking the streets in the middle of the day when it is at night time that most people commit this offence. Perhaps they should work during social hours. Many young people sit on steps eating packets of crisps and chips and leave the empty packets behind them. They should be hauled over the coals for desecrating our country.

Under the legislation householders will be responsible for litter on the footpaths outside their premises. While it is appropriate that a fine should be imposed on a householder who throws garbage in his or her front garden, a house at the end of a roadway could be the centre of gravity for litter on a windy night. Councils should be careful in applying the penalty to private householders.

I welcome the measures proposed in respect of literature placed on car windscreens. Even though politicians are responsible for much of this literature, it is an insult to have one's photograph thrown on the ground almost immediately after it is placed on a car windscreen.

While there is always a danger that problems will arise during silage times, farmers have made great efforts in the area of pollution control. They have learned the hard way. Shops that sell sweets and ice cream should be obliged to place a garbage bin outside their premises for the wrappers. They should also be obliged to empty those bins.

Mr. Sargent

Tá áthas orm gur feidir liom cúpla rud a rá faoin mBille seo. Nuair a thagann cuairteoirí chun na tíre is é an rud is mó a théann i bhfeidhm orthu ná an méid bruscair a bhíonn caite timpeall. Agus nuair a théann Éireannaigh thar lear is é an rud is mó a théann i bhfeidhm orthu siúd ná a laghad bruscair a bhíonn timpeall.

As publicity or embarrassment have not solved our litter problem, perhaps we should change our approach and examine other ways of dealing with the matter. Some aspects of legislation have not been sufficiently followed through. The Minister of State mentioned that the Irish business against litter campaign had commenced operations. This is important. The campaign has already stressed that litter is polluting both economic and environmental life. I hope this message reaches those who may not think twice about litter but are concerned about other aspects of economic and social life. I also hope they are reminded that this issue has a bearing on all, regardless of whether there is litter outside their houses.

The Minister of State said that litter is not as toxic as other pollutants. While this is true in a chemical sense, it kills animals, and especially marine life, which for many is out of sight and therefore out of mind. For example, occasional events involve the large-scale release of balloons filled with gas. I am sure it does not occur to participants that the deflated balloons have been found in the corpses of whales, turtles and fish.

While I do not wish to be a killjoy, it is important that there be a level of awareness that what is thrown away does not go away; it becomes a problem elsewhere, as in cases of unfortunate animal victims of careless human behaviour. For example, I often notice gulls who have died or suffer badly from the effects of plastic wraps which hold beer cans together and which appear to be discarded in drunken stupors at outdoor drinking binges. Dogs put their heads through them. While many are luckily released, seals are often slowly and painfully strangled by plastic netting or plastic beer wraps.

These aspects of litter need to be more widely publicised because while one may consider litter to be dirty and anti-social, one generally does not consider it to be a life and death issue, which is the case for animals and birds. It probably arises through lack of thought rather than malice on the part of those who do not care what happens to their discarded litter. While this is primarily a matter of publicity, it remains an important issue.

The Minister of State referred to the performance of local authorities as uneven, which is a euphemism for bad in many cases and fair in others. On paper, many local authorities are capable of asserting that they are serious about litter. However, as Members will be aware from their own local authorities, each authority has different sections with different responsibilities for dealing with litter. For example, the environmental services section is responsible for litter wardens. When contacted, these sections will only deal with litter in so far as it relates to prosecution for littering, matters arising in connection with litter wardens or matters for which they are responsible. However, if other questions are raised, for example on litter bins, they will refer them to the roads department which is responsible for the bins but not for the litter wardens.

Unless one is dedicated to the campaign against litter one quickly becomes disheartened with the effort which is required to go from department to department within a local authority, never mind going from one authority to another. Dealing with local authorities becomes a hobby in itself. They are often not organised to address matters of concern in a unified sense.

The use of the Irish language on litter bins by local authorities is another example of where difficulties arise. The word "bruscar" used to be widely featured alongside the word "litter". However, there is a trend for designer litter bins, which often appear like imports from Romanesque English towns, the purpose of which is to generate an appearance of antiquity or grandeur. They often do not have any Irish word, only the word "litter" is appended.

While this is fair enough for those who are only concerned with English or for visitors who are learning English, it is a shame that, in taking pride in our country, we must choose not to take pride in our language. However, if we are trying to generate a sense of self worth and pride the two become intrinsically linked. We ought to be benefiting both our environment and our culture. The Irish language should not be omitted from signs which are displayed in the fight against litter. On the contrary, it would be encouraging for people to note that to be Irish means that one does not drop litter.

The wider question which the Bill should tackle relates not just to ordinary citizens out for a stroll, a drive or a picnic who must bring their litter home with them or find a bin but to the business community. It has developed the practice relatively recently, in Dublin in particular, of leaving large amounts of waste generated by packaging — I realise that is a separate debate — on the streets at early hours. It may be due to be collected during the day but it is unnecessary for traders to leave waste lying outside their premises ready for collection so early. This matter may have to be dealt with by legislation if it cannot be solved another way. The waste takes up space and litters the streets for which, under the legislation, they are ultimately responsible for keeping tidy. The message should be sent to traders that the waste should be left outside perhaps an hour before collection, preferably for recycling but, unfortunately, given that it is so minimal, for land fill disposal.

From the small amount I read, the local authorities' litter plans, which the Minister mentioned, contain little more than platitudes in support of recycling. It might be said that litter has nothing to do with recycling because it is a matter of removing bits of paper and tidying them away. However, the promotion of the reduction of waste, and where that is not possible, reuse or recycling, is part of the education process which must be taken seriously in addition to the enforcement of legislation.

Much time was spent discussing the waste hierarchy when the Waste Management Act went through the House but great opportunities exist to get across the message of segregating waste. At present there are litter bins and the wheelie bin companies are trying to introduce a second bin for recyclable packaging. However, the largest proportion of waste is still organic and compostable. Unfortunately, that is a poor relation in the waste hierarchy as practised in this country. We should be vigilant about this aspect at every opportunity and the Bill is another chance to get it right.

I am disappointed it has been decided that the on the spot fine should continue to be £25. As time has passed and prices have increased due to inflation, there should be a graded facility for fines in accordance with the seriousness of the litter offence. Perhaps the on the spot fine is only meant for paper bags but this matter should be teased out on Committee Stage to ensure we have more meaningful fines and ways of enforcing them.

The voluntary sector in this area, including tidy towns committees, anti-litter groups and subcommittees of chambers of commerce, have been ungratefully passed over too often. The work carried out at local level gets some notice during the Tidy Towns Competition but all too often it is a case of people complaining that the tidy towns group is not doing enough. That is a travesty and, as Deputy Browne said, the people who are not involved in tidy towns groups are generally those who litter. That is not always the case but often people who would not go near a tidy towns group think nothing of causing a mess through littering. I wish to put on record my appreciation of all the tidy towns groups that have battled against the overwhelming bad habits of their neighbours.

In the Fingal area, from Balbriggan to Baldoyle and Howth to Blanchardstown, many people are considering the Bill with great interest and wondering if it will be any more than a well intentioned document. Will it be sufficiently resourced so the people concerned about litter will see some difference? I hope the Department of the Environment, which is now responsible for the Tidy Towns Competition, will engage in much more consultation with the groups on the ground. The Department has a tidy towns section and I ask the Minister to consider making a formal link available, such as an open day for tidy towns groups.

This would enable people to discuss the problems they encountered and their results in the competition. For example, they could discuss why some very good tidy towns groups inexplicably lost marks last year and are so disillusioned that many are asking why they should bother entering the competition because it appears their efforts are not being repaid. I hope the Minister will take the level of disillusionment among the tidy towns groups on board because they are a vital part of the fight against litter. They have done so much and I hope they will not be passed over or taken for granted. Only some groups win but many others make the effort to improve their areas. This must be recognised and I hope the Minister will take it on board.

I hope the Bill will encourage those who produce products that cause litter to face up to their responsibilities. This applies to chewing gum companies which, apparently, are not prepared to help clean up the remnants of old chewing gum, and other companies which make glass bottles but which are not prepared to embrace a deposit system for the bottles. They have a role to play and if they are not prepared to play it voluntarily, the Minister should not be afraid to introduce regulations. That is the purpose of the legislation and if the regulations are not introduced, we are reneging on our responsibility. A voluntary code does not always work and I hope that will be taken on board in relation to litter.

Miss Flaherty

The Minister is anxious to conclude the debate and while Members want to contribute, it is important the Bill is not delayed because it must go through a substantial Committee Stage debate. I will be brief in order to allow my constituency colleague to contribute and the Minister to conclude.

I welcome the Bill which is overdue. Dublin city is thriving at present and looking its best on so many fronts. Huge scale dereliction has been virtually eliminated and there is a tremendous social and cultural buzz. It is a superb tourism destination and there is nothing but praise for Dublin in terms of its vibrancy and development in the last decade. The only negative comment one hears about Dublin is that it still earns the title "dirty Dublin". I welcome the introduction of this Bill. While litter legislation has been on the Statute Book and litter wardens have been working in the Dublin area for a number of years, to pursue a case through the courts is a joke because the level of penalty is ridiculously low. It certainly would not encourage commercial enterprises to change their practice. Litter wardens have been helpful in tackling specific problems but their hands are tied. I hope the passing of this Bill will result in the elimination of litter from the city.

The Irish countryside is the most beautiful in the world but it is marred by pollution. The initiative taken in regard to baling bags is interesting and welcome. Plastic is one of the great blights on the countryside. Under this legislation it will be the duty of local authorities to deal with this matter. I am glad the Department will maintain a monitoring role and will have power to call people to account in the event that certain counties are not maintaining the standard.

I have a great aversion to littered wrecks, many of which are to be seen around the countryside. When I heard of the proposal to recycle baling bags, which are used mostly for storing silage, I hoped that a grant scheme, award scheme or good ideas scheme would be introduced by the Department to help tackle problems such as this which seem to be insoluble. In some parts of the county one cannot travel a mile without spotting a wreck. A specific programme is needed to tackle this problem and I hope local authorities will deal with it in the context of their litter plans. As a member of Dublin Corporation I look forward to the development of a litter plan, which has been under consideration in anticipation of this legislation. There is much that can be done in that regard.

I welcome the fact that much of the responsibility for litter will be on the owners of property. One of my colleagues suggested that bin collection be privatised and that the workers in that area be redeployed as street cleaners. Under best international practice, responsibility for large areas around public entertainment buildings and private buildings is on the owners of those buildings. Dáil Éireann is noted for providing opportunities to travel, and one city that struck me as remarkable for its cleanliness is Vancouver which I visited in the last year. I was taken aback by the high standard of cleanliness there.

Anybody who has to keep a house tidy — my husband is a cleanliness fanatic and I am sure Deputy Ahern shares regularly in the household chores — knows the effort that goes into that job. Litter is created even in the best run cities and I welcome the requirement in the Bill that people who provide a service to the public, such as shop owners and flat owners, must factor in the cost of maintaining the premises and surrounding area. In Vancouver, people are to be seen outside each premises at night washing the paving and cleaning the area around their premises so that the city is spotless the next morning. I hope the extra powers and increased penalties in the Bill will make it possible for us to tackle the problem of litter as we approach the millennium.

People who have canvassed as regularly as I have in the past 16 years will have been struck by the fact that estates, even in the most deprived communities, which were once littered, have been greatly transformed by the work of ordinary people who sometimes take over the work of local authorities and work in co-operation with them to give their area a facelift. They cut hedges, plant flowers, shrubs and so on. My constituency has won many prizes in the tidy district competition. I am not clapping my constituents on the back but indicating that there is much goodwill towards the aims of this Bill. It is important that politicians, locally and nationally, support this work and ensure that local authorities do their job. This Bill is a sign that the State is doing its job.

I warmly welcome the new powers and requirements for local authorities and the increased fines. I would like to see continuing creative interest by the Department of the Environment in this matter. I am not sure what section will implement this legislation or if there are people specialised in this area, but active monitoring and supervision of its implementation will be necessary. As with Operation Freeflow, there is public desire to have a clean city and countryside. I would like the Minister to tell the House what structures have been put in place in the Department to implement and monitor the legislation.

There are other related issues such as recycling, which is still in its infancy. I hope this Bill is only part of a fundamental rethink on the elimination of litter and preservation of the environment with the limited resources available.

I warmly welcome the legislation. I hope it is implemented in the year ahead and that it results in a dramatic change in the city of Dublin, crowning its current glory.

Mr. N. Ahern

This is good legislation which I am sure will be passed by the House, but will it be enforced? To enforce any legislation we must ensure that the necessary resources are put in place. Neither good intentions nor PR is enough. Much more is required to ensure this legislation is enforced. I am sure the Minister will say we need to put a framework in place and it is another matter to enforce the legislation. There has been too much anti-litter advertising and PR and not enough law enforcement. There has been too much carrot and too little stick. As in any walk of life, when the balance is wrong measures will not work.

I do not know if the elaborate anti-litter campaign last year did any good. I am sure the advertising agencies did well out of it. It may have helped to set the scene for the introduction of this legislation. The theory may be to run a campaign, introduce the legislation and then enforce it. If the legislation is not enforced, this will amount to little more than the Minister spending money on a PR campaign which will not benefit any of us.

I am speaking on this legislation from a Dublin perspective. There is much talk about young people's awareness of their environment. Many of our young people who are knowledgeable about the ozone layer and the Brazilian rainforest are among the greatest litter louts in this city. It is an easy option for young people to be concerned about the African jungle or the South American rainforest, but they do not appear to bring their concern for the global environment to bear on littering the streets. It appears such awareness of global environmental problems has made young people worse in addressing local environmental problems. They tend to think that by signing up to save the whale and so on they have done their bit for the environment, but they forget about it when they walk down the street. Much attention has been focused on young people in terms of an anti-litter campaign, but they are not coming up trumps. As well as the PR on anti-litter and promoting videos on Africa and Brazil, young people must be told about local litter problems. They must be pulled up for littering for which they must pay a penalty.

An adequate number of litter wardens is required to impose penalties. Two or three litter wardens are based in Dublin. I am sure they do a good day's work, but two or three is not enough. With 270,000 people on the dole, why cannot a few hundred people, rather than a few dozen, be recruited as litter wardens on a commission basis? There is plenty of work for them to do. If recruited, they would make a big difference.

The last speaker spoke about tourism in Dublin. The city is doing well, but surveys of tourists highlight their perception of litter as a problem in Dublin, which does not leave them with memories of a clean city. We must tackle the problem in this city. Dublin is the in city now. We do not have to go to great lengths to attract tourists, but if we do not tackle our litter problem tourists will not continue to visit our city. As well as having a memorable time here they will also need to be impressed by the appearance of the city as well as other aspects of it.

Dublin Corporation is charged with responsibility for cleaning the streets of the city. During the past ten years the Department of the Environment put a squeeze on local authorities and the resources available in this regard are greatly reduced. In the late 1980s the number employed in Dublin Corporation's cleansing department alone fell from 900 to 700. While improving efficiency is welcome, the work formerly done by 200 men cannot be done by the remaining work force. Bin lorries that collect refuse in residential areas are fully manned, corporation workers are assigned to collect litter in the city centre and main shopping areas, but virtually no corporation workers are available to collect litter in the residential areas. I constantly raise this matter with my local authority, but I have been told that area X or Y is cleaned once a week on bin collection day. However, we all know that if a worker is sick or on holidays and the litter is not collected on, say, a Tuesday afternoon, it will not be done until the following Tuesday. A squeeze was put on local authorities in the late 1980s and many of the staff opted to take early retirement. By and large local authorities have managed, but they cannot continue to manage on a permanent basis without the necessary resources. While Governments in recent years have ploughed resources into other Departments of State, area partnerships and so on, local authorities have not recovered from the cut in funding imposed in the late 1980s.

I hope the litter problems I encounter at local level are covered in the Bill. Many litter problems in my area arise in houses set out in flats. The Minister introduced regulations in this regard last year, but I do not know if they are being enforced. Perhaps I should table a question about it. Apart from those regulations, other problems arise in respect of other regulations in that houses set out in flats are not properly looked after. Regulations may place an onus on the landowner to maintain his property from a public health point of view, but the general appearance of those houses in my area is shabby. I understand provisions in the Bill may address that problem and, if so, I welcome them, but much greater enforcement of the regulations is required. I hope the Minister will collect £40 from such landlords and there will be greater enforcement of regulations governing not only the standard of accommodation offered to tenants, but of those governing the appearance of the front and side gardens of properties to ensure they do not drag down the appearance of an area. These matters have not been given much attention over the years and many landlords do not look after their properties.

I welcome the provisions concerning sports grounds. Dalymount Park, Croke Park and Tolka Park are close to my constituency. In recent years an informal arrangement has been set up between Croke Park and the corporation where the GAA give the corporation a few thousand pounds to clean up the area after big matches. It has been on a voluntary basis up to now and has worked to some extent. However, the number of matches deemed to be major games is far too small as is the confined area that is cleaned up. Some work is done in the late evening and more the next morning but the wind does not respect boundaries. If the GAA and the corporation agree to do one side of Drumcondra Road and not the other, the scheme does not work. I am glad this has been given legislative teeth and that local authorities will be able to work with sports organisations and groups running musical or theatrical events to deal with problems of this kind.

There may be problems, however, when the agreement is confined to the stadium and the 300 to 700-metre area surrounding it. There are problems for residents in the wider vicinity of Croke Park as litter is spread over an extensive area. People can be three quarters of a mile away — I am thinking of Glasnevin and Iona — and outside the area agreed between the GAA and the corporation, yet they suffer the nuisance of cars parking outside their driveways as well as litter. Sadly, some of our country cousins bring sand-wishes to Croke Park and do not respect the laws, leaving their trademarks behind them. There will have to be generous scope to deal with this. It is not enough for men to clean for two hours within 200 yards of the stadium.

If money is raised by fines or the contribution of organisations, it should be ploughed back into the communities. This came up in a submission on the Waste Bill last year. In Baleally, Dunsink or Ballyogan, where the tipheads are, and the areas around the stadiums, money should be given to the communities, the local environmental or residents groups who are trying to improve the area.

I am glad the Bill deals with mobile food outlets but the problem is that they are fly-by-nights who have no casual trading licences or status. When officials come after them the day after the event, they are gone. They may be chased by the Eastern Health Board for food hygiene reasons but there does not seem to be enough people on the day of the event to pursue them. I hope this happens after the legislation goes through.

Dogs' dirt is mentioned in the legislation. We have tried by-laws for this with Dublin Corporation but they have not worked and hopefully this legislation is better. The corporation advise sending in a complaint form but neighbours do not like to go to court and say: "At 9.15 a.m. on Tuesday 4 February, I saw Mrs. Murphy's dog". They want to complain to the corporation or their local representative but it is unfair and unreasonable to expect them to give evidence in court about their neighbour's dog. That will not and cannot happen as a neighbour only acts in severe cases and evidence is needed in court. A man on the spot should deal with this and if there were plenty of wardens the problem would be solved.

I welcome the section dealing with dogs but the provisions should also apply to horses. In parts of my constituency the dog problem is a major one but in other parts the problem is horse manure. It would be silly to pass legislation putting responsibility on the owner of a small dog while ignoring the horse. This might be covered by an amendment on Committee Stage because it is a major problem. While I attacked the PR aspect earlier, the tidy districts committees do marvellous work. I am more familiar with them than the tidy towns committees. Some are professional because they have CE schemes, which may be unfair. It compares with the work of dedicated amateurs, especially in country areas, where there is greater local pride and sense of identity. Even in the city some do marvellous work and one could put a certain responsibility on them, but the local authority must also be there, backed up by the wardens.

Others have mentioned the scourge of plastic bags. In a certain part of my constituency there are about 300 people on CE schemes sitting in offices and flats thinking about how they can solve the problems of the world and nobody is outside picking these plastic bags off the bushes and trees. Society has changed from the time people shopped with carrier bags. There should perhaps be a scheme of charging for plastic bags as some supermarkets are overgenerous in giving out these bags, many of which end up in the street afterwards. It would be good to have a charge and a refund for these bags. There were refunds on many items long ago.

In the legislation a responsibility is being put on shopkeepers to clean up outside their shops. I thought it was already a law that not only did shopkeepers have to clean up outside premises but a householder also had to clean the path outside their house. When I was young, in Dublin we regarded that as our responsibility and I thought it a by-law of the corporation. It should be a responsibility and I am glad it is in the legislation. It should not be sufficient to brush up, as Deputy Flaherty said. Shops should have to wash the pavement outside their premises also. During last summer's dry spell I was in a cafe and something had been spilt on the ground some days earlier. Cafes and shops that sell liquids should have to brush and wash up during dry weather. It is a great nuisance and chases business away when they do not. It happens during summer and stains that are on the street for days look bad. The section should be tightened.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment (Ms McManus)

I thank Deputies who have contributed to this debate on the Litter Pollution Bill. I am glad they have expressed strong views on the problem of litter and I agree that we must tackle the problem aggressively. Firm and vigorous action is required. This is not an easy challenge but we are determined to take it on. It is well established that the public feel more strongly about litter than any other environmental problem and they are demanding that something be done about it. The Government has responded positively to these concerns through the action against litter initiative, one of the principal objectives of which is to improve local authority performance in the prevention and control of litter as well as taking better enforcement action against offenders. The Bill facilitates this and contains provisions that meet the concerns raised by Deputies. It puts in place a wide-ranging legislative framework for that initiative, spells out clearly what occupiers of property must do to keep their property free of litter and sets out the duties of local authorities for preventing and controlling litter.

Many Deputies referred to the issue of enforcement. The need to improve on powers and performance in regard to litter enforcement is one of the driving forces of this Bill. Deputy Dempsey expressed concern over the cost to local authorities of taking enforcement action. Under this Bill local authorities will be able to ask the courts to order that fines imposed by the courts be paid to the local authorities and section 25(5) instructs that this be done.

Furthermore, a local authority will also be entitled to ask the court to award the local authority the cost of investigating, detecting and prosecuting offences. This is set down in section 25(4) and it provides that, except where there are special and substantial reasons for not doing so, the court must order a convicted person to pay the local authority's costs. Apart from a local authority benefiting financially from the proceeds of fines and costs which until now accrued to the Exchequer, this approach follows the "polluter pays principle", which is one of the basic principles underpinning environmental legislation.

Litter wardens need to be active on the ground to have effective enforcement. This was mentioned by a number of Deputies and I am confident we will see more litter wardens employed by local authorities when this Bill is passed. They will have a wider focus than just simply trying to catch people dropping casual litter. The proposal in the Bill to extend powers of enforcement to gardaí was referred to by a number of Deputies. I do not see gardaí taking over the enforcement role from local authorities. This will remain primarily as a local authority function for litter wardens. However, it is considered advantageous to extend the powers of enforcement against offenders to gardaí. Many gardaí are involved in patrolling our streets and it is felt they could play a useful deterrent role simply by being recognised as an authority that can issue on the spot fines for litter offences.

I also envisage a close level of co-operation between litter wardens and gardaí who, under the Bill, may be called on to give assistance to litter wardens who might feel this is necessary to deal with any obstruction. If litter wardens are seen to operate from time to time with the assistance of gardaí the public will quickly realise that if one drops litter it is more likely that one may be challenged by a litter warden or a garda or both. If there is a concerted effort by local authorities to take enforcement action against offenders, the public will quickly realise that local authorities are serious about the problem of litter and the involvement of gardaí to a limited extent will bring a great deal of benefit.

Deputy Ahern had doubts about the value of promoting public awareness but we need to engage the attention of the public in regard to litter. It is apparent from surveys that attitudes to litter consist of a complex mixture of aspiration and habit. We recognise it costs taxpayers a significant amount of money to fund cleansing programmes and we readily recognise the economic value of a clean outdoor environment, yet we are not terribly conscious of our littering habits or motivated to change them.

Advertising can help bring about change in peoples' attitudes. A relatively small amount is being invested to promote public awareness and education. Not all of the funding for the action against litter initiative was spent on advertising; a significant amount was spent on developing anti-litter materials which have been sent to all first and second level schools; a scientific baseline survey of litter was also produced.

Tourism is affected by our bad litter habits. The quality of the Irish tourism product has improved enormously over the years in terms of accommodation and food. However, one of the most frequent complaints made by visitors relates to litter. If people take the time and trouble to write about litter we must assume they are telling friends about it and that can and does have a damaging effect on our tourism industry.

Deputies Ahern and Quill raised the question of tenants as well as landlords having responsibility for litter control. Throughout the Bill the responsibility to keep a place free of litter falls on occupiers — this could be an owner, a leaseholder or a tenant but in cases of houses in flats, an obligation is being placed on the owner in addition to the obligations of occupiers to keep the gardens around a house let in flats free of litter.

A number of Deputies raised the issue of plastic bags. New policy measures are already under way in relation to dealing with packaging waste. Regulations imposing obligations on businesses to deal with packaging waste will be published shortly. A voluntary industry led scheme, REPAK, was launched last year to deal with the co-ordination and financing of recovering and recycling packaging waste. The new regulations will give strong support to the efforts of REPAK. The Waste Management Act, 1996, already provides the Minister for the Environment with the power to introduce measures such as charging for plastic shopping bags but it is premature to consider this option at this stage. I wish to see how we get on with industry led voluntary initiatives in tackling these problems.

Deputy Ryan referred to litter being created as a result of domestic and commercial refuse being put out too soon for collection and being badly presented. Local authorities have a power under the Waste Management Act, 1996, to adopt by-laws to regulate the presentation of waste for collection. Deputy O'Keeffe referred to the formation of the IBAL group. I very much welcome the establishment of this group. The Minister has publicly commended their efforts, but to say that only for IBAL this Bill would not see the light of day is not correct. The Minister promised the Bill independently and I am delighted it is before the House.

A number of Deputies referred to the recovery and recycling of farm plastics. Recently the Minister announced details of a new scheme which will implement arrangements whereby waste plastics will be collected free of charge from farmers and will then be sent for recycling. The new scheme will be governed by statutory regulations which have been published in draft form. It is expected they will come into effect in March.

Many of the concerns raised by Deputy Ring are dealt with in the Bill. He highlighted indiscriminate dumping. Section 26 of the Bill addresses this issue. If a local authority finds a bag of rubbish and it is established from the contents who owns it, the person can be charged with an offence and it would be up to the defendants to prove they did not dump it. Deputy Browne also referred to this and I agree with him that we need more litter wardens. I am confident more will be appointed.

I thank all Deputies who contributed to the debate and I look forward to the detailed consideration of the provisions by the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs. Any reasonable points and amendments will be considered on Committee Stage.

Question put and agreed to.