Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 2 Jun 1999

Vol. 505 No. 7

Private Members' Business. - Waste Management: Motion (Resumed).

The following motion was moved by Deputy Dukes on Tuesday, 1 June 1999:

That Dáil Éireann condemns the Government's failure to ensure the proper implementation by local authorities of the Litter Pollution Act, 1997, the Waste Management Act, 1996, and the Packaging Waste Regulations of 1997, and calls on the Government to set out immediately a concrete plan, providing for the necessary investments, to ensure the full implementation of these provisions immediately.

Debate resumed on the following amendment:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following: "Dáil Éireann welcomes the major efforts by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government to ensure full and effective implementation, by local authorities and relevant interests as appropriate, of the Waste Management Act, 1996, the Waste Management (Packaging) Regulations, 1997, and the Litter Pollution Act, 1997, through:

–policy development and clear policy direction on waste management, as outlined in the Minister's waste policy statement,Changing our Ways (1998) and on waste recycling where he will issue a further policy statement this year;

–extensive strategic study and progress in waste management planning;

–implementation of a comprehensive system of waste licensing by the Environmental Protection Agency, and waste permitting by local authorities;

– comprehensive updating of regulatory regimes to support full commencement of the Waste Management Act, 1996, from 20th May, 1998;

–development of producer responsibility initiatives, including recovery/recycling initiatives by REPAK and the Irish Farm Film Producers Group (IFFPG);

–targeted investment and support for recycling under the Operational Programme for Environmental Services, 1994-1999;

–advice and guidance to local authorities on their functions under the Litter Pollution Act, 1997, and the establishment of a new national litter pollution monitoring system;

–sponsorship of the successful National Spring Clean, 1999;

–initiatives and grant aid to raise awareness and support education on litter prevention; and

–a planned new National Anti-Litter Forum."

–(Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government)

Mr. Howlin

I am pleased to have a few minutes to talk about an issue which I regard as one of the most significant to face local government. In the context of local government elections, the issue of waste management is one which I believe will pose the greatest challenge to local and national Government. It is worth noting that the legislative measures mentioned in the Fine Gael motion, the Litter Pollution Act, the Waste Management Act and the Packaging Waste Regulations, were all brought in by me as Minister for the Environment. I believed it was imperative to have a comprehensive and complementary package of legislative measures to deal with waste and the perennial problem of litter. For anybody coming back to the new developing Ireland to witness the prosperity, the new sense of confidence and the new spirit of Ireland, the one negative on which everybody, unfortunately, comments is desecration of the land of Ireland with litter.

No Minister coming into office had such a comprehensive amount and good framework of legislation in place and ready to be developed. I am heartily disappointed that, by and large, little or no progress has been made in implementing the ideals enshrined in both Acts. As regards the Litter Pollution Act, it was envisaged that there would be a draconian system of enforcement to ensure that if we could not win the argument against litter by persuasion, we would do so with legislative tactics. That strategy worked in countries like Singapore in the past and, unfortunately, it might be necessary here. It seems as if the initiative of having a requirement on local authorities to have a strategy for litter abatement and the establishment of a litter pollution unit in the Department of Environment and Local Government to drive national policy and to ensure a comprehensive range of litter wardens seems to have fizzled out. There is certainly no discernible reduction in the volume of litter on our streets and in our workplaces. It has failed because of the absence of will from the present Minister and Administration. Because the concept was not their own, they decided it was one which need not be put to the fore.

The Waste Management Act was the most comprehensive environmental legislation brought through these Houses since the enactment of the Environmental Protection Act earlier this decade. It was, if you like, the final block in that corpus of legislation which deal with water, air and solid waste pollution. It came from the topic I posed at an informal Council meeting of Environment Ministers which I insisted on having dur ing the Irish Presidency. The Waste Management Act has informed European directives in that regard and established in Irish law the concept of the waste pyramid, waste minimisation and reduction, recycling and waste disposal. Precious little has happened since then, and local authorities now face crises.

Old fashioned dumps are full and there is total resistance to establishing new landfill. There is no discernible driven policy to ensure an alternative is in place. Many of the landfills are simply not accepting new waste. Whole categories of waste are being refused in many of the landfills up and down this country. There is no sense of a comprehensive strategy being in place to deal with that.

The Minister's response to the motion was feeble. He said policy development and clear policy direction on waste management is in place and that there will be a further statement this year. We have enough policy statements, and we have legislation. What we want is action. What will the Minister do to help local authorities deal with the waste crisis and to ensure the level of recycling we promised is implemented because precious little recycling is going on? We have not improved a whit in the past two years on achieving the recycling targets we set ourselves. The Minister congratulated himself on the initiative between Repak and the Irish Farm Film Producers Group. The negotiations on plastic recyclables took place two years ago.

Groups such Irish Business Against Litter have been proactive in this regard and groups such as Repak have sought legislative and administrative support to ensure the good example shown by compliant producers of waste is met by those who are recalcitrant. They are all disappointed by the response of this Minister and Government. I hope the issue of solid waste management and the related co-issue of litter abatement will be made a priority in this Administration. I hope the Minister of State with clear responsibility for this issue will be spurred on by this debate to take a proactive, imaginative and, if necessary, a draconian stand to make Ireland litter free and to make Ireland's waste management policy the envy of Europe and the world. We can do it if there is a will but, unfortunately, there is not a shred of evidence of such a will.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I understand Deputy Michael Kitt is sharing time with Deputies Power and Michael Moynihan.

Mr. M. Kitt

I welcome the opportunity to make a contribution to the debate on what the Minister and Minister of State, Deputy Wallace, have been doing in relation to waste management. Whatever about the achievements of previous Ministers, this Minister was the first to state clearly that we should move away from landfill as regards waste management. The Minister launched a document on 1 October 1998 in which he stated the days of landfill, which currently cater for almost 92 per cent of municipal waste, are numbered and that both from a national and EU perspective, landfill must become a subsidiary element of an integrated waste infrastructure catering only for residual waste which cannot be prevented or otherwise treated. The Minister stated very clearly in that blueprint for waste management the hierarchy of policies favoured by him and the Government. He favours prevention and then minimisation and recycling. The disposal of waste is the least favoured option. I hope we will support the Minister in the work he is doing to tackle this serious issue.

Local authorities have a very important role to play in terms of our national waste management performance, and they must discharge that role. I was disappointed at the attitude of Galway County Council, for example. The first decision it should have made, and which I believe it will now make, relates to a site for a thermal treatment plant or incinerator. I fail to see why this is not the way this matter is dealt with, whether on a county or regional basis. We should consider where an incinerator will be provided. Because this was not done in the case of Galway County Council and, I am sure, other local authorities, communities are concerned that not only will they get a super dump but also an incinerator or thermal treatment plant.

I hope the fear of people in the three communities in Galway which were named for possible landfill sites – a super dump cannot be located in Connemara or west Galway – has been allayed by the correspondence we received from the assistant county manager of Galway County Council which stated that a thermal treatment plant or incinerator must provide an energy recovery facility. In the circumstances Mr. Nelson, the assistant county manager, said the thermal treatment plant would have to be cited close to the national electricity grid, a large centre of population or a major industrial complex and as close as possible to the single largest urban area to minimise transportation costs of refuse to the plant. He also stated the plant would have to be located close to the national road and rail networks to avoid incurring major expenditure on road upgrading. For this reason the consulting engineers, M.C. O'Sullivan, have recommended that the plant be located on the eastern fringe of Galway city. The statement that the thermal treatment plant must be located near the city is very important, and there are many sites which could be provided in that context.

A problem in Galway is that a large number of sites were mentioned in terms of landfill locations. The number of sites was eventually reduced to three, namely, at Newbridge, New Inn and Kilrickle, and many reasons were given for and against these locations. Poor roads were mentioned in the case of Newbridge, the site at Kilrickle was near a school and in New Inn, which had a dump up to seven years ago, the site was near industrial and archaeological sites. There is a case to be made for having regional or county dumps located as far as possible from populated areas and I understand this has been the goal of Galway County Council.

A landfill only two kilometres from Ballinasloe was used not only by the local town and County Galway but also by the adjoining counties Offaly and Roscommon. A major concern of the people is that the location in question could become a regional site. We understand that in the long-term the site at Ballinasloe is not on any list, but I am not too happy at the manner in which things have been handled. We rushed too quickly to close smaller dumps before having a plan in place. We were immediately faced with a situation where the dump near Ballinasloe had to cater for a large amount of refuse.

Contrary to what Deputy Howlin said, I think we have made progress on recycling. The spring 1999 edition of Rehab's recycling newsletter states that recycling levels in Ireland have reached a new peak. The Rehab Recycling Partnership recycled an impressive 16,000 tonnes of glass in 1998, a record amount representing 48.3 million bottles and jars. Of course there is room for improvement, Ireland coming 11th in the EU table in terms of glass recycling. While our recycling rate of 38 per cent is ahead of the 23 per cent rate in the UK we are a long way behind the top performers in Europe such as Austria which has a glass recycling rate of 88 per cent, the Netherlands which has a rate of 82 per cent, Germany which has a rate of 79 per cent, Norway and Sweden which have a rate of 76 per cent and Belgium which has a rate of 75 per cent. Obviously recycling is a very important issue in terms of waste management.

I also note that Galway County Council and Galway Corporation have emphasised the role of job creation in recycling, which is welcome. The Rehab Recycling Partnership employs 51 people directly, while another 15 people are employed on a sub-contract basis in the collection and transportation of material. The German Government says it always provides jobs when an EU directive is issued. I hope we will be able to do this in future and show that job creation will result from our waste management policy.

Galway County Council and Galway Corporation have announced new restrictions on the amount of glass it will accept in landfill sites. This is one of the reasons 96 pubs in Galway city have joined a new glass collection scheme. The private sector has a major role to play in waste management and job creation in this context. The public houses involved in this initiative have made a major contribution. I understand each pub has three bins, one each for clear glass, green glass and brown glass. The scheme is very detailed and I believe it will provide a very good service. It comes at a time when the Carrowbrowne landfill site near Galway city has closed, the site in Ballinasloe deals with waste from County Galway and adjoining counties and Galway has to decide where the long-term landfill site will be located. I am glad of the private sector initiatives such as the Rehab recycling initiative and the initiative of the public houses in Galway.

I congratulate the Minister and the Minister of State on what they are doing. I know that every town and village is looking for a bottle bank, but it should be pointed out that there is a cost involved. Correspondence from my local authority states that if the community has funds to pay the annual maintenance charge of approximately £500 they can deal directly with Rehab. It is an excellent idea for communities which can raise such money to have a bottle bank and perhaps other such facilities.

Mr. Power

I share the concern of other Members at the rate of progress in dealing with waste management and litter. Deputy Howlin was clapping himself on the back for bringing forward much of the legislation and in fairness he played his part. However, we should deal with the issue collectively, and I do not intend to point score as we approach local and European elections.

The most common form of pollution is litter. I compliment Deputy Wallace on some of the initiatives he has taken to deal with the problem, but we cannot be too happy with the rate of progress. We must realise that much work remains to be done. Littering is an anti-social behaviour and one which has a certain acceptance in some areas. It would take very little to change this behaviour if the right approach was adopted. We must encourage communities and businesses to respond to the problem. We often talk about being ashamed of our streets and about the perception of visitors. However, I am keener to have the streets clean for the benefit of those living there and enduring the problem 365 days a year.

Under the Litter Pollution Act, 1997, local authorities were given the necessary powers to tackle the litter problem. Some local authorities have been very proactive and have used a certain amount of imagination in this context. Local authorities have a certain flexibility in dealing with the problem in terms of expenditure and the recruitment of litter wardens. Last night the Minister said here that in the second half of 1998 205 litter wardens had issued 4,300 on-the-spot fines. I take it that was a big increase on the previous year but one only needs to be stopped at traffic lights for a short while to see someone throw a cigarette butt, a paper, the butt of an apple or something else on the street. We have been far too lenient about this sort of behaviour and it is time it was nipped in the bud. Last year and earlier this year there were a couple of cases where people were taken to court and fined for throwing cigarette butts on the street. Those cases generated a great deal of publicity. It came as a great surprise to many people that this was the new law in Ireland. It is a pity there are not a few more cases like that because it is the best publicity one could give the anti-litter campaign. We have been too slow in tackling littering.

Many local authorities employ a sweeper to sweep the streets each morning or a couple of mornings a week. While it is fine to have someone clean up the mess in the morning, the fact that the sweeper must clean up the mess each day means that our method of tackling the problem is simply not working. We must reach a stage where there will no longer be a need for these people to clean up every day.

The local authorities are required to adopt a litter management plan and most, if not all, have done so; some of them have been slow to produce their plan. The only message we can take from that is that, for many local authorities, dealing with litter is not a major priority. While that is regrettable, it is something of which the Minister should take note and on which he should take the necessary action.

Last night the Minister mentioned the monitoring body which he has set in place. It must be continually emphasised that it is necessary to scrutinise the new responses which local authorities have drawn up to deal with the litter problem and to ensure that good practices or new imaginative practices which are working are highlighted and that other local authorities are made aware of them. If they can work in one local authority, there is no reason they will not work somewhere else.

The national spring clean was a wonderful idea. Last night the Minister said that over 150,000 participated in anti-litter initiatives throughout the country. Many schools got involved and some of them dealt with the problem imaginatively. They showed great commitment. While public awareness, in itself, is important, public commitment to tackle the litter problem is vital. While the national spring clean is a worthwhile initiative, it is short lived. We want an ongoing commitment from the public to tackle this problem. We must encourage people to break their bad habits. Deputy Howlin stated that draconian action must be taken and I would support that.

Take-aways are to blame to a large extent for litter in towns. All sorts of cartons and drinks' containers may be seen on the street, often beside litter bins, which people just do not bother to use. We must place a greater onus on the owners of these outlets, before they lock their doors at night, to clean up the mess in front of their premises. They are providing a service and it is obviously a good business, but it cannot all be one way traffic and they must play their part. Since it is their customers who are responsible for this litter, it is important that they do not neglect their duties in that respect.

I have often noticed at the races that punters who back a loser are never happy to put their docket in a bin; they have to tear it up. I am sure Deputy Carey, like me, has been guilty of this too. Maybe we could ask Senator Lydon or one of his colleagues to conduct a study to see whether a person derives satisfaction from tearing up the docket after his or her horse loses.

Mr. U. Burke

He is otherwise occupied.

Mr. Power

Perhaps a student will conduct a comprehensive study on it and let us know why it happens.

We must have a more imaginative approach to dealing with the litter problem. There have been several publicity campaigns where we asked people to get involved, but I want to see the private sector become involved. If McDonalds, for instance, was given charge of a stretch of road, such as the Naas dual carriageway from Newlands Cross to Kill or even the main street in Naas, and once a week the McDonalds people went out in their colourful uniforms to pick up the litter, it would give the private sector the opportunity to be seen to be giving back something to the community and it would be good advertising also. It is something which could be explored. Perhaps it could start off on a pilot basis. We could give them responsibility for cleaning up a main street or a side street and the residents of that area would know who was responsible for it. If there was that sort of co-operation, it could be beneficial to all.

Mr. M. Moynihan

I thank my colleagues, Deputies Kitt and Power, for sharing time with me.

The management and control of waste of one type or another and its disposal in an environmentally friendly fashion has become a difficult subject over the past number of years. Difficulties have arisen over proposed landfill sites and dumps throughout the country. It is a thorny issue. The Department of the Environment and Local Government in conjunction with the local authorities must find new ways to dispose of waste and to cut down the volume of waste being generated by consumers and consumer friendly products.

When I was going to national school more than 20 years ago, there was a ferocious campaign to encourage people to use litter bins in public places and to ensure that litter was not strewn around Ireland. While there has been much publicity to combat litter on village streets and in the hedgerows, it is still a huge ongoing problem even though the Department of the Environment and Local Government and the local authorities are implementing regulations. The problem persists because it is easier to dump a bag of rubbish at the side of the road than to ensure that it goes into a landfill or to pay the management fee. A vast amount of work on litter awareness is being done through the education system. Adults have a responsibility to provide good example to ensure people do not continue to litter the countryside.

Cork County Council is running a competition this year to find the most litter free village in the county. Last Monday evening as I walked through my own village of Kiskeam after a funeral, the discussion turned to the number of cigarette butts strewn throughout the village. County council inspectors view every piece of litter, and local people, together with FÁS workers, go through the village picking up cigarette butts and other rubbish. Even though the village is quite small, the people I spoke to said it was possible to go through the village four or five times a day and still find litter strewn around.

With the evolution of silage making, farm plastics have become a major issue in rural Ireland. In the course of excavation work, huge build-ups of farm plastics are discovered. Sometimes the plastics are burnt on massive bonfires and other times they are buried. However, they remain in the system as they are not properly disposed of. Directives are now in place in this regard and farm relief services are putting systems in place whereby farm plastics are collected. It is difficult to encourage farmers to adopt litter or waste disposal programmes.

There are many unauthorised dumps in rural Ireland in which all sorts of rubbish, including dead animals, are dumped. That is a disgrace and I urge county councils to enforce the laws stringently in this regard. Unauthorised dumps only serve to pass on the problem. People are not taking responsibility for their own waste and there is a need for a greater degree of education on the issue.

I compliment all concerned with the national spring clean campaign. During the course of local and European election canvassing in recent weeks, I noticed waste containers located in the centre of many housing estates. Considerable efforts are being made to dispose of rubbish which has been accumulating over the years. I would like to see provision made for such a clean out on an annual basis, rather than have rubbish unceremoniously dumped in the countryside.

With just over a week to go to the local and European elections, posters are to be seen everywhere throughout the country. Most posters are taken down on the night of polling day. Politicians and political parties ensure that posters are taken down quickly, if for no other reason than the Opposition might use it against them if they were not. Healthy competition exists to see which party takes posters down first and we should encourage that.

Most provincial towns now have glass recycling banks which assist greatly in the reduction of waste. Recycling reduces waste, and the use of landfill sites should be encouraged, whether through the education system, the political system or local authorities. I have been involved in discussions with people who have tried to recycle plastic. That type of recycling is difficult as it is uneconomical but it should be encouraged where possible.

Mr. D. Carey

I wish to share time with Deputies Crawford, Ulick Burke, Stanton, Perry and Sargent.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. D. Carey

I wish to make a short contribution to this debate because huge difficulties are being experienced with waste and waste disposal in north Munster. Campaigns are currently being waged in Clare, Limerick and north Tipperary about the location of a regional landfill site. In my constituency, this issue has given rise to hysteria in local communities. People are very upset about the proposal to locate a landfill site within their parishes, particularly when they have been working hard to encourage people to clean up the environment.

Groups in County Clare have successfully contested the proposed location of a landfill site at Doora by Clare County Council. Consequently, the county council must find an alternative. The three possible alternative sites which were chosen were rejected for various reasons. One was rejected because of the exertion of political pressure, a second was rejected on the basis of archaeological concerns and there is a risk in regard to the third site that the Inagh river, a good salmon river, could be polluted in the long run, although this site may yet be chosen. The Minister must invest substantially in local authorities in order to ensure long-term planning in this area.

The Doora facility would have been closed after a certain period of time. However, the regional partnership aspect has not been fully explored. It is left to individual members on authorities to make the decision, but then the NIMBY factor comes into play. A more imaginative approach to landfill sites has to be pursued by the Government.

Substantial investment in the primary school sector is necessary also. Clare County Council encouraged pilot schemes in national schools but it ran out of funds. That national school scheme helped to promote the idea of recycling. Under the scheme, four or five recycling bins were provided in each school for glass, plastic and other waste products. There is a disproportionate increase in the amount of waste created annually, and if this recycling programme is not pursued, particularly through education, the tourism industry will face enormous difficulty in the future.

I had the privilege of visiting national parks in the United States last year. During that visit I saw young children buy wrapped ice cream on a mountain – it was very warm – and not one piece of paper was thrown on the ground. The problem did not arise because there were people supervising visitors to the park, and also the youngsters knew that throwing ice cream sticks and bits of paper on the ground would not enhance their national park.

There are other national parks on the west coast which are used extensively by people from San Francisco and other cities. At the weekend, volunteers clean the beaches along the coast. That attitude does not exist in the psyche of people in this country. People will not volunteer to clean up parks and beaches at weekends. Americans believe in the value of cleanliness and providing a clean environment for tourists, and the west coast has the highest numbers of tourists. It would be valuable for the Government to become heavily involved in waste management. Since the Minister has made seat belts in cars compulsory, why does he not make it compulsory to have a litter bag in every car?

Mr. Crawford

I thank Deputy Dukes for raising this important matter. Local authorities are under enormous pressure regarding the issue of litter. As a member of a local authority, I believe there is an urgent need for massive investment to ensure the problem of litter does not become an albatross that we cannot handle. Monaghan County Council, together with Cavan, Meath and Louth, is preparing a strategic plan to deal with this problem. One of the problems that arises even from an open discussion on such a plan is that as soon as an area is identified as suitable to deal with waste, there is immediate uproar. This is an increasing problem for local councils and, through them, for the Minister and his Department.

This motion deals only with domestic waste, but I want to talk about the more serious problem we are experiencing in County Monaghan. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle, and anybody else dealing with the problem of waste in Monaghan, will be aware that two thirds of all poultry and mushrooms are produced in County Monaghan, particularly in the north of the county. This has caused a serious problem in terms of pollution. The planning authorities can no longer give planning permission to farmers who want to become involved in this major industry. As we all know, we can only go forwards or backwards, we cannot stand still. If new structures are not allowed, the industry will die.

There is need for investment and co-operation among the Department of Agriculture and Food, the Department of Public Enterprise and the Minister's Department. We have had enough committees and seminars, we now want action. This is important to farm families' income but also to the major factories such as Grove Turkeys, Monaghan Poultry, Monaghan Mushrooms, Cartons of Shercock, Provinder Millers and all the other groups involved in job creation in the constituency.

Fiberwatt UK, a company that provides power using farm waste, operates three power stations in the area. These have been visited by Members of the Dáil and senior officials and have been shown to be the answer to the problem of waste disposal. One station operates in the middle of a village without any problem. Fiberwatt UK, along with a Monaghan business family, made an offer to build a station in Monaghan but, unfortunately, they were beaten by an American consortium which was to build a major power station just north of the M50 in north County Dublin. As far as I am aware, that project has not gone ahead and the three Departments I mentioned must get together to ensure that jobs are maintained in Monaghan and that the environment is improved as a result. The Department of Agriculture and Food has an interest in the production and quality of food, the Department of the Environment and Local Government has an interest in maintaining a clean environment and the Department of Public Enterprise has an interest in producing electricity from natural resources. This is a natural resource as far as Monaghan is concerned.

I ask the Government and anyone else who wishes to listen to get the different groups together to ensure that a power station of this nature goes ahead in the Border region. It may be possible to unite with some of the poultry units in Tyrone, Armagh and elsewhere. If that is not done, it will have serious consequences for the industry and tourism. I hope this problem can be resolved in the near future because it has been left unresolved for too long.

Mr. U. Burke

I thank my colleagues for sharing their time with me. It is appropriate that we are discussing waste management here in Dáil Éireann in the middle of a local election campaign because that problem is foremost in the minds of people throughout the country, particularly in my own constituency of east Galway where no less than four communities are outraged at the proposals presented to them over the past few months. It is unfortunate that this issue has been brought to a head due to the lack of forward planning by Galway City Corporation. In the past, Galway prided itself on being the fastest growing city in Europe, but it has to admit that it failed dismally to adequately provide for the management of its waste. When the corporation was brought before the High Court this time last year, it was literally damned by the judge who criticised it for its total lack of forward thinking and its inability to manage waste. The judge should have known that no local authority has ever adequately managed its waste. Local authorities have dumped the waste and abandoned sites. Ministers have failed to adequately finance local authorities to rehabilitate those abandoned sites. The Minister's reply to my parliamentary question earlier this year highlighted the fact that the Department has, to a degree, abandoned waste management.

Are we serious about waste management plans? When local authorities failed to properly collect refuse they allowed private enterprise to do the job adequately. Householders and business people have paid dearly for the inefficient manner in which local authorities provided this service in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Business people are paying rates at 35p plus in the pound and also have to pay a refuse collection tax.

As a result of Galway Corporation's failure to manage its waste, an agreement was reached between the corporation and the council to bring all the waste from the city and county to Ballin asloe which they believed to be the only suitable landfill site remaining in the county. This led to the appalling situation where the county council and the corporation engaged the services of the national waste management specialists, MC O'Sullivan Consultants, and their agent, PJ Rudden, who delivers the bad news to various communities. These people have done nothing but provide a desktop report. What led them to conclude that the only three suitable sites were in east Galway at Kilrickle, New Inn and Newbridge? However, they concluded that, not only had these sites the potential for handling local waste, but they also had the potential of being regional sites.

We now have the added dimension of the proposal for an incinerator in or adjacent to Galway city. Five communities in County Galway are driven daft by a report which has no basis other than being concocted by consultants sitting at their desks. Anyone who knows the topography of the areas suggested would realise that they are totally unsuitable for this purpose.

Local authorities are now taking legal proceeding against communities to the High Court at great expense to these people who are determined that their livelihoods, homesteads and farmland will not be destroyed. The Minister must direct local authorities to cease taking court proceedings against innocent communities who face huge costs in their determination to protect their property. Are the consultants to be similar to judges and lawyers at the tribunals and become rich as a result? I plead with the Minister to direct local authorities to stop bringing communities to court and to consult with them so that some reasonable compromise can be reached.

Mr. Stanton

This is one of the most important issues facing the nation and I commend Deputies Dukes, Clune and Hayes for bringing it before the House. When in Opposition, the Minister had great ideas for controlling the use and abuse of plastic bags. However, we have not seen much of these proposals since he became Minister. Is he going to ban or control the use of plastic bags as he promised to do in his election manifesto?

Ireland is far behind the rest of Europe in terms of recycling. We recycle 37 per cent of glass whereas the figure in Holland is 80 per cent. Some positive measures could be adopted in the recycling process. It may be an idea to incorporate a recycling unit into plans for new housing estates and industrial units. Our planning guidelines do not include any provisions for recycling units. We are building sprawling housing estates and industrial units without considering the concept of recycling. This suggestion should be taken on board.

We are not good at segregating waste. The Minister and the Government should raise national awareness of waste segregation and transform that awareness into action by encouraging each household to segregate waste. Local authorities should facilitate this segregation as there is no point in households doing so if the binmen throw all the waste into one container.

Some years ago we all had small bins outside our houses, now we have large wheely bins. Some houses in Cobh have 17 or 18 steps leading up to them and residents have to drag wheely bins up and down those steps as so much waste is being produced. Has the Minister any proposals to cut down on the amount of packaging being produced? If one buys a tube of toothpaste it is in a cardboard box. Is there any need for this? Surely the box is superficial and can we not cut down on this amount of waste? Changing Our Ways is a document full of aspirations. However, as Deputy Dukes pointed out, there is no progress evident after the Government's two years in office. The situation is getting worse.

There are many lovely beaches in my local area. When tourists flock to the beaches at this time of year they find to their horror that they are filthy. Much of this waste is dumped by people visiting the beaches because local authorities do not have the resources, the wherewithal or the will to clean the beaches. Some of the waste is washed ashore and we need to tackle the issue of waste being dumped at sea by ships. Do we have facilities at ports to dispose of waste? If a ship docks at a US port it must produce the waste to show that it was not dumped overboard. That is not the case here and waste is being dumped overboard at sea and washed ashore. The Minister should take steps to ensure that at least our beaches are kept clean.

We are far behind the rest of Europe in this regard and we need to catch up quickly. I am aware of an industrialist who recently passed through some towns trying to decide in which town he should locate. He passed through early on a Sunday morning. Unfortunately, the chippers had been in business the night before and, needless to say, he found it difficult to make his decision because every street was littered with chip bags, paper and other litter.

The problem of waste is impacting across the nation in all its aspects. We must start dealing with it at primary school level. I have no wish to overload teachers – they have enough to do – but we must promote waste awareness in primary schools. Children must be taught not to dump waste. If one drives past any school after break time one will see litter and waste scattered in the street. It is important to make an impact on school children. Perhaps something could be done to encourage schools, for example, through competitions between them based on the environment around the school.

I congratulate my colleagues for bringing this motion before the House and I urge the Minister to act swiftly on it.

Mr. Perry

I compliment Deputy Dukes on bringing this important issue before the House. Numerous small dumps are closing as stringent new waste management regulations come into force. Dump closures combined with the new regime are exerting pressure for the prompt creation of bigger, better managed facilities on greenfield sites or for the expansion of existing landfill sites.

Many communities, faced with expanding or new county or city service dumps planned near them, refuse to accept the new licences offered by the EPA. The Waste Management Act, 1996, and the new EU landfill directive were intended to herald a new, environmentally sound way of disposing of waste. Under the new legislative framework, every local and regional authority is obliged to furnish a comprehensive waste management plan, embracing a greater emphasis on recycling.

The Minister of State said it is hoped that local authorities will co-operate. They must co-operate in the management and disposal of waste. Waste Management Ireland has been making a strong pitch for county and city waste disposal from local authorities in the west, mid-west and midlands. The Minister has indicated on previous occasions that public-private partnerships will be the way forward. However, it is a huge business. As Deputy Stanton said, there is a huge responsibility to put in place the necessary controls for private operators. Large landfill sites will definitely be needed in the future because for many years there was no overall policy for the management of waste.

Rehab Ireland is doing an outstanding job through its location of recycling bins in the car parks of densely populated areas. People are becoming more educated about the benefits of recycling. The sorting of refuse is also a difficult business.

Promotion in schools is most important. The issue of refuse charges has become an important election issue, particularly the charges on business people. As Deputy Burke correctly pointed out, the only people who are liable for rates at present are business people. In addition, they are also obliged to pay considerable charges for refuse disposal. A skip can cost up to £80 per week. In some cases it might be emptied twice per week which means a cost of £160 per week. That adds up to more than £7,000 per year.

The role of private operators is extremely important. The Minister of State indicated that there would be North-South co-operation on waste management. Under the Good Friday Agreement, there is such a possibility.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has one minute left.

Mr. Perry

The number of landfill sites in the Republic has been reduced from 115 to 85 in recent years. So far, the EPA has issued only four licences for dumps because almost every draft licence is being appealed by objectors.

How and where to deal with waste in the future is a major problem. It demands a management strategy. Approximately 92 per cent of all waste is put in landfill sites in Ireland while in Europe 18 per cent of waste is incinerated. There is a fear of the incineration option in Ireland, but with the proper investment and the right location and given that the ash can be recycled for use in the construction of roads, it is an alternative the Minister should consider. Given that since 1996, when the new controls were introduced, only four licences were issued by the EPA, incineration signals the way forward.

Mr. Sargent

As the Green Party spokesperson on waste, I support this motion and thank Fine Gael for the 120 seconds I have been allocated to speak on it. I congratulate the charities, local communities and households which are at present composting, bringing their bags of cans and other waste to Kerbside, using bottle banks and co-ordinating the waste for recycling in large institutions, such as St. Vincent's Hospital, Fairview. I congratulate Jim Owens who recently announced an initiative there.

In contrast, this Government and, indeed, its predecessor have the necessary power to prohibit waste generation. There is a mighty Waste Management Act in addition to other legislation. Section 29 of that Act gives the Minister powers to provide for various matters, including requirements on the nature of waste, to specify certain designs in packaging and to prohibit, limit or control waste importation, distribution, supply, sale and so forth. The Minister has numerous powers and I urge him to use them.

Let us take the glass milk bottle as an example. Glanbia, or Premier Dairies as it was known in Dublin, is scrapping its bottling plant. However, in Cork 13,000 houses have milk delivered in glass bottles each morning and over 60 per cent of the 200 Cork schools receiving milk receive it in glass bottles. This prevents a large amount of waste in carbons and plastic.

The Minister has the power to tell Glanbia to bring back the glass milk bottle and I urge him to use that power. He also has the power to tax plastic bags, as was promised in the election manifesto. Why has he not used that power? I urge him to ban Repak. It is not doing the job it committed itself to do. The Minister should use the regulations at his disposal.

I call on people who cannot get the glass milk bottle anymore to send their milk cartons to Glanbia or, indeed, to the Department of the Environment and Local Government.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy should conclude.

Mr. Sargent

It is time to scrap Repak, to point out that incineration is a pain in the ash and to encourage waste reduction. The Minister has a job to do and he should do it.

Minister for the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Dempsey)

I thank the Deputies who tabled this motion. While I do not agree with its terms, I welcome the fact that waste management and the problem of litter are highlighted in the House. That is most important.

In support of the proposed amendment to the motion, my colleague, Deputy Dan Wallace, outlined in considerable detail the substantial progress which has been made in waste and litter management over the past two years. The nature of the contribution by the Opposition to this debate suggests a wilful disregard of the facts presented.

I will resist the temptation to outline again what is happening and will continue to happen in this area. It is striking, however, that the Opposition accepts that in the Waste Management and Litter Pollution Acts and the subordinate regulations there is an excellent legislative framework and foundation for action. The policy statement, Changing our Ways, which I published last October, was not faulted; it was, indeed, complimented by several speakers. It was acknowledged that the objectives and targets outlined in that statement would be hard to beat. The thrust of Opposition criticism centred on generalised assertions that the Government is not providing leadership, is not putting pressure on local authorities and is not serious about getting results. I reject each of these criticisms.

It was noticeable that no specific proposals were advanced which are not already being addressed or undertaken, except perhaps the suggestion by Deputy Sargent to increase the litter in Dublin by dumping all milk cartons—

Mr. Sargent

Send them into the Department.

Mr. Dempsey

—by putting them back on the streets. That is most constructive.

Mr. Sargent

The Minister might act if they were sent to him.

Mr. Dempsey

The Government is giving firm leadership and clear policy direction to local authorities, public agencies, businesses and the public. We have identified the problems to be tackled, decided on the appropriate actions to be taken and the targets to be reached. We are now engaged in driving the necessary change.

There has been considerable debate about locally based waste management solutions. Local authorities are concluding a regionally based planning process which will provide a basis for the delivery of integrated waste services and infrastructure to meet modern waste management needs and facilitate the achievement of our objectives. Deputy Dukes was concerned about our commitment to the rationalisation of the municipal landfill network in light of proposals for new landfills around the country. Even with the provision of significant biological and thermal treatment capacity, which he endorses and I welcome, there will always be a need for residual landfill capacity. The planning process should ensure that such developments are consistent with the integrated regional approaches being pursued by the majority of local authorities.

If there was one weakness in the Waste Management Act, 1996, it was that it laid an undue emphasis on local authorities acting on an individual basis. That is not a criticism of the previous Minister, because we were all party to that. I was in Opposition at the time as was Deputy Sargent.

Mr. Sargent

The Minister would not accept my amendment.

Mr. Dempsey

It was not for me to accept it.

Mr. Sargent

He would not support it.

Mr. Dempsey

The regional approach is now being adopted as a result of my policy initiative last October.

Where significant new waste facilities are proposed, whether they involve thermal treatment or residual landfill, they will be subject to the requirements of planning legislation and to waste licensing by the Environmental Protection Agency. This stringent licensing system will ensure high standards of environmental protection apply to all such facilities.

I refute the allegation that the Government is doing nothing to combat litter, although I agree it remains a huge problem in many parts of the country. It is a blight on the landscape and I have repeatedly said that over the past two years. It is a shame on us all. The primary response to the litter problem must come from the local authorities using the extensive powers available to them under the Litter Pollution Act, 1997. Local authority enforcement action has improved substantially since the introduction of the 1997 Act. However, I would be the first to admit that is from a low base and that much more needs to be done.

The Government is also taking measures to support more effective local authority action against litter. As already outlined, a national litter pollution monitoring system will be fully operational by autumn. The objective is to monitor and assess local authority litter management and enforcement action. A key feature of the system will be the review of local litter management plans. The An Taisce led project, National Spring Clean 1999, with financial support from my Department and commercial sponsors, ran nationwide during the month of April and was a tremendous success. I commend everyone associated with it. We have invited representatives of local authorities, the business community, the educational and tourist sectors, environmental NGOs and community and Tidy Towns groups to participate in a new national anti-litter forum to review existing actions targeting litter pollution, to develop a programme of measures to enhance and extend those responses and, it is hoped, to provide financial support for those efforts.

I have not heard anything which gives any substance to the motion tabled. We have made major progress in waste and litter management over the past two years. In terms of policy and legislative development, planning, public awareness and involvement, support for local authorities, waste licensing and implementation of producer responsibility initiatives, we are far advanced from the situation which previously prevailed. I reject the motion and support the amendment.

Local authorities will receive £126 million more than they received in 1997. Part of that additional funding is specifically earmarked for environmental activities to allow them enforce the regulations and clean up their act generally in litter and environmental matters. The Government is committed to a strong waste management policy which it is pursuing. While it is necessary to highlight the bad, we should also acknowledge the good work done by many towns and villages throughout the country through the Tidy Towns competition.

Mr. Belton

I wish to share my time with Deputy Clune.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Belton

No county in Ireland knows as much about tidy towns as County Longford. Ardagh was successful on three occasions and Newtowncashel was also successful. However, like every other county, it has a problem with illegal dumping. The Minister informed us he will establish a representative body to consult about the major problem of litter. Litter is the first thing visitors notice when they arrive in Ireland. I appeal to the Minister to ensure the body does not become another talking shop. We have had too many of those and I hope this will not become another one.

The Minister and his Department should spearhead a special effort to clean up Ireland for the millennium. That cannot be done without providing sufficient resources and making an all-out effort to clean up the country once and for all. When one travels the roads, be it by the edge of a forest or by the side of a bog, one notices the drains are always full of litter. It is unbelievable. People ask what the local council is doing about it but it is not guilty of dumping litter, the people are. A school awareness programme, something certain areas have, is a positive step towards instilling in young people's minds the notion that they should keep the country clean and tidy and that they should be proud of it.

I know a man who collects bottles from pubs and hotels for recycling, but there is not sixpence worth of aid for such people in the private sector. The Minister should examine that and encourage people involved in recycling projects. Other countries sort their litter for recycling but we are only skimming the surface in that regard. The Minister should concentrate on that. Local authorities in the midlands have come together to tackle the waste problem and I hope they make progress. Waste is on the increase in the consumer society, so it should be matched by waste management.

I hope the Minister will follow up on the points I raised. I am pleased to say that next Sunday, when some will be counting the votes for the European elections, the President will be in Ardagh presenting the Tidy Towns competition awards, and I hope Ardagh will win again.

Ms Clune

I am pleased to be associated with the motion. It is appropriate, given our recent experience when canvassing. Many people are concerned at the lack of facilities for dealing with waste. We cannot seem to move away from our dependence on landfill. The Waste Management Act, 1996, is wonderful legislation, as is the Government's latest proposal, Waste – Changing Our Ways. However, they seem to be aspirational documents which have no connection with reality and no impact on our waste management practices. We still depend on landfill.

The Waste Management Act was produced in response to the EU waste management strategy which placed primary emphasis on waste minimisation. However, that Act, the key to a successful waste management strategy, has not been implemented. Instead, as a result of increased consumerism, even greater volumes of waste are being produced each year. There is no indication that the mountains of waste we produce are being reduced.

A total of 42 million tonnes of waste is produced each year or approximately 400 kilograms for every individual in this country. Eleven million tonnes of this is made up of industrial, commercial and domestic waste and the figure continues to rise annually. Everything is now packaged and double wrapped. Take away foods, pizza boxes, burgers and convenience foods that are microwaveable in the container all contribute enormously to the waste mountain, which continues to grow at an alarming rate.

The problem of packaging waste must be addressed. This has been done successfully in other countries but we do not appear to be able to come to terms with it. Everyone has received circulars from Repak Limited which does not seem to be successful. The companies which are obliged to register with it have not done so and local authorities are not pursuing them to ensure their compliance in this regard. Packaging regulations are not being implemented.

The Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dan Wallace, referred to the many wonderful initiatives put in place by the Government. He emphasised that waste management is a matter for the relevant local authorities, but this is not so. Local authorities cannot encourage recycling if the necessary infrastructure is not put in place by the Government.

When in Opposition Fianna Fáil proposed the introduction of a tax on plastic bags to discourage their use and a refund scheme for PET bottles and aluminium drink cans. Why can we not introduce a tax on plastic bags? It would discourage their use because people would reuse them or refuse to accept them while out shopping. There is no need to give a plastic bag to someone buying a pint of milk because it is perfectly safe to carry it in its original container.

Double packaging should be banned. There is no need to place tubes of toothpaste in boxes, to have two wrappers on chocolate bars or to wrap shoes in paper, box them and place them in plastic bags. Such packaging is unnecessary. I recently visited Germany where people use cloth shopping bags and refuse to have their goods put in boxes, wrapped in paper or placed in plastic bags because they are charged for the disposal of such packaging. Charges of that kind discourage over-packaging and the waste it generates. The Minister stated that nothing of substance has been put forward by the proposers of the motion, but we have outlined a number of positive proposals he could accept.

Construction and demolition waste is one of the fastest growing waste streams in the country. It results from new building construction and is comprised of pieces of concrete blocks, bricks and concrete and the waste generated by the renovation and demolition of buildings. It is estimated that up to 50 per cent of the waste in Ballyeally dump in north Dublin comes from building sites. This waste stream has not been addressed. It was mentioned in the Minister's recent policy document, Changing our Ways, but there has been no action on the ground.

Construction and demolition waste is very economical because it can be crushed and used as a filling material, as a foundation for roads etc. It has numerous uses and huge volumes of it are being deposited daily in landfill dumps. The construction sector, which is experiencing high growth rates, has made some efforts to deal with this waste stream but it continues to grow unchecked and unchallenged. Many documents have been produced which offer interesting and varied approaches to the problem.

Why not make it a condition that every planning application should incorporate proposals for the use of recycled aggregates and material in order to address the problem of the waste generated on construction sites? Why does the Government not take the lead on this issue and ensure that all contractors working on State projects use recycled materials and implement waste reduction policies? Positive steps of this nature, while they will not solve the problem, would go some way towards addressing it. They would represent a 100 per cent improvement on what we have at present, namely, nothing.

Some 90 per cent of all commercial and domestic waste is deposited in landfill dumps. We have one of the lowest recycling rates in Europe. The annual competitiveness report produced by Forfás states that the reuse of materials through recycling activities measures both the efficiency of the economy as a whole in reducing costs and the contribution made by the economy to the conservation of depleted resources. If that is the case, it appears Ireland holds a very low position in this regard.

We do not address recycling and its merits in any meaningful fashion. Our recycling initiatives depend on voluntary schemes which involve individuals transporting their recyclables to collection points. This practice will not achieve the ambitious recycling target set in the Government's review. We must consider the markets for these recyclable materials. Why do English newspapers proudly display the amount of recycled paper which went into their production? At present, our contribution to recycling newsprint is to use it for animal bedding. That is not recycling, it is merely finding another use for the product.

We must face the fact that it is cheaper to use virgin paper than it is to use recycled paper. However, if we are serious about sustainable development – this involves current development which will not have a negative impact on future generations – we must intervene economically to encourage the use of recycled paper. There is no collection point in Cork city for used paper or newspapers because there is no market for those materials. If it were obligatory to use a certain percentage of recycled materials, the market would develop.

Smurfit Recycling has stated that it has reduced by 40 per cent the recovery rate of corrugated cases and packaging materials in the past 18 months. The price of aluminium cans has dropped in the past year from £850 per tonne to less than £500. As a result, a number of small firms which had collected those cans are faced with the prospect of going out of business. These firms paid children who collected aluminium cans in school 50p per bag. That was successful both in business terms and in helping to ensure that this product was recycled.

A number of speakers referred to glass recycling, in respect of which our record is good. However, we must do more because we remain far behind our European counterparts in this area.

Many of the documents which have been produced are aspirational. Given that we recycle only between 8 and 10 per cent of our waste, how does the Minister propose to bridge the gap between that and the proposed target of 50 per cent? Many speakers referred to the problem of litter which must be addressed through the introduction of new initiatives. I accept that we are moving some way towards addressing this problem but there is a need for further action.

The motion before the House challenges the Minister to implement the Waste Management Act, the packaging regulations and the Litter Act. We need to see more action on the ground rather than the introduction of further aspirational documents.

Amendment put.

Tá

Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Cowen, Brian.Cullen, Martin.Daly, Brendan.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.

Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael.Kitt, Tom.Lawlor, Liam.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McGennis, Marian.McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.Molloy, Robert.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Ó Cuív, Éamon.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Kennedy, Michael.O'Rourke, Mary.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Dan. Wallace, Mary.

Tá–continued

Woods, Michael.

Wright, G. V.

Níl

Ahearn, Theresa.Barrett, Seán.Belton, Louis.Boylan, Andrew.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Burke, Ulick.Carey, Donal.Clune, Deirdre.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Creed, Michael.Currie, Austin.D'Arcy, Michael.Deasy, Austin.Deenihan, Jimmy.Farrelly, John.Flanagan, Charles.Hayes, Brian.

Higgins, Jim.Howlin, Brendan.Kenny, Enda.McGahon, Brendan.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.Perry, John.Reynolds, Gerard.Sargent, Trevor.Shatter, Alan.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Belton and Currie.

Amendment declared carried.

Question, "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to", put and declared carried.