How much time do I have?
Private Members' Business. - Waste Management (Amendment) Bill, 2002: Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
The Deputy has 30 minutes.
On a point of order, I understand Government time will be finished at 7.30 p.m.
Under the rules of the House, the Government has a half an hour. The Government loses the slot at 8.10 p.m. to 8.15 p.m. I understand the remainder of the time is divided between the Labour Party and the Technical Group.
As movers of the Bill, we have the final 15 minute slot.
I have called the Government speaker who has 30 minutes. That will take us up to approximately 7.55 p.m. I will then call speakers from the Opposition side of the House who will have until 8.15 p.m. when I will call Deputy Sargent or whoever he nominates to conclude the debate.
I wish to share my time with Deputies Andrews and O'Connor.
On 27 June 2001 I spoke in this House on the Waste Management (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2001, introduced by the then Minister, Deputy Dempsey. I fully supported that Bill on the basis that urgent action was required to deal with this serious issue. Waste management is a challenge for us all and some progress has been made in recent years. Economic growth and increasing affluence have resulted in more waste but we have been slow to recognise the consequences of this.
It would be fair to say that central and local government, including Dublin City Council of which I am a member, procrastinated on this issue for years. It was only because of pressure from the European Union that we finally realised we had to bite the bullet on this issue. Progress has been made but as the saying goes, there is more to do. The Minister is giving problems of waste management the highest priority in his Department.
I am sure the Green Party is acting with the best of intentions in bringing forward this Bill at this time. Part of me has to admire its idealism. However, such idealism can also be viewed as naiveté and I firmly believe that if this Bill is passed, it will set us back years in our endeavours to grapple with this important problem. Chaos in the waste planning process would ensue and old controversies, which have finally been sorted out, would be re-ignited. In addition, waste management plans, which have finally been agreed after tortuous consultations, would not be implemented.
On reflection, this Bill is irresponsible and bordering on reckless. Deputies Sargent and Gormley are trying to turn back the clock and this simply is not possible.
Really.
I should have said Deputy Boyle.
I am trying to turn back the clock as well.
I would like to believe the Green Party is acting out of conviction on these matters but I cannot help thinking that taking this Bill in Private Members' time at this point is seen by it as more of a publicity stunt in view of public meetings taking place this week on the proposed incinerator at Ringsend.
As a member of a local authority, I always support the delegation of more powers to county and city councils. I had regrets about the provisions of the 2001 Act which made making and adopting waste management plans an executive function. However, the reality was, unfortunately, that local authorities were failing to act on this issue. The Act was necessary to ensure the waste planning process was finalised and that delays in bringing forward a regional approach and putting a waste management infrastructure in place were brought to an end. A situation whereby 90% of our waste was landfilled was no longer sustainable. Maybe at some stage in the distant future, these provisions can be reviewed but now is definitely not the appropriate time to do it.
In this Bill, zero waste policies are being advanced as a sole solution. This is simply not a runner. Zero waste policies have been adopted in New Zealand and Australia, for example, but these plans remain aspirational and long-term and will not and cannot work on their own. The Government is right to pursue an integrated waste management approach. Such an integrated policy makes provision for recycling, landfill and incineration. In short, five forms of action are being pursued by the Minister: prevention; minimisation; reuse and recycling; energy recovery and safe disposal. Such an integrated approach is the only practical way to proceed.
There are concerns about incineration. It is a controversial subject, but incineration or thermal treatment is only one part of the Minister's overall strategy. Health concerns are the primary focus of this debate and that is as it should be. People's fears should be addressed and a rational and informed debate is required. Nevertheless, it is my opinion that incineration is a safe, tried and tested technology capable of meeting stringent environmental standards and which is widely used throughout the EU. In an Irish context, I believe the Environmental Protection Agency would operate the highest standards with regard to such facilities. This debate will continue which I welcome.
I also welcome the new Government initiatives with regard to waste management. These include a national waste prevention programme, a national market development programme for recyclable materials and further producer responsibility initiatives in electrical and electronic waste in end of life vehicle and tyres, batteries, newsprint and so on. It also includes an office of environmental enforcement to improve enforcement performance, especially concerning illegal waste activities and a national strategy of biodegradable municipal waste to ensure the diversion of organic waste from landfill. It is intended to establish an environment fund to receive the proceeds of levies on landfill disposal and plastic bags and impose a ban on the landfilling of recyclable materials.
In this regard, I call on the Minister to further develop the so-called producer responsibility initiatives and, in particular, to tackle the problem of packaging. Consumers do not have much choice with regard to packaging. Products which they require are presented on a take it or leave it basis. This problem should be addressed at source by ensuring that industrial and manufacturing entities present their products with as little packaging as possible. I hope the Minister will pursue this further and bring forward imaginative policies to tackle it either at a national or EU level.
I also wish to deal briefly with the experience of Dublin city and county. A waste management plan for the Dublin region was adopted by Dublin City Council in 1998. Great progress has been made in its implementation. So much so, that the practices of citizens with regard to waste have changed dramatically. That did not happen by accident. Nowhere is this more evident than in the area of recycling. Dublin City Council has developed and is implementing a wide range of recycling initiatives, which are successful and are receiving wide public support. These contribute significantly to the reduction of waste volumes going to landfill. It is estimated that for the coming year, beginning November 2002, 15,000 tonnes of materials will be recycled, that is, diverted from landfill, as follows: 61% newspapers and leaflets, 34% mixed cardboard, 1% aluminium cans, 4% steel cans and 4% residues not suitable for recycling. The city council, of which I am a member, has put in place a wide range of initiatives and measures to deal with recycling that are having a real impact. The situation has changed considerably in Dublin, and in other local authorities. We have wheelie bins, the green Oxigen bins and the promise of brown bins. There has been major change. I believe the waste management strategies in place will be successful and I would not recommend any change at this time. By going back to the drawing board we would be slowing down the rate of progress.
What about incineration?
The Deputy loves it.
I wish to share time with Deputies Brendan Smith and O'Connor. It is my experience that an Opposition would usually temper its proposals due to the fear that, in the short-term, it may end up in Government and may have to stand over its proposals or that it may have them exposed to serious critical analysis. On reading the Bill, it strikes me that its proposers are in fear of neither outcome and they may be right to have that lack of caution for reasons I will set out in the course of the next few minutes.
Following the landmark decision in July by Mr. Justice Philip O'Sullivan in the case of Wicklow County Council v. Clifford Fenton and Dublin Waste, it appears that local authorities' powers of enforcement of waste management legislation have been improved. The decision may well result in a clean-up bill of up to €20 million for the directors of the company personally, the High Court having lifted the corporate veil of the company's separate legal personality. It was a great decision and one which proves that waste management is taken seriously.
Furthermore, the publication of the Bacon report on waste management together with the census figures published during the summer show that there is a great challenge in this area in the coming years. I believe that the polluter pays principle remains the most effective way to reduce waste and that commercial and industrial waste is, by far, the biggest contributor to our landfills. Incentives have to be provided to commercial and industrial enterprises to encourage them to adopt better practice in environmental policies. It is also essential that pay per weight be introduced as quickly as possible.
One of the characteristics of the debate on waste management has been an exclusive focus on charges associated with the policy. The European Council Directive of 1991 was carried into effect by the Waste Management Act, 1996, and signed into law by the then Minister for the Environment, Deputy Howlin. Since then, few of his Labour Party colleagues have brought themselves to support the polluter pays principle as enshrined in that legislation.
In my time on Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, three estimates have been passed containing a charge and on no occasion did any Labour Party councillor back the charge. A distaste for brave decisions clearly is not the exclusive preserve of Sir Humphrey Appleby and his kind. The Labour Party will have to critically analyse whether there is a dysfunction within its organisation whereby its councillors fail to carry through its national policies.
We implemented it.
The Bacon report recommends that new waste management strategies be prepared, incorporating a more realistic view of recycling targets and probable delays in the installation of thermal treatment plants. However, much of the assumptions on which the report is based have been proven inaccurate. In 2001, the Central Statistics Office predicted that Dublin would have the fastest growing population yet the recent census figures indicate that it is, in fact, the slowest growing area in the country. Furthermore, net migration has increased by 6.8% in the last six years, a much faster rate than had previously been predicted. What all of this means is that, at a practical level, some tough decisions lie ahead for local government. For example, the unpopular thermal treatment option may have to be swallowed.
The previous Minister for the Environment and Local Government recognised the difficulties ahead when he withdrew the power to decide a waste management strategy from local councillors and empowered county managers instead. The Waste Management (Amendment) Act, 2001, which came into force in July of last year, provided that the making of a waste management plan would be the function of the county manager rather than the county councillors while the power to replace the plan remains with the councillors. While I regretted that at the time, I believe it was a necessary step.
The Bill before the House is a step backwards. It is old battles being fought over again. We need to move forward and take tough decisions. One of the arguments against thermal treatment, and it is one which I stood over for some time, is that it discouraged recycling in the manufacturing industry. It was my view that industry, knowing that the final product would ultimately be incinerated, would produce material which did not necessarily have to be of a recyclable variety. Comhar – the National Sustainable Development Partnership – in its recently published report, admits that thermal treatment is inevitable, although stating clearly that it should be kept to an absolute minimum. This is an independent body which represents many NGOs and other State bodies. It was my view that this would be a backward step in an effort to develop an environmentally sustainable future for industry in Ireland.
However, in the past few years great steps have been taken to improve recycling facilities throughout the county. For example, in Dún Laoghaire, more than two thirds of residents have received green bins that allow them to recycle much of their household waste. The introduction of the plastic bag levy has virtually wiped out this insidious element of environmental waste and there is a much greater political will among younger politicians and civic instinct among the public to follow through on recycling, reducing and reusing, as Deputy Haughey mentioned.
People are more prepared to make the effort required to protect our environment and I commend the Minister's commitment to the educational element of waste management. Furthermore, recent revelations regarding illegal dumping have emboldened local authorities in the use of enforcement powers. In general, the Act requires measures to be taken in regard to the disposal of waste and provides for councils to pursue anybody who disposes of waste in a way other than in compliance with waste licences.
However, the need for enforcement and stronger fines would be reduced if proper incentives were provided. For example, most commercial and industrial waste is produced by enterprises that pay local authorities commercial rates. A waiver system could be introduced under statute that would allow local authorities to invite applications for reduced commercial rates from companies demonstrating best practice in the packaging, distribution and disposal of waste.
Under section 176 of the Planning and Development Act, 2000, waste disposal installations for the incineration of waste are subject to an environmental impact assessment carried out by An Bord Pleanála. The board may refuse a proposed development where it considers that the development is unacceptable on environmental grounds in terms of planning and sustainable development. Environmentalists have argued that dioxins generated by incineration may negate any value to the community. There is an argument for considering whether incinerators should be proceeded with in the absence of a pay per weight system throughout the State.
However, this also does not take into account the fact that the vast majority of waste and most illegal dumping is generated by constructed and other industries. Essentially, householders are the least of our problems. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council is in the process of drawing up a new development plan and we are trying to incorporate incentivisation and the green business network as best practice.
I have been appointed to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs and one of its functions is to adequately scrutinise all EU legislation. Had this committee been in place in 1975 when the first EU directive on waste management issued or in 1991 it would have provided a domestic forum for the discussion of the implications of the polluter pays principle. The committee will provide a new element to the decision-making process on European legislation. Tough decisions lie ahead and all parties will have to consider the greater interest of the community rather than short-term political gain. Mr. Justice O'Sullivan's decision is welcome in this regard.
Whatever environmental concerns may exist with regard to incinerators, the recent Bacon report highlights that landfill is a thing of the past and radical and innovative change is required if this generation is to leave the country as it found it.
I am glad to have the opportunity to contribute on this important matter, which has been discussed many times, particularly during the lifetime of the previous Dáil. This is also the first opportunity I have had to congratulate Deputy Gallagher on his appointment as Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government and I extend best wishes to him. He will bring great energy and ability to the Ministry, as he did to other Departments in the past.
Realisable targets must be set when discussing waste management policy. The local authority in my area, Cavan County Council, has had difficulties because of out-of-date and unsuitable landfill sites in a number of towns. The local authority members and its executive, to their credit, set out on a policy which involved closing unsuitable landfill sites and developing one major site to service the needs of the entire county. That facility was developed with the assistance of substantial funding from the Department approximately 18 months ago. It is a modern, suitable facility which also contains recycling resources. It was constructed on the basis that it would have the capacity to meet the landfill needs of the county for many decades.
I compliment the members of the local authority and the executive on their initiative in tackling a difficult issue. They consulted local communities to discuss the need to deal with waste management in a practical manner. They took into account the concerns of the local community and made decisions, which resulted in the establishment of a suitable landfill facility that will service the needs of the country for a long time.
There is no point in political parties or environmental organisations setting unrealistic targets or talking about zero waste plans. There needs to be a better drive to educate people about the need to segregate and minimise waste. I was abroad a number of years ago and I watched a report on Sky News regarding the success of the plastic bag levy, which was heartening.
That was a Green Party idea.
It was a substantial report. The reporter visited supermarkets in Dublin and Newry and highlighted the difference in the minimum number of plastic bags that was being used by shoppers in both supermarkets. Initiatives such as the plastic bag levy that capture the imagination of the people play a worthwhile role in minimising waste. I compliment the former Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Noel Dempsey, on ensuring that proposal was implemented.
I refer to litter in towns and cities. A tourist's first impression when visiting countries usually concerns the lack of litter or an unfortunate abundance of litter. Everyone who travels through the streets of our towns on weekend mornings is horrified by the predominance of litter on them. It is absolutely appalling that people can be so uncaring in the disposal of waste material. There is not only an extra cost involved in cleaning the streets, but a poor image is created for visitors.
Deputy Dan Wallace initiated a number of grant schemes when he was Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government, which provide assistance to schools to create awareness among children through competitions. The Minister, Deputy Gallagher is following suit but I would encourage an expansion of such schemes as that could mean a great deal. Such initiatives can ensure those who are at an impressionable age are guided in the right direction in terms of civic spirit and the need to keep the countryside as free of litter as possible.
As Deputy Haughey pointed out, increased economic activity has led to increased usage of consumer goods, thereby creating increased waste, but there is little excuse for the widespread escalation in the disposal of litter throughout rural and urban Ireland. All of us have a part to play to ensure awareness is improved, particularly among young people so that when they reach adulthood they will respect the environment.
Substantial progress has been made in recent years in the segregation of waste and in the number of centres and amenities that have been established. There has also been a sizeable increase in the number of Bring centres throughout each local authority area. The increasing number of facilities will ensure a widespread improvement in waste management nationwide.
I thank my Fianna Fáil colleagues for giving me the opportunity to speak on this matter. I am sure the Green Party leadership did not mean it personally when it tried to curtail our time.
Certainly not.
I congratulate the Green Party on initiating this important debate. I am sorry Deputy Boyle is not present. I have served with Deputy Sargent on the county council and I was a colleague of Deputy Boyle in another life. I compliment him on this Bill.
This is an important issue and I am sorry there is disagreement about it in the House. Deputy Brendan Smith made the relevant point that litter is the important issue in our constituencies. Tallaght is no different in this regard from any other part of the country. People talk to their representatives about various issues but litter is always on the agenda. An educational process has to be implemented where this issue is concerned. Many of the calls I receive are from people asking me what the council intends to do about litter and I often bravely remind them that litter is created by everybody. Many people understand this but many others continue to litter and I still get calls from them asking me to intervene with the local authority when they have been fined. It is important that we give a positive message about our attitude to this issue.
Waste is an issue of concern for everybody. Deputy Andrews referred to Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, Deputy Sargent will refer to Fingal County Council while Deputy Brendan Smith has just been talking about Cavan County Council. South Dublin County Council, which has been in existence since 1994, has been progressive on this issue. We spent much time this year convincing the council that it should not open a new landfill development near Corrageen in Tallaght. That issue crystallises the challenge we face. On one hand, we need to deal with the mountain of waste every household generates but, on the other, we have to figure out where it should go. We must have a policy to deal with it. People will say landfill is a great way to deal with waste but at the same time they do not want it near where they live. That is the difficulty. We have encountered it in Tallaght and south west Dublin just as my colleagues have in other local authority areas.
I am still a member of South Dublin County Council and I am waiting to hear from the Minister how long more I can be a member.
Will the Deputy be allowed to go forward the next time?
I am a servant of the people like Deputy Ryan and I am a democrat. I have been happy on the local authority and I would not be here if I had not been a member for ten years. I am proud of the efforts South Dublin County Council is making on this issue. Col leagues have mentioned the charges and how popular or unpopular they are. In my area, however, they have given the council additional resources which have allowed it this year to provide land after care, to operate Ballymount baling station and the Arthurstown landfill in County Kildare and to improve the refuse collection service. I will continue to make brave political decisions to ensure this work continues. As members of local authorities wrestle in the next month or so with estimates, they should understand the need to continue to support such work and to provide the services people seek.
If one asks people what the local authority is doing, they will not talk about the grandiose development plans but about whether the bins are being collected, how quickly they are collected and how the service is being delivered. I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this important issue.
I wish to share my time with Deputies Seán Ryan, McCormack, O'Dowd and Twomey.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Despite what Deputy Andrews thinks, the Labour Party has a substantial policy on waste management based on the principles of sustainable development and the polluter pays. I have a copy of the document with me and I will be happy to give him some copies to read and to pass around to his colleagues. The Labour Party also does not believe in double taxation or that a flat tax or the imposition of bin charges for waste management is a good idea.
I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate. The option of recycling all materials back into nature or the marketplace in a manner that protects human health and the environment is laudable. I will support the Bill on the basis of the aspirations it contains although I would welcome further detail on how the proposals might be achieved.
I wish to address two recent occurrences in this country which highlighted either the ineptness or the indifference of those who have responsibility for ensuring the safe recycling of waste or by-products. Ireland is highly dependent on its export food industry and, in particular, the green image that is so important to our markets abroad. The export of waste material containing hormones from a pharmaceutical company through a waste management company in Ireland to a further disposal company in Belgium led to a major animal and human health incident. The lack of clarity about the specific procedures and responsibilities of each party involved must be addressed. There is a need to revisit the legislation and the loopholes it contains which have resulted in the reputation of Ireland's waste management and disposal procedures being question able internationally and, even more importantly, a product originating in Ireland causing considerable havoc in Europe.
The second issue is the disposal of clinical waste. There are specific and detailed procedures and standards for the disposal of clinical or hazardous waste. It is unacceptable that it is possible for a hospital management, for example, to be compromised by the discovery of clinical waste and confidential records in the middle of a green area. This happened in my constituency and in other areas. It happened in a location where children congregated to play. While I do not wish to see a situation develop where it is necessary to police a process of good waste management, the enforcement of waste management must be taken more seriously. Above all, the health and safety of the community must be protected and the highest standards must be enforced.
The two incidents I have mentioned highlight the potential costs to the health of people or animals and to the economy. The wider environmental concerns are no less important for different reasons. Landfill has a limited shelf life but we need to know the Minister's proposals for incineration options. The issue of shortcuts through the planning process for the establishment of waste facilities has been dealt with already. Due to the possibility of shortcuts, it is crucial that the Minister informs the House of the proposed locations of regional incinerators.
The science and technology of waste disposal and incineration is constantly changing and improving. However, our ability to detect smaller and smaller levels of undesirable toxic compounds arising from waste disposal, particularly incineration, is also improving. We also are now better able to establish the health consequences of even small levels of those toxic compounds. It would be most undesirable to proceed with one side of the technology without having a parallel acknowledgement of the possible negative impacts of taking them on board. I do not need to remind the House of the outcome of a small but significant change in technology for processing animal carcases in the 1980s.
I am pleased to have the opportunity to discuss the future development of waste management and the crisis that exists with the disposal of waste. This crisis has developed as a result of the rapid growth in the production of waste in the past five years or so due to the economic boom, environmental concerns and pressure from the EU. For example, since 1998 there has been an increase of over 25% in the amount of waste collected throughout the country. At the outset, I said I would be honest and forthright in my contribution so while supporting the concept of the Bill, I believe that some clarification is required. The concept of zero waste operates in New Zealand but having read all the relevant documentation, I have not seen a case where reduction, recovery and recycling in themselves have eliminated all the waste produced. Can anybody demonstrate that such a process works 100% anywhere? We all aspire to reach that target but so far it has not been done. If there is a waste management process that requires a facility other than reduction, recovery and recycling, I would like to see it in operation.
I have a difficulty with politicians who oppose thermal treatment and landfill. If they are opposed to both systems and if reduction, recovery and recycling will not eliminate all waste, how will we dispose of our waste? Those are critical questions and the public cannot be fooled when it comes to answering them. We must be honest with people and state the facts.
The Government's strategy of preventing, minimising, reusing and recycling waste for energy recovery has failed because the necessary infrastructure was not put in place. People are prepared to play their part in recycling, but green bins must be provided to achieve this. Many local authorities have been unable to provide green bins due to financial constraints and the Department of the Environment and Local Government has been negligent in not supporting them.
More importantly, the Government has failed to provide a national recycling infrastructure. Notwithstanding the efforts of local authorities throughout the country, which have accounted for up to 50% of waste being recycled, unless such a national infrastructure is in place, much waste will be disposed of in landfill sites. Other countries have successfully dealt with recycling waste but Fianna Fáil has failed miserably to deal with the matter. The public and local authorities are ready to respond to the recycling initiative but the necessary national infrastructure is absent. Recycling is just part of the process of ensuring that we deal effectively with waste management.
I compliment Deputies Sargent and Boyle for introducing the Bill in Private Members' time. Waste management is also a concern of the Fine Gael Party and is a personal interest of mine, although I may not have chained myself to many trees.
A few.
Bushes.
However, I have planted as many trees as anybody in this House. During yesterday's debate, I was disappointed by the comments of the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Cullen, who was dismissive of the Bill which has created an opportunity to open up a debate on this important issue. I listened carefully to the last four Govern ment speakers, who are very fine people in their own right, but not one of them mentioned incineration, which the Bill seeks to address. They mentioned litter, including plastic bags, but not the possibility of incineration which the Government is hell-bent on introducing. It wants to burn waste instead of dealing with it properly.
Many local authorities, including Galway City Council of which I am a member, have made great strides in facing up to the problem of waste management. Two and a half years ago the council set about dealing with this matter and has now achieved a reduction of 58% in the amount of waste being sent to landfill. This was done through an educational programme by environmental officers who attended public meetings and visited people's houses. Galway city residents separated waste into 11 or 12 categories but it was a sham because, except for the compost element, we were not reusing the recyclable waste. The waste that was separated was being baled for export, which is not the solution. This happened because the previous Minister did not address the problem of separating waste. The Government did not provide incentives to encourage the recycling and reuse of waste products. Subsequently, this year we abandoned what had been the best waste separation process in the world.
I visited Nova Scotia which operates a much lauded separation system, yet Galway was light years ahead of Canada in what it was separating. However, we were light years behind them in the use we made of the separated recyclable waste. Galway city residents used to have four refuse bags to separate paper, cardboard, dry plastics and milk cartons. The situation has now regressed, however, because we are putting all that waste into one bin for baling and export because there is no market for it here. I challenge the Government to deal with this matter.
The Progressive Democrats Deputies are missing from the Chamber which is a pity because I would like to have challenged my constituency colleague, Deputy Grealish, who was elected on an anti-incineration platform. He and his Progressive Democrats colleagues should vote with us against incineration which the Government is hell-bent on introducing. The Minister took the power away from local authority members and gave it to county managers. When the Minister orders the county managers to jump, they respond, "How high?" That is why incineration will be introduced here, although I applaud the efforts of the Green Party to bring this matter up for discussion in the House.
I want to address a number of issues, including the health impact of incineration. The Minister, Deputy Dempsey, commissioned an analysis of all national and international documentation relating to the thermal treatment of waste and incineration. Unless and until that report is published by the Health Research Board, however, we should not proceed further with plans for incineration. An incinerator is planned for a location beside my town of Drogheda, although it will be nearby in County Meath.
Meath County Council has been shown up disgracefully with regard to one planning decision. Is the local authority more likely to reject an application for a créche or an incinerator on the same stretch of road within a mile of each other? County Meath turned down the créche on the grounds that the road carried heavy traffic and would thus cause noise and pose a danger to people. When it comes to incineration, planning is a joke because proper weight was not accorded to the arguments against the planned incinerator in County Meath when permission was granted for it.
I also wish to raise the issue of so-called regional waste management plans. Each county council was given a copy of what was called a regional waste management plan but they never met as a group to discuss that plan, so at the very least it is a misnomer. It is ridiculous that each county council in turn voted for the plan except the county where the incinerator was expected, Louth. What would happen if there was proper regional planning? All the county councils in a given region should meet and decide where they are going on the issue. The Minister steamrollered legislation through the Oireachtas on foot of the vote in County Louth but I commend everyone in Louth who voted against the incinerator, including those from Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and Labour.
I commend the Green Party on this important Bill.
Ours is a throw-away society and we have a waste management problem. I will focus on the incineration aspect of this complex issue. I am aware the Minister for the Environment and Local Government is keen to see an incinerator near his constituency of Waterford and I do not doubt the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will speak eloquently in favour of an incinerator for Dublin city when asked to do so by the Government, but are they right? We are still waiting for a health report on incineration. There are increased levels in certain cancers in Ireland and even though the medical profession is satisfied that the MMR vaccine is not related to autism, we are still seeing a huge increase in levels of autism. Could all this be due to increased levels of known and unknown toxins in our environment? We simply do not know.
There was a debate on incineration in Wexford recently and a council member went to the UK to investigate the issue himself. He concluded that incineration must be safe because the people working in the incineration plant looked healthy and there were flowers growing outside. This is true but it is too simplistic a deduction when talking about the dangers of environmental pollution. Sadly, however, the Government is not interested in genuinely promoting a recycling culture. Incinerators may be safe but they are also expensive and in a perverse way they compete for the waste we should be trying to reduce and recycle.
Ireland has an appalling record of illegal dumping and the Government is trying to build municipal incinerators in non-urban areas. This does not inspire confidence that the Government itself is confident about their safety. I am in favour of economic progress but I cannot support incineration unless I am absolutely satisfied we are not damaging the generations to come after us.
I am grateful to Deputy Twomey for giving me a minute of his time. I compliment the Green Party on this Bill. If the Government was really serious about sustainable development it would support this Bill. The Taoiseach spoke very eloquently in support of sustainable development at the world summit and he should support the idea of each county looking after its own waste, which is logical in comparison with the regional waste management plans currently formulated.
Let us forget about superdumps and incinerators, which are toxic health hazards, and let us be proactive and concentrate on recycling, which is more positive. The amount of recycling we are doing at present is abysmal in comparison with other countries. A superdump is proposed for Mayo but if that goes ahead there will be a revolution in Mayo as it will not be tolerated. Already we are getting waste from Sligo and we are to get waste from Galway, Roscommon and so on. There is no logic to that. Every county should look after its own waste. Incineration has been proven to be toxic. We need to get our act together on recycling, as that is the future.
I propose to share my time with Deputies Gormley and Cuffe.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I listened with interest to the Minister's speech yesterday. He outlined in great detail his understanding of the waste issue, the current situation regarding waste management, regional waste management plans and his plans for the future. The central focus of this Bill is incineration, as it intends to take incineration off the Irish agenda, but the Minister insists this is not possible so obviously there is a dispute here. This debate will continue into the future.
However, there is no dispute about the need for landfill now and, I hope, to a lesser degree in the future. The reality is that landfills are here to stay for the foreseeable future. For that reason we must ensure that whatever we do now regarding landfills is done properly. We do not want to be apologising in five, ten or 15 years for our inaction, carelessness, refusal to act in the face of evidence or dereliction of duty in not putting safeguards in place to protect the public and the unborn. That is what concerns me. Evidence is emerging through research by the Trinity Centre for Health Sciences that mothers living in close proximity to landfills are much more likely to have children with birth defects – one result indicated to me is that mothers living within 1.2 miles of a landfill are two and a half times more likely to have a child with birth defects. That is an alarming statistic which cannot be ignored.
Such information should spark an immediate review of the regulations governing the location of landfills and the review should take into account human beings as well as the environment, flora and fauna. I raised this matter with the Minister for the Environment and Local Government and although he acknowledged he was aware that the Trinity centre was engaged in such research, he said that because a report on the matter had yet to be finalised and published, he could not comment on putative findings.
However, that research is being carried out and I have outlined the frightening results produced. It cannot be ignored. I therefore request the Minister to engage with the Trinity centre with a view to establishing the exact status of its research and the expected time of publication. I also request that further work on landfill selection be frozen until the research is published.
I thank my Opposition colleagues for their support for the Green Party on this important Bill and for their kind words. Yesterday I listened to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government describe the Green Party as unrealistic and I was reminded of Des O'Malley when he was a Minister 25 years ago. He described those of us opposed to the proposed nuclear power plant at Carnsore Point in fairly colourful terms, saying we belonged to a flat earth society and that we were talking obscurantist nonsense. If we speed on to where we are now, the same rhetoric is being used by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government.
I am afraid time proved us right because nobody in their right mind would support nuclear power. We have been proved right on other issues also, such as ozone depletion, global warming and climate change. There was a time when people said we were alarmist for talking about climate change, but now that is accepted as a scientific fact. The success of the plastic bag levy was mentioned, and that is another Green Party idea.
This is not just about idealism, it is about science, which is on our side. In 50 years' time, people will look back and be astounded by our primitive attitude towards waste management. Instead of burying our waste we now propose to burn it. It is not about the NIMBY attitude. As far as I am concerned it is not in anyone's backyard.
Yes, I live in Ringsend and I have a personal interest in the fact that truck after truck will trundle past my door and the doors of my neighbours. I have campaigned vigorously on the issue of incineration for many years and have even received a gagging order from the courts. However, I campaigned sincerely on the issue and offered sincere solutions.
Deputy McCormack has mentioned the campaign of Deputy Grealish in Galway. I was not aware of that. I am, however, aware that my constituency colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, who has not even spoken on this Bill, campaigned on this issue. Leaflet after leaflet was issued expounding his virtues. As far as he was concerned he was the only person with the necessary clout, ability and expertise to stop the placing of an incinerator in the constituency. When he was not praising himself he was excoriating the Greens, whom he claimed would bring us back to the dark ages. Now is the opportunity for the Minister and the Progressive Democrats to vote for this Bill. That would be a certain way to stop an incinerator on the Poolbeg peninsula. I do not see any members of the Progressive Democrats in the House. They are treating this exercise with contempt. All they can do is make their own ridiculous proposals for thermal treatment, known as the Herhof method. This method simply makes waste into pellets which have to be incinerated later. It does not meet with international criteria and is a ludicrous suggestion.
Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats believe incineration offers a magical solution to the waste problem. One cannot defeat the laws of thermo-dynamics and make waste disappear. For every three tonnes put into an incinerator one tonne must be disposed of afterwards. How is bottom ash and fly ash to be dealt with? This is the real difficulty posed by incinerators.
Does the Government believe incinerators will operate for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year for 30 years without a hitch and that the EPA will look after them? I do not. Private operators are concerned with making a profit and not with public safety. They are interested in getting as much waste into their incinerators and not with health and safety. That is why I have personal fears for the Poolbeg peninsula and for my constituents.
The Greens offer real, reasonable and workable solutions. The zero waste concept works over a period of 25 years. We do not say we can get rid of waste. Landfill will always be part of the equation whether we have an incinerator or zero waste, but it will be an entirely different type of landfill.
No superdumps.
We would not have superdumps. We propose landfill sites of which one could be proud. They would be impeccably clean with no seagulls or rats. We want real recycling and reduction and incentives to industry.
I commend the Bill to the House and I hand over to Deputy Cuffe.
This Bill addresses the devastating blow dealt to democracy by the Minister's predecessor, Deputy Noel Dempsey. It also addresses the Minister's zealous admiration for incineration, which appears to be shared by the entire Fianna Fáil parliamentary party. British Nuclear Fuels changed the name of Windscale to Sellafield. Is the Minister now going to call incineration thermal treatment? Should his political career falter there will be an opening for him in BNFL's public relations department, such is his zeal for name changing.
Fianna Fáil wants to see incinerators, not just in the open countryside but also in some of the most densely populated areas of the country. Ringsend has been dumped on for generations. It has suffered the landfill site in Poolbeg, cement plants and the annual conflagration at the car recycling plant. It is not good enough that one of the most disadvantaged communities in the country is to be dumped on again with the proposal for an incinerator on the Poolbeg peninsula.
Incineration is expensive, produces climate change emissions, takes the pressure away from recycling and leaves a residue. Do we want to pay Treasury Holdings or its equivalent hundreds of euro per year per household to burn our rubbish? Is that Fianna Fáil's sad vision of the future? Incineration does little for job creation. One fellow drives the lorry and another pushes the button. This does not create jobs in a recycling economy. Incineration is incompatible with a serious attempt to create jobs within the recycling economy.
Waste management is not rocket science, although some incinerator sales representatives would like to convince us that this is the case. We do not need this sort of technology. We need to choose the options which already exist and are working abroad.
Ten years ago the Green Party members of Dublin Corporation directed the city manager to commission a waste management plan founded on the principles of city-wide waste reduction, reuse and recycling. We wanted this plan to be based on EU directives, to outline options for employment creation in waste management, to provide for source segregation of recoverables and to advance all of these issues. We were laughed at by the Minister's party colleagues but we are not laughed at now. We need more than a discussion in the Minister's Department. We need action in these areas. Targets must be set. We do not want to continue with the predict and provide strategy which seems to be good enough for the Minister and his consultants.
Incineration is not good for our agriculture, food or tourism industries. We can look abroad at many options. Australia places financial deposits on drinks containers to encourage recycling. That would prevent the Government from allowing the Irish Glass Bottle Company to fade away with the loss of hundreds of jobs.
Our Bill calls for a total ban on incineration as a waste management technology and a major emphasis on recycling. We want the powers of county managers to introduce regional waste management plans rescinded. We were appalled by the divide and conquer approach shown by the former Minister for the Environment and Local Government and by the blow it struck at local democracy.
Our proposals can work. The plastic bag levy is successful and similar incentives could help us to reduce our waste mountain. We also need incentives from the Department for markets for recyclables. Where are the incentives? What Departments are using recycled materials? The Department of the Environment and Local Government is making strides in that regard but what are other Departments doing?
We need to set a target for a waste free Ireland, perhaps by 2012, and we want to see clear and significant progress towards this goal. We believe a zero waste strategy would lead to innovation and would move beyond the incremental approach being furthered by the Minister's Department at present. Instead of embracing incineration we must opt for waste reduction, reuse and recycling, with well managed landfill for any waste remaining. This will ensure the clean, green image of Ireland is maintained and enhanced for future generations. Ireland's image abroad and our agriculture, food and tourism industries depend on it.
I commend the Bill to the House.
Question put.
Tá
|
Allen, Bernard.Boyle, Dan.Breen, James.Breen, Pat.Broughan, Thomas P.Burton, Joan.Connaughton, Paul.Connolly, Paudge.Costello, Joe.Coveney, Simon.Cowley, Jerry.Crawford, Seymour.Crowe, Seán.Cuffe, Ciarán.Deasy, John.Durkan, Bernard J.Ferris, Martin.Gilmore, Eamon.Gogarty, Paul.Gormley, John.Harkin, Marian.Hayes, Tom.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael D.Howlin, Brendan.Lynch, Kathleen.McCormack, Padraic.McGinley, Dinny. |
McGrath, Finian.McGrath, Paul.McHugh, Paddy.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Olivia.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Murphy, Gerard.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.O'Dowd, Fergus.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Pattison, Seamus.Penrose, Willie.Perry, John.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Eamon.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Sherlock, Joe.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Twomey, Liam.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack. |
Níl
|
Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, Barry.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Seamus.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe. Carey, Pat. |
Níl–continued
|
Carty, John.Collins, Michael.Cowen, Brian.Cregan, John.Cullen, Martin.Curran, John.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Tony.Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Ellis, John.Finneran, Michael.Fitzpatrick, Dermot.Fleming, Seán.Gallagher, Pat The Cope.Glennon, Jim.Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Hoctor, Máire.Jacob, Joe.Kelleher, Billy.Kelly, Peter.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Seamus.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, BrianLenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McEllistrim, Thomas. |
McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheál.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Mulcahy, Michael.Nolan, M.J.Ó Cuív, Éamon.Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.O'Connor, Charlie.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Donovan, Denis.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Malley, Fiona.O'Malley, Tim.Power, Peter.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wallace, Dan.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe.Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael.Wright, G.V. |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Boyle and Stagg; Níl, Deputies Hanafin and Kelleher.
Question declared lost.