Vol. 614 No. 4
107 Ms Enright asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if the nitrogen element of the nitrates directive as it applies in Irish law will be reviewed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5293/06]
112 Dr. Upton asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he has received or reviewed additional scientific information regarding the provisions of the EU nitrates directive, particularly in relation to nitrate and phosphate levels from agricultural waste; and when he expects to publish the deferred regulations in relation to the EU nitrates directive. [5300/06]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 107 and 112 together.
As indicated in reply to Priority Question No. 105 on today's Order Paper, the regulations which give effect to Ireland's nitrates action programme under the nitrates directive provide for nutrient management planning in line with the environmental requirements of the directive and long-standing guidelines published by Teagasc.
I also said that Teagasc has indicated that it may be possible to review part of its advice on crop nutrient requirements in a way which could improve the effectiveness of the regulations. My Department secured agreement with the European Commission that there is merit in allowing time for this advice to be elaborated. It will have to be a very short period of time because as long as this process goes on, it will delay the negotiations on the derogation. I am sure the Deputy will agree that that is something none of us would wish to consider. To this end, I announced the de facto deferral of Part 3 of the regulations. I and my colleague, the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Coughlan, jointly made it clear that if revised phosphate tables are brought forward by Teagasc and supported by robust underlying science, the Government would be prepared to make a case to the Commission for revising the current limits. Any formulation, and it is important to be accurate and truthful in this, would have to respect the environmental requirements associated with the nitrates directive. I am not sure what will come out of that further elaboration and I look forward to receiving material from Teagasc.
In regard to nitrogen standards, in agreement with farming representatives and in accordance with Sustaining Progress, Ireland is pursuing the derogation from 170 kg to 250 kg. That is critically important to farmers but, more particularly, it is important to dairy farmers. Deputies will understand the reason that is the case. It is crucial that we do nothing to jeopardise that set of negotiations. I did not make the point to Deputy McCormack but I make it now. Until we appeared to be moving off course yet again on this issue there were signs of much good will from the Commission. I believe that if we get on track with our negotiations and focus on that, we will be able to get the derogation but the exact date will depend on when we finish our work.
Teagasc has not been specifically requested to review its advice on the nitrates issues. However, to the extent that its revised submission on crop nutrient requirements, which is still awaited, suggests any further beneficial adjustments to the regulatory regime, these will be considered. The possibility of such further adjustments will also depend on its meeting the environmental requirements in the directive and also on them being approved by the Commission.
Why has Teagasc not been asked to review the advice on the nitrogen rather than the phosphorus element? Has the Minister considered any changes to the nitrogen tables? Teagasc has said it is prepared to review that aspect of the issue. Will the Minister formally ask Teagasc to review that area in addition to the other area he mentioned?
I understand the gentleman from Teagasc, who has been very helpful in recent times, offered the information. I am not standing on ceremony on this issue. I want to do the best for farming but I also want to bring to an end to the nonsense that has gone on in this country about the nitrates directive. The reality is that we have boxed ourselves into a serious corner. We are the last country to sign up to the nitrates directive. We have already lost a case in the European Court of Justice. We face daily fines and interference with the single farm payments and we will not be able to progress the derogation. In those circumstances, it is not rocket science to determine the best way of progressing to service farming.
To be clear, Teagasc proffered some additional advice on the issue of phosphates following the signing of the regulation. It has been invited specifically to do so quickly and in a concerted way. It has been asked to bring robust science to us and if it does all of that, we will be able to take it back to the Commission. I am awaiting material from Teagasc and when I receive it I will deal with it.
I was interested to hear the Minister say that he wanted to do his best for farming. I would understand that comment if it had come from the Minister for Agriculture and Food. If the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government takes that particular role in the matter, who is doing the best for the environment? We are taking about the pollution of water from fertilizer run-off from land and the physical waste from poultry farms, pig farms and so on going into ground water, rivers and lakes. I understand the farming interest and the concerns of agriculture in this matter but if the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government believes his role is to do his best for farming, who is defending the environment? Also, when will the advice Government got from Teagasc be published? Surely it is time it was in the public domain. Teagasc appears to be of the view that the advice it gave the Minister is a State secret.
The material, particularly the tabular statements which are the issue here, comes from published Teagasc material. There is no mystery about it. It is a transposition of advice that is long published. It comes from Teagasc's green book. There has been some modifications in those tables but the modifications have been upwards.
With regard to the comment about who is doing the best for farming, this is a very difficult time for farming. It is important that we apply this directive. I compliment the Deputy for making his points so accurately because there are some people in this House who would ignore them in terms of the dangers to drinking water and water in general, which is the purpose of the directive. That is why I, as Minister, have signed this regulation. It is 13 and a half years late, and a variety of Ministers before me could have done it but did not. The former Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, did a huge amount of work on this and almost came to the point where he could have signed off on it. To be frank, if it had been signed off then we would have been in a better position than we are now, and credit should be given to Deputy Noel Dempsey for that.
Why did he not do it?
The Deputies know the reason. At that time there was not the degree of agreement on it.
In this process I have listened carefully to what farmers and my advisers have said about how to protect the environment and reach a balance. I do not want to apply the regulation and finally bring this hiatus to an end in a way that damages farmers, nor would the Deputy or his party wish that either. One has to implement the directive — I have set about doing that — but one has to do it in a way that is conscious of the challenges that raises for farmers.
Is it not the case that due to three separate REP schemes over 15 years and the good farming practice guidelines introduced in 1996 water quality has dramatically improved in that period and we have the best quality ground water and river water in the entire EU and are one of the top 25 in the world? Is it not the case that Dr. Cross said at a meeting of the Joint Committee on the Environment and Local Government last week the nitrogen tables need to be reviewed and that he was prepared to review them if the Minister requested Teagasc to do so? At this late stage will the Minister ask Teagasc to review the tables? Is it not the case that every other country that made an application for a nitrates derogation has had to wait years to have it approved? Does the Minister believe we can succeed in getting it in six months? Is the Minister aware of research in the UK where similar samples were sent to four separate laboratories to analyse the nitrogen content of soil and the variation was between 63 kgs and 133 kgs of nitrogen per hectare? How can the tables be consistent given that type of inconsistency on a scientific level?
I do not want to continue to focus on this issue because it is not helpful — so much has been said by different persons from Teagasc that it is not helpful because we have had different statements from time to time in the recent past——
The Minister promised to be helpful.
I am simply telling the truth and telling it as it is.
Publish the scientific evidence.
I will be absolutely straight with the Deputy.
Will the Minister publish it?
If everybody spoke with a single resolve on this issue it would be far better for farming. The green book from Teagasc, as the Deputy should be aware as he speaks on agriculture, has been published. It has been the standard and that is what is transposed——
Will the Minister publish——
If the Deputy as an agriculture spokesperson for a party that prides itself in this regard——
Will the Minister publish the information presented to him?
——does not know that, God help us. The Deputy's second point relates to one of a series of statements made by Dr. Cross who did say everything in this directive was agronomically sound. The Deputy asked the length of time it would take for a derogation. I was absolutely confident we would be able to obtain this derogation within a rapid timescale until the latest issue arose. I will have to take whatever science comes from Teagasc on this issue. If there is any equivocation about it, it will not be helpful to farming. I hope the temporary suspension of Part 3 will be a matter of weeks not months. If Teagasc can produce robust science we will go back to the Commission and deal with it at that stage. I am not prepared to tolerate undue delays which will put the derogation under threat. The Deputy, as a spokesperson on agriculture, will agree that particularly on the nitrates side the number one priority must be to get the derogation increased from 170 kg to 250 kg, because otherwise one would be arguing a case for damaging a huge number of farmers, particularly in dairying.
Is it not the case that water quality has improved?
The Deputy is correct. Water quality in this country has improved dramatically. It is also a fact that the highest preponderance of phosphate and nitrate contamination comes from agriculture.
Without the nitrates directive——
That was the point to which Deputy Gilmore adverted. The Deputy is correct that farming alone should not be blamed for contamination of water. There have been other sources but there has been a huge amount of investment in addressing those other sources and we need to deal with the last outstanding source.
In the context of water quality in the EU.
108 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the progress to date in 2006 on the national spatial strategy; if he intends to review the national spatial strategy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5270/06]
122 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the status of the national spatial strategy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5251/06]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 108 and 122 together.
At national level substantial progress is being made in implementing the national spatial strategy, which is having an increasing influence on policies and programmes across a range of Departments and agencies. At regional level, a key policy bridge between national development priorities and local planning has been put in place with the adoption of regional planning guidelines to provide a strategic framework for local planning. At county and city level, strategic land use and planning frameworks for a number of gateways are in place and work is well advanced on others.
The potential impact of the strategy in terms of achieving more balanced regional development has been underscored by the Government's decision in July 2005 that the regional dimension of the next national development plan, now in preparation, will be broadly based on the NSS. The priorities of the NSS and regional planning guidelines have also been recognised in the Government's ten-year investment plan for transport, Transport 21.
In leading the implementation of the NSS it is my intention to ensure it continues to inform the macro-investment agenda. To support the development of the NSS gateways, my Department in conjunction with Forfás, has commissioned a major report, now nearing completion, on their potential for accelerated development in housing, commercial and employment terms and the key infrastructure priorities that will be necessary to facilitate such development. Similar work is also being undertaken in relation to the hubs identified in the NSS. Work on a feasibility study to further develop the concept of an Atlantic gateways corridor, with enhanced linkages and networking between Cork, Galway, Limerick-Shannon and Waterford, is also nearing completion.
My Department, in co-operation with other relevant Departments, is also pursuing measures to enhance co-operation on spatial planning and infrastructural investment across the island of Ireland, as endorsed by the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference. In conjunction with the Department of Regional Development in Northern Ireland, a framework is being developed for collaborative action between the NSS and the Regional Development Strategy for Northern Ireland, thus creating conditions that will facilitate enhanced competitiveness on the island as a whole.
I am satisfied the national spatial strategy provides a strategic planning framework which is of sufficient robustness and flexibility to cater for changing circumstances, including the most recent CSO national population estimates which suggest a population of up to 5 million by 2020. It is not proposed to review the strategy at this stage.
I welcome the Minister's response. I am not being rude but I cannot hear the Minister clearly. It may be the way the sound is being transmitted. It is distorted on this side.
Actually——
It might be my earphones. Perhaps the Minister should move to the Taoiseach's position.
Modesty prevented me from doing that but I will do it now.
I suggest we need somebody there at whom we can have a good laugh. I say that as a joke. I welcome the Minister's comments although I did not hear them all clearly. However, I note that he mentioned a report that he has commissioned and which will be ready shortly. I ask the Minister to put it in the public domain as soon as possible. I welcome his commitment on the North-South issue of spatial strategy. Recently, I attended an SDLP conference on North-South spatial strategy which was useful. The problem, and this is one the Minister would have in commuting to and from Dublin City, is that our roads on the east coast are continually clogged. No matter how early one rises in the morning one can still have to wait at least an hour or an hour and a half to get through the hub or the gateway into the city at the port tunnel. The east coast is being developed exclusively. It is no longer sustainable to live along the east coast. If people have to travel their commuting time takes longer and their contact times with families are short. I ask the Minister to accelerate his commitment to the regional hubs and particularly those hubs and growth centres in the west and the transport corridors thereto, because that is where we can share the wealth and the prosperity of our nation by bringing the jobs to those areas rather than locating them all in Dublin.
I apologise for the sound problem. I could hear that there was a difficulty. With regard to the gateways generally, the Department is working with Forfás on a report which will look at the infrastructure needs. The Deputy is correct. The whole purpose of the national spatial strategy is to produce a much better balance on the island. There was a noise when I was making that point.
On the Atlantic corridor, which would be of particular interest to Deputy Ring, who put the question, the feasibility study is to consider the enhanced linkages and networks between Shannon and Limerick, Cork and Waterford cities. This study is nearing completion and it will be well worth debating when it is completed.
I agree with Deputy O'Dowd regarding his patch, the north east, and that of Deputy McGinley, the north west, in that one should consider the difficulties posed in those regions by the abomination that is the Border. I was in Clones yesterday and, as both Deputies will know, it has been hit extremely badly because of its location. North-South co-operation, or all-island co-operation, could be very beneficial and could result in a win-win situation. I agree with the Deputy that this is an important area.
Does the Minister agree that the key issue regarding the national spatial strategy concerns the availability of zoned land and the market in terms of where people want to purchase houses? Has the Minister produced any figures relating to the capacity of land on the east coast that has been rezoned but not yet built upon?
The Minister stated the national spatial strategy was being used as a means of evaluating the need for infrastructural projects. It was presented as a means of delivering in respect of leisure, education and various infrastructural projects, for example, by way of drawing development from the east coast to other areas. To what extent is the strategy being used in this regard? It seems there is a considerable amount of catch-up in areas subject to a high level of development. It is very difficult to see how the resources can be spent in the two places at the same time.
The Deputy, like me, represents a constituency very much affected by the spill-over from Dublin. Let me give a couple of examples of how the national spatial strategy links directly into that. The five-year capital investment envelopes which have been agreed reflect the strategy. It is particularly important to find out the infrastructural needs regarding the western corridor. The high density rail-based corridor in Cork is directly related to the strategy and is providing additional public transport to 20,000 homes.
The national spatial strategy has significance even within the Dublin area. On the creation of a more compact Dublin, the idea behind the plans for Dublin city, Fingal, south Dublin and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown is to promote substantial housing output in those areas. However, one encounters problems other than those I have mentioned and Deputy Gilmore will be able to speak at length on the problems associated with increased density in his constituency. Getting the balance right is a challenge but the national spatial strategy is a good template against which to do so.
I understood the national spatial strategy would have to be driven and I recollect that the Minister's Department was to be the lead engine in driving it. Will he tell us how this is done? I do not see anybody in charge of the strategy. I hear it mentioned from time to time but cannot recall a single decision made by a planning authority or the Government that would not have been made in any case. No planning decision that I can recall turned on the existence of the national spatial strategy.
I disagree with the Deputy. There have been many cases in which the strategy——
Decentralisation——
The first planning decision I made last year concerned the scale of retail units. We made a specific——
That concentrated development in Dublin.
No.
The national spatial strategy was to spread development to the regions.
A specific relationship was established between that and the hubs and gateways. There was a specific cross-reference——
Are we to have an IKEA at every gateway?
Yes, one can have that type of development——
They are moving back into the city centres in the United Kingdom.
——in each of those areas.
They are getting smaller.
I am sure the Deputy, like me, welcomes the prosperity that will come to Ballymun.
Rezoning.
Each of the major investment decisions refers back to the national spatial strategy. Under Transport 21, many of the detailed planning issues are related specifically to the strategy.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
