Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 2 Jul 2008

Vol. 658 No. 2

Hazardous Waste: Statements.

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley)

I welcome this opportunity to address the House on the former steelworks site on Haulbowline island. When the matter was last raised in this Chamber, I was in Cork at a meeting on the Green Paper on local government reform with local representatives from all political parties. I thank my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Hoctor, for deputising for me on that occasion and dealing with such a complex issue. I wish to address the real concerns of those living and working in the Cork Harbour area. I want to make it clear that we are dealing with an environmental challenge that did not manifest itself overnight but is instead the legacy of an industrial past. While we do not have much experience of such a legacy in this country, it is common elsewhere in Europe.

The steel plant on Haulbowline island was an important part of the local economy for more than six decades. The site has the potential to contribute to the local society and economy again in the future, albeit in a more environmentally acceptable manner, and I think it will do so. Industrial activities of this nature were poorly regulated during those decades, unfortunately. By contrast, an integrated approach to the regulation of such facilities is now the norm. The consequence of such poorly regulated activity is the accumulation of an unquantifiable, but clearly significant, quantity of waste in the area of the facility known as the "east tip". While we do not have all the details of what was dumped there over a 62-year period, we know that the site is seriously contaminated. It has been widely known for some time that serious contamination has taken place. The contamination is rightly a cause of concern for the local community.

I propose to address the role of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in managing the Haulbowline site. I will do so from a twin perspective — to allay public concern and to challenge those who are interested in other issues. As Deputies are aware, the steel plant was sold by a previous Government in 1996 for £1 and went into liquidation in 2001. In 2003, the Government gave the Department the task of co-ordinating the complex legal issues which were outstanding at that time. The Department was also asked to provide for site security and maintenance. Crucially, it was given responsibility for enabling a site investigation to be carried out to assist the Government in determining the best option, environmentally and economically, for the future use of the site and its remediation.

In its discharge of this mandate, the Department arranged for the carrying out of a comprehensive site investigation; established a system of ongoing environmental monitoring; decontaminated and demolished the steelworks buildings; and arranged for a site surface clearance contract with Hammond Lane Metal Company Limited. As a result of these actions, the Government can now make an informed decision on the future use of the site. A detailed risk assessment of the entire site, with recommendations for the appropriate remediation that is required, can be undertaken. Last evening, I met representatives of the local community, including Senator Boyle. I took the opportunity to hand to them the entire report on the site investigation which concluded in 2005, including the full suite of technical data it generated.

Deputy Simon Coveney

There are four other reports. That is the problem.

Deputy John Gormley

No. The Deputy is quite wrong. I am happy——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister, without interruption.

Deputy John Gormley

Can I say——

An Ceann Comhairle

He has just ten minutes.

Deputy John Gormley

I will answer the Deputy's questions when he asks them.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I can quote from the reports.

Deputy John Gormley

The Deputy is incorrect. As I said to the Deputy earlier this morning, if this is an exercise in eliciting information, I am quite happy to give him any information he likes. I will give him everything if that is what this is about.

Deputy Simon Coveney

We got it by means of a freedom of information request.

Deputy John Gormley

If it is about political point-scoring, that is a different matter.

Deputy David Stanton

No.

Deputy John Gormley

If it is about getting information, the Deputy can have every bit of information he wants.

Deputy Simon Coveney

The Minister should listen to what we have to say before he starts making such accusations.

Deputy John Gormley

The Deputy can have every bit of information he wants.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Minister should not lecture us.

Deputy John Gormley

I gave the representatives all that data and the full suite of technical data which it generated. I also gave them the reports on the ongoing monitoring of the site which has been carried out over the intervening period. These documents are now in the public domain and my Department has arranged with the consultants who produced the 2005 report that they will clarify any technical issues which may be raised.

This information is the total of the reports and investigations of the site arranged by my Department. The 2005 report in particular summarises earlier desktop studies and, more importantly, reports on comprehensive intrusive site investigation which included extensive analysis of soil, water and air, including sub-surface testing for heavy metals. It is important to stress this point. The more recent work on the site was intended to be solely for the purpose of surface clearance. The earlier investigation involved extensive sub-surface investigation.

I base my reassurance to the community on these reports which have indicated no immediate threat to human health or the environment in the locality, while, of course, recognising that this is a problematic site which will ultimately require an extensive and co-ordinated resolution.

The particular issue which arose recently relates to the uncovering by a sub-contractor of sub-surface waste. Sub-surface excavation of waste was not part of the Department's contract with Hammond Lane Metal Company Limited. It was the considered view of the Department, following consultations with the Environmental Protection Agency and Cork County Council, that the required course of action in the short term would be to cap the exposed waste with inert slag material.

This was not acceptable to one of Hammond Lane's subcontractors who expressed concern that liability might accrue to it as a consequence of any impact that the disturbed material might cause. By way of reassurance, and in the context of the then proximity of the end of the planned surface clearance works, the Department wrote to the contractor on 18 April 2008 advising that the back-filling approach was what was required.

It was also stated that the management of the area which had been disturbed would fall to be determined by the Government, in the context of the pending decision on the overall future of the site and the resultant more comprehensive remediation which might be required. The contractor was also assured that it would not be expected to accept future liability.

Despite these assurances, and repeated instructions to stop unauthorised works related to the sub-surface waste, including by letter from the Chief State Solicitor on 23 May 2008, the sub-contractor refused to leave the site and continued to operate without authorisation and in a piecemeal fashion, causing a potential threat to the environment. Following legal advice, the contract with Hammond Lane Metal Company Limited was terminated with immediate effect on 30 May 2008.

In light of these recent events, my Department has now re-engaged the consultants to carry out an independent and rigorous assessment of site conditions. This assessment is now under way and will involve analysis of soil, slag, dust, surface and ground water samples for all likely contaminants, including heavy metals such as chromium. The results will be published.

My Department and other relevant agencies are properly engaged in the management of this legacy site in a manner which is consistent with good practice and minimisation of risk to human health and the environment. A coherent overall approach, rather than piecemeal action which could inadvertently cause problems to the local community and the environment, must be taken and that is the objective pursued by the Department.

I have been an environmental campaigner for 26 years. I understand fully the concerns of local people and those of the Deputies opposite. I know they are doing their job in trying to hold the Government to account. I say to those Deputies, genuinely, that I will give them any information they require and I will give the same to any residents who seek it. It may not be sufficient to talk across this Chamber but if the Deputies wish to meet with me to discuss the matter, I am more than happy to oblige them.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I wish to share my short time with Deputies Stanton, Clune and Hogan.

I recognise the Minister's commitment to the environment which is not in question here. I also recognise that information we have seen in respect of this site and its handling raises serious concerns. I do not want to get into issues of relationship between sub-contractors and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. My issue is one of public health. This is a site in the middle of Cork Harbour which is not safe, as information from independent sources suggests. That is why I questioned the Minister's statement which attempted to reassure people that there is no risk to public health.

I will raise four specific issues. Last December, a shoreline sample was taken, the results of which I have in front of me.

Deputy John Gormley

By whom?

Deputy Simon Coveney

The sample measured mercury. It was taken by independent consultants and I can show the reports to the Minister afterwards. If he has not seen them, he should have. The figure quoted for mercury found on the beach outside this site is 281 milligrams per kilogram. The recommended intervention level is ten. This is 28 times the level that should require intervention. What does the Minister say to that? Has he seen that report?

A second issue of concern is that, in an effort to get agreement, the Department agreed to take on an independent engineer with expertise in landfill to try to establish how much surface level material was left to be moved by the contractors. I have an e-mail from that engineer which states, in part:

Today is our fifth day on site and the process of quantifying the quantities of surface waste left for disposal for the Department of the Environment is progressing well. However, we feel obliged to make an interim report regarding the findings so far. It is of considerable concern to us that there are significant levels of hydrocarbon-contaminated mud under the constant influence of tidal movements and percolating rainwater which we would deem necessitating emergency treatment immediately.

That engineer was let go the following week by the Department. What does the Minister say to that? Why did this occur? What has happened regarding the concerns expressed by that engineer?

Third, is it appropriate that the Department's representative at the former Irish Ispat site, in respect of managing the environmental monitoring and clean up of the site, used to be Ispat's quality and environmental manager? That is a genuine question. It was the same situation for Irish Steel.

Is it appropriate to appoint, again, White Young Green to do a job it already did in 2005? That company is the only one that says there is not a serious public health threat at Haulbowline while three or four other reports state that there is such a threat.

Deputy David Stanton

Deputy Coveney is right to say that this is a public health issue. We have had much correspondence from people in the Cobh area who are concerned about public health. Is the Minister aware of the National Cancer Registry report which indicates that when rates for the Cobh urban area were compared to Ireland at large, the incidence of cancer in Cobh was 44% higher than what might have been expected?

Will the Minister organise a baseline independent health study in Cobh and the Cork Harbour area? Does he agree that this is very serious and worrying? The study I mentioned was carried out for the years 1994 to 2005.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Was that the National Cancer Registry?

Deputy David Stanton

It was.

Will the Minister also give assurances regarding the position of the Irish Naval Service on Haulbowline Island? Naval personnel are living and working there. A member of the service rang me yesterday to tell me that when the recent work started, the high levels of dust on the base were frightening in the mornings when they entered it. In his response the Minister said he was worried about a potential threat to the environment. Could he quantify that threat? Why was it okay to move the surface slag from the site and not okay to move the underlying material, which amounts to 500,000 tonnes? Is the cost of the work a factor in the Minister's decision to cease work and cap the site? Will he state whether there is an aquifer under the island or in the area that might be at risk? I understand the site is in a limestone area. Is there leachate seeping from the site into ground water or sea water and is there a danger of dust blowing into Cobh, east Cork and the surrounding area?

Deputy Deirdre Clune

I welcome the Minister's invitation to meet him and take him up on it. Will he make the report he made available to the residents last night available to Members present and other public representatives?

Deputy John Gormley

No problem.

Deputy Deirdre Clune

There is considerable concern and people need to have the facts in order to answer the questions for themselves. That would be an important first step for us.

Last week the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Máire Hoctor, referred to a comprehensive site survey carried out by White Young Green. Its content seems to be quite extensive. I cannot understand why the company is on site again to look for chromium 6. People are asking whether this did not arise originally and whether the first site survey was not fully comprehensive. Given the recent concerns, what was done in 2005? The Minister stated the new survey is in response to the work being carried out by the subcontractor but the type of waste would not have changed because, as he said, it had been accumulating for over 60 years under Irish Ispat, which was formerly known as Irish Steel.

The issues associated with the subcontractor comprise a side issue to many people; the main issue comprises the waste deposited on the site and the need for the Minister to provide information and reassure people he is fully committed to dealing with it. I accept he is committed personally but we need the Government as a whole to be committed. There ought to be enough funding made available in the budget to carry out the required clean-up on the site. I understand the tide is washing through boreholes and that the run-off and leachate from the site are being washed into the harbour. Capping the site seems fruitless if the tidal elements affect the boreholes.

What kind of survey was carried out in 2005 such that it did not indicate the levels of waste that have now been made known to the public? If we had the results of the survey, perhaps we could answer that question. The Minister stated another site survey is being carried out at present. This will result in further questions and I call on the Minister to ask an independent body to examine the results. This will enable people to formulate answers to worrying questions. The Minister stated in the media last week that he is happy there is no threat to public health in the harbour area. We need the relevant information to be satisfied on that question.

Deputy Phil Hogan

This is a very serious issue and I know the Minister is treating it seriously. When was he first briefed on it and when was its seriousness first brought to his attention? The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has been involved with this matter since 2005. It arises from a court case that was struck down in respect of a licence by the Environmental Protection Agency in 2002. The agency, the Minister and Cork County Council have reports and they should be made available to all Members of the House. It was disrespectful to Members of the House that information was given to residents yesterday evening, including a person who has no democratic mandate, and not given to all Members of the House.

Deputy John Gormley

Does the Deputy disapprove of that?

Deputy Phil Hogan

In fairness, everybody is entitled to the information. There are public representatives on all sides of the House, including that of the Minister, who are genuinely concerned and want to be in a position to answer the questions they are being asked by residents.

Deputy John Gormley

I gave the answers to the residents.

Deputy Phil Hogan

Yes, but what about the public representatives elected by the people?

Deputy David Stanton

We should have received them also.

Deputy John Gormley

They are receiving the answers also.

An Ceann Comhairle

I must call Deputy Ciarán Lynch.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The risks to public health have been made known and must be dealt with by the Minister's Department. I ask him to move as quickly as possible to provide us with all the information he has only admitted to laying in the Oireachtas Library this morning.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

I wish to share time with Deputy Kathleen Lynch.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

This is certainly a public health issue and is possibly the most significant one that has arisen in the State in a long time, if not ever. When the story broke last week, it presented an opportunity for the Minister to show some leadership. Instead of showing leadership, he engaged in a blame game and blamed the local newspaper that broke the story. He blamed the contractor and also political parties. There were two specific responses. The newspaper that broke the story, the Irish Examiner, summed up the Minister’s response in its editorial last Friday when it stated “His was an amateur, half-cocked attempt to undermine the messenger, and amount to no more than a momentary diversion in a scandal that has run unchecked for nearly a decade”. As Deputy Stanton indicated this morning, there are genuine concerns in the area and the residents are rightly concerned. That no action has been taken on the many reports on this matter is of concern. Verbal assurance on the part of a Minister is not enough because the people living in the area in question know the worth of verbal assurances.

Last Thursday, given that the Minister was in Cork and attending to Green Party business, among other matters, he should have got into his ministerial car and travelled to the site, phoned the county manager, met the chief executive officer of the Environmental Protection Agency and begun to work on an action plan. He should not enter the House a week later and state that steps are beginning to be taken.

We are still at a loss regarding the Minister's communication with the county manger or the Environmental Protection Agency. Are all the reports of all the agencies on the Minister's table or are there others he has not seen and which are not available to the public?

I welcome the fact that the Minister met residents last night but his duty of care is far greater than that which would have him meet a residents' association. First, he is accountable to this House. Last week, the town council in Cobh and the county council requested a meeting with him but he has not yet agreed on a date to meet. Further matters arise with regard to accountability.

What plan has the Minister to offer assurance to the local community? Assessment reports have been carried out and further ones have been indicated this morning. What is the correlation between what we are now finding out and what was known originally? How accurate were the assessment reports produced in 2004?

Last year, before the general election, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin, was running around telling people he was to build a hotel and jetty on the site. In light of the risk assessment reports, can he state what his plan was based upon? Is the plan still active? Last week the Minister for Environment, Heritage and Local Government stated he had difficulty obtaining information from various agencies and Departments. This is an utter nonsense in that he, as Minister, should experience no blockage in obtaining any such information.

Some 80,000 tonnes of material were removed from the site in 2004 and 500,000 tonnes remain to be removed. If one wanted to visualise the remainder of the waste material, one should visualise a tonne, multiply it by 100,000 and then by five. This indicates the extent of the difficulty. The residents need clear indications as to what will happen. I understand some of the material removed from the site was used as underlay in roadworks. Can the Minister clarify this?

In his response today, the Minister stated that work will begin soon. It was indicated to me this morning that the contractor is to resume work on Monday morning. If so, given the Department's concern that the work was being carried out in a piecemeal manner, what will be done differently next week? The contractor is on record as saying that no surface work can be done on the site because, as soon as one goes near the surface, further serious problems arise. I wish to know what the contractor intends to do next week. I also wish to know what timeframe is envisaged by the Minister in this regard and what costs will arise. What price will the Minister pay? As this issue is examined more closely, only one conclusion can be reached, namely, that the Haulbowline site must be dealt with in its totality.

While I believe two air monitors are operating at Haulbowline, I understand there may have been a third, which has been removed. The Minister should clarify what are the specifications of such air monitors. Given that staff returned to work last Friday morning without any assurances as to their personal safety, are the monitors modified or do their specifications enable them to detect the materials disclosed in the Irish Examiner last week? In respect of the workers’ day-to-day safety, such monitors provide their only assurances, by indicating they are working in a safe environment.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch

Interest in this debate is wider than those who have spoken. An entire harbour community is interested and I was pleased the Minister met the residents last night. However, this issue goes beyond them. Town commissioners in Monkstown, Passage West and Cobh, as well as Cork county and city councillors, ultimately will be obliged to oversee and be responsible for what happens on this site. The Minister must meet such individuals as a matter of urgency.

When the issue first came to light, the Minister started on the basis that because he was a Green Party Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, he knew best. Clearly, this was not the case. Certain questions must be asked and responded to. Not one, but three reports were produced. While there is uncertainty as to whether the report available to the Minister constitutes a fourth report, three reports were produced from 2003 onwards. It is not as if people did not know about the issue. Moreover, they knew of the difficulties involved and the necessity to solve the problem. However, this does not appear to have been the attitude taken when the story was unearthed and exposed in the media.

Chromium 6 is the most dangerous substance present on the site and one must be extremely careful about it. My information is that the dust is most dangerous. Therefore, one cannot unearth any part of the slag heap without covering it to ensure the dust will not be carried away on the prevailing winds. As anyone from Cork is aware, there are prevailing winds in the harbour. This is what must happen.

The people living around the harbour must be told what action is being taken. Moreover, they must be reassured because this is not the first issue people in Cork have dealt with in respect of dangerous chemicals. Cork is the location for the preponderance of Ireland's chemical industry. The people will not be fobbed off as they are able to read reports and have been doing so for years. They know what to look for and when they are being fobbed off. One must be extremely careful in this regard, as one cannot put people's health at risk. It is not good enough for the Minister to lecture Members to the effect that he is the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and knows more about the environment than anyone else. Clearly, he does not.

People living around Cork Harbour must be reassured that what must be done at the site will be done in a safe manner to protect them, their children and those who will come after them. Moreover, there should be no further leaks about discoveries of matters already contained in reports. The Minister should outline the plan. Will it involve a covered unearthing to prevent dust particles from being carried away by the prevailing winds? I refer to the other three reports that the Minister continues to state are not available. They are.

Deputy John Gormley

I never said any such thing.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch

Where are they and can Members have them? My information is they date back as far as 2003. The Minister must have known about an issue that has the potential to be so hazardous. It must have been one of the priority issues when he entered government. As a matter of urgency, he should meet the local authorities involved.

Deputy Arthur Morgan

The first point regarding the situation at Haulbowline is that the persistent claims by the Government that there is no health risk do not ring true. This morning I was informed that excavation work was being carried out in what was believed to be the most contaminated part of the site. Interestingly, a departmental official who was present to represent a Department which claims that there is no health risk was wearing a protective mask. Perhaps the precautionary principle was in operation. Apparently, the driver of the excavator was not wearing such a mask and Members may take from that what they will.

This matter has arisen previously. Several reports in 1995 stated the site was heavily contaminated on the basis of dust samples and indications there had been leaks into the river. However, these reports were not acted upon and 39 workers who were allowed onto the site were not advised to wear protective masks, thus placing them in a highly dangerous position. This was a highly irresponsible decision, given that the reports ought to have acted as a warning sign regarding the health risks to any person accessing the site and, in particular, any person working directly in the contaminated area.

When workers and contractors on the site heard of the rumoured reports and their contents, they requested copies but were told they were confidential. I have been informed that five reports have concluded the site is heavily contaminated. If there are such reports on health and safety issues, there is a legal and moral obligation to make them available. To do otherwise is to place those working in such circumstances in danger without their knowledge. Arising from their concerns, the aforementioned 39 workers have sought medical advice. However, the doctors who have examined them are hampered by not knowing what tests to carry out because no one is certain exactly what contaminating substances are involved, apart from the confirmation that chromium 6 is one of them. However, such information is contained in the reports and making them available constitutes a clear matter of public interest, not least to the 39 workers concerned, as well as others who may have come into contact with those substances.

This is the issue at stake. While it may be a source of embarrassment for several Ministers and former Ministers as far back as 1995, that is only a minor issue. The Minister should put aside the desire to score points or to hide his blushes and publish the reports, which is what the people want.

Deputy John Gormley

That is what I have been doing.

Deputy Arthur Morgan

In fairness to the Minister, he has at least shown a degree of openness in his dealings with local residents. I understand that yesterday he made available to them a number of reports, including a previously confidential report from 2005 commissioned by Cork County Council which found the carcinogen, chromium 6, to be above acceptable levels. This certainly would explain the above average rate of cancer in the general area. I understand he also has promised to make available to them all previous reports, as well as a new report by independent consultants. If that is the case, it is to be welcomed but as I stated previously, he should go further and publish them.

Apart from the specific case under discussion, once again Members are dealing with a situation in which the public interest has been sacrificed to political expediency. This has been the case in respect of the Sellafield plant, an issue with which I have been involved for many years and in which we have had to contend with persistent denials, cover-ups and sleight of hand designed to obscure the facts. The bottom line in many instances appears to be that State bureaucrats and their political masters — perhaps that ought to be the other way round — will go to inordinate lengths to prevent the emergence of any facts that might embarrass them or prove that they have been in error, even in instances where they are left carrying the can for events that happened before they had responsibility for them. Perhaps an inherited corporate code of omerta is in operation. On the other hand, members of parties who were once in the position in which the Minister now finds himself, are acting as if the matter has nothing to do with them and their parties were never in government. People affected by these issues do not care about those matters. They are not interested in who was Minister back then and who got which report and on which date. They are solely interested in the truth about the potential risks to which they have been exposed. We need to ensure that they get the facts.

Just to remind the House that some things have not changed, I wish to revert briefly to the proposed destruction of a consignment of hydrogen cyanide at the Kilbride military camp in County Wicklow. Had it not been for public protests and information being made available to public representatives and to locals who were being deliberately kept in the dark about it, this might very well have become yet another Haulbowline.

The common factor in all of this is the Defence Forces personnel. Members of the Naval Service were, and still are, at risk in Haulbowline, yet seemingly it was thought acceptable to destroy a highly dangerous substance in an area under the control of the military. The added advantage was that anything done in such a location would be less likely to become public knowledge, due to the restrictions placed on members of the Defence Forces regarding what takes place in military installations. Despite this, local people know what was supposed to have taken place and I call on the Minister, in the spirit of the new openness which he displayed towards the Cork people he met last evening, to make a statement on exactly what is proposed to take place in Wicklow and to prevent it going ahead if it presents a risk to either the local population or to people within the Kilbride camp.

An Ceann Comhairle

We have very little time for questions, so I ask each Deputy to be brief.

Deputy James Reilly

This is probably one of the greatest public health issues we have encountered during the lifetime of this Dáil. We have reports which show that the level of mercury in the soil is 281ppm, when action should be taken when the level is 10ppm. This causes severe neurotoxicity in people and is well known to be a major cause of neurological disease and disorder. We do not have any statistics for the incidence of neural diseases in the Cobh area, and it would be interesting to get them. However, we know that chromium 6 is there and is a carcinogenic. We also know from the National Cancer Registry that there has been a 44% increase in the incidence of cancer in the Cobh area. We are in a situation where there is a known carcinogen on site. We have information showing there is an increased incidence of cancer in the immediate area. One plus one equals two — this is an urgent issue the Minister needs to address.

There have been reports in the newspapers drawing an analogy between this case and the Erin Brockovich case. Even if the Minister does not have a moral or ethical problem with this, there is a great litigation bill coming down the tracks if we do not take action and make this as safe as possible as soon as we know about it. Now that we know about it, we need to act on it. We need to know what actions the Minister will take. It is not sufficient to await another report that will take several more months, exposing people in the interim to this carcinogen.

Deputy Simon Coveney

My issue is not so much about what happened in the past, but how we handle it from now on. Why does the Minister only accept that one comprehensive report was done on this site, back in 2005, when——

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley)

Will I list the reports that have been carried out?

An Ceann Comhairle

Allow the Deputy to ask his questions first.

Deputy Simon Coveney

When I was speaking earlier, the Minister dismissed all other reports as either not being independent or not being of a high enough quality.

Deputy John Gormley

I have not been allowed to respond.

Deputy Simon Coveney

When the Minister responds, can he answer that question? Has the Minister seen the survey on mercury levels on the beach at the site to which I referred earlier? If he has, what was the response of the Department? Has the Department carried out its survey on the beach? If not, then why not? What was the response to the concerns expressed by the independent engineer who was working for the Department at the time? If the Minister does not have a response, why not?

The Minister must be on top of this so that confidence can be built in the community, and the Government should spend whatever money is necessary, even though budgets are tight, to make this site safe. The head of the Naval Service wrote a letter to the Department, expressing serious concerns about a health threat to the employees on the naval base. What was the response of the Department to that letter?

Deputy John Gormley

I need to respond to some of the points made here. I have been accused of lecturing people. I have not lectured anyone. The only lectures I have heard are coming from across the floor, which is regrettable.

Deputy Phil Hogan

Answer the questions raised.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch

The Minister should not be so sensitive.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

We are the only ones doing our job this week.

Deputy John Gormley

I make no apology for meeting with the residents yesterday evening. They have a complete entitlement to the information and they have been given all of it. I am also happy to give it to the public representatives.

Deputy Phil Hogan

That is just second hand information.

Deputy John Gormley

It is not second hand information. The residents have expressed the most concern about all this. I was asked to meet with them urgently, which I did. The Deputies here seem to be casting doubt about that and want to reprimand me for meeting with them.

Deputy Phil Hogan

Nonsense.

Deputy Simon Coveney

This is just a red herring.

Deputy John Gormley

I would like to deal with a number of these issues. I am quite sure Deputy Hogan is more than happy to move on, because it was his Government——

(Interruptions).

Deputy John Gormley

It is the case that there is a lack of environmental legislation going back to the time when the Deputy's Government sold Irish Steel for £1.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch

Irish Steel had been there for 60 years.

Deputy Simon Coveney

The Minister has been in charge for a year and his record is not good.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

The Government changed in 1997.

Deputy John Gormley

Here are the reports. If the Deputies want me to give them information, I will give it to them.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Minister, Deputy Martin, will tell the Minister about it.

Deputy John Gormley

In 1995, a report was produced by KT Cullen & Co. for Irish Steel. In 2002, a report was produced by O'Callaghan, Moran and Associates for the liquidator. In 2002, an Enviros Aspinall desktop studywas produced for the then Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. My own Department produced a report in 2005, which makes reference to all previous reports.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch

Who carried out that report?

Deputy Simon Coveney

Why is the Minister taking on the same consultants now?

Deputy John Gormley

I told the Deputy that already. The consultants, White Young Green, are the people who did it.

Deputy Simon Coveney

Why is the Minister taking on the same consultants now?

Deputy John Gormley

Can I answer the questions? There is too much banter going on here. The Deputy raised the issue of the shoreline sample. This material was notified to the Department. All of it was shipped for disposal to Germany and paid for by the Department.

Deputy Phil Hogan

When was the Minister notified about that?

Deputy John Gormley

There is a series of questions and I will try to go through each one.

Deputy Simon Coveney

Is the Minister saying that all of the shoreline material was shipped to Germany?

Deputy John Gormley

Can I answer the questions? I will get back to that. The engineer who wrote the report was retained by the contractor, who was subsequently dismissed. He then went off with that contractor. The Deputy is trying to portray that——

Deputy Simon Coveney

He was retained by the Department. Is the Minister saying he was not retained by the Department?

Deputy John Gormley

I would like to ask a different question. Who are the Deputy's sources?

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Minister should just answer the questions asked.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I got this information under the Freedom of Information Act.

An Ceann Comhairle

There are other Deputies who wish to speak, so the Minister must be allowed to answer.

Deputy John Gormley

The air monitors have been in place since 2005. I have given a copy of all of that information to the residents. I am happy to give it to Deputy Lynch. It is in accordance with the proper technical standards. There is no difficulty at all with it.

All Deputies are asking about a plan of action. I immediately acted upon this issue. I sent in the people last Friday and they are now conducting an analysis. I sent them in because of the disturbance that occurred due to the unauthorised works. We needed to assure people that there was no continuing health risk to them. I want them to have that work completed as quickly as possible. Then I will set down the options and go to my Cabinet colleagues in the autumn with a list of options of what will be done with the site.

Someone stated this will take months. It will not. I guarantee that. I am taking every action I can as quickly as possible.

I am trying to go through all of the questions here — I took notes on many of them.

Deputy Simon Coveney

What about his representative on site?

Deputy John Gormley

This has been raised. People have stated that he worked with the company for 30 years. My understanding is that he did not, that he worked for ten years with that particular company.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I have not said that. What I said is——

An Ceann Comhairle

Please, Deputy Coveney.

Deputy John Gormley

I am just telling Deputy Coveney that. One can cast aspersions, but the independent monitoring is showing the dust levels — which was raised by Deputy Lynch — and the water analysis, all of which is available. The Deputies will have copies of that. Anyone who wants a copy will be provided with one. There is no difficulty in that respect. I want this to be as transparent as possible. It is as simple as that.

I want to nail this issue particularly. There is this implication that there are other reports that I am not publishing. Unfortunately, people have stated repeatedly that there are other reports which are being hidden in some way. Deputies can have all the reports. There is no difficulty in that regard at all. It is as simple as that.

Deputy David Stanton

Has the Minister any comment to make about the level of cancer in Cobh which I mentioned earlier and would he organise a baseline health study of the harbour region? Has he any comment to make on the safety of the Naval Service personnel, who are physically on top of this site? Are they safe? Could he give us an indication about the leachate into the harbour and into the bay? What is his estimate of the overall cost of this?

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

I thank the Minister for his response. I welcome that he will put a timeframe on this. Can he tell us when that timeframe will be set, how much the cost of the works will be and the extent of those works?

Second, on a question I put to him earlier, I have been informed this morning that the contractor is due to resume work on Monday morning. Can the Minister confirm to the House whether that is true? Given that the contractor was stopped because, to use the Department's phase, the work he was doing was piecemeal, will a different approach now be used given that it has been indicated the contractor is to resume work next Monday morning?

Deputy John Gormley

That is not correct. The contractor is not going back on site. That would be unthinkable, frankly, given what we now know. I am not trying to divert by talking about the sub-contract, but I am telling the Deputy that that genuinely is an issue. It is not the contractor who is going back; it is the people who are conducting the analysis.

Deputy Lynch asked how long it will take. I hope that it will take approximately five weeks to do the job properly. He also asked about the cost. This is a guesstimate. I would say it would cost over €20,000 to have that sort of analysis done.

Deputy David Stanton

What about the questions I asked?

Deputy John Gormley

Yesterday I spoke to the residents about the idea of a baseline health study and, indeed, it has been suggested by my colleague, Senator Dan Boyle, for quite some time. I am happy to look at that issue. I am not an expert on cancer rates. I am not a medical doctor and I do not profess to have great knowledge in this area. Certainly, a baseline study is to be recommended and I will go to Cabinet with that.

An Ceann Comhairle

I call Deputies Morgan and Michael Ahern, briefly.

Deputy David Stanton

What about the Naval Service?

Deputy John Gormley

On the Naval Service,——

Deputy Simon Coveney

And the formal letter that came from the Naval Service.

An Ceann Comhairle

Sorry.

Deputy John Gormley

——the Department has been in frequent contact with colleagues in the Defence Forces and it is understood that the Department of Defence will engage independent consultants to investigate its own area of the site adjacent to the east tip as a result of the recent unauthorised actions. They are looking at that. There are monitors on site as well. They are part of the monitoring process.

Deputy Arthur Morgan

I regret that I missed the Minister's contribution to this debate. In the second last paragraph of his statement, the Minister stated that he is re-engaged the consultants to carry out that assessment. Can he give us a timeframe for that? Is that the five week period to which he referred?

Deputy John Gormley

That is correct.

Deputy Arthur Morgan

Is he taking any precautionary measures to protect people going onto site, even those who are conducting investigations? Is the Minister requiring that they be protected in some way? Will the Minister ask that the Naval Service personnel involved at the site at any period over the past 15 years be examined medically to see if there are any issues arising?

Deputy Michael Ahern

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving me a few minutes. First, as the Deputy who has been 27 years representing the Cobh area and who lives nearest to the westerly wind side of the island, I also have a particular concern about my own area just outside the bridge. The Minister answered a number of my queries, one of which related to meeting with Cobh town council whose members are the elected representatives of the area. I have been in contact with the Minister's office and spoken to him, and I am glad to say that he will meet with them.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

That was never answered.

Deputy Michael Ahern

Second, I thank the Minister also for telling us that he will make all of the reports available to the rest of us, who have been elected for many years in the area.

Third, I want to ask about the study on the leachate, which would not only affect the harbour but also would go into Aghada, Whitegate, Ballynacurra and East Ferry; those areas should be checked out as well.

I thank the Minister for his reply regarding a baseline study on cancer. This is important to allay the fears that have been expressed to me over the weekend by many people in the area. We should employ a different set of consultants to carry out this study——

Deputy Simon Coveney

Hear, hear.

Deputy Michael Ahern

——because the first response when there is a new report is that these are only covering up on the report that they did in 2005.

Deputy James Reilly

On a point of clarification, I mentioned that there was a 44% increase in cancer rates. I meant to state that there is a 44% higher than expected incidence of cancer in the Cobh area as against the national average.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Reilly has clarified the matter. I call the Minister.

Deputy John Gormley

I thank the Deputies for putting their questions. Deputy Morgan asked about people going on site. My officials have gone on site. Many people have gone on site. If they think that there is some sort of problem with dust, I am sure they will take precautions. The people who are carrying out the analysis, for example, in the next five weeks will be going on site and it is up to those individuals to make that judgment. On the face of it, given the monitoring results it looks as if there is no potential difficulty with dust — that is what we are being told.

Deputy Morgan asked about the Naval Service personnel. They have their own medical services. Deputy Morgan asked that personnel be examined. That is a matter for the Defence Forces. I do not have any input into that whatsoever.

On the points raised by Deputy Michael Ahern, of course I will make all of the reports available to all of the Deputies in the area. My Government colleagues have expressed the concern of the residents in the areas they represent and I take on board all of those comments.

Deputy Ahern stated that he wanted different consultants used on this occasion. The reason that these consultants have been hired is exactly because they have done a previous study. We discussed this issue yesterday evening with the residents, who have got their own experts. Deputy Lynch alluded to the fact that these people have expertise and that is undoubtedly the case. Many of them have scientific and legal expertise. It was their belief that what there ought to be is a peer review of the existing report and, indeed, the new report. I am happy to do that again to ensure that the methodology that is being used is correct and that it stands up to the best scientific scrutiny. That is the way we are proceeding. It is an open and transparent way and it is sound from an ecological and scientific point of view.

An Ceann Comhairle

We are out of time but four Deputies are still offering. I ask Deputy Michael McGrath to be brief.

Deputy Michael McGrath

I will be brief. I thank the Minister for coming into the House and discussing this in an open fashion. There are a couple of main points. One immediate issue is the need to reassure the general public in terms of any potential health consequences. Can the Minister, Deputy Gormley, set a deadline for the presentation of the White Young Green report at the earliest possible date? This will allow him to give a categorical assurance to people that there is no health risk.

The Minister should commit to full remediation of the site and I hope he will bring proposals to Government at the earliest opportunity. Will the Minister make a commitment to full remediation on-site? Finally, I welcome what I hope is a commitment that he will proceed with a baseline study of the harbour area. This will set the parameters for any future measurements to be undertaken in terms of health affects.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch

I appreciate being allowed ask a further question. What needs to be emphasised is that the people in the harbour area need to have confidence in the process. Up to this point they have not and I hope this can change. We must ensure people are confident that this situation will be dealt with adequately, properly and speedily. I asked a question, which the Minister did not answer, related to meeting various town councils and the city and county councils in Cork. These are the groups which will determine how well this operation is carried out. The Minister will not be there all the time, but these councils will.

Deputy Deirdre Clune

Given the Minister has had a comprehensive report on this matter since 2005, does he know the extent of the remediation work needed? Can the Minister give a commitment that a full budget will be provided to meet the cost of cleaning up? The Minister should have some estimate or idea of this and there should be a commitment.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Minister, Deputy Gormley, has been aware of this matter for a long time. There was an inspector's report by the Environmental Protection Agency in 2002. Will he also make that report available? Given the history lesson the Minister gave earlier on these matters, he will be well briefed regarding the decision of the courts to strike down the EPA licence. This prevented the EPA from carrying out enforcement proceedings in 2002. The EPA had a licence as the company went into liquidation. In case the Minister was under any illusion about this matter, the EPA failed in the High Court bid to secure enforcement proceedings and force remediation.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I wish to clarify one of the Minister's answers. The Minister said all of the shoreline material which was tested for mercury levels has been removed and sent to Germany. Will the Minister clarify how much shoreline material has been sent?

Deputy John Gormley

I will begin with Deputy Hogan's question. My Department is separate from the EPA, which is statutorily independent.

Deputy Phil Hogan

It is represented on the steering group.

Deputy John Gormley

I will see what can be done, but I am unsure if the EPA can make available material that was the subject of a court judgment.

Deputy Simon Coveney

The EPA advised the Minister to open up the site.

Deputy John Gormley

Regarding the question about meeting with the councils, I intended to go to Cork to discuss the Green Paper. Perhaps I could meet the people in the area, especially the local representatives, in that context. I was contacted by one of my councillors yesterday and agreed tentatively to do that, but it will be in the autumn.

Can Deputy McGrath remind me of his question?

Deputy Michael McGrath

It was about full remediation.

Deputy John Gormley

This was raised by the Opposition too. The point about remediation is there are various forms. I hope the report and options paper will spell out in detail the best approach. It all depends on the proposed use of the site. If the site is used for residential purposes, extensive remediation is necessary. Remediation of course, brings its own difficulties. It involves bringing up all the material and so extreme care must be taken. There are other options. One can remediate part of the site and cap another part. I am sure the experts will come back with a series of options. If it is used for parkland that is quite a different matter, one does not have to remediate to the same extent——

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

Housing or a hotel has been suggested.

Deputy Phil Hogan

A marina and a mixed development site was another suggestion.

Deputy John Gormley

The Deputy assures me he discussed a mixed development site——

Deputy Kathleen Lynch

A crèche too.

Deputy John Gormley

He never mentioned a crèche by all accounts.

Deputy Simon Coveney

We should develop the site economically.

Deputy John Gormley

The point is that if——

Deputy Micheál Martin

Fine Gael sold it off for one pound.

Deputy John Gormley

If there was a residential development there——

Deputy Phil Hogan

Is the Minister suggesting we can have half a million tonnes of toxic waste under a hotel?

Deputy John Gormley

The site must be remediated to the best extent possible. I realise Deputies have further questions and I will have answered all questions put either in person or in writing.