Dublin Port Tunnel.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

I thank the Ceann Comhairle and his office for allowing this debate. It is critically important and is a matter of deep concern. The Dublin Port tunnel is the largest piece of infrastructure in the State and cost over €800 million to build. The operating system is called Scada — supervisory control and data system — and I shall refer to it as such.

First, I wish to get the timeline right concerning this issue. On 15 January there was an early warning to the National Roads Authority, NRA, concerning the safety of the port tunnel. On 23 January EGIS Tunnels and the NRA met to discuss the safety issues. On 23 March rigorous testing on safety issues regarding the Scada system commenced. On 26 March the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport held a meeting which was attended by the NRA. Representatives were asked specifically about the safety of the tunnel and whether there were any issues in respect of it. Questioning on this was forensic. It is my view that the NRA misled the duly appointed Oireachtas committee by not reporting serious issues concerning the safety of the port tunnel. I contend that the National Roads Authority has no credibility with regard to the transparency of what is going on, and perhaps even with regard to the truth about what is happening in respect of the port tunnel.

The EGIS report stated:

The system is unable to ensure the required level of safety. There were design and operating deficiencies and it had a lack of reliability. It was inefficient to improve and it would create confusion with the system if that were to happen. It is unsuitable to ensure safe tunnel operations.

Another key issue was the absence of documentation in respect of the system. Documents on how to run the system, what was there and what was not, were not available. There was no list of alarms. This would generate dangerous situations.

There are very serious problems with the port tunnel. They have been known to the NRA since at least the beginning of this year. If Paul Murphy, a reporter on "Prime Time", had not put this into the public domain we would not know anything about it. Accountability, credibility and, most of all, safety, are today in the hands of the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Noel Ahern. The safety of the port tunnel is what we are concerned about and how we can ensure that it is safe. The Minister of State is accountable to us in the House, as the National Roads Authority is accountable to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport about what is happening in this matter.

The NRA has issued a statement to say that the system is being adjusted or improved. The conclusions of the EGIS report on the ability of the system to be improved upon are exceptionally clear:

Due to its design we conclude that the system will be very difficult to improve and will not be able to accommodate certain improvements listed in a special task order. Most parts of the Scada will need to be replaced. The main point of concern is the use of components, material and software, inadequate for real-time monitoring.

In support of this the report lists the technical options that can be considered and states that these will result in problems occurring at all levels of the architecture. They include response times for the commands and status reports, reliability of the communication system and data collection system, legibility and efficiency of the control interfaces, list of alarms, multiple windows and highlighting of important information relating to the structure. The report also refers to another report, by Martin Kelly, which relates to the network architecture. The choice of equipment and its suitability in the tunnel command control system have also been mentioned.

There is clear evidence of significant problems in the operating safety of the tunnel. The NRA has clear knowledge of the matter which it failed to give to the committee. There is the accountability of the Minister of State for the safety of the port tunnel. What is he doing about it? Will he identify in his response what has happened since, particularly in light of the consultants' view that the tunnel cannot be improved?

The key points I wish to make to the Minister of State are these. Has the NRA come to a decision regarding the replacement of the system? That is what is recommended. Will it be replaced? Not to do so will result in enormous expense and cost. The consultants believe that a replacement of the system should be favoured. Can the Minister of State vouch for the safety of the system by giving us an assurance from an independent and internationally renowned expert, experts or company, with regard to the current operation and safety of the port tunnel? We must have that independent assessment. Clearly, the professional advisers concluded in April that it was unsafe but now there has been a change of tune. We want to ensure it is totally safe and we want the Government to commit to an independent audit.

I received reports today that the Scada system installed in the port tunnel is regularly freezing, that is to say, it is still malfunctioning. Will the Minister of State confirm or deny this? This matter is of incredible national importance as it is crucial for the economy that the port tunnel works. It is also crucial that people can go through it safely.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

I also call on the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Noel Ahern, to initiate a full independent investigation into all aspects of safety at the Dublin Port tunnel to reassure the 5 million motorists who use it that it is safe. People need reassurance that, for the 98 or 99% of the time the tunnel has been open since its formal opening, their lives have not been in danger when passing through it.

I am disappointed that the Minister for Transport, Deputy Dempsey, is not here this evening as I feel he has shirked this responsibility again and again. Like Deputy O'Dowd, I was involved in an earlier "Prime Time" investigation and the Minister refused to report on the matter to this House; he said it was a matter for the National Roads Authority, NRA. This kind of archaic nonsense makes a mockery of the Dáil and the democratic system.

Like most people, I was shocked by the further allegations made on the "Prime Time" programme in recent days and the internal EGIS report that RTE made public, which alleged that the Scada safety system was unsuitable to ensure the safe operation of the tunnel and that it generates dangerous situations. It also alleged that the whole Scada system was deficient and inadequate and should be replaced. We were assured by Mr. Fred Barry of the NRA, at a meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport, after an earlier series of closures, that the tunnel was absolutely safe. However, given the recent reports, I have the same doubts and concerns as my Fine Gael colleague.

This week's "Prime Time" investigation came on the back of several other investigations by RTE and the Evening Herald, and there have been distressing allegations that the Dublin fire brigade could not enter the tunnel under certain conditions. During the no-warning shutdown of the tunnel last February there was mayhem across the greater Dublin area. Concerns have been aired in the media about alleged unsafe conditions for driving vehicles carrying petrol, diesel and other combustible cargo through the tunnel. It has also been indicated that parts of the Scada computer system and all 32 pairs of jet fans in the tunnel have been replaced. Why was that necessary so soon after the opening of the facility?

Will the Minister of State address these concerns and outline the contact he has had with the NRA and Dublin City Council regarding the operation of the tunnel? Will the NRA initiate an additional review of health and safety procedures in the tunnel? Will the Minister of State or the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, order an immediate investigation? On behalf of the Labour Party I call for one. Will the Minister, this evening, assure the public that the tunnel is safe? The Minister must establish a full and independent safety review to completely restore confidence as many drivers no longer wish to use the tunnel because, since the last "Prime Time" programme, they consider it to be dangerous.

There seems to be a poisonous industrial relations atmosphere swirling around some of the allegations and information that have come to the fore. Many people were shocked to learn that the NRA and Dublin City Council were also planning to launch legal action against Nishimatsu, Mowlem and Irishenco because of the number of alleged serious systems failures.

My colleague, Councillor Seán Kenny, who is chairperson of the Dublin City Council traffic committee, has called for the termination of the Transroute company's contract because of ongoing safety problems. What is the Minister's view on this suggestion?

Given the importance of the port tunnel to Dublin's north side and indeed to the rest of Dublin and the country, it is critical that its safety is clarified through a full, independent investigation.

Defence Forces Property.

Deputy Lucinda Creighton

I wish to raise a serious issue, namely, the sudden decision of the Department of Defence to evict residents of a block of family units in the Defence Forces married quarters at Cathal Brugha Barracks by means of a letter dated 11 September 2008, which demanded that the residences be vacated by 30 October 2008. I call on the Minister for Defence to remedy this matter, as well as his failure to honour agreements entered into between the residents and the Department of Defence in the 1990s, whereby the units were to be sold to the residents. Such agreements have not been honoured by the Department to date.

The background is that the individuals involved are either former Army officers or family members of deceased Army officers. While each household's personal circumstances differ, all have a common bond in that the father in each of the family units was a member of the Defence Forces of long standing, having served a full 21 years in the Army. Their families have resided in the aforementioned married quarters for more than 30 years. No one can argue with the fact that these people have given the State some service and deserve to be recognised and treated with dignity and respect.

On 19 September, the residents of each unit received correspondence from the Department ordering them to vacate their homes by 30 October. The nature of this letter was extraordinarily cold and callous. It stated that should the recipient fail to vacate, a court order would be issued and the Department would seek to recoup the costs and expenses incurred as it claimed it was entitled to do under the relevant Act. This is no way to treat people who have served this country. It constitutes shocking behaviour and it is completely unacceptable that it was allowed to happen.

I stress this correspondence came out of the blue. While there was ongoing communication during the 1990s regarding the purchase of these units from the Department of Defence, it was laid to rest at that time. Nothing happened and the proposal was not pursued by the Department. I have seen correspondence in the name of the Minister for Defence, Deputy Willie O'Dea, which was communicated in 2006 and which made no reference to eviction orders or notices or to the initiation of any such proceedings. Suddenly however, a letter arrived telling people they must vacate the homes in which they have lived for the past 30 years within five or six weeks. This is extraordinary.

The position of the residents is clear. They engaged in good faith with the Department and its representatives in the 1990s in an attempt to buy their homes from the Department. This proposal was not pursued by the Department and it effectively was dropped. While the residents have acted in good faith, I contend neither the Minister nor the Department has done so in the manner of their dealings with former Army officers and their families.

A meeting took place in recent days between the residents and representatives of the Department of Defence at which certain obstacles were put forward by the latter in respect of the purchase of the units in question. I stress the residents still are prepared to purchase the units, albeit at the rate offered to them in the 1990s because it was not their fault they ultimately were not allowed to purchase, as was agreed at the time between their solicitors and the Department. They put no obstacles in the way and all such obstacles were laid down by the Department. I contend that the price is non-negotiable in that the people involved must be allowed to follow through on the agreements that were put in place in the 1990s and which were reneged upon by the Department. While there are issues in respect of various utilities such as water supplies and so on, these undoubtedly can be ironed out in terms of management structures within the complex.

Although I am running out of time I wish to make a further point. There was an intimation by the Department of Defence that there could be in some way a distinction between those units that are still occupied by former Army officers and those which, in effect, are occupied by Army officers' widows. I take grave exception to this suggestion, which suggests that the wives of Army officers should be disadvantaged because they have had the misfortune of losing a loved one. This is a shocking way to distinguish between people whose families have been dedicated to the service of the State. They must be treated with some decorum and respect.

The bottom line is this has been exceptionally heavy-handed treatment which has caused significant anguish for those involved in that they were told they would effectively be thrown out on the street within a period of a just a few weeks, having lived in these units for the past 30 years. I urge the Minister to put forward a satisfactory plan that would allow these people to have comfort and security for the future in terms of making their homes in these quarters of Cathal Brugha Barracks.

Deputy Noel Ahern

I thank the Deputy for raising the matter. I will speak from notes supplied by the Department of Defence. Defence Forces married quarters are provided to serving members until their retirement or resignation and Defence Forces regulations state that quarters must be vacated within 15 days of leaving the service. The current position has arisen as a result of a failure to vacate these quarters as required.

The Defence Forces married quarters at Cathal Brugha Barracks consist of three and four-bedroom maisonettes. A letter issued to 11 occupiers who are in occupation on 11 September 2008, as the Deputy mentioned. They were informed of the Department's intention to complete the process of obtaining vacant possession of these married quarters and the occupiers were requested to make arrangements to vacate the premises and make alternative arrangements for their accommodation as soon as possible, but no later than the end of October. In the event that the occupiers qualified for local authority housing, an application form was enclosed.

I understand the Deputy's comments about the manner being callous and cold with regard to such matters, but it would not be appropriate for me to comment on any of those remarks. From what I have heard, the letter was probably written by a legal person. The Department of Defence indicates it should be clearly understood that the occupiers of these quarters are not being evicted as they have no entitlement to reside there and there are no tenancy agreements in place.

I understand the Deputy's comments on people who have done the State service through the Defence Forces. These issues often depend on what agreement was signed. Although I do not have the full detail, I understand it is not today or yesterday that these people retired. In many cases the issue might not concern widows but another generation. If the Department has such rules, it is clearly becoming more efficient in implementing them as they seem to have been ignored for donkey's years.

Previous attempts in the 1990s to sell the quarters to the occupants were not completed as legal difficulties were encountered. No agreements were ever entered into to sell the quarters concerned to those people who are in occupation of them. At a meeting with officials on 24 September, the occupiers were informed the deadline was not set in stone and the opportunity to work with them to achieve a solution favourable to all parties was welcomed.

It would appear now, arising from yesterday's meeting, that all the occupiers wish to purchase the quarters. Officials in the Department of Defence undertook to review the possibility of selling to the occupiers and a further meeting has been scheduled for the end of October. It is hoped that substantial progress will have been made by that time to facilitate a solution that meets the needs of the both the occupiers and the Defence Forces.

When I served as Minister of State with responsibility for housing, there were a few old cases like this involving voluntary housing and apartments. The argument was often thrown about that people were made an offer in 1988 or 1992 and the people wanted to buy at that price. I do not believe I ever saw anybody succeed with that argument, although I understand it. Matters seem to have moved forward in recent days from what the Deputy termed the original "cold and callous" letter. I hope business can be done very quickly.

Water Quality.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins

I read with great alarm about the events which took place in the established residential area of Mervue. The area is really divided in two, Old Mervue and New Mervue. Old Mervue was built in the 1960s and before that there was Shantalla, built in the 1950s, Claddagh, which was built before then, and Bóthar Mór, which is older again.

The particular problem which arose in Mervue came about suddenly and without any warning to the residents. To save time and deal with the issues in the case, I ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to clearly specify that if Galway City Council comes up with a response which involves resources, the Department will be willing to give such additional resources and enable the matter to be resolved quickly and with safety.

A second issue that arises relates to discussions which took place between the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and officials in Galway City Council on a previous occasion when the council was suffering following the discovery of cryptosporidium. On that occasion, was there any discussion on any other issues that might arise regarding drinking water quality?

As an aside, I am deeply disappointed by the Minister's attitude towards a different issue, the source of the water supply in the Corrib. He is insistent on leaving it with the local authority but I believe there should be a separate authority for managing water quality and the Corrib.

On this specific issue, I have given the years of construction of the houses, most of which were bought under the tenant purchase scheme. As they were built in the 1960s, they have an elderly population. Effectively, at the end of July, Galway City Council notified the environmental enforcement section of the Environmental Protection Agency of a deterioration which was equivalent to four times the permitted level of lead content. This was 106 micrograms per litre instead of the permitted 25 micrograms per litre.

I welcome the enforcement section of the EPA because before it came about, many complaints one might make were dealt with somewhat rhetorically. When the enforcement section of the Environmental Protection Agency was dealing with this issue, it was 25 August by the time a reply came from Galway City Council to documentation issued on 30 July. The enforcement section of the EPA requested that the council prepare a programme for the replacement of pipework, consult with the Health Service Executive and identify the extent of the problem. That was on 25 August.

On 8 September, the city council responded by indicating that it was determining the extent of the required work and suggested that an agreed approach be forwarded to the EPA. However, it became necessary on 24 September for the enforcement section to issue a direction to the city council to carry out a survey of all the areas involved, the necessary work and the lead testing carried out over the past four years.

How much of that information has been supplied to the EPA? There was also a request to identify an action programme. It is important we get answers to the following questions. Will the additional resources required to put this matter right be provided? Has there been discussions between the two Departments on coming to the relief of an elderly population with the distribution of water, which is urgently required? Will account be taken, for example, that if it is established the connecting pipe in Mervue is made of lead, and there is lead piping in houses in the older estates built before 1970, the Department will be in a position to respond to both circumstances?

My next point is crucial. Will officials from the Department be visiting the city council? Perhaps the most important of my points is to ask why there is such a culture of not declaring a problem openly to the public when it arises. Why was it necessary to have this long delay, which is dramatically revealed by the fact there was an ordinary city council meeting on Monday, 22 September with no mention of the problem? Suddenly, it is revealed on 23 September and a special meeting is held on 24 September. Why is it necessary to want not to declare these matters in public or move quickly to resolve them, thereby avoiding anxiety, particularly among elderly people?

Deputy Noel Ahern

I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government who regrets that he cannot be present.

The Minister is very disappointed that this problem should be visited on the people of Galway who went through a very difficult summer in 2007 with cryptosporidium in their public water supply. He is conscious of the difficulties and inconvenience suffered again by some residents. It is a great worry for people and must be solved without delay.

The Minister's understanding is that the lead excess is likely to have been caused by lead leaching into drinking water from old lead water pipes serving certain limited areas of the city, mostly in older housing estates. It is important to stress that the water leaving the treatment works does not contain lead.

Galway City Council has confirmed that its priorities are to identify the areas affected by intensive lead sampling, introduce additional water treatment that would eliminate the leaching effect from old lead pipes and implement permanent pipe replacement measures, as required and as quickly as possible. As a short-term temporary step, standpipes are being erected in the Old Mervue area to provide an alternative potable water supply.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins

It is important that water is distributed to old people because requiring people to go to a standpipe, of which it has been suggested there will be one per avenue, would be difficult.

Deputy Noel Ahern

In the past year, radically improved supervisory structures for water supplies have been put in place by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Local authority drinking water supplies are now subject to direct supervision by the Environmental Protection Agency. The agency has been given extensive powers of direction and intervention for this purpose and the penalties for failure to comply with the new drinking water regulations have been substantially increased. The EPA yesterday exercised its new powers of direction in this case.

The purpose of the new regime introduced by the Minister is not alone to underpin compliance with water quality standards but to ensure consumers are adequately protected and properly informed. I note the Deputy's comments on the delay in providing information and the culture of secrecy at work. The Minister has in recent weeks announced details of a wide range of measures to guarantee high standards in our water supplies, including accelerated investment in key "at risk" schemes, improved operational practices and sharing of best practice among local authorities. A key element of the Minister's initiative is improvement of consumer access to information on the quality of drinking water.

The Minister will direct local authorities to publish on their websites up-to-date information on drinking water quality in their areas. They will also be instructed to establish contact hot-lines so that members of the public can get the facts about the quality of their drinking water. This ready access to information on water quality will empower consumers to actively engage with their local authority on the quality of their supplies.

The response to the problem that has emerged in this case in Galway shows that the new system works and immediate local action is guaranteed when an incident occurs — all things are relative. The EPA, as the body responsible for supervising local authorities' management of their public water supplies, will oversee Galway City Council's response to the problem.

The latest EPA drinking water report published in January 2008 reported 20 out of the 944 public supplies in the country had a sample with in excess of the standard for lead. These are in all cases associated with lead service connections serving properties that are more than 40 to 50 years old. Many more modern pipes are plastic. The EPA has for several years alerted local authorities to the issue. Appropriate pH correction at the water treatment plant ensures water will not react with lead pipes. The dosing of phosphates is also recommended by the EPA as a means of reducing lead in the water as it has the further effect of sealing the lead within the network. This can be done easily and quickly.

Substantial funding is being provided towards Galway city's water conservation programme and it is open to the city council to prioritise any pipe replacement that would take the offending lead services permanently out of commission. This may provide a solution to the Deputy's request that extra funding be provided. Considerable funding has been allocated to Galway City Council for its water system. It is a matter for the council to prioritise how this funding is spent. In the meantime, it is important that all possible resources are focused on getting the problem solved quickly and effectively. The Minister is confident that with continuing close co-operation between the council, the EPA and the HSE, lead levels in the water supply can be reduced and then phased out.

I will convey to the Minister the Deputy's question concerning lead in households. I doubt the Deputy's request can be acceded to as local authorities are usually responsible for external piping up as far as the walls of households or stopcocks located on footpaths. Piping from the stopcock to household sinks is usually the responsibility of the householder unless he or she is a local authority tenant. However, I do not wish to announce policy, favourable or otherwise, on behalf of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. If officials are in good humour, the Deputy's hopes may be realised. I will convey to the Minister the Deputy's comments on the need to assist elderly people. I am sure the area has a strong community and people will assist older members of the community who may not be able to walk to standpipes.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.25 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 30 September 2008.

Dáil Éireann debate - Thursday, 25 Sep 2008