I propose to deal with some general points which occurred after I made my own submission. I will then deal with individual points in response to Deputies and Senators.
The restrictions on rural housing are contained in the first instance in the development plans made by county councillors and not by An Taisce. They, in turn, are subject to the national spatial strategy which contains restrictions and is made by the Government and not An Taisce. That strategy, in turn, is subject, under Article 29 of the Constitution, to our EU commitments such as the various landscape directives, the groundwater directive and drinking water directive, all of which were adopted by the Government and not An Taisce. Quite specific restrictions on rural housing were promulgated by the rainbow coalition in the sustainable development strategy for Ireland document of 1997. This document was adopted and not amended by the following Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrat-Independent coalition Government when it put the Treaty of Amsterdam to a referendum in 1998 and asked people to endorse the concept of sustainable development on a full legal footing binding the Irish Government. Before that, it was just a policy but, once it was adopted, the idea was that it would bind the Government. It was open to that Government to change the strategy in regard to rural one-off housing prior to the referendum but it chose not to do so.
A number of Deputies have questioned An Taisce's reference to An Bord Pleanála on the grounds of groundwater protection. The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg has already issued a judgment against Ireland because of our failure to protect drinking water to existing rural dwellers because of the proliferation of septic tanks, which the local authorities do not have the resources to monitor.
The European Commission has threatened to withdraw all agricultural grants from Ireland as a result of our failure to protect groundwater. The Government states that 20% of our groundwater has been contaminated by nitrates and a third of single wells have been contaminated by bacteriological coliforms and 42% of group water schemes have been contaminated by coliforms. The Government pleaded with the EU for a year's grace in order to put in a groundwater protection plan and on that basis, the threat to withdraw all agricultural subsidies was withdrawn. However, given that 90% of all farm income in Ireland comes in the form of cheque from the EU taxpayer, shortly to be the Irish taxpayer, it would be irresponsible in the extreme to threaten that economic basis to the rural economy by continuing to put pressure on groundwater resources which the local authorities acknowledge they do not have the resources to monitor.
Deputy Timmins's original submission continues to mis-state An Taisce's policy.
We have never suggested that rural development should be confined to agriculturally based applicants. Our policy has always specifically recognised essential social need and other land based activities. An Taisce never tells people what is good for them. Our submissions to local authorities and An Bord Pleanála are always based on the development plans made by local councillors, Government policy and EU legislation adopted by Government.
In response to Deputy Upton's point, the protection of groundwater cannot be left to builders. Her statement that there would not be any implications of a health risk to the existing population is contradicted by the European Court of Justice judgment which states otherwise and by the MC O'Sullivan report of May 2002 for the Central Fisheries Board, which acknowledges the existence of that risk. Her statement that monitoring of septic tanks should be minimal runs counter to the ECJ judgment and the MC O'Sullivan report. In Germany, there is an annual inspection fee on septic tanks. Deputy Ferris's references to the pure flow system as a solution for protecting the water table is not accepted by the MC O'Sullivan report, which identified particular problems with the system in holiday homes which are used erratically, and it further states that it is not suitable for certain ground conditions, so there are some situations in which it is not suitable, and An Bord Pleanála has quite often recognised that fact in its judgments.
Deputy Carty suggested that An Taisce should go back to preserving our heritage and keep out of the planning process. However, one can only protect our heritage, including our water resources and landscapes, through the planning process. Senator Callanan states that county councils are competent to protect groundwater and also that septic tanks are not responsible for pollution. The ECJ judgment and most recent Government reports on groundwater, such as Making Ireland's Development Sustainable, from July 2002, state otherwise. I repeat that it is the European Court of Justice and the Irish Government which state that septic tanks are causing groundwater pollution, not An Taisce - we are not the source of that information.
Deputy Wilkinson referred to a particular planning application. An Bord Pleanála ruled on 15 September that the proposal would be prejudicial to public health and adversely affect a special area of conservation whose protection is an EU requirement. He also refers to An Taisce as a group of serial objectors, which is untrue. We are a prescribed body under legislation and it is our function to refer appropriate cases to An Bord Pleanála, which we do in four out of every thousand applications. An Bord Pleanála upholds more than 90% of our objections, generally on the grounds of public health and public safety. I am sure that nobody here would advocate compromise on such fundamental issues. He also suggests that speculative sales of sites should be allowed. However, Government policy as expressed in the national spatial strategy clearly precludes this. Further, he suggests that An Taisce's actions result in people leaving rural Ireland. The truth is to the contrary. I personally lobbied during the 1990s for the adoption of a regional strategy to repopulate rural towns, villages and areas and to revitalise their schools, post offices and other infrastructure. It has always been our policy to move development away from the magnet of Dublin and into the rest of the country.
Senator Scanlon advocates speculative site sales to boost farm incomes, but again, Government policy, through the national spatial strategy, precludes this. His assertion that there is no danger posed to people living in rural areas by septic tanks is contradicted by the ECJ judgment and MC O'Sullivan report and also by various judgments of An Bord Pleanála. Deputy Ó Fearghaíl stated that An Taisce supported Kildare County Council's rural policy. All appeals by An Taisce relating to Kildare are in support of the county council's development plan, made by the county councillors. His reference to a suicide following a marital break-up omitted to clarify that Kildare County Council's professional planner recommended that the application be refused or resubmitted in the name of another family member. The Deputy also criticised An Taisce for not objecting to a particular one-off house application. As I said before, we only object to a limited number. It is open to the Deputy to put in his own objection if he feels it is merited.
Deputy Blaney advocates abandoning restrictions on opening new entrances on national primary and secondary routes with speed limits of 60 mph. These restrictions emanate from a Government agency, the National Roads Authority, on public safety grounds. There have been a number of fatalities as a result of inappropriately sited entrances countrywide, regardless of the condition of the road itself. Deputy Bruton states that some appeals are vexatious. No An Taisce appeal has ever been dismissed as being vexatious. In fact, the chairman of An Bord Pleanála told the Oireachtas Committee of Public Accounts that An Taisce only refers to it the more blatant breaches of development plans and Government and EU policy. He also asks us to rely on the professionalism of the planning board to do the job. However, An Bord Pleanála cannot intervene unless a reference is made to it by a prescribed body or a third party. An Bord Pleanála upholds more than 90% of An Taisce's appeals. The Deputy suggests that An Taisce appeals divert local authority human resources. However, there are no oral hearings in relation to one-off housing appeals; therefore they do not unduly tie up local authority staff resources. If local authorities complied with planning guidelines there would be even fewer appeals. In fact, in some local authority areas in Ireland there are very few appeals from An Taisce.
An Taisce is in favour of social sustainability. Our policy provides for essential social need yet our policy also accommodates people who wish to live near families, elderly relations and so on. In relation to transport emissions, although emissions of lead to the air are down, according to the Government, because of better car exhaust systems and so on, the fastest rising greenhouse gas emissions are from transport. We will have to pay more than €1.3 billion to Britain, for example, under the Kyoto Protocol because of our failure to meet our Kyoto commitments. That represents an unnecessary net loss of money to the country. The Deputy suggested we should picket Moneypoint. We will not be picketing the plant, but we have appealed the application to extend the burning of coal on the grounds that it breaches the national climate change strategy published by the then Minister for the Environment and Local Government, DeputyDempsey, in 2000.
In relation to the impact of one-off rural housing, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has identified the cumulative impact and has accordingly initiated restrictions. Again, there is a cumulative impact from the proliferation of septic tanks. Deputy Bruton mentioned alternative rural enterprises. Any activity allowed by the development plan and the spatial strategy that does not put pressure on the road infrastructure seems to be appropriate. I have been asked on many occasions by rural dwellers to assist them in objecting to large industrial activities in their midst when, they said, the roads could not accommodate them, and I have always facilitated them in that regard. However, I can foresee that a farmer, for example, might want to put a lathe into an outhouse as an alternative enterprise. Since that would not necessarily generate a huge amount of traffic movement, it could very well fit in with the spatial strategy or with the development plan in relation to the siting of industry and so on. However, we do not wish to give a list as such; we are merely giving the parameters that have been laid down in order to answer Deputy Bruton's questions.
To return to Deputy Timmins's later questions, An Taisce has never advocated confining rural housing needs to agricultural projects. Politicians are welcome to be members of An Taisce, but elected politicians and electoral candidates are barred from officership positions locally and nationally. We always invite politicians from both Government and Opposition to make presentations at the Green Flag awards in schools, the Blue Flag awards for beaches and so on and they are always happy to do so. In fact, we have had considerable support from political parties for our forthcoming conferences on CAP reform and heritage legislation accompanying our annual general meeting in Kilkenny.
Deputy Timmins mentioned an identifiable person outside this House. That puts me at a disadvantage because I do not enjoy privilege and I have taken on board what the Chairman said about that. The Deputy referred to a press conference given by An Taisce involving a person who is identifiable as a result because it related to Glen Ding woods. That local authority councillor is not a member of An Taisce and An Taisce has appealed section 4 motions tabled by him. The press conference was about an archaeological site and not only did the councillor help us to preserve it, he put his own property at risk in taking a court action against the county manager. He secured a judgment against him which forced the manager to give information to him, the chairman of the county council, at that time. It is not surprising that he should be involved, then, in a press conference on that issue because his involvement was as fundamental as that of An Taisce.
The equivalent of section 4 motions under the new Act were mentioned. Deputy Timmins said six or seven were passed by an independent councillor in Ms Corcoran's area who has been diametrically opposed to the policy of An Taisce and five of them were appealed. He said that he had submitted three applications himself. I cannot deal with such situations because all these section 4 applications were made by all three local councillors in the electoral area and passed by at least 18 county councillors. We cannot identify them as being one person's section 4. In County Wicklow, section 4 motions must be passed by 18 out of 24 councillors and must be proposed by all of the local councillors so there is no distinction between them.
Deputy Timmins stated that another identified individual submitted incorrect information regarding at least one planning application in County Wicklow, saying that he entered into conversation with the applicant and had obtained information from a local source and gave a reference number. That was not a question of inaccurate information given to An Taisce but insufficient information on the planning file itself and the planning officer at An Taisce works from the planning file. It arose because the applicant had insufficient information on the file but, after the applicant clarified it with An Taisce, we did not appeal it.
Deputy Joe Callanan said that we were presented with a draft plan 18 months ago that almost ensured there would be no one-off housing. That is not true; that draft plan did not include such a restriction. The Planning Acts require the local authority to prepare a plan and for the elected members to adopt it. He stated that the elected members prepared their own plan.
Deputy Callanan also stated that while septic tanks are a problem, high phosphate detergents are used in washing machines and if they were banned water quality would improve 10% overnight and he asked why An Taisce does not pursue that issue. We have pursued it, we have given an award to a professional cleaner who uses non-toxic and non-phosphate cleaning materials, a practice we have recognised and encouraged in many submissions.
Senator White acknowledged that she is a member of An Taisce and dealt with its policy. The policy of An Taisce was promulgated over the course of two years and was approved by the council of An Taisce and the involvement of all members was invited in its formulation. There is no restriction on politicians being members of An Taisce but there are, however, restrictions on their being officers of it.
Cryptosporidium, a coliform that has killed abroad and which has now arrived in Ireland, is prevalent in the rural environment and it is difficult for single wells to deal with it by chlorination. It is easier to deal with the threat of cryptosporidium from public supplies than from private, single supplies.
Deputy Ferris asked if the four objections in every 1,000 included serial objectors. When I gave that figure, I said that we may appeal four decisions out of every 1,000 to An Bord Pleanála.
Senator Scanlon raised questions about groundwater and effluent treatment in water cleansing systems. If they are installed in inappropriate ground conditions or to incorrect specifications and not properly maintained, they cause a risk.
Deputy Blaney states that the EPA produced statistics that demonstrate that the northern and western regions do not have high nitrate levels, making out that my point is farcical. The Government states that 83% of nitrates pollution is caused by agricultural activity and that 20% of groundwater is polluted nationally in that way.
Deputy Ó Fearghaíl asked a specific question about commercial developments. He gave the example of a major retail development with a residential component with attached conditions, stating that there are more conditions attached to one-off housing. My only answer is that is a matter for Kildare County Council, not An Taisce.
The Chairman asked about people being allowed to sell sites. The sale of sites for speculative purposes is not allowed under Government policy as spelt out in the national spatial strategy. He also referred to the High Court action taken against Meath County Council for breach of the strategic planning guidelines for the greater Dublin area. In that judgment, the court acknowledged that Meath County Council had breached the strategic planning guidelines but that case was not taken by An Taisce, it had nothing to do with it.
Senator Peter Callanan raised the issue of a holiday development on the Beara Peninsula. An Bord Pleanála turned that development down on a number of grounds. The Senator asked me to visit the site but the planning officer for An Taisce had already visited the site and objected to the revised application on a number of grounds.
The Chairman also asked me to visit that site and, in deference to the Chairman, I agreed to do so. I went down to meet the developer and his architects and I pointed out three flaws in the development in relation to its visual impact from Berehaven, which is a major issue with An Bord Pleanála. I suggested a manner in which this could be dealt with, which the developer accepted. He is to send me revised proposals and maps before he resubmits it. He asked that I look at it beforehand and I said I would do so. The developer accepts that the revised application still has problems that have not met with the requirements of An Bord Pleanála when it refused the original one. That covers all the points which were raised, and Mr. Nix may also wish to cover some specific points.
