Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on the Secondary Legislation of the European Communities debate -
Wednesday, 2 Jul 1975

Pollution of Sea Water and Fresh Water for Bathing (Quality Objectives).

Apologies for inability to attend have been received from Deputies Desmond, Thornley and Fitzgerald and from Senators FitzGerald, Ryan and Yeats.

The main business today is the consideration of five draft reports and I propose to begin our consideration of them straight away starting with the Report on the Pollution of Sea Water and Fresh Water for Bathing. Members have the draft report before them so I propose to go through it reasonably quickly as it has been fairly fully considered at sub-committee level.

As Members can see the proposals are being put forward in pursuance of the aims of the Communities' programme of environment action, which was approved by the Council of Ministers on 22nd November, 1973. Paragraph 2 sets out the provisions of the proposed Directive. Paragraph 3 discusses the proposed Directive in the context of our situation. We refer to the fact that there are really only two places in the country where the level of pollution is above that set by the guidelines, that is, the Bull Wall and Killiney Bay.

There are interesting figures in paragraph 3 which say that even though we have about 3,500 miles of coastline we have only 342 miles of sandy beaches and of those only about 80 miles in all are used for bathing purposes. However, we underline the fact that these beaches are a very important national asset and that it is very important that they be protected.

In paragraph 4 we give our views. We refer to the fact that, in general, we accept the Directive and its purposes, but we are not entirely satisfied that the lack of monetary aid is appropriate in our situation. However, we have made a general recommendation that the situation in regard to pollution be kept under continuous observation and that any action which needs to be taken from time to time should be taken. We also refer to the fact that the Directive does not cover swimming pools. We feel that that omission from the Directive should be examined. We express our appreciation of the assistance which we have been afforded by Bord Fáilte and An Taisce. May I take it that the report is adopted?

Although I was not able to be present at the sub-committee that considered this report I should like to say that it seems to be rather complacent about the level of pollution in Irish waters. I appreciate that there is a certain generalisation in the draft report, but we have a very severe increase in pollution, from sewage in particular, all around the country in lakes and in sea water where children bathe. I should not like it to be thought that the Joint Committee were complacent and that we were congratulating ourselves on the position in this country. A few years ago we might have been able to say that we were relatively pollution free. During the last five years there has been a marked increase in pollution. This has happened because we have very little safeguards and no proper system of national monitoring. The Joint Committee should not be complacent, but we should, perhaps, be stronger in advocating a greater necessity for national monitoring.

Yes, to some extent those views are incorporated on page 4 where the report states as follows :

. . . The Joint Committee doubts if this would be the proper approach here. It considers that it would be more efficacious to ensure that any dangerous degree of pollution is brought to public attention by adequate publicity.

Having regard to our present favourable position, the Joint Committee believes that we should endeavour to see that all our bathing places conform to the more stringent guide values of the relevant parameters. It recommends that provision be made accordingly in any domestic legislation implementing the Directive.

Nevertheless, the situation is that fish are dying in water not safe for bathing purposes. Fish are dying in lake water in various lakes in Ireland. There should be a much greater degree of control and of public attention drawn to the present level of pollution. I am glad to have this opportunity of saying that I regard this report as being complacent. Pollution is serious at present and is getting worse by the month. There are not sufficient controls, there are not sufficient domestic statutory controls, nor is there sufficient domestic inspection of the situation.

I certainly agree with the view of the Joint Committee in this draft report. We should accept the Directive and implement it but I would not like to think that we were satisfied.

We have no intention of being complacent about it.

This Committee is not charged with responsibility for pollution. We are only charged with studying the implications of the Directive, and we have done that.

I appreciate that. But when drawing the attention of the Houses of the Oireachtas to the contents of the draft Directive it is also within our scope to emphasise that the situation is a very serious one here in certain areas.

I agree with Senator Robinson that this is something that we cannot be complacent about. We will have to take all the safeguards necessary and see that they are taken by those who have the responsibility to ensure that pollution will not become a problem here in the years ahead. We have pollution to a limited extent. We do not want to see it develop and the public must be made aware of the necessity of controlling it. We must ensure that the public are aware of what is at stake.

Paragraphs 1 to 5 inclusive, agreed to.

Draft report agreed to.

Ordered : To report accordingly.

Top
Share