I move amendment No. 1:
In page 5, subsection 1, line 31, after "roadway" to insert "and motorway".
The purpose of the amendment is to ensure motorways are not excluded from the Bill.
Litter Pollution Bill, 1996: Committee and Final Stages.
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2.
The amendment is not necessary as the defination of "roadway" includes the roadway of a motorway. Section 43 of the Roads Act, 1993, defines a motorways as a public road and public road is defined in the definition section of the Bill.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 2 agreed to.
Section 3 agreed to.
SECTION 4.
I move amendment No. 2:
In page 6, subsection (1), line 25, after "materials" to insert "and livestock".
The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that effluent or feathers are not left behind by lorries carrying livestock or poultry. This often happens and I am sure the Minister of State has been them on his travels from Cork to Dublin. Are vehicles which carry livestock, chickens and similar goods covered by the Bill?
The Senator has raised a good point. I asked him to withdraw the amendment and I will have the matter considered for Report Stage. It may be that the term "goods or materials" in the Bill embraces livestock. However, the matter needs further examination and I will deal with it on Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 4 agreed to.
Sections 5 to 7, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 8.
Amendment No. 3 is out of order as it involves a potential charge on the Revenue.
Amendment No. 3 not moved.
Question proposed: "That section 8 stand part of the Bill."
I am sure there is a provision regarding the payment of grants to bodies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and others to help them carry out their work.
I will check the Deputy's point and come back to it on Report Stage.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 9.
Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 are related and may be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 8, subsection (3), line 32, after "notice." to insert "but not later than seven days,".
The purpose of the amendments is to ensure that an open ended arrangement will not be put in place and that people will be tied to specific dates, such as seven and 21 days. The amendments involve the insertion of a timeframe in this area.
I note the Senator's point but the amendments are not necessary. They are too restrictive for primary legislation. If a local authority issues a notice to a person to remove accumulated litter, the person has a right to make representations to the local authority within a period specified by the authority in the notice. It could be less or more than seven days. The matter should be left to local authorities to decide and I ask the Senator to withdraw the amendments.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 5 not moved.
Section 9 agreed to.
SECTION 10.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 9, between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following new subsection:
"(3) A local authority which fails to make and implement a litter management plan shall be liable to penalty."
The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that penalties will be imposed on local authorities which do not prepare plans or take this matter seriously. As the Minister of State is aware, there is some concern that, because local authorities have major responsibility in this area, they may fail to honour their own commitments. It is desirable to include a provision whereby the Minister will have the power to impose penalties on local authorities which fail to implement the Bill.
I do not understand how the amendment will work because it does not specify the penalties which would be imposed on a local authority if it failed to produce a litter management plan. There is no need to provide for a penalty clause because I envisage that every local authority will produce a litter management plan as required by the Bill. At this point, over 40 local authorities have made and adopted plans while the rest are actively working on their plans.
If the Minister of State is satisfied that local authorities are preparing plans and will comply with the legislation, I will withdraw the amendment. However, perhaps the Minister of State could point out to local authorities that we considered including penalties in this area. A sum of £5,000 could be easily inserted in the Bill but, as the Minister of State said, I am not sure it is necessary. However, he should impress on local authorities that they have as much responsibility to carry out their duties under the legislation as anybody else who could be penalised.
There is close contact with local authorities on almost a weekly basis and they are under no illusion about this matter. They are aware that the Department and the Minister are serious about this issue. They are aware of the Department and the Minister's views and they are actively responding to them. They will have their plans in place as quickly as possible.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 10 agreed to.
Section 11 to 14, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 15.
I move amendment No. 7:
In page 12, subsection (1)(b), line 19, after "and" to insert "within a reasonable time of the ending of any particular period of the operations of the outlet".
It is important to include specific time frames in the legislation to ensure open ended arrangements are not put in place. The purpose of the amendment is to strengthen the section by setting down a reasonable time limit.
I note the Senator's point and I will examine the proposal. I ask him to withdraw the amendment and I will come back to the matter on Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 15 agreed to.
SECTION 16.
Amendments Nos. 8 and 9 are related and may be discussed together.
I move amendment No.8:
In page 14, subsection (9)(g), line 21, after "seaport" to insert "or marina or adjoining parking or laybys."
The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that certain areas are not omitted from the Bill. It is difficult to ensure that every eventuality is covered in primary legislation. However, the amendments would strengthen the coverage of the areas about which I am worried.
The amendments are not necessary because the areas are covered by the provisions of the Bill already. The term "marina" is already covered in paragraph (d) where it refers to an area for other indoor or outdoor sports or recreation. Parking areas are covered by paragraph (h) of the Bill, which refers to public car parks. The term "arcade", as in "shopping arcade", is covered by the term "shopping centre" in paragraph (i). The issues raised by the Senator are covered by the Bill but if he withdraws the amendment and puts it down on Report Stage I will look at this matter again.
I will do so if the Minister of State feels there is adequate provision for these situations.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 9 not moved.
I move amendment No. 10:
In page 14, subsection (9)(k), line 27, after "otherwise" to insert "or in an area where planning permission has been given for special event, or public gathering."
This is to ensure that, if planning permission for a big event is granted, a situation does not arise where there will be no requirement to have an area cleaned up within a specific time. After the St. Patrick's Day celebrations there was litter chaos in most towns.
The amendment is unnecessary because sections 17 and 18 are devoted to measures associated with the holding of special events at which large numbers of people will attend. I ask the Senator to withdraw his amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No.11:
In page 14, subsection (9)(n), line 30, after "vehicles" to insert "buses or".
The section mentions railways and I wish to ensure that bus stations are covered. For example Bus Aras is a separate entity.
This amendment is unnecessary because right of way is reserved for buses on public roads. This is covered by the Bill and is the intention of paragraph (n), which means that notice can be served on CIE in respect of railway lines.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 16 agreed.
Sections 17 to 33 agreed.
SECTION 34.
Amendments Nos. 12 and 13 are related and may be taken together. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No.12:
In page 25, paragraph (a), line 43, to delete "the municipal fund" and substitute "a special separate municipal fund".
The purpose of this amendment is to make sure there is a separate fund dealing with litter rather than having payments going to the general municipal or local authority funds. There is a provision for diverting fines imposed by breaches in the litter laws into the municipal or local authority funds. There should be a separate litter fund supplemented by the money collected by way of fines.
These amendments are unnecessary and do not achieve what the Senator wants. This amendment would oblige local authorities to ringfence the money received in fines and penalties. Local authorities are already spending approximately £20 million a year on the control of litter. If money was ringfenced local authorities would feel they could only spend what was designated for the control of litter and the money taken in would be the only money spent on this. That would not achieve the Senator's aim; this was the response given when this matter was raised in the Dáil debate on this Bill.
I appreciate the Minister of State's point but the opposite argument could also be made. We do not want money coming in through fines for litter offences used for public lighting. If the Minister of State can give an assurance that that will not happen, I will not press the amendment. If a local authority got £50,000 or £100,000 in litter fines, I could not condone it being spent filling potholes.
The money that will be taken in fines and penalties will be a drop in the ocean compared to what is being spent already. Local authorities are spending the maximum amount they can on litter control and any money brought in would merely help them to shoulder that burden. The Senator should withdraw his amendment and we can discuss it again on Report Stage if he wishes.
I will not labour the point but if money comes in from litter fines it should be used for litter protection measures rather than going into the general funds.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 13 not moved.
Section 34 agreed.
Sections 35 and 36 agreed.
TITLE.
Acting Chairman
Amendment No. 14 is out of order as it involves a potential charge on the Revenue.
Amendment No. 14 not moved.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment.
Acting Chairman
When is it proposed to take Report Stage?
Next Tuesday.
Acting Chairman
Is that agreed?
If the Senator wishes to take Report Stage now we can do so.
In view of the assurances given by the Minister of State, there is little point resubmitting the amendments.
We have powers under the regulations to deal with any matters not covered in the Bill. If it is wished to take Report Stage now we can do so.
Agreed to take Report and Final Stages today.
Bill received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I appreciate the forthright way the Minister of State dealt with our amendments. I thank his office and the officials for the valuable work done in the preparation and presentation of this legislation, which will go a long way towards dealing with our major litter problems. I hope the Bill is successful and the Minister and his staff continue their work to deal with this menacing problem.
I also compliment the Minister and his staff. I am glad we could finish the Bill this evening with the co-operation of the Opposition.
I thank Senators for their contributions to all Stages of the Bill and I am glad it will now pass into law. It is important legislation and we hoped the position will be improved through education rather than enforcement.
Question put and agreed to.
Sitting suspended at 5.15 p.m. and resumed at 6 p.m.