Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 25 Jan 2006

Vol. 182 No. 10

Adjournment Matters.

Water and Sewerage Schemes.

Mr. Kitt

I thank the Cathaoirleach for allowing me to raise this issue and the Minister of State for coming to the House. We have a considerable amount of water schemes in County Galway and I estimate the county has the greatest number of water schemes in the country. I am slightly disappointed that both group water schemes and public water schemes have not progressed recently as much as I would have wished. Allegations have been made that Galway County Council has not spent all of the money allocated for group water schemes. From conversations I have had with some councillors they would contest this claim. A considerable amount of money has been spent on water schemes, a trend which should continue for both group water schemes and public water schemes.

The amount spent on sewerage schemes under construction amounts to €26 million, and €68 million will be spent on water and sewerage schemes in County Galway this year. It is disappointing that many of the smaller schemes listed in 2002 and 2003, and possibly earlier than this, appear to have been put on the 2007 list. Twelve of the schemes on the 2007 list cost less than €5 million. The smaller schemes, which make up the majority of the schemes in question, should be dealt with before 2007.

Some schemes were completed in the past under the reed bed system. The scheme in Williamstown in County Galway is an example of such a scheme. The cost of these schemes was less than 50% of the cost of a traditional scheme. Many towns have inadequate sewerage schemes and improvements to such schemes are included in the programme for 2006 and 2007.

"Design build operate" is a phrase used in connection with the construction of schemes. The scheme in Milltown in north Galway was once a standalone scheme but is now included in a group, as are schemes in Dunmore and Kilkerran. The schemes in the latter two locations are treated in conjunction with Leenane in west Galway. While I always believed it would be a good idea to use the design build operate model, I am concerned about schemes which were standalone but are now being included in bundled schemes.

I was pleased to hear the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government say before Christmas that schemes costing less than €5 million could be fast-tracked and that local authorities would not be forced to send every scheme to the Department. This is a very good idea. Allowing the county council to deal with schemes would be very welcome in a county like Galway, which has a considerable number of them.

I am sure the Minister of State is familiar with the progress of a scheme. A particular scheme looks like a very good idea, is drawn up, approved by the council and goes out to consultants. The next thing we hear is that the scheme must be enlarged, for example, it must be enlarged by a quarter of a mile on one road or half a mile on another road. The matter then returns to the Department because the scheme must be costed again, which causes significant delay. The estimated cost of schemes scheduled to start in 2007 is €256 million. I would like to have seen these schemes started this year. Progress on the 12 schemes that cost less than €5 million, such as those in Milltown and Kinvara, would be welcome. The Kinvara scheme has been raised in the Seanad by Senator Ulick Burke, in Galway County Council and in the European Parliament with regard to pollution and the threat to the environment. The Minister should eliminate some of the red tape and then we would have a great opportunity to give every small town and village a sewerage scheme and progress with the water schemes which need much more investment.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. B. O’Keeffe)

I thank Senator Kitt for raising an important national issue. I hope the information I am now going to provide will satisfy him that we are making real progress.

Providing modern water services infrastructure to support social and economic objectives has been a major focus of Government spending over the past number of years. There has been unprecedented investment by my Department under the national development plan on water and sewerage schemes and this has made a key contribution to the economic growth that has benefited every part of Ireland.

My Department's Water Services Investment Programme 2005-07, published last month, includes some 60 major water and sewerage schemes, with a value of over €451 million, for Galway. Many areas of the county, such as Carna-Kilkieran, Tuam and Headford will benefit from improved water supplies. Also included are new regional water supply schemes for Costelloe, Gort, Ballinasloe, Clifden, Loughrea, Dunmore-Glenamaddy and Portumna. All these schemes will play a major role in the development of the residential, tourism and commercial sectors of these areas. In addition, towns and villages such as Athenry, Ballinasloe, Barna, Carraroe, Clifden, Glenamaddy, Headford, Milltown, Oughterard and Tuam can also look forward to new or upgraded sewerage schemes.

I am as anxious as the Senator to see all these schemes get to construction and completion as quickly as possible and my Department is doing everything it can to ensure this happens. However, the Senator will appreciate that multi-million euro schemes that are being funded by the taxpayer must go through detailed planning and development processes to ensure they meet their intended objectives, are designed and constructed in an economical manner and produce drinking water or treated waste water to a standard that meets national and EU requirements. Moreover, the acquisition of land or completion of statutory planning procedures such as environmental impact assessments cannot be achieved overnight but must be completed before tenders can be invited for the construction of any scheme.

Over the years my Department has consistently delegated more and more responsibilities to local authorities to speed up the procurement of new water services infrastructure. For example, once the preliminary report for a project costing up to €2.5 million is approved under my Department's water services investment programme, the local authority can generally proceed to construction without further reference to the Department. I want to extend this devolution of functions further and I have recently announced that for every project in the water services investment programme valued under €5 million — there are 291 of them — local authorities will henceforth be entitled, after they receive preliminary approval, to proceed right through to construction without further reference to my Department. This will give local authorities unprecedented authority to advance individual schemes with a minimum of Departmental involvement.

I hope the result will be a significant speeding up of hundreds of individual schemes from drawing board through to completion. It will also mean that my Department's expertise can be concentrated on advancing bigger and more costly projects. The Senator will also be glad to learn that, as a particular measure to help Galway, my Department agreed last year to fund the costs of two additional engineering posts in Galway County Council's water services section. Much of the function will now fall on the local councillors to ensure their local authorities will expedite projects costing under €5 million because the responsibility has now been devolved to them.

On the rural water side, I am particularly pleased to acknowledge the great efforts being made by all the rural water stakeholders in County Galway to address the pressing problem of quality-deficient group water schemes. Approximately 15,000 rural households are dependent on group water schemes in County Galway. I am determined that funding will not be a constraint on the task of bringing over 100 quality-deficient group water schemes in the county up to standard. Spending nationally on rural water has increased dramatically, from around €15 million in 1997 to €119 million in 2005. This is real progress by any yardstick.

As the Senator is aware, responsibility for the administration of the devolved rural water programme rests with the county councils. It is a matter for each county council to determine and implement its annual programme of work. Over the three-year period 2002 to 2004, Galway County Council underspent its block grant allocation for rural water by over €8 million. This included an amount of €1.133 million earmarked for small public water and sewerage schemes. There is a lesson to be learned there. We must be far more energetic locally to ensure the council officials meet the demands and spend the money given to them during the year in question.

I am pleased that Galway County Council is now giving the upgrading of rural water schemes the priority and attention it deserves. In 2005 the council looked for funding for an ambitious programme of work that focussed on the provision of new, stand-alone water treatment plants for up 60 group water schemes with poor quality private sources. In response to the council's ambitious plans a record capital allocation of over €14 million was provided last year for rural water plus a further €410,000 to meet the council's administration and technical costs. I understand that construction is currently under way on the provision of 17 group scheme treatment plants that together will serve around 3,500 Galway households. Planning is well advanced on further contracts to provide fully treated water for up to 40 more group schemes serving over 6,000 households. Good progress is also being made on connecting quality-deficient group schemes to the county's expanding regional water scheme network.

The 2005 programme targets set by the council for 2005 were fully realised and the €14 million allocation was drawn down in its entirety. Galway County Council has submitted another ambitious programme of rural water activities for 2006. I am at present examining all the local authorities' proposals and I will be announcing the 2006 allocations shortly. There is already an unbroken eight-year record of increased rural water spending and I intend for this year's allocation to ensure that record is more than maintained.

Mr. Kitt

I thank the Minister of State for his reply.

State Property.

Ms O’Meara

I thank the Cathaoirleach for the opportunity to raise this important matter and I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House. I am sure the Minister of State has been to Nenagh at some point——

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

I am on my way.

Ms O’Meara

When he comes one of the first things he will see is the fine castle. This is a fine example of a circular keep, is in good order and is a symbol of the town. It is located in the town near the church, the courthouse, the jail and other buildings of significance and heritage. It has been the dream of many people in Nenagh that the castle and its environs would be developed as a tourism project. It is urgent that this happens because Nenagh does not have any natural tourist draw and this project could be that draw. Many people have worked hard for this and Shannon Development — when it was allowed to develop regional tourism — was very supportive as well. The political forces in the town have supported this project, including Nenagh Town Council. The council put its money where its mouth was and purchased two buildings on Pearse Street in order to allow an access on to the street. The permission was not granted for the demolition of the two buildings so we are now in a different scenario.

In recent times, I and other public representatives were asked by Nenagh Town Council to contact the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government regarding this issue. The council would like to obtain legal control of the property around the castle so that it can carry out works. At the moment, there is also some anti-social activity in the area and it is gathering litter. If the town council had legal control over it, the area could be developed into a public park and a nice amenity. The town council asked for a meeting with the Minister but did not receive a reply until recently. In November, I received a reply from the Minister on this issue. In it, he requested me to ask the OPW to carry out yet another report on the project. Rather than proceeding as the OPW proposed, the Minister has now asked the OPW to go back to square one. This means that more time will elapse before anything happens. In his letter, the Minister states that he has requested the OPW to carry out a further study in accordance with details outlined in the letter. This would result in a scaled down project. It is my concern that the Minister is planning to scale down the project and do less than the community wants to do.

Effectively, the clock could go backwards on this project, which is very important to the town. The Minister may know that representatives from his own party gave many commitments on this issue in the past. It is vital for the tourism potential of Nenagh, which is simply not being realised. However, if the castle project could be developed, much more would follow, such as a heritage centre in the jail. The OPW is currently finishing what looks like a magnificent job on the courthouse, just across the road from the castle. There is the potential for the development of a number of fine buildings, most of them heritage buildings. I appeal to the Minister to speed up this project and to communicate with Nenagh Town Council. There will be no solid progress on this issue without that level of communication and drive from the Department.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

I am pleased to update the House on the Nenagh castle project and I thank the Senator for bringing it to the attention of the Seanad. The Nenagh Tourism and Development Committee purchased 35-36 Pearse Street, Nenagh, including outbuildings, with the intention of demolishing them to open up a vista to Nenagh Castle from the Dublin Road approach to the castle. It was intended that opening up the vista would give the castle more visual prominence in the town and bring it back to being a focal point of the town.

However, permission to demolish the two properties on Pearse Street was refused on appeal in 1997. Following this, consultant architects were appointed in 2000 to examine the options for the properties and the castle, in advance of public consultation regarding the future plans. They proposed an extensive scheme including visitor facilities with an estimated cost in 2002 of €1.3 million. Running costs were estimated at €130,000 to €150,000 per annum. The intention was that the facility would be run by the OPW. The castle is in State ownership and the Pearse Street properties were also transferred to State ownership in 2004. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government must ensure the best value use of the resources available for our built heritage. In the present case, it is important that all stakeholders — the Nenagh community, Nenagh Town Council and the State authorities — be involved in advancing an attainable project for the castle. For example, the county manager has said that there are advanced plans to develop tourist trails both in Nenagh itself and in the north Tipperary area and that Nenagh Castle would be integral to these plans.

Therefore, having regard to all the circumstances, it was considered the best solution was to ask the OPW to make recommendations for a suitable development at this site, less ambitious than that identified in the consultant architects' report, and having regard to the other issues, which have emerged concerning the castle and castle field. This has been done. I look forward to seeing the outcome of this review at an early date and I believe that the opportune time to meet with Nenagh Town Council will be when there has been an opportunity to study that review. The Minister would be open to a meeting at that stage because there would be great merit in such a meeting when we have the outcome of the review.

Ms O’Meara

Can the Minister of State indicate the timeframe?

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

I cannot indicate a timeframe, but I understand we are expediting the result of the review. I will communicate further with the Senator on the exact timeframe we expect is involved.

Electricity Generation.

Mr. U. Burke

I wish to ask the Minister of State to respond immediately to the many wind farmers who are unable to gain access to the national grid because of the current management and monopoly of the ESB and to clarify his responsibilities in this area. The Minister, in a parliamentary reply in the Dáil, denied responsibility for it and said it was a question for the regulator. My understanding, however, is that the regulator is a civil servant and, as such, he is responsible for the implementation of Government policy. In 2005, when the Minister was addressing the Wind Energy Association in Dundalk, he clearly indicated his involvement in Government policy and his wish to expedite such policy in the area of wind energy connections to the national grid.

On numerous occasions over the past year many Members of this House expressed concern over continuing unexplained issues as regards access to the national grid for renewable energy, in particular wind energy. The Minister knows the considerable moneys and time that have been expended by many groups and private individuals as regards monitoring the suitability of particular planning for wind energy and also in the planning process. For many groups both of these initiatives have proven to be very expensive. All of this development took place in response to clear and unambiguous Government policy in support of wind energy. Having gained sight of the finishing line, many of the wind energy developers now find their planning permissions are running out, while those responsible for access to the grid are sitting on their hands and doing nothing to progress matters. At present approximately 2,000 MW of electricity are waiting to be connected.

It is important to be truthful. The suspicion among many of those proposed promoters is that the ESB and its subsidiaries, which already have access to the national grid, are being given first preference. The Minister of State will be aware of the situation from Donegal down to Galway and into Kerry and west Cork that there are proposals there ahead of projects beside lines that could provide access to the national grid. In other words, the capacity is there and many promoters are looking at a national grid that is capable of taking their capacities if they were allowed to go. Other projects, however, particularly in Kerry and west Cork, that are far removed from the national grid are, nonetheless, ahead of them in terms of access. This means the others will have to wait for up to ten years for access. There is a clear indication from this that something is seriously wrong. It is very important that the Minister now takes responsibility for the situation.

We know that up to 90% of the electricity generated in this country is based on fossil fuels imported from outside. Some 50% of that is gas. Only a few weeks ago, because of the disruption in the Russian supply of gas through the Ukraine, there was growing fear in many of the industrialised countries that use this source of energy over what might happen in the future. Ireland depends on Britain for gas, which comes from Scotland through the pipeline, for up to 50% of its generating capacity. All of these countries were fearful as to what might happen as regards energy. There was talk in England about "dimming the lights" in homes and in Germany some classified the impending crisis as the "war of the 21st century". At the same time officials in the Department as well as in Bord Gáis were dismissing the crisis as was the regulator.

However, Professor John Simmie of NUI, Galway, clearly indicated his concern. He failed to understand why a country like this, so dependent on fossil fuel and particularly gas imported from Britain, could make so light of such a serious crisis. All of this is a warning sign that in the future we need to get real about access and developing wind energy, especially where it is readily available. The excess capacity is available but it is not being allowed. People are suspicious as regards the regulator because of his past association with the ESB. I ask the Minister of State to clarify the situation in this regard.

My other request is that we prioritise connections for those proposals that are ready to go, which have ready access to the national grid nearby. It is also vitally important to consider the complete separation of the ESB from the national grid. That will allay the fears and suspicions felt by so many people.

Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (Mr. Gallagher)

I thank Senator Ulick Burke for raising this issue. He asked at the outset for clarification on the position with regard to the Minister and I will do that. First, I will clarify for the House where actual responsibilities lie as regards access by wind farmers to the electricity, distribution and transmission systems.

In accordance with Part V of the Electricity Regulation Act 1999, on access to transmission and distribution systems, responsibility for access to the national grid, together with the subsequent costs pertaining to same, rests solely with the Commission for Energy Regulation, CER. The Minister has no function in the matter. The CER gives directions to the transmission system operator, TSO, and distribution system operator, DSO, as regards grid codes, matters to be specified in the code and the terms for the connection to, and use of, the transmission and distribution networks. These are all solely matters for the CER, with the Minister having no function or power to intervene. Having stated that, I take this opportunity to advise the House on the background to the issue raised by Senator Ulick Burke and current developments.

On 3 December 2003, the CER decided as an interim measure that the electricity network operators ESB and ESB Networks were not required to offer new binding connection offers for windfarms before the end of 2003. In making this decision the CER was exercising, as I have already pointed out, its exclusive competence under section 34 of the Electricity Regulation Act 1999. The commission was responding to concerns on the part of the grid operator about system stability and reliability if all proposed windfarms were connected. The House should be aware that the CER also has statutory responsibility for security of supply. After the moratorium announcement was made the CER established a working group representing itself, the network operators, Sustainable Energy Ireland and the Irish Wind Energy Association to address the issues and concerns.

In July 2004 the CER published a direction, which appeared to lift the moratorium. However, the Minister is advised by CER that a number of technical issues were unresolved which meant, in effect, that no new connection offers issued before end 2004. Following progress on the outstanding technical issues the CER issued a further direction to the system operators in December 2004. This direction mandated the operators to give immediate priority to issue connection offers to those 34 applications — referred to as "gate 1" applications — which were deemed complete by 3 December 2003, the date of the moratorium. The total capacity involved amounted to 371 MW.

Subsequent to this the CER has been developing, in co-operation with the system operators, proposals for those grid applications still within the application process. These are termed as "gate 2" applications. The Minister is advised by the Commission for Energy Regulation that a draft decision regarding its criteria for entry to gate 2 will issue from the commission within the next fortnight. The Government is firmly committed to progressing the contribution of renewable energy sources to national electricity generating capacity. We are on track to meet our EU target of just over 13% by 2010. The private sector is playing no small part in the meeting of that target by making significant investments in wind energy and in other types of energy.

In order to ensure delivery of the required new renewable energy capacity, the Minister will shortly launch a new support programme which will feature a fixed price feed-in tariff mechanism. Further prospects for the renewable energy sector as well as the institutional arrangements and market structures for the Irish electricity sector, are part of the comprehensive strategy review by Deloitte & Touche. This review has just been completed and submitted to the Minister. It is currently being considered by the Department in the context of the finalisation of an energy policy consultation paper.

Senator Ulick Burke questioned the impartiality of the commission. Both the Minister and I are satisfied there is no question of a lack of impartiality. The Commission for Energy Regulation acts in a totally impartial manner. Its only concern is to ensure that Ireland can strive to meet or hopefully surpass its EU target by 2013.

The Seanad adjourned at 7.50 p.m. until10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 26 January 2006.