Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 18 December 2007
63 Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the action he proposes to take to make the Poolbeg incinerator project redundant and unviable; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35489/07]
View answerThe waste-to-energy plant proposed for the Poolbeg area is being promoted by Dublin City Council, acting on behalf of the four local authorities, and is provided for in the statutory Dublin regional waste management plan already adopted by the local authorities concerned in accordance with the provisions of the Waste Management Act 1996.
The project has received planning permission from An Bord Pleanála and the Planning and Development Act precludes ministerial involvement in individual planning decisions. In addition, the project requires a waste licence which is, under the provisions of the Waste Management Acts, the statutory responsibility of the Environmental Protection Agency. The agency is in the process of making a determination in respect of this matter. Under section 60(3) of the Act, as Minister, I am specifically precluded from exercising power or control concerning an application for a waste licence.
My personal views on this project are a matter of public record, as is the emphasis, which I consider necessary in the context of the Government commitment to a waste review, on minimising waste going to landfill and incineration. However, in public comments I have made as a Minister, I have at all times been respectful of the statutory limitations under which I must act in particular instances and I have never suggested that I possess specific powers concerning this proposed development.
As Minister, I set policy and determine the implementation of policy on waste. I have a range of powers and functions under the waste management legislation which enables me to exercise this role. In particular, I have the power to issue directions on policy, to require changes to waste plans, although this power does not apply retrospectively, and to require the making of by-laws.
I have already signalled a fundamental change in waste and resources policy. This policy change will move the emphasis in waste management up the waste hierarchy. As part of this policy change I am commissioning an international study for the purposes of a waste policy review.
The Minister is wrong when he said he could do nothing, or would not attempt to do anything, to make the Poolbeg incinerator redundant. On Monday, 19 November, when the decision was announced, the Minister said he was very disappointed. He said he planned to review waste policy within the next nine months and expected that that review would find the incinerator was redundant and was not viable. The following day, the Taoiseach told the Dáil the Minister had no power to halt the Poolbeg incinerator. Either the Minister or the Taoiseach is wrong, which is it?
I was explicit in my reply to the Deputy if he listened to what I said.
I did.
As regards this project, I am not claiming that I have specific powers. However, while I am not pre-empting the outcome of the review, I said repeatedly in the House that if the review carefully examines the figures that have been supplied to me and which I have issued in the House concerning the total municipal waste arising, which is about 3.2 million tonnes, it can be reduced by recycling. If one has a 50% recycling rate, and with mechanical biological treatment or MBT, one can raise that substantially — it can be reduced to about 1.7 million tonnes, and it can be reduced even further with MBT. The national figure I gave here was between 400,000 and 600,000 tonnes. The emphasis has to be on MBT.
As was mentioned, I was in Bali last week where the Austrian environment minister launched an MBT plant. That is the way to go. As regards climate change, I am conscious of the fact that replacing a hole-in-the-ground landfill simply by putting everything into a fire is not a sustainable method of dealing with waste in the long term.
Does the Minister accept that all his huffing and puffing before the election and since he became Minister is largely redundant? His words are not viable in the context of doing anything to stop the incinerator going ahead.
All the huffing and puffing is coming from the Deputy's side. Last night, I attended a meeting in Ringsend and was happy to take questions. Funnily enough, however, there was no one there from Fine Gael.
Deputy Gormley is the Minister so what did he tell them? Did he tell them the same thing?
The Deputy and his colleagues say they did X, Y and Z, but they voted for the incinerator in Ringsend. It is all documented there.
What did the Minister tell them? Did he tell them he would make it redundant?
The Minister should answer the question and be direct.
Answer the question.
I believe the Leas-Cheann Comhairle was the Minister at the time the waste management legislation was introduced.
The Minister knows it is not proper to involve the Chair in the debate, but accolades are all right.
It is not proper but it is a fact that he did a wonderful job as Minister for the Environment and Local Government.
Answer the question.
I must say, however, that when incineration was included in that legislation, Fine Gael voted for it.
Will the Minister answer the question he was asked? If not, he can do nothing.
