asked the Minister for Local Government whether he is prepared to make a special scheme of grants available to local authorities to enable them to clear up pollution of lakes and rivers for which they are responsible.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Lake and River Pollution.
9.
Works necessary for eliminating pollution caused by discharges from public sewerage systems are included in the ongoing sanitary services programmes of local authorities. Such works already qualify as sanitary services schemes for loans from the local loans fund and for the generous State subsidy provided in respect of loan charges. I might add that the capital provision for sanitary services in 1976 is £23 million compared with £8.23 million in 1972-73 and that State subsidies in the same period rose from £2.034 million to £4.907 million.
Is the Minister aware that in relation to many sanitary authorities the capital allocation for this year is not as much as it was in respect of last year?
That would be so. There is nothing unusual about such a situation because if a scheme is being undertaken in one year there is no reason why the local authority concerned should receive in the following year the same amount of money as they received in the previous year either for that scheme or for any other. Schemes must be undertaken in the order of priority laid down by the local authorities.
Is the Minister not aware that in many cases the allocations are not sufficient to enable sanitary authorities to undertake water and sewerage schemes? In those circumstances how can they be expected to deal with the problem of the pollution of lakes and rivers from the same allocation? Is a special scheme not required to deal with pollution?
A special scheme would require a special money allocation and the Deputy's party have been asking us to reduce public expenditure.
Not for works of this nature.
Extra money which was allocated to me recently is being used to undertake a number of additional schemes but it would not be possible to undertake all the schemes involved. This is work that should have been done during the past 50 years.
Would the Minister like to come down to Lough Sheelin?
Would the Minister agree that the pollution problem in lakes and rivers is becoming progressively worse and at an alarming rate? In these circumstances would he not accept the argument that to reduce the amount of money as between one year and another is not the way to approach the problem?
The situation is that many lakes and rivers which were rather bad in this respect a few years ago are now showing signs of improvement while there are others in respect of which there is suspicion now. What I said was not that there would be a lesser amount overall but that a lesser amount would be given for specific counties. It would not be reasonable to say, for instance, that because we gave £5 million to Tipperary three years ago we should have given the same amount last year and again this year. The money available for this purpose must be spread around. The Deputy is aware that local authorities decide on the order of priorities of schemes. Naturally, they only get enough money to meet the cost of whatever scheme they are doing.
I realise that the Minister picked Tipperary at random but it was a very bad example. Is he not aware that the local authorities operate under many disabilities in dealing with water pollution but that the main problem is the lack of adequate finance? There is no need to go back five years but as and from today can the Minister assure the House and all those concerned with the problem of pollution that there will be adequate finance made available to back the powers which are being provided for in the Bill; otherwise the Bill will be totally inadequate?
We ought to await the introduction of the Bill before commenting on it.
If I could be sure that every Deputy here would follow me into the voting lobby, I should have no hesitation in putting pressure on the Minister for Finance to provide the necessary moneys for this work. No previous Government whether it was Coalition, Cumann na nGaedheal or Fianna Fáil realised the seriousness of not providing adequate money for sanitary services and we are now in the position that, although, the allocation for these services has increased from £8 million to £23 million it is merely a drop in the ocean in the context of the problem as a whole. Never before has the situation been so critical.
(Interruptions.)
Order.
There was a great deal of money needed for the technology element involved.