asked the Minister for the Environment if his attention has been drawn to the findings of a recent report that there is no safe lead air pollution level and if so, if he will make a statement in the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Pollution.
1.
I am assuming that the report referred to by the Deputy is the Lawther report on lead and health published very recently in Britain. I have been unable to find a statement in the report to the effect that there is no "safe" lead air pollution level. Paragraph 125 of the report, however, states that no firm evidence exists for guidance on what might be taken as a wholly "safe" level in the environment or the body. This is a very different matter and, in fact, the findings of the report appear to be reassuring, in so far as they may be applied to conditions in Ireland generally.
I might also mention that there is an EEC directive on the biological screening of the population for lead which defines reference levels for blood lead in members of the general population and requires remedial action to be taken if the reference level criteria are not met. The Department of Health, which is responsible for implementing the directive, has carried out the monitoring operations required by the directive and forwarded the results to the EEC Commission. I am informed that the criteria prescribed in the directive are met in Ireland. Furthermore, the results of the monitoring at the Dublin stations in Dame Street and O'Connell Street are not unsatisfactory. The annual mean concentrations on a 24-hour basis are below the level of 2 micrograms per cubic metre, which is the standard proposed in the EEC directive on air quality standards for lead.
2.
asked the Minister for the Environment if he has received a complaint regarding the pollution of waterways at Connellstown, Enfield, County Meath, caused by effluent from a farm owned by a company (details supplied) discharging into a tributary of the Enfield Blackwater and the action being taken to prevent a recurrence of this pollution.
3.
asked the Minister for the Environment if he has received a report (details supplied) on pollution at Connellstown, Enfield, County Meath and if so, the action taken thereon.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together.
Under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977, it is a matter for local authorities to investigate instances of pollution and take any necessary remedial action. I understand that a complaint concerning water pollution alleged to have been caused by effluent from this company's farm was investigated by Meath County Council in September last, when a bacteriological test on a water sample indicated that the water was fit for human consumption and that there was no indication of pollution.
I also understand that planning permissions for agricultural buildings provided by the company in question at Connellstown, Enfield, have been granted by the planning authority, subject to conditions. I am informed that the latest development by the company is currently the subject of an appeal to An Bord Pleanála.
As to the particulars furnished by the Deputies with the Questions, I have sent a copy of this material to Meath County Council for attention and have asked them to communicate with the Deputies in due course.
Arising out of the Minister's reply, would he not agree that this is a very serious matter which could possibly be fixed up quite easily? It is a question of fact of whether or not there is pollution. Would the Minister not agree that the suggestion made by the local people that, in fact, the sample of water which was analysed was taken out of a tap and not taken out of the river, if true, would be a very serious allegation?
Under the circumstances, would the Minister ask Meath County Council to have the whole matter reviewed? I am rather interested in seeing that this matter is straightened out. Could he ask Meath County Council as a matter of urgency to look into this?
Arising out of the Deputy's statement, I have no evidence that what the Deputy says is correct. I have asked Meath County Council to investigate the matter fully. I have also asked them, as I said in my reply, to communicate with the Deputies who have tabled the questions. The matter is receiving urgent attention.
Could I ask the Minister when the material for the question was furnished to the county council by him?
Quite recently. No report, as such, came to my Department as regards this matter. It, however, came to our notice and we contacted Meath County Council, as the responsible body in this matter. They have the responsibility as regards water pollution.
Would the Minister not agree that it is quite evident that the local people, unless they felt that there was something seriously wrong, would not have gone to the trouble that they have gone to? Would the Minister not agree that, in the interests of the organisation concerned, he should try to get the matter cleared up as quickly as possible and not simply say the water was all right and that they would have to put up with it, even though the lives of people may in consequence, depend on whether or not it is all right?
I should like to make the position clear to the Deputies. I am sure both Deputies are well aware that Meath County Council are the authority responsible for the investigation of water pollution in their area and they carried out the investigation. It is their responsibility to do so. They have been asked by my Department to treat this as a matter of urgency and have been asked to report to the Deputies concerned. I have confidence that Meath County Council will do this and have every confidence, also, that the Deputies will follow up the matter.
I have experience of what a prod from the Department will do to a local authority.
They have got the prod.
Has Deputy Bruton a useful question to ask?
Very useful, as always. The question I should like to ask the Minister is, would he not agree that the information was furnished to his Department approximately a month ago and would he not further agree that if it had been supplied then to the county council, it would be reasonable to expect that the county council could have had a reply to him in time to form a definitive reply in relation to the material supplied, for inclusion in the reply that he has given to the House today?
Of course, delay in replying is a matter for Meath County Council. If there is a delay, we shall be reminding them of the matter.
Their reply has not been lost in the post?
The matter is primarily their responsibility.
4.
asked the Minister for the Environment the prosecutions, if any, initiated under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977, the location both in county and river of such prosecutions, the decisions of the court and the fines, if any.
5.
asked the Minister for the Environment if he has satisfied himself with the operation of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 and if he proposes to introduce amending legislation.
6.
asked the Minister for the Environment if his attention has been drawn to the difficulties arising from the pollution of certain lakes and rivers, in particular Lough Sheelin, County Cavan as the result of activities of certain pig farmers and if he proposes to take any action in relation to the protection of the natural environment.
I propose with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 4, 5 and 6 together.
I am aware that pollution from agricultural sources, including run-off from slurry-spreading on land, has been giving rise to problems in some areas, notably in the Lough Sheelin catchment and I would refer the Deputy to my reply to Question No. 367 on 27 February, 1980, in which I pointed out that the problem of over-enrichment in this lake and its feeder streams is largely an agricultural one, a solution to which is being actively sought by a number of bodies. My Department is participating in these efforts.
It is for the local authority to take any necessary action in relation to offences under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977. Officers of my Department have visited the Lough Sheelin area and reported to me on conditions in the area. My Department wrote subsequently to the Cavan County Council, drawing attention to their responsibilities in the matter and requesting that every effort be made by the council to prevent pollution of the lake from any source and to secure appropriate evidence for prosecution of offenders.
As regards the operation of the 1977 Act generally, I have, on two recent occasions, publicly expressed dissatisfaction at the limited extent to which the wide ranging powers under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 have been availed of by local authorities and I have indicated that I expect a more positive approach to the implementation of the Act. I am having the matter pursued with local authorities.
With regard to possible further legislation in the water pollution control area, I would refer the Deputy to my reply to Question No. 310 on 11 March, 1980.
Detailed information as to the number of prosecutions taken under the Act, the location of the areas or waters in respect of which any such prosecutions were taken, or the outcome of such prosecutions, is not available to me. In this connection, I might point out that prosecutions for some of the primary offences under the Act may be taken by any person. As to prosecutions by authorities, I am aware of four prosecutions in 1978, one in County Wexford, two in County Limerick and one in Offaly. A fine of £200 was imposed in the Offaly case. No fines were imposed in the other three cases, where the defendants gave undertakings to discontinue the polluting discharge.
Would the Minister of State say what action, if any, his Department have taken in relation to Lough Sheelin since the Taoiseach gave his personal undertaking to have the matter rectified and can he tell the House whether his Department have had any communication from the Taoiseach in relation to that undertaking?
The matter of the pollution of Lough Sheelin, as I said in my reply, is getting the attention which it needs. Again, it is entirely a matter for the local authority and we have been pressing them for action as regards this matter. As I said, I am not satisfied that the Water Pollution Act, 1977, is being administered by the local authorities in the way we would expect. The Taoiseach is keeping in close touch with the situation because, like everybody else, he is interested in preventing this kind of pollution, which is all too prevalent.
Is the Minister of State aware of the undertaking given by the Taoiseach to the action group formed in connection with Lough Sheelin?
I am well aware of the Taoiseach's interest in Lough Sheelin.
Will the Minister tell the House if his Department have done anything else since that specific undertaking was given by the Taoiseach?
We have given this matter our full attention since the statement by the Taoiseach. I am well aware of his interest in this matter and in the general subject of pollution. All possible steps have been taken to pursue the matter but it is primarily the responsibility of Cavan County Council and my Department are constantly in touch with them on the matter.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Is it not a fact that there is a committee consisting of representatives of the Departments of Forestry and Fisheries, Environment and Agriculture dealing with this matter and investigating ways of facilitating the disposal of slurry? Further, is it not a fact that a Minister of the Taoiseach stated that in the national interest and in the interest of the economy of County Cavan the disposal of the slurry would be facilitated by grant aid?
The Deputy is correct when he says that people from my Department and from the Departments of Agriculture and Fisheries and Forestry as well as other interests are investigating the problem. With the help of agricultural advisers they are trying to find ways of dealing with the matter to the satisfaction of all concerned. Allegations that Cavan County Council are not accepting responsibility with regard to this matter have been investigated. It is not an easy problem to deal with. It is an urgent matter and I can assure the House that everything possible has been done to find an acceptable solution.
(Cavan-Monaghan): I take it the Minister is aware that piggeries in the area in question were constructed in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Department of Agriculture and with the assistance of grants provided by the Department. Finally, I suggest to the Minister, as would appear from his original reply, that there are other offending agencies contributing to the pollution. Town sewage is finding its way into the lake. Is that not a fact?
It is mainly an agricultural problem—
We cannot discuss all the methods that could be used to deal with Lough Sheelin. It is a local question and we have dealt adequately with it.
(Cavan-Monaghan): It is a national question.
Some of the other questions are more general.
(Cavan-Monaghan): I suggest to the Minister of State that the disposal of town sewage from three counties is contributing to the pollution. What is the Minister's comments on that?
Many things are contributing to pollution throughout the country but the main problem with Lough Sheelin is an agricultural one. It is the over-enrichment of Lough Sheelin from the agricultural spill-over that is in question. The Deputy will agree with me that this is a difficult problem for Cavan County Council to deal with and all of us would like to see an acceptable solution for all concerned. I want to assure the House that everything possible is being done in this matter.
(Cavan-Monaghan): I appreciate that the Minister's reply has been reasonable. I wish to establish that local authority sewage is discharging—
The Deputy is giving information. He is not asking a question.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Although the Minister is slow to accept what I have said, he does not deny it.
Will the Minister not agree that legislation has been ineffective because the method of implementation by local authorities has been a failure? Does he consider the enforcement authority should be the boards of conservators not local authorities who are often the prime polluters?
The Water Pollution Act has not been in existence for very long and its operation is being looked at closely. I am disappointed by lack of action on the part of local authorities. They have been requested on many occasions to give this matter serious attention. I read out to the House the small number of prosecutions which have been taken. In two cases mentioned a fine was not imposed; there was a fine in only one case that was brought by a local authority. I am well aware that the matter needs special attention but I think it would be premature to make changes at this stage.
Has the Minister of State brought his displeasure to the notice of local authorities?
Yes.
I am aware of certain inter-departmental activities occurring at the moment because of the overlapping of the Departments of Agriculture and the Environment. Will the Minister of State tell the House when he expects the inter-departmental committee to submit firm proposals? Will they be submitted before next winter when the pig slurry problem will become acute once again?
I expect to have the proposals well in advance of any problems that may arise next winter. I do not want to hasten the committee unduly because it is a very difficult matter. I have already expressed the wish that a solution acceptable to all would be found. We have asked for a report as quickly as possible.