asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry the action he is taking to ensure that oysters and other shellfish are not contaminated by discharges from public sewage systems operated by local authorities in coastal areas; and if he will make a statement on the oyster beds in the inner Galway Bay.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Contamination of Fish.
13.
I am obviously concerned that commercial shellfish resources should not be subjected to sewage contamination which, though not harmful to shellfish, would render them unsuitable for direct human consumption and so jeopardise their marketability.
The Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977, gives responsibility for the control of sewage discharges from land based sources to the local authority into whose functional area the discharge takes place. However, local authorities engaged in the provision of new sewerage schemes involving a discharge of coastal waters are invariably obliged to obtain a foreshore licence from the Minister for Communications in respect of outfall facilities. My Department are consulted regarding all foreshore licence applications and may object to any proposal which is considered to constitute a threat to fishery interests. Such action is necessary only in a minority of cases.
I am well aware of the importance of the commercial oyster beds in the inner part of Galway Bay, and of their potential for development. My Department are currently engaged in investigations intended to ensure that this resource is not jeopardised by proposed sewage discharges in the area.
In regard to the proposal to discharge raw sewage into Galway Bay at Mutton Island, have the Department given their approval to the discharge of untreated sewage and is the Minister satisfied that that proposal should now proceed?
No, my Department have not given approval and we are objecting to the issue of foreshore licences by the Department of Communications for the Oranmore sewerage scheme. The local authority have accepted the validity of the case——
Not Oranmore, Mutton Island; Galway Corporation, not Galway County Council. It is in the question. There is nothing in the question about Oranmore.
In relation to Mutton Island I am not in a position to give the necessary information on that to the Deputy. I will communicate with him later on today and let him know the position.
I have put down several questions in the past number of months—
This is Question No. 13.
Is the Minister not taking them all together?
No. The Deputy is referring to Question No. 14.
We are dealing with No. 13 now.
Let me ask the Minister if he is confining his reply to Question No. 13 regarding the sewerage scheme for which his Department have given their approval for discharge, will that approval also apply to future extensions of that scheme or will it be necessary for the local authority to seek a new licence in the event of a second phase being added to a sewerage scheme which previously had a licence for a smaller discharge? Is there any quantification?
I would feel that the application for a licence would depend, first of all, on whether there was a change of location — for example, in relation to the outfall at the discharge point. Obviously, that would necessitate applying for a new licence. In relation to increased volume of the sewage, it would depend on the conditions applying to the original licence. If it was felt that the maximum had been exceeded that would be damaging to the prospects of development adjacent to the outfall point, it would depend on the conditions attaching to the licence.
Will the Minister take a more active role in the enforcement of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act? In Roscommon the Hind River has been polluted by Roscommon County Council, the very people who are regarded as the enforcers of that Act. They themselves are discharging raw sewage into the Hind River which is a very important river outside Roscommon for coarse fish——
The question on the Order Paper relates to shellfish.
Will the Minister take a more active role in the enforcement of the Act?
As far as I know, the Deputy is a member of the local authority which he is now alleging are polluting the area. I would ask him to take a more active role with his local authority. If he picks up any provincial paper in any week he will find that the regional boards under my Department are up front in demanding and ensuring that people do not pollute the lakes and rivers.
I am not the Minister in this regard. It is his responsibility to see that the waters are not polluted.
That is not a question.
(Interruptions.)
On Question No. 13, in regard to the Oranmore sewerage scheme, did the Minister's Department give permission for the discharge of untreated sewage at Sallins Point which is adjacent to an oyster bed? Did his Department approve of that scheme? It was designed to be discharged at that point.
My information is that my Department objected to the application initially and that the local authority have accepted the validity of the case put by this Department and are currently examining alternative waste disposal arrangements in that area.
Prior to the design of the scheme were the Department of Fisheries and Forestry consulted by either the Department of the Environment or the local authority, Galway County Council, about approval for the discharge of sewage at Sallins Point in Oranmore? Is the Minister aware that about eight or nine months was spent designing this sewerage scheme to discharge at Sallins Point and that due to local objectors — the Department of Fisheries and Forestry may have come in later — the fact was brought to light that this scheme was at an advanced stage and proposed to discharge into an oyster bed which would have been destroyed by it, and that this was being supported by the Minister's Department and other State agencies?
I am not aware of the support by my Department that the Deputy mentioned. I am not aware of any support being given by my Department to the discharge. I am also not aware of our being made aware at the initial stage of the design of the scheme. The procedure is that where a foreshore licence is being sought by a local authority, at that stage we are consulted and it may very well not come to our notice until that stage.
Ceist 14.
Would the Minister agree that the position that obtains at present where a local authority with the approval of the Department of the Environment can set about designing a scheme — or having one designed by a private consultant as in this case — involving the expenditure of thousands of pounds——
A question.
——of taxpayers' money——
This is in the form of a speech.
Is the Minister aware that this position obtains at present? Would he agree that it is most unsatisfactory that a sewerage scheme be agreed before approval is sought for discharge? Would he agree that a situation similar to this can arise again in the future as in the case of the Oranmore scheme which has to be redesigned? Major changes had to be made in it and much of the expenditure went to waste. The design of an outfall pipe of over a mile was unnecessary——
That is a speech, not a question.
There is an oyster bed. Will the Minister ensure that in future the Department of the Environment and the local authorities will seek approval from his Department before they set about designing these sewerage schemes?
The Deputy knows that I am not responsible to the Department of the Environment. However, I will endeavour to bring to the notice of the Department all that he has raised and see if this area can be tightened up.
In the case of the Oranmore scheme will the Minister give an assurance that it will not discharge into an oyster bed? Is he aware that where it is now proposed to discharge the sewage at a new outfall point oyster beds exist which are known as the Oranmore oyster beds?
Consultations are now taking place about an alternative discharge point and I assume that nobody in my Department would agree to a discharge into an existing oyster bed.
There is an oyster bed at the proposed new outfall.
Discussions have not been concluded on the location of the discharge.
My information is different, that they are deciding on the outfall point.
The remaining questions will appear on tomorrow's Order Paper.
In view of the refusal of the Minister for Justice and the Minister for Health and Social Welfare to meet a delegation from the Eastern Health Board to discuss the questions of the role and the financing of the Central Mental Hospital, of security, including the treatment at the hospital of para-military type patients and ward security, I should like to raise on the Adjournment the whole question of the Central Mental Hospital.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
I gave notice of my intention to raise by way of Private Notice Question the apparent breakdown of law and order at the Tallaght by-pass where there is a conflict between the travelling community and the settled community.
My office communicated with the Deputy giving the reason for the question not being accepted.
Will the Chair not accept that this is a matter of extreme urgency?
In accordance with long-standing practice my office have communicated with the Deputy giving him that information.
That communication is most unsatisfactory. A dangerous situation has arisen at Tallaght——
Deputy Molloy may not discuss my ruling here. I am calling on Deputy Tunney who has been given permission to put to the Minister for Communications a Private Notice Question in so far as the question relates to the provision of Army emergency transport but the part of the question which relates to the dispute is not in order for a Private Notice Question.