Vol. 421 No. 4
20 Mr. J. Mitchell asked the Minister for the Environment if he will make a statement on the outcome of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro; and if, in particular, he will outline (a) the follow-up steps which will now be taken by Ireland and by other States and (b) the timescale for these steps.
22 Mr. Kavanagh asked the Minister for the Environment if he will make a statement on the Rio Earth Conference; and if he will outline the resources which will be made available to ensure the implementation of Agenda 21.
28 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for the Environment if he will outline the implications for the national environmental policy of the measures agreed at the recent Earth Summit; if he will give details of the additional resources which are being allocated for this purpose; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
33 Mr. Kavanagh asked the Minister for the Environment if he will make a statement on the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit.
265 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment if he will give details of his proposals to improve the environment following his participation in the Save the Earth Conference in Rio de Janeiro; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 20, 22, 28, 33 and 265 together.
I refer to the full statement on the outcome of UNCED which the Taoiseach has made in response to earlier questions today.
Implementation of, and follow-up to, the agreements reached at Rio will involve action by a range of Government Departments and public bodies, as well as by the non-governmental and private sectors. The implications for national environmental policy will be addressed through the environment action programme, which is subject to regular review.
Implementation of UNCED objectives and, in particular, those of Agenda 21, will have resource implications for all countries, with the bulk of these requirements having to be met from internal sources. Agreement has, however, been reached in this context for the provision of new and additional resources to developing countries. These will be provided principally through official development assistance, which in the case of Ireland is the responsibility of the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Assistance to developing countries will also be provided under the conventions signed at UNCED; the contribution to the climate change fund will be met from my Department's Vote.
Earlier today in questions asked of the Taoiseach the Government's appalling record in relation to overseas aid was exposed, as was the hypocrisy and fraud in their approach to the Earth Summit. Does the Minister have any intention of bringing forward a date by which the use of CFCs in this country will be phased out? Could he elaborate on the Government's plans to conserve energy, especially in public buildings and in private commercial and domestic buildings? When is it likely that the EC Commission and the Council of Ministers will conclude their consideration of carbon taxes?
Some of the questions asked appear to be the responsibility of another Minister.
They are all related to the environment.
I reject out of hand the allegations made by Deputy Mitchell in the context of overseas development aid.
Ireland has the worst record in Europe.
We would all wish to be able to place our country in a more dynamic position. The Taoiseach has already told the House that the Programme for Government includes plans for overseas aid, which will be adhered to.
That is a fraud——
The expression "fraud" should be used very carefully in this House; I take it as a political — and not a personal — charge against any individual or Minister in this House.
It is a true political fraud.
Please, Deputy, you must be very careful about using such expressions.
The Deputy will be aware that at the meeting of the Council of Ministers on the environment in March — and reiterated in May — the timescale for the prevention of the production and distribution of CFCs was brought forward to the end of December 1993 by a unanimous decision. In relation to the carbon tax, in spite of comments to the contrary from Commissioner Ripa di Meana a formal proposal in relation to this matter has yet to emerge from the Commission to the Council. When it is it will then be considered.
Will the Minister agree that by the adoption by our Government of Agenda 21 we have committed ourselves to a cleaner Europe and to a reduction of our contribution to global environmental emissions? In view of that, will the Minister also agree that our Government have done nothing in their efforts to stop the building of Sellafield II? Indeed, they have positively encouraged its building as the Taoiseach in 1990 agreed to an increase in the amount of EC funding when he was Minister for Finance and President of the Council of Ministers for Finance, which will have damaging consequences for our environment, particularly for the Irish Sea and for those who live on that coastline.
There has been outright opposition by successive Governments to the reprocessing plant at Sellafield and our constant demand for an EC inspectorate. Various other areas have been considered and we even considered legal action to see what could be achieved. So far, regrettably, we have not been able to report progress. However, the matter is still on the Government's agenda but — let us admit it — it has proved to be a limited field in terms of trying to make any changes as far as the British Government are concerned.
Deputy J. Mitchell rose.
I am very anxious to dispose of the remaining Priority Question No. 21. However, if it is not responded to quickly it will be to the disadvantage of the Deputy's colleague.
May I put one quick supplementary question in relation to Sellafield? Will the Minister acknowledge that the Taoiseach, as Minister for Finance, signed an agreement in relation to funding for Sellafield II, thereby facilitating the project, although he had a veto? In the light of that, will he explain the Government's policy in relation to Sellafield? Will he also acknowledge that this year's provision for ODA is the lowest for 20 years?
Clearly, the Taoiseach will deal with specific questions if Deputy Mitchell tables such questions to him as they do not fall within the area of my responsibility. The Deputy is well aware of the Government's position in regard to the second matter he raised——
That is rubbish.
The Deputy is aware of the Government's efforts to find an acceptable solution to this problem.
