Vol. 500 No. 3
9 Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources if he will make a statement on the progress made in implementing the action programme on water quality announced by him in August 1997. [3808/99]
There has been considerable incremental progress since I tasked the Central Fisheries Board with the implementation of the water quality action plan. Last year saw a welcome investment in new equipment for water sampling analysis by the Central Fisheries Board. The CFB and regional boards also worked assiduously to improve dialogue and co-operation between the boards and the other relevant State agencies as well as the farming organisations. The publication of codes of practice by the IFA on silage effluent control and phosphate usage was a welcome and important initiative.
Last summer, I authorised the regional fisheries boards to take on a team of temporary environmental officers during the critical "fish kill" period. These temporary teams were deployed in surveying river stretches in their area with a bad history of pollution incidents and liaising with farmers to encourage and assist them to prevent pollution. This proved a practical and effective initiative on the ground.
Last autumn I approved the appointment by the Central Fisheries Board of an environmental and catchment management co-ordinator for 12 months to drive and co-ordinate delivery of the water quality plan and the catchment management pilot projects. The co-ordinator took up the appointment in early January. The inland fisheries forum on water quality representing all relevant interests is scheduled to hold its first meeting in the first quarter of 1999 and will serve as a platform for information exchange, strategy review and co-ordination between all the players.
Arrangements are in hand in the Central Fisheries Board to establish the mobile emergency response unit which will assist in the co-ordination and mobilisation of resources in responding to fish kills. A free phone system on pollution awareness will also be set up for the 1999 season in the Central Fisheries Board. The co-ordinator will also review and make recommendations on the penalties for pollution related offences. We must ensure such penalties have the maximum deterrent effect.
The level of fish kills due to pollution incidents in 1998 was the lowest since the 1980s. There were 29 fish kills reported last year, involving approximately 23,000 fish, compared with 39 fish kills in 1997, involving 200,000 fish. Last summer's bad weather and high water levels were contributory factors, but I am also satisfied that the action we are taking to raise awareness, tackle problems and improve co-ordination of pollution prevention and response is paying dividends.
I have continuously stressed the importance of close co-operation between the fisheries boards, local authorities and all other relevant agencies and farming organisations. I am confident the level of co-operation and co-ordination achieved in the last 18 months can be further enhanced and that continued implementation of the water quality action plan will contribute significantly to the national effort to prevent, as well as respond effectively to, pollution of our rivers and lakes.
I welcome the positive steps to improve water quality. Does the Minister of State agree many farmers will have to invest considerable resources in farmyard pollution measures but, given the CAP reform proposals and the present climate in farming, the resources might not be available? Does he agree it is fundamentally important to secure as much finance as possible for the control of farmyard pollution scheme to encourage farmers to make the necessary investment?
The number of fish kills in 1998 indicates a welcome trend. However, the Minister of State must also be concerned about the role of large industries. There was a major fish kill recently which was linked to a successful company. The measures and controls are operated by the regional fisheries boards which have a good working relationship with the farmers who live on or near river banks, the ICMSA, the IFA and other farming bodies. That is good. However, are the same controls and restrictions applied to industry to ensure the mechanisms they have in place do not lead to the type of pollution we saw recently? What measures are in place to deal with industrial pollution?
I cannot disagree with the Deputy's remarks and I thank him for his compliment on the water quality action plan. It is in everybody's interest to improve water quality. A total of 23,000 fish is still too many. There were contributory factors in the improvement from 1997. I will not pray for a bad summer this year, but I hope even fewer fish will be killed.
Being a farmer, I am aware of the implications of CAP reform. It is vital that farmers are given assistance to provide a pollution control enterprise on their farms. Without an incentive it will be difficult to encourage them to do so because there is no profit for the farmer in pollution control measures per se. We have to encourage them and the way to do that is to provide some incentive. I will talk to the Minister about that and, as somebody with first-hand information, the Deputy can be assured I will make a strong case.
There is little we can do about the natural occurrences in 1997. The Deputy suggested that industries may not be monitored properly or that they are not taking sufficient care, and that this was widespread across all sectors, including farming. In Wexford County Council there is liaison among the council, the ICMSA and the IFA and that is working well. Closer liaison should be established between the industries and the various organisations and that should be monitored on a continuing basis. The majority of industries are very responsible. They do not want to get a bad name for whatever reason because it will reflect on them regardless of their product.
Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.
