asked the Minister for Public Enterprise the plans, if any, she has to introduce a radon remediation grants scheme for householders; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [16488/99]
Other Questions. - Radon Gas.
10
I refer the Deputy to my responses to Questions Nos. 31 and 49 on 31 March and Question No. 107 on 17 February. As I mentioned in my responses to those questions, there are no funds available for a radon remediation grants scheme in 1999. While the Government has not provided financial assistance for householders for radon remediation purposes, it has committed considerable resources to assessing the extent of the radon problem and creating public awareness of the problems associated with high radon levels.
I will continue to take an active role in reviewing measures to tackle high levels of radon. I will also monitor progress on existing projects and encourage the RPII to continue its works of maximising public awareness on this issue.
Does the Minister of State agree that, given the healthy state of the national finances, it is outrageous that the small amount of money required for radon remediation grants has not been made available by the Government? Is he aware that between 250 and 300 people die each year as a consequence of the ingestion of radon gas in their homes? Does he agree that if the same number of people were being killed in any other way, the Government would take strong action? Will he go back to the Minister for Finance with his senior colleague and seek funding in 1999 to tackle this urgent problem?
The Government is aware of research which shows that long-term exposure to radon can cause lung cancer. The RPII, which has highlighted the risk factors, has made recommendations on what should be done to tackle the problem. Various steps have been taken. The RPII's national radon survey which commenced in 1992 is almost complete. Revised technical guidance documents relating to the national building regulations were published by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government.
The Minister of State is waffling; money is needed.
The RPII offers a radon test to householders at a cost of £15. At the request of the Minister for Education and Science, it commenced a three year survey of schools last year to ensure any problems are identified. We are endeavouring to ensure the greatest possible level of information is made available to the public. When the Deputy raised this issue last week – it was also raised by Deputy Currie – the Minister indicated—
Half-heartedly.
—that we would return to it to see if it can be addressed.
Is the Minister of State aware that when I was in his position I obtained the necessary funding from the Department of Finance? Is he also aware that I put the grants scheme in place after long negotiations with the Department of the Environment and Local Government and that the minimal amount of money is required to implement it? I welcome his comment that he will return to the Department of Finance to look for the money.
I am aware the Deputy put in place what I consider a meritorious grants scheme which was not implemented by the then Government.
That is incorrect.
We cannot have an argument about it.
The Minister of State is misrepresenting the position.
He is misleading the House.
On a point of order, the Minister of State who is not intentionally misleading the House—
That is not a point of order. The Deputy should please allow the Minister of State to conclude his reply.
The Minister of State should be aware that funding was provided to implement the scheme but that the Minister for Finance took it away.
There is a time limit on questions. We must now proceed to Question No. 11.
Is there six minutes available for each question?
That question took only five.
That question commenced at 3.43.55 p.m. and concluded at 3.49.05 p.m.
It took six minutes and one second.
After the two minutes for the Minister's initial reply, there is one minute each for supplementary questions and the Minister's further replies, within a limit of six minutes.
The Chair should remember that politics is not an exact science.
Unfortunately, the people who drew up the Standing Order gave the Chair no choice but to follow it.