Vol. 515 No. 3
28 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the measures, if any, proposed by his Department in response to EU proceedings in respect of water quality; the measures, if any, implemented in this regard; the measures contemplated; the response, if any, of the EU institutions to his Department's proposals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6013/00]
Water quality problems in group water schemes, particularly those using private sources and serving some 50,000 households, are at the centre of the EU's concerns. I have initiated extensive measures to help bring these groups, which generally lack any form of water treatment or disinfection, into compliance with drinking water standards.
Last year some £39 million was spent on rural water compared to £8.5 million in 1996. A total of £420 million is being provided in the National Development Plan 2000-2006 for the rural water programme and much of this will focus on resolving the difficulties in the group sector. Based on recommendations of the National Rural Water Monitoring Committee which represents group schemes, rural organisations, local authorities and my own Department, comprehensive rural water strategies are now being developed at county level. These will identify how the quality issue can be tackled through upgrading and renewal works on group schemes and by optimising usage of public and private water infrastructure.
New water treatment technologies are also being piloted in group schemes at some 30 locations. The moneys to fund the county strategies and to pay for the installation of new group scheme treatment and filtration technology where required have been provided in the NDP. I am also reviewing the grant and subsidy regime for group schemes to ensure they will be in a position to meet the additional investment and running costs falling to them.
I am disappointed that, against the background of the enormous and genuine efforts already being made, the Commission should now be contemplating court action against Ireland. The Commission itself acknowledges the progress now being made after what it calls "years of neglect". Earlier this month, I wrote to Commissioner Wallstrom, requesting a meeting to give her details of the extensive action we are already taking to resolve these problems.
Will the Minister indicate when he expects quality levels to reach the standards required by the European institutions? When was the Department first made aware of the need to address the issue?
We expect that standards will reach those of the European Union as quickly as possible. Once the county water strategies are in place, we will embark on a programme to put remedial measures in place. We are currently trying various methods of disinfecting the water and some of those experiments have been very positive. We had to go through this procedure to ensure the most effective ways of tackling the present problem are used.
The first complaint about group water schemes was received by the Department in 1995 but was not dealt with.
Has the Minister indicated to the European institutions when the quality of the schemes will reach the required standard or have the institutions asked the Department about a time scale?
We indicated to the Commission that we would improve the schemes and outlined the work we are undertaking. We told it that the programme would be completed as quickly as possible. That is the only indication we gave. It is not possible to set out a time frame for a solution to the problem. We must ensure private group water schemes co-operate as well. There is not any legislation in place to compel such schemes to adopt the standards. We have introduced regulations and will pursue them in consultation with the group water schemes.
Many of the measures outlined by the Minister to address the issue were in place before the Commission decided to initiate proceedings. What has changed to make him think that an appeal to the Commission will cause it to drop those proceedings? Will the Minister clarify if it was the timescale or the procedures which are being put in place which are being questioned?
The word "improvement" in public supplies has been used by us in discussions with the Commission since 1988. It is well recognised but it caused it a difficulty in this case. The Commission is also concerned that in our regulations we introduced an exemption for schemes serving fewer than 50 persons even though that is allowed under the new drinking water directive.
