Vol. 531 No. 2
10 Ms O'Sullivan asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if the Government is considering the introduction of legislation which would allow the Minister or senior local authority figures to overrule elected members in regard to decisions concerning incinerators; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5152/01]
15 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government his plans under the Waste Management Act, 1996, to prescribe a date by which waste management plans must be made by particular local authorities; if he will give a general policy direction to local authorities in regard to the making of waste management plans with particular reference to the four local authorities which have not yet adopted waste management plans; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1289/01]
20 Ms Clune asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the number of local authorities which have a waste management plan in place; the deadline for the introduction of such plans; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5169/01]
34 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government when he will exercise his powers under the Waste Management Act, 1996, to expedite the completion of waste management plans by regional groups of local authorities. [1255/01]
41 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the plans he has to deal with the national crisis in waste disposal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5151/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10, 15, 20, 34 and 41 together.
Meaningful and comprehensive planning is a key prerequisite to improved waste management performance, and considerable effort has been devoted at national, regional and local level to delivering effective results. From the outset local authorities were encouraged to adopt a regional approach to the planning process with a view to the more efficient and cost-effective provision of services and infrastructure. The great majority of authorities subsequently committed themselves to the making of joint, mainly regional, waste management plans.
To date, 30 local authorities with waste management planning responsibilities have decided to adopt relevant local or regional waste management plans. Certain of these decisions were, however, subject to significant qualifications. Individual authorities in three different regions have not adopted the proposed regional plans. No date has been prescribed for the completion of the planning process.
I have legal advice to the effect that a regional plan must be adopted on the same basis by all the local authorities concerned. Failure to adopt a regional plan by one or more of the authorities concerned or its adoption subject to substantive variation or qualification means that the overall plan cannot be considered validly adopted by any authority involved, that is, there would be no regional plan.
It is imperative that the current waste management planning process is brought to a satisfactory conclusion as soon as possible in order that progress can be made in the delivery of improved waste services and the integrated infrastructure necessary to meet our waste management requirements. A further delay in making sensible long-term provision for the waste management needs of the regions concerned is untenable. I have, accordingly, considered all the available options to bring the planning process to an early and satisfactory conclusion.
I am satisfied that the existing powers under the Waste Management Act, 1996, to formally require specified authorities jointly to make such a waste plan, prescribe a date by which all such plans must be made and give a general policy direction to local authorities regarding the content of such plans would not in themselves be adequate to ensure a satisfactory and timely outcome. I intend, accordingly, to bring forward new legislative proposals in a forthcoming Waste Management (Amendment) Bill, 2001, which will shortly be submitted to Government for approval and publication. The Bill will also include other legislative provisions on waste considered necessary at this time.
Do the legislative proposals include a measure to allow county managers or senior local authority officers to adopt a waste plan if local authority members do not agree such a plan?
As I stated earlier, when I annoyed the Deputy greatly, I do not propose to go into the details of the legislation until it has been finalised by Government.
I appreciate that we must wait until the Bill is introduced in the House before it can be considered, but the Minister has announced that he intends to take certain legislative measures in respect of the drafting of waste management plans. It is reasonable to ask him to inform the House in general terms what are his plans. There is a waste crisis. It is a controversial issue in many areas. Members and the public are entitled to know what legislative direction the Minister intends to take. Where will he go with this legislation?
What are the Minister's intentions?
What is the purpose of the legislation?
I thought I made it clear in my reply to these questions and the previous question that the purpose of the legislation is to bring the planning process in terms of waste management to a conclusion in order that we can commence the implementation of waste management plans.
There is a great deal of aggravation about waste management facilities such as landfills, recycling plants or incinerators. Is it not critical to have information on what is happening to waste? I recently tabled a parliamentary question about what happens to waste which businesses are required to retain on their premises for recycling for four weeks if they are not participating in a recycling scheme. The Minister replied that he did not have the information. Such information, on a regional basis, is critical to ascertaining the demand for waste disposal.
I agree that the more information available on waste and waste streams the better. Certain general information is available through the EPA on waste streams, but the detail which the Deputy sought in her parliamentary question was not available. It is important to have as much information as possible. Every Member is aware of the levels of waste outlined in the recent EPA report. These levels are growing. We have a poor recycling infrastructure in which we need to invest. The only way to tackle the problem is through proper planning, not knee-jerk reactions.
Although proper plans have been drafted, they are being held up by a number of local authorities. It is imperative that we move from planning stage to implementation stage. When implementation stage is reached it should be much easier to obtain the information referred to by the Deputy. We need to reach implementation stage quickly.
The Minister referred to the Paul Daniels and Walter Mitty solutions. His is the Tommy Cooper solution, as he tries to make waste disappear, but he makes a mess of it every time. He insists on building incinerators when Ludwig Kramer of the waste management unit of the European Union is stating that no new incinerators will be built in most EU member states, nor in the United States, New Zealand or Australia as incineration is seen in similar terms to nuclear power. Why is the Minister proceeding with a discredited technology?
There are lies, damn lies and statistics, not to mention half truths. Mr. Kramer made that comment when asked how the public in some EU member states viewed incineration. It is easy to understand the reason the Irish public views it in the same way given the scare tactics being employed by the Green Party, Sinn Féin and others.
They are not scare tactics, but the facts.
The European Union, which does not waste time, decided less than two years ago to put a new incineration directive in place. Deputies Gormley and Sargent wanted it to be written into the Waste Management Act, 1996, passed when Deputy Howlin was Minister for the Environment and Local Government.
The Minister supported such a move.
I supported it strongly. I remind the Deputy that recovery is part of the waste hierarchy.
It is an excuse for incineration.
The Deputy should allow the Minister to conclude.
The Deputy is supposed to be an expert on environmental matters. Recovery is an important part of the waste hierarchy.
It will be useless.
Certain parts of environmental law and an integrated waste management strategy are not populist and will not be accepted by the Deputy. When questioned by an Irish journalist about incineration the Commissioner said that it was perfectly safe. Incinerators are in use in all European countries.
New ones are not being built.
They are.
They are.
Who is building them?
The strange thing is that while the level of dioxins in Ireland is about eight times lower than in the nearest European country, it still has higher cancer levels.
There are good reasons for that.
I wish to return to the planned legislation which seems to be as mysterious as the third secret of Fatima. I understand the Minister wants to bring waste management plans to a conclusion and that his intention is to give the power to conclude them to someone other than the elected members of local authorities. May I conclude, therefore, that the Minister supports and promotes incineration as a solution to the waste management problem?
That has been made crystal clear. The Minister has nailed his colours to the mast.
Deputy Gormley should not jump to conclusions, as he did at the weekend which caused embarrassment on local radio on Monday.
The Minister is treasurer for Fianna Fáil, roles which are incompatible.
I am not sure it is possible to embarrass the Deputy as his neck is so hard.
That is a good one coming from a Fianna Fáil Deputy.
The Deputy's heart is in the right place.
I would appreciate it if Deputy Gormley had the good grace, manners and courtesy to withdraw his allegation and apologise. He is not man enough for that.
The Minister must be joking.
On a point of order, I asked the Minister a supplementary question. While I have no problem with him taking issue with Deputy Gormley on any issue, I want him to answer my question.
I am afraid that there is no time.
My supplementary question was not answered, which is disrespectful both to me and the House.
I have answered it three times so far.
Brass neck.
No, the Minister has avoided answering it three times.
I refer the Deputy to my three previous answers which I confirm. Has it got through to him yet?
