The Deputy will no doubt recall the response I gave to Question No. 80 on 28 June 2000, Question No. 15 on 23 November 2000 and Question No. 151 on 20 March last. The position is unchanged.
However, I wish to stress again that because of the proximity of commercial mussel beds and the serious risk to human health from viral contamination arising from sewage receiving only second ary treatment and having regard to the impact such contamination would have on the livelihood of Irish mussel fishermen, I will have to insist, as a minimum, on provision for retrofitting of UV or equivalent treatment. Deputy Deasy will agree that it is only prudent to ensure the operation of the plant and the impact of the discharge on mussels do not adversely effect human health. If the provision for retrofitting of UV or equivalent treatment was agreed, it would be possible at a later stage to upgrade the plant at reasonable cost should it be found necessary to do so.
Until the council indicates that it is prepared to accept a provision for the retrofitting of tertiary treatment I cannot, in the interests of human health and the livelihood of local fishermen, approve the application. The polluter pays principle must apply here and, in addition to the health issues, I also have to consider the impact on the livelihoods of the fishermen.
Neither I nor my Department has to date received a request from Waterford County Council for a meeting on this issue. Officials of my Department are available to discuss the matter with officials of the council if required.
