I wish to share my time with Deputy Keaveney.
Protection of the Environment Bill 2003 [ Seanad ] : Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
Acting Chairman
Is that agreed? Agreed.
This is a comprehensive, wide-ranging and necessary Bill. As someone who comes from the Dublin North-West constituency, I have more than a nodding acquaintance with landfill sites. As far back as 1950, the Finglas and Cabra areas experienced the despoliation of badly managed landfill sites by Dublin City Council and Dublin County Council. I speak with some direct experience, if not authority, on this issue.
I draw the attention of the House and of the Minister to an issue of which at least one Deputy on the Opposition side, namely, Deputy Joe Higgins, is aware. There is a phenomenon in the Dublin area, which may well be experienced in other areas, whereby significant numbers of cars are systematically dumped on the side of roads on the periphery of the city. There is a particular problem in Dublin in that the dumping takes places on the boundary between Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council. The car dump in my area is located near Dunsink Observatory, which is administered by the council for advanced studies, which was established by the Department of Education and Science and Dublin universities. There are up to 4,000 car bodies in the dump. Will the Minister consider introducing a provision on Committee Stage whereby the Waste Management Act 1996 or a related Act would be amended to permit local authorities to remove car bodies from the periphery of the city? There is confusion in regard to powers provided under the Planning Acts, the Waste Management Act and the Litter Pollution Act. Even though there is a task force comprising representatives of Fingal County Council, Dublin City Council and the Garda, it is unable to satisfactorily prosecute the perpetrators of this activity.
I have consulted officials of my local authority, Dublin City Council, in regard to aspects of the legislation and, rather than ranging all over the place, I will hone in on a number of specific issues. The fly tipping of builders' waste has reached epidemic proportions over the past year or so along side roads in city areas, namely in Ballymun, Darndale, Coolock, Finglas, Blanchardstown, Cabra, Clondalkin and Tallaght. It was thought that much of this activity had been addressed by the introduction of waste permits. However, the legislation in this regard is inadequate to deal with the problem.
I ask the Minister of State, therefore, to consider introducing a requirement that all advertisements, including those printed in the Golden Pages, by persons promoting a waste collection service must contain the collection permit number of the person or company involved and making it an offence for such advertisements to be carried without a valid permit number. The current system is not adequate. Local authorities have a problem with advertisements in the Golden Pages and in local newspapers, particularly free sheets that circulate in the Dublin area, by persons offering a waste collection service and providing only a mobile telephone number as a contact point. Dublin City Council suspects that most of the material collected by these persons or companies is dumped illegally.
Section 14 of the Waste Management Act could be strengthened through a number of measures. Local authorities have the power to halt and board vehicles but it should be clarified whether this power also extends to stationary vehicles. Local authorities have the power to order the driver to take a vehicle to a designated place and hold it for such a period as may be necessary for its purposes. There is a serious flaw, operationally, in ordering the driver to take the vehicle to the designated place. If we wish to have effective enforcement, the authorised officer should also be specifically allowed, if it is considered necessary, to impound the vehicle at the road side and have it removed to a designated place. The owner should be made liable for all towing and impoundment costs and these should paid before the vehicle is released. These recommendations have been made by a task force comprising local authority officials and the Garda. The power to impound stationary vehicles should also be clearly stated.
It may be said that these powers are excessive but it is the only way to deal with unauthorised hauliers. They disappear when they drive to the designated place, despite the carrying out of late night enforcement operations. It is impossible to ensure in most cases that the vehicles reach the designated place. If what I propose was included in the legislation, the procedure outlined would make it difficult to avoid going to the designated place.
I refer to the level of fine outlined under section 10 of the Waste Management Act 1996. It provides for a fine of £1,500 or €1,905 on summary conviction. There is significant work involved for a local authority in bringing such a conviction and this level of fine is not a deterrent. The level of fine should be increased significantly and I ask the Minister of State to examine this issue so that the fine and the maximum prison sentence are increased.
The exemption specified under section 39(7)(d) of the Waste Management Act 1996 should include the deposit of waste from litter bins, road sweepers and clean up areas into compactors at local authority depots. This would exempt such facilities from the requirement to obtain an EPA licence.
Section 14 of the Act does not allow a right of entry to a premises unless the authorised officer has reasonable grounds for believing there is a risk of environmental pollution or that such has occurred. That is borne out in practice as the local authorities work with their hands tied behind their backs. This section has been used against local authorities when prosecutions have been brought under packaging regulations. The judge, in a number of cases, did not accept that the packaging waste on the producer's premises gave rise to a risk of environmental pollution. The rights of entry need to be made more explicit and should include entry rights to investigate whether breaches of the Waste Management Act 1996 or regulations made thereunder have occurred.
Can abandoned cars be specifically included in the definition of litter? There is a problem in terms of what constitutes a abandoned car. Is it a car that lies on the side of road for a long time with a number plate? If the number plate is removed, is it in a different category?
It should not be necessary to retrieve evidence for litter prosecutions involving objects discarded from cars. That provision is proving to be an anomaly. Records held by individuals or companies that are required for compliance with the Waste Management Act 1996 or regulations made under the Act should be admissible as evidence in court in all prosecutions and there is a serious doubt as to whether this is the case currently.
There is a number of other issues but I will communicate with the Minister of State directly on them. A great deal of tightening up is required to ensure the legislation is as enforceable as it should be. We thought that much of the previous legislation in this area had solved all our problems but, regrettably, it has not. We should try and get this as right as we can this time.
When we debate environmental issues, we often refer to the phrase "minimise, reuse and recycle." It is a compact phrase that rolls handily off the tongue. However, in statistical terms, there is not enough of it happening. While that is nothing to be proud of, a great deal of good work is being done by a number of people. Until we as citizens decide we want to do something about these issues, we will not get far. It is all right to put legislation in place, as we can address any issue and legislate it to death, but someone must enforce it.
We should have enough pride in our own country to want to see it looking well. Domestic waste and items such as cars, washing machines and fridges should not be left in our most scenic areas. We do not want to see our rivers polluted by raw sewage and animal excrement. We all have a role to play and we must decide to do more than we are currently doing.
Much work is being done. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government announced that €55 million would be made available for the environment fund this year and significant funding has been given for capital works. When one compares what is being spent this year with the last operational programme one sees how funding has increased. This gives us an incentive to encourage local authorities to rise to the challenge they are offered. The Minister is providing the money and local authorities should draw it down. I was critical of my county for not having a project on the drawing board for the last round of capital applications. I was amazed that a county which is progressive in many ways, particularly in relation to the environment, did not make an application. However, I believe County Donegal is in the process of putting together an application for the incoming round of funding. I trust it will be met with approval.
In my constituency there is a new waste station in Carndonagh which has a facility for most types of waste. The disposal of cars has been a huge problem in the recent past. Cars which had failed the NCT were being driven at high speeds and in a reckless fashion and burned out in the middle or on the edges of roads or on forestry land. In the very recent past it appears that the price of scrap metal has gone up and there is a rush to get these cars off the roads. It might help Deputy Carey to examine the issue of the scrap value of cars. I hope things have changed since we had a clean-up in recent weeks. Although we have a waste facility in Carndonagh people still drive miles to abandon waste. It is a sad day when people put rubbish in their cars and drive to scenic areas to dump it rather than use the facility provided.
This brings us to the core issue of paying for a service. I disagree with the campaign in Dublin of non-payment of waste charges. If people do not share the load the facility cannot be provided. I believe one must pay a little for a service to appreciate it. I agree with the Minister's action in granting the power to discontinue the collection of waste from people who are not paying the charges. I believe strongly in fair play. Those who create a little waste should not have to pay as much for its disposal as those who create a lot. The pilot study in Cork to weigh waste is an important step forward and should be followed. People should get credit for minimising their waste and for using recycling facilities.
Donegal County Council has put many initiatives in place. The tidy towns scheme is doing much to raise standards. I would like to see more support for volunteers. The Joint Committee on Arts, Sport, Tourism, Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, of which I am chairman, will consider volunteerism at its next session. State agencies cannot do everything on their own.
I am a member of a county council and I know the difficulty faced by councils in making decisions regarding the siting of waste management and sewerage facilities. We often baulk at the challenge of deciding where such facilities will be located. For every 50 proposed sites there will be 50 pressure groups. It is important that hard decisions are taken and that we move things on collectively. It is only if we work together with the support of funding that we can make a better country.
Acting Chairman
I call on the Minister of State. You have 15 minutes.
May I make a point of order? I attended on Friday to speak in this debate—
Acting Chairman
That is not a point of order.
May I make my point, Chairman and I will abide by your ruling. When I attended on Friday to speak in this debate no one was offering from the Government benches.
Acting Chairman
That was dealt with on Friday. It is not a point of order.
The point of order is this. I attended again today. All the time made available today has been taken up by the Government and no one on this side has had an opportunity to make a case.
Deputy O'Dowd is right. It is disgraceful.
It is absolutely disgraceful.
Acting Chairman
Deputy O'Dowd, you have made your point. I ask you to resume your seat. The Minister of State will reply.
Will the Minister of State share some of his time with the Opposition?
I would like to hear the contributions of Opposition Deputies but I do not think sharing my time would be of any advantage. We will all be together on Committee Stage and we will use the time then. I will need ten minutes to respond to the contributions of Deputies.
I thank Deputies for their contributions to the debate. I am struck by the fact that a small number of provisions took up most of the Deputies' time. I take it, therefore, that the vast bulk of the proposals in the Bill is non-contentious and, in most respects, welcomed. This gives us a good basis for Committee Stage.
I highlight a comment by Deputy Allen, who said that legislation is one thing and implementation is another. I could not agree more. Many of the Bill's provisions tackle that very issue. Let us take, for example, the question of empowering local authorities to decline to collect domestic refuse where the householder has not paid for the service. This is a question of enabling the local authority to implement the law in the most straightforward and simplest way possible. The current position which forces local authorities to continue to collect waste from those households which have not paid their waste charges sends a clear signal to those in default that their inaction is acceptable.
We are sending a clear signal to the Government.
I sat through the debate and did not interrupt any speaker. It is not my nature to interrupt others and I demand the same respect.
It is akin to telling a person he can have his day in court some time in the future but in the interim his refusal to pay will not be challenged. This situation might be acceptable to some but it is not acceptable to this side of the House, nor is it acceptable to those people who pay their charges. Law abiding citizens – people who pay are law-abiding – should not be expected to subsidise those people who will not pay up.
The proposal to make it an executive function to set waste collection charges is a matter of implementation. Waste charges are a fact of life. They are necessary if we are to achieve a modern and efficient collection and disposal service. In this connection, accusations were made about the Government's attitude to local government. The Government is committed to supporting and reinvigorating the local government system. For example, a major review of the funding system is being undertaken, taking account of the international experience. New financial management, human resources and IT systems are being put in place, together with increased emphasis on corporate planning and customer service. The sphere of local government influence is being widened significantly through the city and county development board process and new financial supports for councillors are in place, together with training and better back-up and a modern legislative framework.
Over the Government's term of office the programme of action to strengthen local government will continue and intensify. There will be further measures to improve local authority performance and to develop the role of the elected council as part of this process. Accordingly, there is no lack of commitment to local government or local democracy and it is wrong for anyone to suggest otherwise.
With regard to waste charges, Deputies have, deliberately or accidentally, overlooked the fact that local authorities are empowered, under section 103 of the Local Government Act 2001, to consider and adopt annual budgets. This long-standing process is not being changed by the provisions contained in the Bill and local authority members will continue to carry out this very important function for their local community.
Under the Bill local authority managers will have the power to determine charges for waste collection and disposal, but the level of charges will continue to be decided locally and, in particular, following consultation between the manager and elected members in the context of adoption of the annual budget.
I remind Deputies that the waste management plan is a key instrument in ensuring the country gets the waste management infrastructure it needs. Deputies will be well aware that finalisation of these plans was not without difficulty. It involved people exercising their responsibility and making hard but necessary choices. This applies equally to those elected members of local authorities who adopted plans and to local authority managers who had to act in the absence of agreement from members.
While plans need to be kept up to date, there is no merit in revisiting the foundations on which the plans are based. We cannot allow uncertainty to creep back into the waste management planning system. Inaction will inevitably lead to inertia. We need to keep the focus firmly on delivering modern waste management infrastructure and services. That is why it is proposed to make the review, variation or replacement of a waste management plan an executive function, exercisable by local authority managers. This will ensure that plans, many of which were adopted after considerable argument and debate, will not be overturned or altered in ways that set at nought their fundamental objective, that is, the putting in place of modern waste infrastructure and services. Of course, there will be full public consultation with regard to any such variation or replacement of plans. The provision on waste management plans is a vital step and one that must be taken at this stage.
There were suggestions that this Bill is a Trojan horse or some other exotic device to introduce taxes by stealth. In this regard I simply remind Deputies that every aspect of the Bill is open to the scrutiny of the Houses of the Oireachtas.
Deputy Cuffe, in his contribution, wrongly suggested that the Bill promotes incineration as a panacea. The Green Party is well aware that national policies are firmly grounded on the internationally recognised waste hierarchy, and this Bill is no exception to that policy. Prevention, minimisation, reuse and recycling are, and will remain, key priorities. What some people seem to have a problem with is how to deal with waste that cannot be dealt with under those preferred options and thus refuse to grapple with the realities we face. Such people are like ostriches. Failure to make provision for properly constructed and managed thermal treatment facilities and residual landfills will mean the ostriches will find themselves burying their heads in rubbish rather than in sand.
It might be the safest place to be.
The issues we have been discussing show a stark contrast between the approach taken by the opposite sides of the House. The Government is prepared, and duty bound, to make hard choices on implementation and to move on.
This is why the Bill provides for a substantial strengthening of Ireland's environmental legislation. At its core is provision to bring our integrated pollution control and waste licensing systems, already among the most advanced in operation in the EU, fully into line with EU legislation. Issues relating to the directive will be fully dealt with in Committee, but I should point out that we are transposing a European directive so we must comply with its fundamental provisions and mandatory requirements. I am sure Deputies will bear this in mind on Committee Stage, both in terms of submitting amendments and in considering the explanations that will be given.
Specifically on the issue of IPC licences, Deputy Cuffe raised a point about appeal mechanisms against proposed determinations by the EPA. Complex technical and specialised issues may arise in applications for IPC licences, therefore it is appropriate that decisions on such applications be taken by a highly expert, independent body. The EPA is that body – it has developed considerable experience in IPC licensing over the past eight years – and there is provision for comment on draft EPA decisions before they are finalised.
A number of Deputies referred to climate change. As the House is aware, Ireland has an emissions growth limitation target of 13% over 1990 levels under the Kyoto Protocol, reflecting our need for economic development. Our Kyoto obligations arise in the commitment period 2008-12. The Government's National Climate Change Strategy, published in November 2000, comprises a systematic programme towards meeting these obligations and sets a ten-year policy framework for achieving the necessary emissions reductions.
We are two and a half times over that already.
While measures in place or in progress are capable of achieving approximately 20% of the reductions required to meet our obligations, continuing emissions increases due to volume growth in the economy mean that implementation of the strategy must now be intensified. Meeting our target is an important Government commitment. Accordingly, a review of implementation of the strategy has started and we intend to ensure more focused and intensive action towards full implementation over the remainder of the decade, including pursuit of any additional measures which may be identified in the review. In the broader context, I reiterate that the focus of our efforts for the environment must, at this stage, be on action. When this Bill is passed we will have the strongest environmental legislation this country has ever seen. With this in place we will have the opportunity to better and more fully tackle the environmental challenges we face.
Deputy Carey made reference to a number of issues. He spoke about permits on advertisements, whether in the Golden Pages or elsewhere. We must examine this, and whether stationary vehicles must be considered the same as vehicles on the move.
The increasing of fines is included in the Bill. In addition, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will later this year introduce a fines Bills which will then ensure that fines, right across the spectrum of Departments, will be increased regularly on an index-linked basis.
Deputy Keaveney importantly referred to the fact that we are custodians, that we should have pride, and that, while we can enact all the legislation we like, at the end of the day it is important we create the awareness that Ireland belongs to the people, not to the 166 Deputies. All of us, collectively, have a responsibility to ensure we pass on this country in a better environmental state than we received it. If it is not possible to improve it, then we should maintain those very high standards if we can achieve them.
I wish to share with the House my experience today in County Leitrim presenting green flags. A number of Deputies and leaders of parties have made such presentations at schools. This is an ideal programme introduced by An Taisce, with which we in the Department work. That is where we must start. If I had found a sweet wrapper today, it would have been impossible to present the green flag.
There are 269 schools involved in the green flag programme. I applaud what they have done and I would try to entice more schools, both at primary and secondary levels to become involved. If the schools did so, some of the litter problem would certainly be resolved.
Question put.
Tá
|
Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, Barry.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Callanan, Joe.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Carty, John.Collins, Michael.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Curran, John.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle.Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Finneran, Michael.Fleming, Seán.Gallagher, Pat The Cope.Glennon, Jim.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Hoctor, Máire.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy. |
Kelly, Peter.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Seamus.Lenihan, Brian.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McDowell, Michael.McEllistrim, Thomas.McGuinness, John.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Mulcahy, Michael.Ó Cuív, Éamon.Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.O'Connor, Charlie.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Donoghue, John.O'Donovan, Denis.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Malley, Fiona.Parlon, Tom.Power, Peter.Ryan, Eoin.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V. |
Níl
|
Allen, Bernard.Boyle, Dan.Breen, Pat.Broughan, Thomas P.Burton, Joan.Connaughton, Paul.Connolly, Paudge.Cowley, Jerry.Crawford, Seymour.Cuffe, Ciarán.Durkan, Bernard J.Gilmore, Eamon.Gormley, John.Gregory, Tony.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael D.Howlin, Brendan.Lynch, Kathleen.McCormack, Padraic.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Finian.Mitchell, Olivia.Morgan, Arthur. |
Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Murphy, Gerard.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.O'Dowd, Fergus.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Pattison, Seamus.Penrose, Willie.Perry, John.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Sherlock, Joe.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Upton, Mary. |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Hanafin and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Durkan and Stagg.
Question declared carried.