Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Catherine Murphy for her comments and acknowledge the difficulties of members. Being here is important, and Deputy Catherine Murphy took the time to put down the amendments.

While we all have different experiences of the EPA, and I acknowledge that whatever experience Deputy Catherine Murphy had locally happened, my experience is entirely different. I always found it above reproach. It was a bit like Caesar's wife, according to the history books. It is totally independent and I have never seen a successful challenge on a scientific basis to anything generically of which I am aware that the EPA does. Compared to international bodies, it ranks extremely high in terms of public confidence.

The environmental protection agency of practically all countries is extremely independent, highly efficient and scientifically based. Any meetings I have had with the EPA have always been about facts. They have never been about opinions in terms of the conflicts in my community. The current structure is proven and it has worked well.

On the question Deputy Catherine Murphy raised about the four offices, each office will have a head and the heads report to the director. I am happy that, within the context of what they are presently doing, there will not be any diminution of their role.

There are new efficiencies that can be made. I appreciate that members may not necessarily be aware that the two organisations, the EPA and the RPII, are already working together on the monitoring of drinking water. They are also already working together on waste management, including radioactive waste; water quality; and emergency response protocols. These functions, that they jointly do as two separate organisations, can now be carried out more efficiently and effectively.

There is also a general move internationally towards the merging of functions in a crossover between environmental and radiological protection. On the environmental protection agencies in radiological protection, there are 35 members of the European environmental protection agency and 14 of these have at least some involvement currently in radiological protection. Most of these are called EPA, EA or some derivative. None has the word "radiation" or "radiological" in its title. If that is helpful, that is the international experience.

The role is extremely important. I have every confidence in the professionalism of both organisations when they merge. I acknowledge that when organisations merge there are HR issues and personality issues. They have to merge and there has to be space and time and enlightened management decisions to ensure that there is a seamless transfer. Differentiating the status of the various offices within the EPA, in terms of saying that one section has a different legal role from the rest of them, would likely do more harm than good. They all are under the banner of the EPA and that covers everything.

On the other issues Deputy Catherine Murphy raised, the office of environmental enforcement, the office of climate, licensing, research and resource use, the office of communications and corporate services and the office of environmental assessment all are equally important. They all are part of the EPA. They all have the powers and have to go through the due process. I hope that is helpful.