Ms Laura Burke:

I will clarify what I said at the time. I said that the EPA has a very important role in regulation but we also have a role - which we talked about it earlier in the meeting - with regard to encouraging behavioural change and encouraging people in their homes, businesses and communities to be resource-efficient and to protect the environment. To be very clear, we have roles in regulation, in knowledge of the environment and in advocacy. Specifically our advocacy role is set out very clearly in our statement of strategy and it is that we aim to influence positive behavioural change by supporting businesses, communities and householders to be more resource-efficient. With regard to regulation we look at the full range of enforcement tools - I talked about this earlier - including education and advice, warnings, civil sanctions, criminal sanctions and licence revocation. We have used and we will continue to use all of those tools, as appropriate. We are not, we have never been and we will not be in the future, a light-touch regulator and this will be highlighted by the number of reviews and independent assessments of the EPA.

In our statement of strategy we note that a clean, healthy and well-protected environment lies at the heart of economic recovery. We stated that we will continue to carry out our core functions of environmental regulation, enforcement, monitoring, assessment, research and reporting, in an exemplary manner, but we will also work with others to build awareness and to achieve the behavioural change needed in our homes and communities and at policy level, to enable us to become a low carbon resource-efficient economy and society. As clearly highlighted by Senator Keane earlier, Ireland depends on its clean, green image for economic recovery. Two areas highlighted are agriculture and tourism. We cannot have a situation where Ireland is aiming to be portrayed or where we portray ourselves that we are clean and green but we are unable to demonstrate it. Whether that is the case in the agricultural sector or whether it is a case of raw sewage being discharged into waters, it does not marry; we cannot say we are clean and green unless this can be demonstrated.

With regard to the review group and two particular recommendations, both the review and a follow-up on implementation are available on the EPA website. It was published earlier this year. As regards the EPA's absolute statutory immunity, recommendation 7.6.3 of the review group was that the EPA's absolute statutory immunity should be revised, particularly with regard to damages. This is something for the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to assess. The update states that a number of other State agencies currently have statutory immunity, including the Health and Safety Authority and the National Asset Management Agency. In the case of the latter, it was provided for under legislation as recently as 2009. The Department has highlighted that it is particularly important to examine the potential impact of any change in this provision on the ability of the EPA effectively to discharge its statutory functions. It is up to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, legislators and the Office of the Attorney General to examine the implications.

With regard to the Ombudsman, recommendation 7.6.4 of the review identified that the EPA should be subject to the Ombudsman's jurisdiction in respect of alleged maladministration, and appropriate resources should be made available to the Office of the Ombudsman. The EPA has no objection to falling within the remit of the Ombudsman. In that context, it is stated in the update that the EPA review group recommended that it should do so in respect of issues of maladministration only. In drafting the Ombudsman (Amendment) Act, the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government engaged extensively with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and the Office of the Attorney General on this issue to achieve an acceptable legislative wording to enable administrative procedures to fall within the legislation, but excluding the quasi-judicial function of the EPA. A satisfactory form of wording was not finalised so the EPA remains exempt for the purpose of the Act. However, we have no objection to falling within that Act.