Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for coming before the joint committee. They set out their stall very well. It is clear we have an infrastructure deficit and it will cost €1 billion to remedy the problems. I will focus for a few moments on the Ringsend treatment plant. It has been known for a long time that capacity issues would arise as economic development progressed throughout the country but specifically in Dublin. During my time as a member of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, Mr. Grant made presentations to councillors on capacity in which he stated that planners had to stop granting planning permission. This was a profound statement, particularly during a housing crisis. While I am in favour of economic development, the plant in Shanganagh cannot even pump out waste.

We are hearing stories about capacity in the Ringsend treatment plant, including about solids occurring in the attenuation tanks and water being released, albeit on a tidal basis. We heard on "Morning Ireland" today about conditions on Merrion Strand. We know where the problem lies given that the beach is right beside the Ringsend plant.

We are discussing a serious case being brought before the European Court of Justice for breaches to the urban waste water directive. In simple terms, the case relates to the failure to ensure that urban waste water at 38 locations across the country is adequately collected and treated to prevent serious risk to human health and the environment. That is the essence of the case. In setting out their stall, the witnesses made clear that significant investment is being made in this area.

Ringsend has a projected budget of €363 million, of which costs of approximately €51 million has so far been incurred. There is a huge amount of money to be spent there. How will it be funded? Is funding holding back the roll-out? I know there are some planning issues, they are complex, they too must be addressed and they are stringent and strict. I am fully aware of all of that but are necessary funding and resources preventing a speeding up of the process of addressing all the problems Mr. Grant outlined? That is the kernel of it all.

I echo what my colleague, Deputy Ó Broin, said about the Department. It would be important to have the Department before the committee for some future debate and hear what it has to say. I would like to hear more about how the witnesses engage with the Department and vice versa, that is, how the Department responds to them. That is very important if we are to analyse forensically what is happening and what constraints are being put on the witnesses. I would like an honest exchange with them. What is the big issue? All of this can be addressed. Is it simply down to the money? Is it simply down to specific planning issues in some of the specific issues which have been referred to? Mr. Flynn has told us that our rate of compliance with basic standards is 51%. That is a disgrace. It is factual and it is not a criticism of Mr. Flynn but it is a disgrace and it clearly needs to be addressed. I will keep it simple. Can Mr. Flynn explain what the constraints and frustrations and other things are that are holding the EPA back on delivering on what he has clearly identified as major problems? How can we get on track again regarding compliance with the directive?