Mr. David Flynn:

I thank the Senator. The technical unit in our Department has read the report, and I know the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine has done so. We had no queries that went back to the EPA. I am not sure whether the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine had.

The report is published with supporting documentation. The EPA has been very open in coming to meetings of the water quality working group to explain the report, its basis and the difference between the monitoring programme used under the water framework directive and that used under the nitrates directive.

With regard to the map that is causing such understandable issues around this whole process, it is not a construct of the EPA but is based on the criteria set down in the implementing decision of the Commission. The EPA has taken the criteria that the Commission has set for good or ill and has implemented them in the report, and that is what gives rise to the map with the red area the Senator referred to. It is not a decision of the EPA to construct a map in the way in question on page 27 of the report; it is faithfully implementing what it was asked to do, which is what is in the legal text of the Commission's implementing decision.

The EPA is very open to explaining. Some queries have been raised with us about the data and standards used. I am sure the EPA will be happy to explain these to anybody who wants to hear from it. Its representatives have been to this committee and others on many occasions.

There has been a series of reports over many years setting out very similar issues. Therefore, there is nothing in this report that comes as a particular surprise regarding the water quality aspects or water quality findings. That is not to take away from how it is put together in the requirements of the Commission's implementing decision. It may not be how we would choose to proceed if we were free to proceed in our way, choosing the locations where we would like to see particular measures focused on nitrates and particular measures focused on phosphorus. One of the areas we should explore with the Commission is our ability to examine the map again and marry it with the concept of having the right measure in the right place, which we were speaking about earlier in the process.