Colm Keaveney (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Gorman is very welcome. I congratulate him on his very strong and committed presentation. Clearly, he is passionate about this area. I am sure the industry or pastime is deeply embedded in the heritage of Cong. Despite Mr. Gorman being a Mayoman, we are neighbours. His presentation was excellent. There is a consistent thread or theme on which I would like him to elaborate. Obviously, there is a very strong business case that is riddled with references to hope, employment, investment and a net return for communities. This is critical to Mr. Gorman's strategic submission. It is a labour and project-intensive programme. I would like him to elaborate on what is required to achieve the maximum return and sweat this product out as much as possible. What central investment is required for him to have an acceptable level of whole-time equivalents to stay on top of the product and ensure it is being protected with a labour-intensive programme? How much is needed to bring it up to the required standard?

While I wish Mr. Gorman the very best of luck in the process of his appointment, I have grave concerns about the decrease in the number of whole-time equivalents. It is a critical regional and rural product. I am greatly alarmed by the percentage of staff who have been lost, considering the benchmark across the public service. There is an urban myth that every shore or bank for trout or salmon is worth €800 to the economy. This is a significant natural environmental resource in which we need to invest significantly and which we need to protect. As Mr. Gorman highlighted, he has grave concerns about the future viability of the product if we are not investing in programmes based on the integration of elements that have newer and younger dimensions.

I live on the banks of the River Clare. When Mr. Gorman refers to future legislation, does he believe there is a role for his organisation in enforcement? HIQA is responsible for the establishment of health standards and engages in enforcement, makes recommendations and establishes timelines. The Mental Health Commission has a timeline for the enforcement of capital expenditure, upgrading or standards improvements. These are enforceable in law. Does Mr. Gorman envisage a comprehensive environmental enforcement role for a statutory authority to achieve investment in something that obviously gives rise to grave concerns?

I am concerned about the slippage in investment and budgets and the decrease in staff numbers. This results in a diminished authority.

How does one protect that authority with stronger legislation that has enforcement and give it the authority to set timelines, projections and investments that will be honoured if we are going to protect such a significant natural resource? Issues that arise include pollution, the need for investment in riverbanks, remedial works and unforeseen crises such as the identification of invasive species like the zebra mussel and so on. Does the authority have a contingency resource or does it have to knock on the door of the Exchequer? Can it set an enforcement procedure that precipitates an obligation on behalf of Government to give it the resources to address an immediate crisis?