Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 26 April 2018

Select Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment

Radiological Protection (Amendment) Bill 2018: Committee Stage

10:00 am

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind members and officials to switch off their mobile phones as they interfere with the broadcasting system. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. This meeting has been convened to consider Committee Stage of the Radiological Protection (Amendment) Bill 2018. I welcome the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Denis Naughten, and his officials to this meeting.

Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.

SECTION 3

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 11, 14, 15 and 17 to 22, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 10, 16, 23 and 24 have been ruled out of order, which I do not understand. The amendments relate to the function of the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, in terms of managing the risks from radon, which is a radiological protection risk. I understand that an amendment which does not relate to the purpose of the Bill may be ruled out of order but the aforementioned amendments are related. I cannot not accept that they have not been allowed.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 16, 23 and 24 have been ruled of order as they have the potential to impose a charge on the Exchequer. In accordance, with Standing Order 179(2), they are out of order.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To be helpful, I am happy to discuss the principle behind these amendments when we come to the relevant section.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The issues as opposed to the amendments may be discussed.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How can I appeal this ruling? This is not an insignificant issue. In fact, it is probably the most significant issue in terms of radiological protection risks. It is estimated that there are 200 lives-----

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We cannot have a discussion on the amendments because they have been ruled out of order. I am happy to meet the Deputy to discuss his resubmitting the amendments on Report Stage. The Minister has offered to discuss the issues when we come to the section.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I have to be in the Dáil Chamber to deal with parliamentary questions to the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, I will not be here for the whole meeting. I would welcome the opportunity to meet the Chairman and-or the departmental officials with a view discussing how the amendments could be resubmitted on Report Stage.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a matter for the Bills Office. The Deputy's amendments have been ruled out of order. If he wishes to discuss the possibility of resubmitting them on Report Stage, I am happy to do so. We cannot discuss the amendments today.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I may not be here when the relevant section is reached, I will follow up the possibility of resubmitting them on Report Stage with the Bills Office and with the Chairman, as suggested. It beggars belief that they have been ruled out of order.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

With the Chairman's permission, I am happy to read into the record the notes I have on the amendments when we come to the relevant section, even if Deputy Ryan is not here, so that he at least has our perspective on them.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 8, lines 31 and 32, to delete "carrying out of a practice," and substitute "the carrying out of a practice".

On amendments Nos 1 and 2, the Government proposes to make two amendments to this section at line 21 by the substitution of "carrying out of a practice" with "the carrying out of a practice" and at line 32 by the substitution of "a radiation" with "the radiation".

In both cases, the word "the" is being included. The purpose of the amendments is to provide clarity that the definition of "undertaking" refers to the person with legal responsibility for the carrying out of a practice; that is to say, the licence or registration holder, not the practitioner who uses the radiation source as part of his or her work duties. This distinction is important because in the event of a breach of a licence or registration condition, the Environmental Protection Agency has the legal clarity required to hold the licence or registration holder to account.

On amendments Nos. 6 to 9, inclusive, the Government proposes to make a number of amendments to section 8 by deleting all words from and including "which" on line 22-----

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the Minister discussing amendment No. 8?

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am discussing amendments Nos. 6 to 9, inclusive.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not think amendment No. 8 is included in this group. Amendments Nos. 6, 7 and 9 are included in it but amendment No. 8 is not.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In setting out my position on amendments Nos. 6, 7 and 9 I will refer to amendment No. 8 because it is relevant and it will save me having to speak on the amendment later in the debate.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I was saying, amendment No. 6 involves the deletion of all words from and including "which" on line 22 down to and including "apply" on line 24 and their replacement with "which, pursuant to regulations made under section 30(1) or (2), requires authorisation and who is required by those regulations to be a registered person or a licensee in respect of the relevant activity, shall make an application". The amendment is being proposed on foot of legal advice to bring additional clarity to section 8 to provide that the relevant activity is required to be authorised by the Environmental Protection Agency and that the person required under the regulations to hold a licence or registration for that purpose shall make such an application. For the same reason, the Government is proposing amendment No. 7 which involves the deletion of the words "which requires authorisation pursuant to regulations made under section 30(1) or 30(2) shall apply" and their replacement with "which, pursuant to regulations made under section 30(1) or (2), requires authorisation and who is required by those regulations to be a registered person or a licensee in respect of the relevant activity, shall make an application".

Furthermore, the Government is proposing amendment No. 8 which involves the deletion of lines 32 to 39, inclusive, on page 11 of the Bill and their substitution with the following:

(2)(a) Subject to paragraph (b), where the Agency receives an application referred to in subsection (1), the Agency shall decide, based on its regulatory experience and taking into account—(i) the magnitude of expected or potential doses of radiation, and

(ii) the complexity of the relevant activity to which the application relates,whether it is registration or a licence which would be appropriate to be granted in respect of the relevant activity concerned.

(b) The Minister may, in regulations made under section 30(1) or (2), provide in respect of a relevant activity that only a licence may be granted and, where provision is so made, the Agency shall, where it receives an application referred to in subsection (1) in respect of the relevant activity, consider the application on the basis that only a licence would be appropriate to be granted in respect of that relevant activity.

The amendment adds a new subsection (2)(b) to section 29A of the Radiological Protection Act 1991 which provides that the Minister may prescribe that certain activities be subject to licence only. Certain practices are not appropriate to the new registration system owing to the associated inherent risk. There are also certain activities which are required to be licensed under European legislation such as certain activities using high activity sealed sources. The amendment is necessary to ensure the Minister can provide in secondary legislation for parameters and strictures to ensure safety will be paramount in the authorisation of relevant activities and to respond effectively to the future development of practices and use of radiation sources in industry. The Government is also proposing amendment No. 9 which involves the deletion of the words "made under" on lines 6 and 7 of page 12 and their substitution with the words "referred to in". The amendment is being proposed on foot of legal advice to provide a correct reference.

I would also like to set out the position on amendments Nos. 11 and 12 which are being proposed by the Government. Amendment No. 11 is a drafting amendment which involves the deletion of "periodically." and its substitution with “periodically.".". The extra full stop is necessary to indicate the end of the section. Amendment No. 12 which involves the deletion of lines 22 to 29 on page 12 of the Bill is being proposed on foot of legal advice. The purpose of section 8 of the Bill is to give the Minister the necessary powers to make regulations to provide for a graded approach to authorisation and enable the transposition of certain requirements in Council Directive 2013/59/EURATOM which is known as the basic safety standards directive. As the Bill is not the transposing instrument for the directive, the subsection is beyond the scope of this legislation. Subsection (6), as drafted, transposes Article 27 of the basic safety standards directive. Our legal advice is that this provision is more appropriate to the transposing instrument - the regulations made under section 30(1) and (2) of the 1991 Act. The subsection, as drafted, is also misleading because it does not represent an exhaustive list of activities which require authorisation before they may be carried out. There are other practices that are required to be authorised on foot of other directives such as the importation or exportation for disposal of radioactive waste from the State to another country under Council Directive 2011/70/EURATOM which established a Community framework for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste. There may also be other activities and practices that should fall under this requirement and be considered in the context of the regulations made under section 30(1) and (2) of the 1991 Act.

On section 9 of the Bill, the Government is proposing amendment No. 14 on foot of legal advice. The amendment involves the deletion of lines 7 to 16 on page 13 of the Bill and their substitution with a new paragraph 3 with the following text:

(3) A relevant activity in respect of which registration or a licence is granted may be carried out in accordance with the registration or licence, as the case may be, from the date on which the particulars referred to in subsection (2) are entered in the register of registered relevant activities or the register of registered licensed activities, as appropriate.

The amendment clarifies that the operative date from which a registration or licence will come into effect will be the date on which the particulars are entered in the appropriate register.

On section 10 of the Bill, the Government is proposing amendment No. 15 on foot of legal advice. The amendment involves the deletion of all words from and including "the" where it firstly occurs on line 25 on page 13 of the Bill down to and including "activities" on line 26 and their substitution with "a European act which relates to relevant activities". The amendment provides that the Minister may make regulations to provide for cases in which European Acts provide for discretionary measures which would not fall under the definition of "obligations imposed on the State".

The Government is also proposing amendments Nos. 17 to 21, inclusive, to section 10. Amendment No. 17 involves the deletion of "subsection (2)" on line 38 of page 13 of the Bill and its replacement with “subsection (2A)". Amendment No. 18 involves the insertion of the words "addition to those matters referred to in subsection (2A), in" after the word "In" on line 40 of page 13 of the Bill. Amendment No. 19 involves the deletion of the word "under" on line 29 of page 16 of the Bill and its replacement with the words "referred to in". Amendment No. 20 involves the deletion of lines 33 to 37, inclusive, on page 18 of the Bill and their replacement with "(vii) the issuing by the Agency of a licence or of a certificate in respect of a registration, including the form and manner of such a licence or certificate, the manner (including by electronic means) in which it is to be issued and the information it is to contain,". Amendment No. 21 involves the insertion of the words "(within the meaning of section 2 of the Principal Act)" after the word "authorisation" on line 34 of page 19 of the Bill.

These are drafting amendments on foot of legal advice to correct cross-references in the text.

On amendment No. 22, the Government proposes, in page 21, line 22, to delete "(as amended by Part 1)" and substitute "(amended by Part 2)". This amendment updates the text to include the correct cross-reference.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask the Minister to keep to the amendment groupings as agreed with the Department. The Minister discussed amendments Nos. 8 and 12, which are related to Deputy Stanley's amendment No. 13. When we come to amendment No. 8, I will let Deputy Stanley speak on it because he is a sponsor of amendment No. 13 and it is directly related to amendments Nos. 8 and 12. It would be great if we could keep to the groupings.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Apologies for that. Those groupings came late from the Bills Office.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 8, line 33, to delete "a radiation" and substitute "the radiation".

Amendment agreed to.

Section 3, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 4

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 9, between lines 4 and 5, to insert the following:“and

(iv) by the insertion of the following paragraph after paragraph (k):
"(l) to report annually to the Oireachtas on the implementation of the National Radon Control Strategy or any successor strategy.",".

I will broaden the point I made earlier. One of our concerns is that we are not paying sufficient attention to the issue of radon gas and its effect on health. The radiological protection agencies have a role in this regard. I refer to the need for them to report to the Oireachtas to highlight the level of risk. In particular, as will be seen in later amendments, there is a real concern regarding the lack of attention to mitigating this real risk in rental properties. It is a risk which can be mitigated at relatively low cost and with significant effect. As I stated, it is estimated that there are 200 related fatalities a year. That is the equivalent of the number of road deaths.

It is a failing in the current system that we do not set high conditions on addressing that risk. I understand it was recommended that such reporting mechanisms would be included in the responsibility of the radiological protection authorities, but that has not been provided for in the legislation. That is the reason for the proposed insertion of this wording, the obligation "to report annually to the Oireachtas on the implementation of the National Radon Control Strategy". It is a hugely significant health issue. We are not addressing it at present. This is an opportunity to strengthen the reporting requirements and I hope the Government can support it.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support the amendment from the Green Party. I raised this on Second Stage. It is a crucial issue. On the risk to health, it is supposed to be the second biggest cause of lung cancer after nicotine. It is a serious issue. I note the Minister's statement that all new homes are being fitted with radon barriers. I welcome that but there is a question there, particularly in the counties and areas that are in the high-risk zones. It is a worthwhile amendment. My party certainly supports it.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We all are in agreement here. The reality is that radon is responsible for between five and six deaths a week. It is something I am conscious of because my own constituency is to the fore in this regard. I have been deeply engaged with my officials on this issue.

The provision exists since 2002. Many Ministers have gone through the Department since 2002 who have sat on their hands in respect of it. At long last we are getting movement on it. As I announced in the House on Second Stage, we are putting in place a pilot scheme specifically to see what will work in practical terms. On foot of that, we will draft an amendment to the current flawed primary legislation from 2002 to put an effective scheme in place, not only for rental properties but for every affected property in the country.

I accept that not enough attention has been paid by my predecessors to the issue of radon gas. That is why I was determined as Minister to address this issue once and for all. On foot of this pilot scheme, once we see what will work on the ground, my intention is to amend the flawed legislation of 2002 and come back with robust legislation that can ensure we address this problem right across the board.

The Government opposes amendment No. 3 as the proposal for the Environmental Protection Agency to report annually to the Oireachtas on the implementation of the national radon control strategy or any successor strategy is not workable for both legal and practical reasons. The national radon control strategy has not been established on a statutory basis and it follows that statutory reporting obligations cannot be imposed on something that has not been put on a statutory basis. On a practical level, the proposed amendment is not workable as the implementation of the national radon control strategy is not the responsibility of the Environmental Protection Agency. The policy function for tackling radon rests with the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment. The national radon control strategy, chaired by my Department, is a multi-agency approach in improving awareness of and protection from radon gas. While the Environmental Protection Agency is an important cog in that wheel, it does not provide the chair or secretariat for the strategy implementation group and is not responsible for delivering on the action points in the strategy.

There are 31 identified action points set out in the national radon control strategy and it is intended that all action points will be implemented. A total of 11 actions are complete, ten actions are on track for completion by next month, and ten further actions will be commenced and will be either completed beyond the strategy end in 2018 or carried out on an ongoing basis. Key achievements to date include: the establishment and launch of a dedicated website, www.radon.ie; the completion and roll-out of targeted training courses on radon remediation for construction site staff, local authorities and contractors; and the establishment of a registration scheme for radon measurement services and radon remediation contractors.

One of the key recommendations made by the strategy relates to financial incentives to encourage householder action on radon. A comprehensive radon testing and remediation survey will shortly be undertaken to assess the degree of uptake of radon testing and remediation in homes in high-risk radon areas and adjacent lower risk areas and to inform the detailed design of a new financial incentive scheme.

Due to the success of the work programme of the national radon control strategy, I intend to establish a successor strategy on a statutory basis to continue the good work in identifying and remediating radon where it occurs. In light of the point that the Deputy has raised in his amendment, I will give consideration to how best to inform the Oireachtas Members on its good work as part of that process.

The reports of the current strategy and working group are published and publicly available. In light of what Deputy Eamon Ryan has said to me, however, I have no issue with laying those reports before the Oireachtas and circulating them directly to members of this committee.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a fluffy response. It talks about multi-departmental responsibility and is long-winded and convoluted. This is a straightforward issue. There are maps. The Minister correctly states there is a website. The website tells us there are areas of concern, including Mountmellick, Ballylinan and Graiguecullen. I would ask that some of those areas be included in the pilot project. Other Deputies will identify areas in their constituencies, but those are three high-risk areas in County Laois that need to be addressed.

This is simple. The question for us is whether every house, every new build and every extension is being fitted with radon barriers.

We need a testing system for homes to determine which homes have radon barriers in the high-risk red zones. We do not want every house in the country tested. In the towns that are high risk, such as Ballylynan and Mountmellick, we should ensure that tests can be done very easily to determine what is there and then we should put a scheme in place. I do not want to hold up the discussion of the amendment. It is a very good amendment. We should have a short session dedicated to this. It is all over the place and that is no disrespect to the Minister. When everyone is involved, it is nobody's responsibility. Radon is a serious issue and is killing people. We have a responsibility in the House to legislate for it. We also have a responsibility to get a scheme in place to address it.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I listened with intent to the Minister. I was slightly confused because he said at the start it is not possible to accept this amendment because the radon strategy reports are not statutory and therefore we cannot have a statutory provision. At the end he says he is willing to lay the reports he has to hand before the Oireachtas, which in a sense is exactly what we are looking to do with the amendment, to report annually. I might come back on Report Stage to see if there are other examples where non-statutory reports are laid before the House on a statutory basis. I do not see that as a reason why it cannot be done.

With regard to the various agencies and where the authority lies, my understanding is the key role of the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, is as the expert in identifying risk areas. That is the significant information. It is really important. When we are aware, as Deputy Stanley says, of those red zones, then we really have to kick into action to make sure all houses - not just rental houses although there is a particular problem in those - including new builds are covered. We are talking about taking action that will save five lives a week and prevent the huge trauma that comes with lung cancer that arises from proximity to these gases. It can be alleviated at relatively low cost. That is the really critical point. It is not an impossible issue to address if one has good information.

I will return to the core point about providing the detailed analysis from the EPA or other agencies in a public way in order that landlords, homeowners, builders, public services and others will target the problem that exists. I stand by the amendment. I might come back on whether it is legally possible to have a statutory call to report on something that does not have a statutory provision. If it is the case, maybe the Minister could come back with an amendment that would give the report the statutory footing to allow us to do it.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How does the amendment stand?

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will press the amendment.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will allow the Minister in.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have learned a lot in dealing with this legislation. It has really opened my eyes. It was my intention to do as Deputy Stanley proposed and introduce a national scheme to deal with radon gas and I was determined to do it. It has been kicked around for long enough. We are talking about five or six deaths every week, never mind the number of people who end up in hospital and in treatment for this on top of that. It is a huge drain on the resources of the State. For small money we can have a massive impact on health outcomes in this country. There is absolutely no argument on that. I have spent the past 12 months trying to put a scheme in place but because of the legislation that was enacted in 2002, it is not possible for me to do that unless I amend the 2002 Act with a detailed scheme. I have learned that by putting something into legislation it makes it more difficult to do the right thing. That is why we are looking at a very tight and quick pilot to look at how a scheme would run effectively in order that we can come back, amend the legislation and bring forward a proper scheme to cover every home in the country, whether rental or owner occupied.

Following on from Deputy Eamon Ryan's point, the advice I have is I cannot put a statutory provision in this legislation. As a result of my experience of the scheme that is already there, I am very slow to put in place a statutory provision that could complicate matters when getting this scheme up and running in the future. There should not be any reason not to have a reporting structure in place. I will not try to impede it. I am quite willing to look at it again. I am also quite willing to look at any suggestions or examples of where there is a statutory provision. I have no difficulty providing the information. It is not an issue. I am committing, as Minister, that the information will be laid before the Oireachtas and will be circulated to members of the committee. I have absolutely no problem if members want to come in and have a broader debate on the implementation of the radon strategy and go through it. I have no difficulty with that. I have a difficulty with writing it in black and white without a statutory footing in place. That difficulty arises as a result of the legal advice I got and from my experience with the 2002 scheme, which is not fit for purpose and which is now creating a barrier to me implementing a scheme across the country.

To answer Deputy Ryan's question, the areas identified across the country are identified by the Geological Survey of Ireland, GSI. It has identified from geology where the red zones and amber zones are. We will look at it again. If the Deputies have suggestions I am quite happy to look at them. The advice I have is I cannot write it into statute without a legal provision being there but I am quite willing and give a commitment here to circulate the reports when they become available.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How stands the amendment?

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will press the amendment and return to it on Report Stage. I will liaise with the Minister's officials with regard to his suggestions. I will press this and my other amendments. I have tabled a priority question to the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and must go to the Chamber to ask it. I hope to return later.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The EPA does not produce the report. With regard to giving the EPA a statutory responsibility to publish or circulate any report, it cannot because it does not produce the report in the first place. From a drafting perspective, it is not sound.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that because the GSI presents the original information?

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The strategy group, which is chaired by our Department, produces the report. As Minister of that Department, I am giving a commitment here that I have absolutely no difficulty in circulating the report but the Deputy is asking the EPA to lay before the Oireachtas a report it has no function in drafting. The amendment, as drafted, is not sound. It is not workable.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would still argue that the EPA is the agency with responsibility for measuring environmental risk or scientific assessment of interaction between scientific information and the health effect on others.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the amendment being pressed?

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Section 4 agreed to.

SECTION 5

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 are related and will be discussed together.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 9, between lines 37 and 38, to insert the following:“(c) in paragraph (h) by the insertion of “and the Oireachtas” after “as appropriate”.

Unfortunately I have to attend in the Chamber. I will return to my amendments on Report Stage.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will I read into the record my perspective on the amendments?

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate that.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will read my reply to amendments Nos. 4 and 5.

Before we move on to this, I would like to say that I am a good while in this House and I am really surprised that an amendment that is inoperable and is not legally sound was pressed, especially when a Minister offered to work with those involved. New politics is all well and good but at the end of the day, we are legislators. We are supposed to bringing forward legislation that is legally sound. I just want to mark my disappointment in regard to that because I am someone who spent a long time on the Opposition benches and who spent a lot of time drafting amendments. I am quite willing to accept, and I am open to, amendments and I have spoken to my officials in that regard. However, I would appreciate some assistance from the Opposition to ensure that whatever legislation is brought forward is actually legally sound.

The Government opposes amendment No. 4 for both legal and policy reasons. Paragraph (h) of section 8 of the principal Act assigns a function to the Environmental Protection Agency to make recommendations on pre-existing legislative proposals by Ministers for legislation that contains measures for the protection against radiological hazards. The amendment as drafted is not workable as the Oireachtas as an entity does not make legislative proposals. If the intent of the amendment is to extend the current function, in that the Environmental Protection Agency should make recommendations on Private Members' Bills initiated by Members of the Oireachtas, the Government would oppose this for the reason of policy and potential cost.

The policy function for the environment area, including radiological hazards, rests with the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment. While certain functions are delegated in legislation, the Environmental Protection Agency role is to inform and facilitate the Minister in his or her exercise of those functions. The Minister is responsible for the formulation and implementation of radiological policy and is directly accountable to the Oireachtas in this regard.

It would not be appropriate for the Environmental Protection Agency to bypass the Minister and to make recommendations directly on Private Members' Bills. Any recommendations by the Environmental Protection Agency need to be considered by the Minister in the wider context of Government policy and a proper assessment of potential regulatory and legal impacts provided by the Minister's Department. As part of the legislative process, the Government's considered views on Private Members' Bills, as informed by expertise resident in the various Departments and agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency, are conveyed by the Minister with functional responsibility for the area. The Minister is then responsible and accountable for implementing any such legislation.

Any attempt to undermine or bypass a Minister's responsibility or accountability to the Oireachtas raises constitutional implications that would require detailed legal scrutiny. Irrespective of the policy and potential constitutional issues that this amendment raises, there is no costing for the impact of this amendment on the Environmental Protection Agency budget and I am not convinced that this would represent a good use of its resources.

The Government opposes amendment No. 5. Both the principle and the details are already for in section 7 of the principal Act. Paragraph 1(d) assigns the general function to the Environmental Protection Agency to advise the Government, the Minister and other Ministers of the Government on radiological safety matters relating to the transport, use, storage, maintenance and disposal of radiation sources, wheresoever located.

Paragraph 1(c) further assigns the general function to the Environmental Protection Agency to advise the Government, the Minister and other Ministers of the Government and the public on measures for the protection of individuals in the State from radiological hazards. The function of the Environmental Protection Agency to advise the Government, the Minister and other Ministers of the Government on radiological safety matters is comprehensive and is not restricted by geographical location, type or purpose of the radiation source.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Amendment No. 5 not moved.

Section 5 agreed to.

Sections 6 and 7 agreed to.

SECTION 8

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 11, lines 22 to 24, to delete all words from and including “which” in line 22 down to and including “apply” in line 24 and substitute the following:

“which, pursuant to regulations made under section 30(1) or (2), requires authorisation and who is required by those regulations to be a registered person or a licensee in respect of the relevant activity, shall make an application”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 11, lines 28 and 29, to delete “which requires authorisation pursuant to regulations made under section 30(1) or 30(2) shall apply” and substitute the following:

“which, pursuant to regulations made under section 30(1) or (2), requires authorisation and who is required by those regulations to be a registered person or a licensee in respect of the relevant activity, shall make an application”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 8, 12 and 13 are related. Amendment No. 13 is a physical alternative to amendment No. 12. Amendments Nos. 8, 12 and 13 will be discussed together. The Minister has discussed amendment No. 8 but I will allow Deputy Stanley to speak because amendment No. 13 is sponsored by him.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 8:

In page 11, to delete lines 32 to 39 and substitute the following:

“(2)(a) Subject to paragraph (b), where the Agency receives an application referred to in subsection (1), the Agency shall decide, based on its regulatory experience and taking into account—

(i) the magnitude of expected or potential doses of radiation, and

(ii) the complexity of the relevant activity to which the application relates, whether it is registration or a licence which would be appropriate to be granted in respect of the relevant activity concerned.

(b) The Minister may, in regulations made under section 30(1) or (2), provide in respect of a relevant activity that only a licence may be granted and, where provision is so made, the Agency shall, where it receives an application referred to in subsection (1) in respect of the relevant activity, consider the application on the basis that only a licence would be appropriate to be granted in respect of that relevant activity.”.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In regard to amendment No. 3 - I say this to try to be helpful - we recognise there is weakness in it. The Minister spoke about it being pressed. He will also notice he was not tripped up with it, and he could have been. The committee should discuss that matter with the Minister. We need more information in regard to the 2002 legislation. I do not want to labour this point-----

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On amendment No. 13-----

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 13 relates to how professionals, such as physiotherapists and chiropractors, will be dealt with in the future. I know a further statutory instrument will deal somewhat with this area under the Basic Safety Standards Directive, but we need to consider these professions in the context of this Bill. They may be excluded from taking or accessing X-rays and questions are being raised by people in those professions. People working in those professions believe it is crucial to the care and the service they provide.

It may be best to address it within the upcoming statutory instrument and not in primary legislation, but the Minister needs to take our concerns on board. We recognise this may not be the place for it but we have to raise it because it has caused problems in those professions where people, including physiotherapists and chiropractors, are providing very important services to the public. They are skilled and there is a registration process under way in respect of those professions. The Minister might take that on board.

Photo of James LawlessJames Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support the amendment. I am familiar with the chiropractors' situation, in particular, and have visited some of the chiropractors' surgeries and have seen the equipment and the investment they have made in that equipment and in training and upskilling themselves to use those machines. It is a significant outlay for their practices. I suppose there is a dichotomy in that there is a divergence between the Department of Health and the Minister's Department. To be fair, the Minister's Department has been quite helpful in engaging on this and trying to make it work. As Deputy Stanley said, it may be dealt with in the statutory instrument coming through from the Department of Health. There needs to be a joined-up approach between the two Departments. Maybe we should get the Department of Health on the same wavelength as the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment.

Whatever way it is worked out, it seems unfair to have a set of practitioners who have access to, and have invested in, equipment and who have been using it for many years as part of the service to their patients but to have a sort of drop dead approach where overnight, they are not allowed to use it anymore. This needs to be looked at. We are happy to take advice or to engage in consultation with the officials in terms of what is the best way to tackle this. The Department of Health has a role to play as well, but it is important that something is worked out to cater for that block of people.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have first hand knowledge of physiotherapists and chiropractors, so this is something I am very conscious of. There is a lot of co-operation between my Department and the Department of Health on this. We are on the same wavelength and we have agreement now that the EPA will be the lead agency from our Department and HIQA will be the lead agency from the Department of Health to agree the procedures and so forth that would be required in regard to this.

However, I revert back to the evidence the Chief Medical Officer gave to the health committee yesterday. I have no function or role, nor can I have one, in deciding which professionals can use these. It is not my responsibility to determine the education and training and capacity and capability of medical professionals to use this equipment.

What we have done in this legislation is to make it clearer, far more transparent, far more streamlined and easier for whatever health professional is going to use this equipment to get licences and to be able to use it.

We streamlined the process and made it far more transparent. However, only the Department of Health can decide who may apply to use it in a health context. We can do as much as we are able in that regard but, ultimately, only the Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, with the advice of the chief medical officer, can declare which health professionals may utilise it. One would not expect me, as Minister, to be decide upon such matters in respect of any other profession. I do not have the necessary expertise in the area. Most members would agree the Department is quite busy anyway without dealing with the health aspects of this issue.

I will read out my prepared reply, which may be helpful to Deputy Stanley. I accept his point on this issue. He is probably correct. This is a discussion that must take place when the statutory instrument is ready. It would probably make far more sense for a draft statutory instrument to be circulated first but that is a matter for the Minister for Health. I will express that view to him on foot of our discussion here. I give a commitment to relay, through my officials, to the Minister for Health that it would be helpful for the draft statutory instrument to be circulated in advance of it being signed.

The Government opposes this amendment as it requires the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, to adjudicate on or consider matters that are beyond the competency of the agency. The Environmental Protection Agency does not regulate the professional conduct or competence of professions and has no function in determining the levels of education or professional development necessary to carry out procedures using radiation sources. Section 7(2) of the principal Act provides that the function of the Environmental Protection Agency in respect of the use of radioactive substances, materials or sources, radiation sources and radiation generators as a prophylactic, diagnostic or therapeutic agent for the purpose of the prevention, diagnosis or treatment of any human ailment, infirmity, injury or defect is limited to the supervision and care of the radioactive substance, materials or sources, radiation sources and radiation generators concerned, as well as ensuring that the said radioactive substances, materials or sources, radiation sources and radiation generators are properly calibrated and maintained. In short, the role of the Environmental Protection Agency is to regulate the equipment used in such practices and ensure it is fit for purpose.

I recall that Deputy Stanley raised the issue of chiropractors on Second Stage of the Bill and I remind him that the designation of competent practitioners for the purposes of carrying out medical procedures is a matter for the Minister for Health and beyond the scope of the Bill. However, I note the comments that have been made and will relay them to the Minister for Health.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am happy for the Minister to so do, as long as the issue is being addressed. It might be best to regulate this issue through statutory instrument.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 12, lines 6 and 7, to delete “made under” and substitute “referred to in”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 10, in the name of Deputy Lawless, has been ruled out of order as there is a potential charge on revenue.

Photo of James LawlessJames Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

May I speak to the amendment?

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy may not, as it has been ruled out of order.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In terms of procedure, Deputy Lawless should allow the Chair to deal with the amendment. He can then speak to the section and raise the issue and I will be happy to respond to him.

Photo of James LawlessJames Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister.

Amendment No. 10 not moved.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 12, line 21, to delete “periodically.” and substitute “periodically.”.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 12:

In page 12, to delete lines 22 to 29.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As amendment No. 12 has been agreed to, amendment No. 13 may not be moved.

Amendment No. 13 not moved.

Question proposed: "That section 8, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

Photo of James LawlessJames Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his guidance. A concern has been raised by the Irish Association of Physicists in Medicine, which has great knowledge of these practices, in regard to registration being a permanent and once-off process without any subsequent checks, renewals or inspections. Once a practitioner is registered, that is it. In any circumstance, if a test must be met and a person does so but then no longer has to worry about it, it is easy for practices and standards to subsequently slip or compliance levels to fall. The concern is that there is merit in requiring a renewal of the licence or registration or an audit, check or some kind of renewal process. There was previously an EPA system for licence renewal but, if I am reading the legislation correctly, that will be dropped and the registration will be a one-off. When the EPA was doing those licence checks, it was difficult for it to get evidence of compliance. It seems somewhat paradoxical that we are taking away the requirement to look for evidence of compliance in a situation where sometimes there is difficulty in getting such evidence. We are giving practitioners a free run in terms of there being once-off registration and that not having to be revisited or renewed when there has previously been difficulty in getting evidence of compliance. I raise this in the context of the Bill and the registration process but it seems good practice that such registration would have to be renewed periodically or revisited. I am interested in the Minister's views in that regard.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I see from where Deputy Lawless is coming but the legislation turns the practice in this area on its head. The Bill provides for a single point at which one applies for a licence but there will be ongoing inspections in that regard. There may have previously been issues with compliance but a different approach to regulation was taken until now. We now have a graded approach relating to use and risk, which are assessed. As I stated in reply to Deputy Stanley, a process will be agreed between the Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, and the EPA in that regard. One must remember that there is ongoing training, registration and monitoring of these professions. We are discussing radiation, radiation sources and equipment, which will be addressed by ongoing inspection. We are trying to get rid of unnecessary bureaucracy, which causes duplication. Either one is competent to use this equipment or one is not. The equipment and paperwork will be inspected on an ongoing basis. Practitioners must also register with their professional body, which will ensure they are competent to operate the equipment.

I had a note drafted in response to amendment No. 10 and to assist the Deputy I will read it into the record. The Government opposes the amendment proposed by Deputy Lawless on the reasons of cost and efficiency. The purpose of the new graded approach to authorisation introduced by the Bill is to ensure a reduction in the administrative, regulatory and financial burden on both the competent------

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I suggest that the Minister does not read his note into the record because we are not allowed to debate the amendment and by responding to it he is so doing. He can pass his note to Deputy Lawless if he so wishes.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As for the comments made by Deputy Lawless, the objective of the Bill is to reduce the administration and regulatory aspect and to bring in a new, graded approach rather than the current one-size-fits-all mechanism. There will be no diminution in safety protocols, and registered persons will be subject to inspection by the Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that all standards are maintained. Imposing a requirement to renew the registration periodically would impose an additional cost on both the agency and the client but would not improve either the culture of safety or standards.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister can correspond directly with the Deputy on this point if he so wishes.

Photo of James LawlessJames Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister has been very helpful. I might introduce an amendment on Report Stage. I just want to flag that at this point. I will engage further with the Minister.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 9

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 14:

In page 13, to delete lines 7 to 16 and substitute the following:
“(3) A relevant activity in respect of which registration or a licence is granted may be carried out in accordance with the registration or licence, as the case may be, from the date on which the particulars referred to in subsection (2) are entered in the register of registered relevant activities or the register of registered licensed activities, as appropriate.”.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 9, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 10

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 15:

In page 13, lines 25 and 26, to delete all words from and including “the” where it firstly occurs in line 25 down to and including "activities" in line 26 and substitute "a European act which relates to relevant activities".

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 16 in the name of Deputy Eamon Ryan is deemed out of order as it would involve a potential charge on the Exchequer.

Amendment No. 16 not moved.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 17:

In page 13, line 38, to delete “subsection (2)” and substitute “subsection (2A)”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 18:

In page 13, line 40, after “In” to insert “addition to those matters referred to in subsection (2A), in”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 19:

In page 16, line 29, to delete “under” and substitute “referred to in”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 20:

In page 18, to delete lines 33 to 37 and substitute the following:
“(vii) the issuing by the Agency of a licence or of a certificate in respect of a registration, including the form and manner of such a licence or certificate, the manner (including by electronic means) in which it is to be issued and the information it is to contain,”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 21:

In page 19, line 34, after “authorisation” to insert “(within the meaning of section 2 of the Principal Act)”.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 10, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 11 to 15, inclusive, agreed to.

SECTION 16

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 22:

In page 21, line 22, to delete “(as amended by Part 1)” and substitute “(amended by Part 2)”.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 16, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 17 to 32, inclusive, agreed to.

SECTION 33

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 23 and 24 in the name of Deputy Eamon Ryan have been ruled out of order as they would involve a potential charge on the Exchequer.

Amendments Nos. 23 and 24 not moved.

Section 33 agreed to.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 25:

In page 5, line 7, to delete “and” and substitute the following:

“as amended and extended by this Act to the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment; to transfer the functions of the Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government under”.

The Government proposes to amend the Title on foot of legal advice and as outlined in the amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Title, as amended, agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments.

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister and his officials for attending.