Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)

That should be enough to cover the problems of my county.

I have stated that I fully accept the interconnector that is going underground. I accept the necessity for the North-South one and everybody involved in the campaign to have the proposal changed from overground to underground fully accepts the necessity for this. We in the north east also want more businesses and more jobs created and we want to be able to run our own factories etc. There is no doubt about that and we will do our bit for the country by carrying the supply through the counties. The issue is not that, but how we go about our business.

In that regard, there is a couple of issues I want to tackle. First, seeing as today is about EirGrid and its role in the future, we really must look at how EirGrid does its job of dealing with people and how it makes decisions because the company got it wrong in this instance. I accept EirGrid was given permission by a previous Minister to put these overground, no questions asked. I also accept that since then this Minister, Deputy Ryan, has stated that first let us do a study to check out all of this. That is the way it should have been done in the first place. They should have undertaken this study first.

Everyone speaks of best international practice and we compare figures and charts. Those opposed have different figures to those who are in favour, but I would like to see an analysis of best practice from the past couple of years, not dating back over the past 30 years, of what other countries have decided to do because the majority of infrastructure for carrying electricity was built years ago and would not necessarily adhere to today's best practice. Many private companies are producing and using the DC line, which seems to work quite well and seems close to the usefulness of an AC line, and yet EirGrid states it cannot be used. Other Government representatives, including the next Taoiseach, told us to forget about it, that it was not even worth discussing. When it involves people's health, it is worth discussing and checking out to see whether it is an option. One should not rule it out.

EirGrid, before an Oireachtas committee, ruled out the use of the M3. They did not even consider it. That is not right. That is not treating people properly or giving every chance of a fair say. They ruled out going underground and, as I said, did not even check it out. They ruled out engaging properly with the people.

They decided to come down and tell the people that it was not possible to go underground and that it would cost ten times the amount. Those were mistruths — I cannot use the word "lies" here. They were wrong to state that they could not go underground. They were wrong to state that it would cost ten times the amount when they did not know what it would cost. We might accept that AC might cost more, but none of us here knows. It could cost two times, five times, 10 times or 20 times the amount.

It is wrong for a State body to arrive down to a community and give information that is wrong to mislead and to discourage a certain method. Despite giving EirGrid more powers, we should give it proper direction on how to conduct its business, how to do proper research, how to deal with people and how to conduct proper public relations. I accept that EirGrid will state that it has learned from this and, with some humility, it has accepted that it got certain matters wrong, but it is still adamant it will opt for the same use of infrastructure. We must look at all of that.

Returning to the reasons people have a difficulty with these pylons and the infrastructure running over them, there are many reports, probably hundreds in the past couple of years but many more than that over the past ten to 30 years, some of which raise doubts over magnetic fields. Many do not, but there is a doubt and where there is a doubt, Government, State bodies and all the rest have a duty of care to the people and to their families to check all of this out. There are other arguments about the environment, esthetics and the value of family homes and of land, but they all are separate to the real argument based on health. Those other matters should be looked at, but health is the most important matter and we must thoroughly check it out before we engage on a policy of putting in any more lines.

Apart from the health issue, there could be savings to be made as well. It might be cheaper to go underground using different technology and I want that fully checked out. I do not accept the figures we have been given by EirGrid for the cost of going overground. They are not realistic. They do not include the full cost of the hassle involved in the years of legal and planning challenges and delays. All of those costs must be factored in and we must look at the real cost of going underground. If it is at all possible to go underground, for health reasons if it is the same cost we should definitely go underground and even if it costs a little more we should consider it. It might prove less expensive than going overground. That needs to be fully checked out.

I agree with Deputy McManus and other Deputies who stated we should come in here to debate the matter, and we should debate it at Committee as well. The Minister, Deputy Ryan, is open to that because he has been very open about this in the past couple of months. In his speech, he mentioned that he hoped and believed EirGrid will have a big influence on that study and will have a big say in the deliberations. I am sorry he did not state in the same speech that he expects the community to have the same say, and that he will give them the same chances. As EirGrid is on one side of this debate and the people are on the other, both should be given an equal opportunity to have their views heard and concerns addressed by the consultants conducting the study. Both should be brought in and listened to, and given a fair chance to put their case, because both have an argument to make. It is wrong to give one side more than the other.

As I stated, I will not say the health argument is true or false. There is evidence and doubts, and we must check them out fully. No loss of life is acceptable, despite a guy who claimed to work for EirGrid stating on local radio that it was okay in Italy for four or five children to die over 30 or 40 years. That is not okay and is not acceptable. One cannot put a cost on that. No politician worth his or her salt, irrespective of party, could ever accept that.

There are people in the north east who are doing a great deal of work on this. They have made a 300 page submission to this study to have this investigated. They are doing their job right. They are not necessarily scaremongering, they are just talking about the issues. However, they are going around trying to raise hundreds of thousands to fight this legally because they have been led up the garden path by certain people and politicians that this can be stopped in the planning process or in the High Court. In my view, that cannot happen unless we change the direction given to EirGrid and unless the Government changes the regulations on the use of lines overground. No barrister or solicitor would be able to defeat planning laws. If Ministers and politicians who claim to be against it are against it, the best, quickest and most effective way for this to be done is to bring new regulations to this House stating that in future all lines will go underground. I, for one, accept that one cannot go back to do something with existing lines but we can for those of the future in a cost effective manner. The Minister needs to tell the people that this is about political decisions of Government, not about raising millions to fight legal cases. People in these areas cannot afford to spend millions and yet they feel they must because they are being convinced that it is not just a matter of politics. It is a matter of politics. This House makes decisions on how this country is run. This House makes decisions on how taxpayers' money is spent. Taxpayers' money will be spent to build this infrastructure and therefore the decision lies in here. The study is a useful step in the right direction to assess the situation and give us the information we need to have a proper and balanced debate, but if the figures add up and if the information is true, I would expect the Minister to make that decision and direct EirGrid to go underground with this and other lines in the future. It is not about Meath, Cavan and Monaghan, it is about the future of the country and how we decide to spend our money and do our business, protecting everybody and delivering energy at the right price. Nobody is asking for extremes, just a fair crack of the whip. Let us not have people spending money unnecessarily when it is down to decisions made here.

I ask the consultants to explain in their report why some countries have decided to apply directives and regulations on the distance of such lines from homes. EirGrid technically must install lines 25 m from homes and will try to have them at 50 m. Personally, I encourage them to be at least 150 m from homes. Why have other countries set targets of 200 m and 250 m? Somebody has obviously convinced them that it is right to do so. We need to access that information and find out why that choice was made so that at least we can have a proper debate.

I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for the latitude. It was not all technically to do with the Bill but the Minister gave us the opportunity by going that road himself.

See this speech in context