Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)

On behalf of the Labour Party I want to offer a broad welcome to this Bill. The Bill has obviously been subject to a significant background review in the context of the REACH regulation and consolidates the enforcement of a number of European laws in the chemicals area.

I am greatly indebted to the staff of the Oireachtas Library research service for bringing this subject down to some degree of common sense. I compliment them on their work and also compliment the work of the environmental scientists there who are excellent and most helpful, which I wish to acknowledge on the record of the House. People like me are grateful to them. Despite being a barrister and despite being familiar with nuanced elements and provisions of legislation, I found this a complex Bill. One would expect it to be so because it deals with a significant amount of legislation. This is a framework Bill introducing a regulatory framework which is extremely important. At least it will all be collated in one source which is important for industry. It will bring into play the Council Regulation EC 1907/2006 concerning the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals — the REACH regulation which came into force on 1 June 2007. This is urgent legislation from our perspective in so far as it must be enacted by 1 June 2008. It also deals with Council directives on the control of major accident hazards, the Seveso Directive, Council Regulation EC 648/2004 on detergents and Council Regulation EC304/2003, concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals.

This Bill is very important in that context and this is the reason it must be supported because it will ensure that Ireland is in compliance with EU legislation through the denomination of national authorities and the identification of methods of enforcement through the imposition of penalties for matters of non-compliance. This is very important legislation in the absence of strict enforcement and regulatory framework. It is dealing with matters that may well have an impact not just on human life but also on the environment. We are all aware of the importance of the control of production of the manufacture and use of chemicals from the perspective of the protection of human health and the protection of a safe environment. The focus of this Bill is to protect human health and to protect the environment from potential harm. These are worthy objectives to which we all subscribe. We may wish to table amendments on Committee Stage. However, the Bill is generally successful in encompassing the thrust of the EU provisions, with which we must comply.

The implementation of this legislation will undoubtedly lead to some costs that must be borne by industry in respect of inspections and non-compliance. The policy objective must be to minimise these administrative costs as much as possible. However, a broad overview of the cost benefit analysis suggests that national competitiveness will be enhanced by the implementation of a more cohesive and focused regulatory regime, as set out in the Bill. It is important to acknowledge that.

There is existing legislation which applies to human and veterinary medicines and to food flavourings and foodstuffs in general. We have a fine and significant corpus of legislation in this regard. This Bill incorporates the relevant EU regulations and directives on the authorisation and control of chemical substances. The REACH regulation requires transposition into Irish law by 1 June 2008. The urgency of the Chemicals Bill hinges on this far-reaching legislation.

The Bill has implications for manufacturers, importers, formulators, distributors and users of chemicals. It places a clear onus on the companies concerned. That is an important consideration for any legislation. Too often in legislation there is reference to Tweedledum and Tweedledee but no clear indication of precisely where the onus lies. In this case, however, it is placed firmly on the companies concerned, which must devise appropriate strategies to ensure they become REACH-compliant.

I understand the pre-evaluation process and so on has been completed but there may well be teething problems given the significant number of chemical substances currently in use, spanning a broad range of industrial and household purposes. These will have to undergo health and safety screening before being submitted to the registration process. The legislation effectively transfers responsibility for the control and safety of chemicals from the various supervisory authorities to the chemicals industry itself. The greatest level of responsibility in this regard will rest with manufacturers, but all links in the chain, including distributors, importers and users of chemicals, must adhere to the relevant obligations. That is clearly set out in the Bill. The REACH regulation will be beneficial in so far as it invests control and power in one regulatory body. The system of regulation will likewise be simplified.

In examining the background to this legislation, I received excellent assistance from the Oireachtas research staff. I compliment them on their efficiency and helpfulness. I understand the REACH regulation was one of the most intensely lobbied legislative proposals at EU level in recent years. The then Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Killeen, was in Brussels in November 2005 and on other occasions to discuss the legislative proposals. There were various attempts to reduce the scope of the Bill and dilute its provisions. However, its central tenet remains the placing of the burden of proof on manufacturers to show that some 30,000 commonly used industrial chemicals and substances that were placed on the market by them are safe and pose no threat to human health or the environment. These are serious concerns.

At the same time, many of these chemicals are essential for the production of various goods and processes which are of benefit to consumers. A balance was therefore required. Genuine concerns have been expressed that the legislation might go overboard, making the process of manufacturing so prohibitive from a cost perspective that it would have implications for our economic competitiveness. Nevertheless, the primary focus must be to ensure that chemicals, of whatever nature, do not threaten human health or damage the environment.

In October 2006, the EU's environmental committee rejected an amendment to the legislation that would have required the EU to accept data prepared for the OECD, the United States Environmental Protection Agency and other chemical regulators. On 18 December 2006, an agreement was reached with the European Council on the REACH proposal. This obliged producers to register all chemical substances produced or imported above a total quantity of one tonne per year. This provision has come into force progressively from June 2007. The Minister of State observed that it will take some 11 years to complete the process and that all relevant substances will have to be registered by 2018. It is a significant undertaking. In the meantime, pre-registration requirements must be met.

The European Chemicals Agency in Helsinki will be responsible for the authorisation process. The former President of the European Parliament, Mr. Josep Borrell, described the REACH regulation as one of the most complex texts in the history of the EU. He also observed that it was essential to protect public health and the environment from the risk of chemical substances without threatening European competitiveness. The Government played a significant role in the development of the EU provisions and was acutely aware of their significance. It supported the objective of the legislation while seeking to ensure a degree of balance, with particular reference to the concerns of the manufacturing industry. We discussed the continuing threats to our manufacturing base with the Minister, Deputy Martin, during Question Time yesterday. There are some 230,000 people employed in this area and we must ensure it remains competitive and continues to grow. As the Minister observed, the growth of the last decade will be difficult to sustain, but the industry remains an important source of employment. We must provide the support necessary to allow it continue as such in the years ahead.

As I understand it, chemical substances will be categorised according to a defined gradation. The European Chemicals Agency will be responsible for the authorisation function. This transfer of responsibility for the testing and evaluation of chemicals represents a change in the traditional practice. Instead of public authorities being obliged to prove that a particular substance is dangerous, the onus is now on the producers to prove it is safe. That is an important change.

It is clear that Ireland played its role in formulating the provisions that ultimately emerged. There were balances to be struck between the concerns of an industry which serves as an important source of employment and the important objective of ensuring that neither human health nor the environment is put at risk. The Bill before us achieves that proportionality. I understand the Health and Safety Authority will have a role to play. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will deal with pesticides. The EPA will deal with the REACH regulatory function. The Minister for Health and Children will deal with the detergents regulation. The Revenue Commissioners will deal with controlling and exporting the various substances.

One of the problems to which Deputy Varadkar referred is whether authorities, such as the Health and Safety Authority, which already have a significant workload will have the resources and personnel to ensure the objectives of this legislation will be carried out with regard to scrutiny on compliance and enforcement. One could postulate that one will never have enough personnel to carry out all the functions of a Bill. It could go on to infinity as new areas are developed and new products come on stream which must be dealt with. However, it is important that additional staff are allocated to enable the legislation passed by the Houses of the Oireachtas to be implemented. Deputy Varadkar made the point that there is nothing worse than legislation being passed which becomes nullified because its effectiveness is lost by the failure to ensure it is implemented in the way it should be.

This has gone through a process with industry groups and one anticipates they have been attuned to the issues and that the information and the contents of the legislation have been disseminated to the various constituent bodies of the business and industrial groups. It is important that they are fully aware of this and dry runs and screenings have already taken place. The regulation on the import and export of dangerous chemicals implements the Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade.

This appears to be all about the headline industries. What will happen to the downstream industries which will utilise chemicals? How will this impact on them? Will the same level of regulation apply to them? We discussed regulation with ISME and other such groups who came before the joint Oireachtas committee and over-regulation is a major problem. Every Oireachtas Member, councillor and aspiring public representative knows that a business can be strangled by the level of bureaucracy imposed. Small and medium enterprises are still the lifeblood of many areas throughout the country. Will we make it difficult for them to survive? Has a cost benefit analysis been carried out to ensure the obligations with which they must comply will not be of such a nature that the entire system will be put out of place?

A significant element of the Bill comprising ten sections pertains to enforcement functions. This is well and good and as Deputy Varadkar mentioned, it contains a name and shame provision. Those who contravene or fail to act in compliance with the obligations imposed upon them by the legislation will have their names published. The idea is that this will have a deterrent effect on others who might contemplate not complying with the express wishes of the Oireachtas laid down when a Bill of this nature is passed.

I notice a parallel with the provisions of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005. This is useful because the same procedures will be utilised in terms of improvement, contravention or prohibition notices. With regard to enforcement penalties and provisions, in the case of a minor breach will someone be brought before the District Court to be dealt with in a summary fashion rather than put through a more rigorous process? Will a person only be brought to court if he or she fails to comply with the various notices served? A minor or technical breach may be involved and we should not need to bring the entire armoury or panoply of the State enforcement system into play. A person or company should be given an opportunity to remedy the position, rectify the grievance which inspectors discovered and ensure compliance.

The Seveso directives came about because of a major accident in the chemical industry in Italy in 1976. The aim of these is one to which everyone subscribes, which is to prevent further major accident hazards involving dangerous substances and, where accidents do occur, to limit the damage to human health and the environment. Rather than having this split between various Bills, it has been brought under one umbrella and this is important.

The detergents regulation deals with biodegradability testing requirements and providing better information on detergent labels. It requires manufacturers to produce safety data sheets for the medical profession and for consumers. This has been raised at European level and officials from one of the Departments explained it to us. In this context, labelling is extremely important so people are made more aware. Labels should be in readable form.

I broadly welcome the Bill. I am amenable to ensuring it is passed as quickly as possible to meet our deadlines. The last thing we want is the European Commission imposing fines on us. We have enough places to utilise our moneys without paying fines. Will the Department officials produce an easy to read digest to the legislation? It is complex and Deputy Varadkar's opening comments are apposite and correct. The essential elements of the legislation could be simplified and put into a small handbook. This would be useful not only for the manufacturers, producers and distributors involved, but also for people using detergents in domestic situations. It will ensure they have the full details of the products with which they are dealing and will also make them aware of the system of regulations in place and what are the remedies for breaches and non-compliance with the legislation. It would be a useful adjunct to the Bill.

See this speech in context