Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)

I read with great alarm about the events which took place in the established residential area of Mervue. The area is really divided in two, Old Mervue and New Mervue. Old Mervue was built in the 1960s and before that there was Shantalla, built in the 1950s, Claddagh, which was built before then, and Bóthar Mór, which is older again.

The particular problem which arose in Mervue came about suddenly and without any warning to the residents. To save time and deal with the issues in the case, I ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to clearly specify that if Galway City Council comes up with a response which involves resources, the Department will be willing to give such additional resources and enable the matter to be resolved quickly and with safety.

A second issue that arises relates to discussions which took place between the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and officials in Galway City Council on a previous occasion when the council was suffering following the discovery of cryptosporidium. On that occasion, was there any discussion on any other issues that might arise regarding drinking water quality?

As an aside, I am deeply disappointed by the Minister's attitude towards a different issue, the source of the water supply in the Corrib. He is insistent on leaving it with the local authority but I believe there should be a separate authority for managing water quality and the Corrib.

On this specific issue, I have given the years of construction of the houses, most of which were bought under the tenant purchase scheme. As they were built in the 1960s, they have an elderly population. Effectively, at the end of July, Galway City Council notified the environmental enforcement section of the Environmental Protection Agency of a deterioration which was equivalent to four times the permitted level of lead content. This was 106 micrograms per litre instead of the permitted 25 micrograms per litre.

I welcome the enforcement section of the EPA because before it came about, many complaints one might make were dealt with somewhat rhetorically. When the enforcement section of the Environmental Protection Agency was dealing with this issue, it was 25 August by the time a reply came from Galway City Council to documentation issued on 30 July. The enforcement section of the EPA requested that the council prepare a programme for the replacement of pipework, consult with the Health Service Executive and identify the extent of the problem. That was on 25 August.

On 8 September, the city council responded by indicating that it was determining the extent of the required work and suggested that an agreed approach be forwarded to the EPA. However, it became necessary on 24 September for the enforcement section to issue a direction to the city council to carry out a survey of all the areas involved, the necessary work and the lead testing carried out over the past four years.

How much of that information has been supplied to the EPA? There was also a request to identify an action programme. It is important we get answers to the following questions. Will the additional resources required to put this matter right be provided? Has there been discussions between the two Departments on coming to the relief of an elderly population with the distribution of water, which is urgently required? Will account be taken, for example, that if it is established the connecting pipe in Mervue is made of lead, and there is lead piping in houses in the older estates built before 1970, the Department will be in a position to respond to both circumstances?

My next point is crucial. Will officials from the Department be visiting the city council? Perhaps the most important of my points is to ask why there is such a culture of not declaring a problem openly to the public when it arises. Why was it necessary to have this long delay, which is dramatically revealed by the fact there was an ordinary city council meeting on Monday, 22 September with no mention of the problem? Suddenly, it is revealed on 23 September and a special meeting is held on 24 September. Why is it necessary to want not to declare these matters in public or move quickly to resolve them, thereby avoiding anxiety, particularly among elderly people?

See this speech in context