Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)

I thank Deputy Niall Collins for sharing time. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this Environmental (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2011. I resent the way this legislation is being rushed through the House. Sixty five minutes is not enough time to debate it, and we all know the reason for that. The legislation as amended by the Government represents another major U-turn and broken promise.

I welcome the Minister, Deputy Hogan, and Deputy Kevin Humphreys to the Chamber because I have just received some information today that the Minister and the Deputy will be interested to hear. I do not know whether the Minister realises it but he is already making a name for himself across the north side of Dublin where he is called Poll Tax Phil with the introduction of these new charges. I thought he should know that he is now a brand name in that area.

On the legislation, I remind Deputies that the Minister of State, Deputy Lucinda Creighton, stated she would fight tooth and nail to stop the incinerator in Poolbeg, and Deputy Kevin Humphreys criticised the former Minister, John Gormley, for not doing enough in that regard. Deputy Kevin Humphreys has renegued on his commitments in the most cynical way, but what is worse is that the Taoiseach gave a written commitment to the people of Dublin South-East that he would stop this incinerator going ahead. I will return to that later as I have a copy of the letter before me. This is a Taoiseach who does not have a shred of credibility left in regard to promises. He promised to deliver many things to many communities knowing full well that he would have to turn his back on those people once they had voted for his party. That is a serious allegation.

The deletion of the incineration levy is yet another stunning U-turn by this Government. The coalition parties never ceased to criticise the previous Minister on this issue and yet it is now clear from the statements made by Covanta that had the provision for the incineration levy remained in the legislation, this oversized incinerator for the Poolbeg peninsula would not be going ahead. In an article published in The Sunday Business Post before the election, a representative for the company stated clearly that it would not proceed as long as this provision remained. The article also stated that the company had met Deputy Enda Kenny and Deputy Ruairí Quinn. The Covanta aide said they were happy with the meeting. One wonders what was said by the Taoiseach at that meeting.

The more one reads about this project and the capitulation of the coalition, the more suspicious one becomes. It is a project that has been shrouded in secrecy with no democratic accountability. Only recently the Minister published the Hennessy report on the financial viability of the plant but with large sections of the report censored. So much for the transparency the Government talked about in the past. The report shows that this is a mad contract which will cost the taxpayer dearly if Covanta does not get sufficient waste. Have we learnt nothing? We only have to look at the mess of the M3 public private partnership and the Limerick tunnel, where the lack of cars means major penalties for the State. Is it not extraordinary that there has been no democratic scrutiny of this contract? Not a single councillor, TD or Minister had seen the contract. That is why the senior counsel, John Hennessy, asked the then Minister, John Gormley, to examine the contract. I understand that even Mr. Hennessy had considerable difficulty getting his hands on the contract.

The Government has chosen to ignore the Hennessy report. It has also chosen to ignore the international review on waste management which argued cogently for the imposition of an incineration levy to drive waste higher up the waste hierarchy and get the very best rates of recycling. Why has the Minister decided to dump the international review drawn up by international experts? At a time when resources are growing scarce, when peak oil is a reality and when we have to reduce our carbon emissions substantially, it makes no sense at all to opt for an incinerator on this scale. In order for it to be profitable it will have to draw waste from every part of the island and perhaps beyond. Is that sustainable? This is a national issue. It is not an issue specific to one constituency. That is the reason I raise it in the House today.

There are other aspects of this deal which deserve closer attention. Mr. PJ Rudden is often quoted in the media as a waste expert who favours the incinerator. None of these newspaper reports state that Mr. Rudden's company has made €25 million in consultancy fees from the project. Is it any wonder he is in favour of it?

The other major question is the reason Dublin City Council decided to proceed with the preliminary contract during the 2007 election campaign and why it proceeded to sign the contract when the Minister warned it not to do so. A lot would come out in the wash if there was an inquiry on this matter but with the way this Government has pandered to the wishes of big business, it is unlikely that we will get such an inquiry.

I will deal with some of the issues I mentioned earlier in regard to broken promises. The website of the Minister of State, Deputy Creighton, on 13 July 2010, stated:

Fine Gael remains committed to stopping the proposed incinerator in Poolbeg. Lucinda recently sought assurances from Fine Gael party leader Enda Kenny that the party would oppose the construction of the proposed incinerator if elected to government. Deputy Kenny unequivocally confirmed that Fine Gael would continue to fight tooth and nail to oppose the incinerator.

She further stated: "Lucinda again calls on Minister John Gormley to stand by his promises to the people of Dublin South East and scrap the incinerator for once and for all". That is another example of a broken promise.

There are other aspects of this deal which deserve closer attention. Mr. Rudden is often quoted in the media as being a waste expert who favours incineration. I mentioned the payment of €25 million before a single brick is laid.

It is also important to address the claim of legal problems as this is an excuse local representatives will use mostly to justify their support for the Bill. On Committee Stage the Minister made the entirely disingenuous claim that because of legal constraints, he had no option other than to remove section 7 which provided for the incineration levy. He claimed that was because it was incompatible with the revised waste framework directive which came into force early this year. However, if there was an incompatibility, it would set a higher level than the incineration levy. Similarly, a levy on incinerators that qualify as recovery facilities can be set at a lower level than that for incinerators classed as disposal facilities. These are simple matters to address and it is clear the Minister's decision to scrap the levy is not down to any legal difficulties. The Irish Waste Management Association is in favour of levies and against the Poolbeg incinerator. While the industry is crying out for a financial instrument to encourage recycling, the Minister is ignoring it in favour of giving the green light to a facility that nobody wants other than Dublin City Council. It is important that we raise these issues. I welcome the opportunity to discuss this very important legislation. I hope the Minister will respond to some of the key points I raised.

See this speech in context