Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to discuss the Bill, which Fianna Fáil strongly supports. We need a strong and sound framework to deal with dangerously volatile nuclear material, which is of paramount importance to any state.

The legislation also gives us a chance to discuss the broader Government approach to reshaping our public service. Prior to the 2011 election, the public was promised a dramatic reduction in the number of quasi-governmental organisations. This promise, like so many others, has been thrown by the wayside. Fine Gael, in its pre-election promises, stated: "One of the essential measures in Fine Gael's Five Point Plan is to abolish or rationalise 145 State agencies, boards, committees, taskforces and public bodies, often referred to as quangos, to help us hit the deficit reduction target without affecting frontline services". The cameras were rolled out for a photo shoot and it was said the face of public service would be radically changed by Fine Gael, with quangos a thing of the past. We are now into the Government's fourth year and the reality of that promise is very different from the bold numbers outlined by the Government. The fact is Ireland now has a grand total of 12 quangos fewer than when the Government took office. This is a far cry from the promised 145 quangos to be abolished before the election. In fact, the Government has set up 33 new quangos and merged 45 to date. On top of all that, it set up the bonus-driven super-quango of Irish Water. In the legal services industry, it intends to set up two further quangos to help regulate the area.

If this is the "Reinventing Government" promise made by Fine Gael, maybe it does actually believe it achieved a "democratic revolution". However, instead of streamlining public services it has attempted to present its failures to live up to pre-election promises as radical change. It is the typical spin-obsessed policy by the Government, where spin triumphs over actual substance.

The Government has not clarified how much it has actually saved from the 45 mergers that have taken place to date. I am interested in finding out how much these savings have been offset or completely overwhelmed by the establishment of the additional 33 new quangos. Does the taxpayer really pay less now or is the Government desperately trying to hoodwink them? In his speech, the Minister of State said "the savings may not be significant". I hope that when he replies he will outline the savings involved in this legislation. At the current rate of progress achieved, by 2016, the end of the Government's term, the net reduction in quango numbers may be fewer than 20, or one fifth of the original target. This is nothing less than a damning indictment of the Government's "spin over substance" obsession and adds to the growing list of broken promises. The Minister of State's claims of progress in the quango cull is firmly rejected by these facts.

The original promise to abolish 145 quangos was born from a knee-jerk populist response by Fine Gael rather than a rational approach to how we can improve our public services. It failed to look at how best to reintegrate unnecessary bodies back into Departments, what additional bodies, if any, would be needed and the merit of retaining certain existing boards. Making sweeping promises without substance and then failing to deliver upon them when in power has been the hallmark of this Government. It is deepening public cynicism about the political process and underlining the disconnect between people and their politicians. This is all to evident in the huge anti-establishment vote in last month's elections.

I have some comments in regard to the specific proposal put forward in the Bill. The proposed merger makes sense and I support the legislation. The EPA has the capacity and experience to undertake the work currently under the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland. The RPII was originally established in 1992 under the 1991 Radiological Protection Act, which conferred on the RPII a broad remit in regard to radiological protection in Ireland. The advisory, research, licensing and educational role of the institute can be adequately performed within the framework of the EPA.

It is vital that the newly merged body retains its commitment to the goals and objectives of the institute and its work to date. The threat of nuclear fallout and ensuing radiological positioning is a dreadful vista for the country. We must continue to guard against such a possibility and adequately prepare to deal with it. While Ireland has no nuclear power plants, nor should it, we do have radiological materials, in particular in medical facilities, and we need to be enabled to adequately deal with this.

It also underlines the need to recommit to our efforts to shut down Sellafield nuclear power station, which remains a potential danger to the safety of the country. The impact of the plant on the east coast has been the subject of considerable debate and public anxiety. The newly merged body should have a role in undertaking research into this area and strengthening our case. The watching brief that the RPII has had in regard to Sellafield and its ongoing activities must be maintained within the newly merged body. The possible impact of the plant on Ireland demands ongoing supervision to back up our case with the UK.

This Bill also enables Ireland to ratify the 2005 amendment to the International Atomic Energy Agency Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material. This is an important convention in establishing high standards of care in handling these extremely hazardous materials. All EU member states are among the signatories, with Ireland ratifying on 6 September 1991. The convention required that the international community afford certain levels of physical protection during the international transport of nuclear material. It also established a framework for co-operation among member states for the protection, recovery and return of stolen material.

I have long been a great admirer of the work of the RPII and I would like to particularly mention a brochure sent to Members in recent days, with the very helpful title of "Who we are and what we do". The leaflet sets out clearly the situation as regards radiation in the environment, in the home and in the workplace, as well as nuclear safety and emergency response. In particular, the issue of radiation in the home is one that should be further debated in this House. The leaflet states that exposure from radon, particularly in the home, accounts for 56% of the total radiation dose received by the Irish population. It states that exposure to radon represents the greatest health risk from exposure to radiation and it is linked to up to 250 cases of lung cancer each year.

In a letter from the chairman of the RPII, Professor William Reville, he refers to the significant problem with the naturally occurring radioactive gas, radon. He states that radon is the second biggest cause of lung cancer after smoking and refers to the 250 radon-linked lung cancer figure, which is greater than the statistic for deaths on the road in Ireland, which was 190 road fatalities in 2013. He suggests that reducing exposure of the Irish population to radon is obviously a matter of great importance, and that the RPII plays a key role in the national radon control strategy launched by the Minister, Deputy Phil Hogan, in February 2014.

Professor Reville also refers to the national radon survey and the preparation of a radon map of Ireland which divided the country into 10 km grids. In each of those squares, a percentage of houses predicted to exceed the national radon reference level were surveyed. This is the level at which house owners are strongly advised to take steps to reduce radon levels. The RPII offers a home radon measurement to all domestic householders and places of work in Ireland and strongly encourages those with indoor radon levels above the radon reference level to have remediation work carried out to reduce the radon concentration.

I very much welcome what Professor Reville has said. I think the RPII has an excellent reputation at home and abroad. It is trusted by the Irish public and seen as an independent body whose regulations, guidelines and advice are solidly based on the best scientific evidence. This legislation underpins the work it is undertaking, strengthens the protection of nuclear waste and material and deserves to be supported.

See this speech in context