Joe O'Toole (Independent)

Despite the fact that we have promised, time and again, to charge for waste collection by volume, weight or bin, why is it there are still local authorities that charge an annual amount? One can send out a barrow load every week and nobody makes any change. While that is not the main issue being debated, perhaps the Minister would examine it.

Two years ago I made the point here that the two greatest issues facing communities in Ireland and which would cause local authorities most aggravation — a hearing is taking place today — were energy and waste disposal. Why not look at a situation where if local communities are prepared to look after their energy needs and waste, they would be given a tax break? That is a sensible idea. It is a properly incentivised approach and it would work. One would then get a real debate.

The Minister will recall that I tend to agree with him on the question of incineration. From what I read, incineration must be part of any future discussion. Like the Minister, I disagree with the idea of nuclear energy but I would like to hear a discussion on the balance between nuclear fission and nuclear fusion, a debate which has never taken place in this House. At least nuclear fusion is controllable. If there is a need for a compromise, that is where it should be. These debates have not taken place. They are issues for another day and, perhaps, I will set up that lunch for the Minister and Mr. McCaughey and act as referee to see if we can write an agreed minute and move it forward.

I wish to deal with the protection of the term "architect". I chaired the audit review group. Having done that, it has been accepted by the Committee of Public Accounts that we failed to protect the term "accountant", which was not possible at the time. In the meantime, legislation has been passed to protect all sorts of nomenclatures of different people in the medical area, veterinary surgeons and others. We are now looking at the issue of architects. I wish to share my experience. I agree with what the Minister is doing in the Bill. I agree with the idea of protecting the title of "architect" and the other titles. I agree that the Competition Authority's report on architecture makes some valid points, but I do not agree completely with it.

Let us look at the argument Senator Bannon and the independent architects have made. It is not rocket science. I do not agree with all their arguments but they made a fundamental point. If I were advising them, I would them I would advise them to stick to the fundamental point. People who are doing a responsible job in the community deserve protection from this legislation. How can one go about doing it? Can it be done? It has been done in many cases previously.

In one former life I dealt with it in the case of what used to be called untrained teachers. We had to find a way to deal with the issue when we brought in the teaching council and regulations. It required flexibility, training, education, an openness of approach and recognition of a transition period between where we were and where we wanted to go. If we are certain about where we want to go, we know we will arrive there. If compromises must be made, we should make them. That should be done by means of a structured process in a responsible way. We did it for teachers by establishing courses to allow them avail of various training. What was the qualification of the man or woman who designed the Hanging Gardens of Babylon? What was the architectural qualification of the builder and designer of the Pyramids——