Dan Boyle (Green Party)

-----or acting in concert with each other, very often in conspiratorial political groups, to override the decisions of planners and county managers and organise the building of housing and other amenities on areas that should never have been built upon. We are beginning to live with the effect of this.

I speak as a representative of the Cork area which, in the current set of circumstances, was probably the largest affected. Geographically and historically, Cork has been open to widespread flooding. Cork has an island city centre and an area below sea level. However, despite those factors, tremendous efforts were made, especially with the creation of the Cork main drainage scheme in recent years to lessen the impact and incidence of flooding. The events of the past week have undermined much of the confidence built up with regard to those changes during recent years. The reality is that we can and probably will be subject to this type of flooding more regularly.

What is especially disturbing about the Cork situation is that in addition to the devastation caused in Cork city, on the same night and on different watercourses throughout County Cork, half a dozen other towns were affected. These were not only the traditional towns of Mallow and Fermoy which are always prone to flooding but the towns of Bandon, which was particularly hard hit, Clonakilty and Skibbereen. This shows we are dealing with an extraordinary set of circumstances. If we add in the effects of flooding in Limerick, Clare, Galway, Westmeath and Athlone, we are talking about a new reality that requires a different type of thinking, a different way of allocating resources and a better way to be prepared for a new future that will involve catastrophic weather as part of our future lives.

I do not believe this reality has been grasped because the policy implication means changing how we live our lives. As we debate whether particular taxes should be levied or whether we should change public behaviour at certain times, we should be conscious that the reason for proposing such measures now, even if they are politically unpopular and in the short term may bring about a widespread public reaction, is to avoid the type of occurrences we experienced in the past week. The fact is they are likely to be more regular and more intense in the future.

I do not believe we have had a proper or honest political debate on these issues. It could very well be that this is what we will be most concerned about in the future. In recent years we have been rightly concerned with our immediate economic well-being and issues such as health and education come into our intellectual debate from time to time. However, we have not debated the extent to which this issue will impact on people's everyday lives, where they live, how they live and the services and amenities that are immediately available to them. This more than any other issue may determine our future given the impact of a situation such as this, not only in terms of flooded buildings but also in terms of the knock-on effects of not having access to drinking water for days on end, the spill-over effects, if one pardons the pun, of what that does to public health, and the economic by-product of people not being able to work, generate wealth or distribute that wealth in the economy.

As an island country and, ironically enough, as a country that is meant to be least affected by the effects of climate change in the future, when we see how this impacts on us now and is likely to worsen in the future, we can understand some kind of context for how it will affect the planet. Believe it or not, we are getting away with it more easily than are others and yet we are suffering as a result. Until we have that realisation and understand the reality for people whose homes are submerged in water, who are isolated as a result of events such as this, who are uncertain as to when, how or if these events are going to happen in the near or medium-term future, we will fail.

I hope we learn from the experience and discover whether our emergency services responded adequately and quickly. Given the resources under which they operate, I believe they performed heroically. As other speakers said, the concept of individuals and communities being under pressure has reinvented the traditional Irish attitude of meitheal. However, we cannot rely on these factors in every set of circumstances. There is an expectation that the system of government we have, at both national and local levels, is there to meet an immediate need when a crisis arises. There is uncertainty on the part of people who find themselves with damaged houses and without access to water. They may not find the situation is being responded to as it can be.

If we learn appropriate lessons from this there may be in it the means of economic salvation. There is need for a massive repair programme which will be a stimulus in itself, not only by dealing with the effects of the damage created by the immediate flooding but by putting in place proper safeguards that will meet the future dangers of probable higher levels of water in many watercourses throughout the country.

On those grounds, I hope the debate that follows is less about the immediate effects we have suffered and more about the long-term situation we must face as a people. I am confident there are some in this Chamber who are willing to participate and lead such a debate. I look forward to how the Government, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Minister of State with responsibility for the Office of Public Works respond to this debate and to consideration of the likelihood of future incidents of this type.