John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)

It is very impressed with the legislation we are putting forward and it is seen as extremely innovative. There is a belief it will serve as a template for environmental legislation elsewhere, a fact in which I take great pride. We also aim to enshrine those climate change targets about which the Senator has spoken into the planned climate change Bill, the heads of which I intend to publish shortly. To say that this can be done easily is to underestimate that challenge. It is not easy.

I forgot to say that the Oireachtas committee we set up has been used as a talking shop as a means to give adversarial comment and to knock the Government. That is not what it was set up for, which was to get a political consensus. I am very disappointed in this.

We are proceeding with the climate change Bill 2010, a comprehensive legislation which we hope will reduce our greenhouse gas emissions in the context of a transition to a low carbon economy. As Senators know, the framework for the Bill was published last December and work has since been progressing on the heads of the Bill and the preparation of a framework for climate change adaptation.

We face enormous challenges in this area. The latest data from the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, which is responsible for greenhouse gas emission projections, show the distance to target in the Kyoto Protocol commitment period 2008 - 2012 at 2.5 million tonnes of CO2 per year, or 12.7 million tonnes for the five year period. This is significantly lower than the original expectation in the national climate change strategy published in April 2007. At the time it was estimated that up to 18 million credits would be required to ensure compliance over the five-year commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol at an estimated cost of €270 million.

As outlined in the EPA's most recent projections under the national allocation plan 2008-12, the EPA established a new entrant set-aside where allowances were set aside for new entrants coming into the EU emissions trading scheme and for the expansion of existing installations over the 2008-12 period. It is currently estimated that there will be around 5 million allowances remaining in the new entrant set-aside at the end of the Kyoto period which will be available for the State to use towards Kyoto Protocol compliance.

I want to move on swiftly as water quality was also mentioned. The facts speak for themselves, and there is no way if there was a Labour Party Government we would spend the record amount we have on water infrastructure. The high priority that this Government attaches to the protection and improvement of water quality is demonstrated in a number of key areas. These include the extensive suite of legislation introduced since 2007, the transposition and implementation of the Water Framework Directive and the substantial investments in the water services investment programme. Key legislative developments since 2007 include continued implementation of the water framework directive through the introduction of new standards for water quality in both groundwater and surface waters; new regulations to give legal effect to the bathing water directive; the establishment of an authorisation system for waste water treatment plant discharges; and regulating for best practice in the management of nutrients in the agricultural sector.

In addition, the enactment of the Water Services Act 2007 and the European Community (Drinking Water) Regulations 2007 was designed to bring about a better quality of drinking water through increased enforcement powers. Under the regulations, suppliers of drinking water are required to ensure the water supplied is wholesome and clean. The application of the provisions in these regulations was instrumental in fully addressing a judgment against Ireland by the European Court of Justice on drinking water quality.

The EU water framework directive is a key initiative aimed at improving water quality throughout the European Union. First transposed in 2003, I introduced two significant new pieces of legislation in the past year to transpose further key aspects of the directive. These provide for new standards of water quality in both surface waters and groundwater. The first cycle of the river basin management plans is close to finalisation having been adopted in all 34 local authorities. The plans set out a programme of measures for the protection and improvement of water quality in seven regional districts based not on administrative boundaries but on natural catchments.

In March 2008 I introduced bathing water quality regulations which transposed the new bathing water directive. The new regulations give a stronger focus to the protection of human health. They also provide for the identification of beaches, the creation of beach profiles, the assessment of bathing water quality, the classification of beaches and the implementation of measures to ensure all beaches have a classification of at least sufficient by September 2015.

I also recently allocated €1.5 million over three years to support the maintenance and cleaning of key tourist sites during the peak season of May to September. However, it must be realised that the sustainable solution to maintaining our wonderful beaches rests fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the public that enjoys, but sometimes takes for granted, this wonderful part of our environment. This means bringing home any rubbish generated at the beaches and ensuring it is properly disposed of.

I also introduced new waste water discharge authorisation regulations in 2007. These regulations provide for the first time for the licensing of all discharges into the aquatic environment from local authority-owned sewage systems. Licensing of these systems by the EPA is well advanced with 89 licenses issued to date. In addition, revised good agricultural practice regulations were introduced in March 2009. These regulations provide for improved farmyard management and strengthened enforcement provisions. It is encouraging to note that the results from the EPA's national monitoring programme, published in February 2010, indicate that nitrate concentrations in rivers and lakes are relatively stable and levels in groundwater have begun to stabilise. The EPA is not recommending any additional measures to prevent and reduce water pollution from agricultural sources until results from ongoing studies into the efficacy of the existing measures to achieve the objectives of the good agricultural practice regulations are known.

The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has a provision of €508 million in its 2010 Estimate to fund the ongoing provision of water services infrastructure. This provision will mean that average spending on water services infrastructure throughout 2009 and 2010 will be up 3% on the 2008 outturn. It is a clear statement of the priority which the Government is giving to preserving and protecting our water resources as a key element of our environment, to meeting EU standards for drinking water and wastewater treatment and to providing critical infrastructure that will ensure ongoing support for economic development.

This level of investment in protecting and improving our water resources builds on similar levels of investment over many years. Compliance with the secondary treatment requirement of the EU urban wastewater treatment directive, which stood at 25% in 2000, is now at 92%. Some 480 water and wastewater schemes have been completed and there has been an increase in wastewater treatment capacity equivalent to the needs of a population of 3.7 million. The increase in drinking water treatment capacity is equivalent to the needs of a population of 1.1 million.

One can clearly see from the EPA's monitoring that we have seen an improvement in recent years in the quality of water in general and drinking water quality specifically. Despite what is seen in the media and the spin sometimes put on the issue, the overall water quality in bathing areas has also improved by approximately 4%.

With regard to river basin districts, it is important to emphasise that this is the way we will present our reports. In the past they were presented in terms of geographical areas but it will now come about in terms of catchment areas. This is the best way forward and gives us a better understanding of how water resources must be protected in coming years. With the Green Party in government this has and will continue to be done.

Hazardous waste and legacy sites were also briefly mentioned in the motion and by Senator Hannigan. The issue of industrial legacy sites, which operated at a time when such industrial activities were less well regulated, is one which the Government takes extremely seriously. It is recognised that there are unique environmental concerns among the local authorities in some areas because of the activities that have previously been carried out on the sites concerned during the years. Inevitably, in the nature of these activities - such as steel making, mining, gas works, and so on - they generated, over a considerable period, large quantities of wastes, some of it hazardous, which now requires to be dealt with. The former Irish Steel-Irish ISPAT site in Cork is a case in point. Between 2003 and 2009, Cork County Council, acting as the agent of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government carried out a comprehensive site investigation to determine the levels of contamination at the site and the remediation-development options there. It initiated ongoing environmental monitoring at established monitoring points, decontaminated and demolished the steelworks buildings and arranged for a site surface clearance.

The Green Party has been in government for three years. Under my watch, more has been spent on environmental remediation at Haulbowline in a 12-month period than was spent in the previous 68-year history of the site. I also ordered a comprehensive risk assessment by consultants White Young Green and made public the contents of all previous studies undertaken at this site. That is a matter of record.

A previous Administration sold off the site in question for £1, without having any regard to the environmental consequences. It must be borne in mind that the worst pollution at Haulbowline occurred not on our watch - the Green Party has taken more action than any other in respect of the site - but on that of the Labour Party when it was last in government. That is a fact.